billydee4
-
Posts
96 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by billydee4
-
-
Oh God! Two more rants from Bryan. This is my favorite quote: "I don't believe that LaClair has ever successfully pointed out a fallacy or an untruth on my part." meaning, even though I've been proven wrong a thousand times, I'm still right.
I found this interesting article at crosswalk.com--I'm on their subscription list for some reason:
Student Sues History Teacher Over Anti-Christian Comments
The Christian Post reports that a lawsuit filed by a high school honors student and his parents against California history teacher James Corbett for anti-religion bias has ignited debate about the role of a teacher's convictions in the classroom. Chad Farnan, a sophomore, tape-recorded his Advanced Placement European history teacher's remarks, including: "When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth" and "Conservatives don't want women to avoid pregnancies -- that's interfering with God's work." Farnan said, "It just shocks me that someone would think that and say that. He's my teacher, and I've lost respect for him. I'm offended." The 16-year-old and his parents are suing Corbett for violating the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from advancing religion or promoting hostility toward religion. "Corbett causes students who hold religious beliefs to feel like second-class citizens because of their protected religious expression, beliefs and conduct," stated an announcement by Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a Christian legal group representing Farnan.
A christianist gets her feelings hurt and files a lawsuit. Now the Establishment Clause prohibits promoting hostility toward religion? What a crock! And remember, this is only the girl's side of the story.
-
-
-
1992
Running for the U.S. Senate, Phelps gets a remarkable 30.8% of the ballots cast in the Democratic primary even as he terms his opponent a "bull dike" [sic].
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport...cle.jsp?sid=184
I guess Kansas Democrats are far-right conservatives.
They are more likely deluded fundamentalist christians out of touch with reality. They represented 30.8% of the people identified as Democrats who voted in that primary, so you can't generalize anything about Kansas Democrats from this information.
Nice try.
-
Platoon was a movie about VietNam, 40 years ago. There are also movies about
WW2 just as violent. Need I tell you that making an anti-american movie about
a war we're currently engaged in is a little different ?? Need I tell you that this
movie will be viewed in the arab world as representative of all american military
personnel and will hurt our cause over there if not result in american deaths ??
The producer, DePalma, and the financier, Mark Cuban are left-wing wackos and
I haven't seen one person on KOTW step up and condemn them for making this
dispicable movie. Birds of a feather stick together.
We have never declared war on Iraq. The people there and in the rest of the reason have plenty of reasons to hate us. Are you really stupid enough to think that the Middle East is getting its intelligence from American movies? They know about abuses before we do. The best way to avoid more American and Iraqi lives is to get the hell out of there.
-
"Conservatives without Conscience" by Screaming Dean ?? I think I'd rather
have a root canal than read anything by him. However, I'm reading a book by
Ann Coulter, "If Democrats had brains they'd be Republicans". I recommend
it to any Loony Lefy that wants to improve himself. BTW, I never called you a
coward and a liar. I did doubt your assertion that you served in the military, I
never before heard any former GI with such far left views. As for my exit
strategy; Iran is the problem. We can't leave until Iraq can defend themselves
against Iran, otherwise Iran takes over as soon as we leave and Iraq becomes
a base for international terrorism funded and protected by Iran. Also, if Iraq
becomes a base for international terrorism when we leave, Israel becomes a
target. If Israel is attacked, they will strike back (with nukes if necessary)
against Iran. If that happens, all bets are off. We're back in it and probably in
a larger conflict than we're in now. So...... we stay until Iraq is stabilized, that
may take years, or until Iran provokes us enough that we knock out their
military and petroleum facilities with air strikes. Either way, radical Islam is
not going away any time soon and neither are we.
1. Ann Coulter is an ass and a bigot.
2. We'll stay in Iraq until they are stabilized? When they can defend themselves against the Iranians? In what century will that be? Iran has a problem with our being in Iraq, not with Iraq itself.
3. We've already made Iraq a base for terrorism, which it wasn't before. Israel has been a target since 1948.
4. We've already pissed off many Muslims by invading one of their countries without provocation, so attacking another Muslim country is going to help how? Knocking Iran back to the stone age like we did in Iraq is not a way to win friends in the area.
5. We don't know if Iran has nuclear weapons yet or when they will have nuclear weapons. Israel has a stockpile. We have even more.
God, are you stupid.
-
Sorry, Strife, but I have to call you on this. 2dumb has never had an answer, a counter-argument, or point. He only makes stupid comments when he either disagrees with or doesn't understand a post. I think he just doesnt understand much at all.
-
It has already been demonstrated that the Dranger transcript is innacurate.
This is probably because of the poor quality of many parts of the recordings as well as Dranger's personal bias. For example, his hearing the teacher say "salvation" when the recording actually says "celebration." This was demonstrated in an earlier post.
Also, your remarks seem to be off the cuff without any research.
I don't care to put every sentence of your lengthy post under the microscope, but it is a fact that there was an ancient city of Tyre which was in present day Lebanon and one half mile off the coast was an island called Little Tyre.
During periods of invasion, the inhabitants Of Tyre would flee to little Tyre off the coast. When the invaders left, they would return and rebuild.
The specifics of Ezekiel's prophecy in chapter 26 verses 3-21 include:
v-3 " ...I will bring many nations against you, like the sea casting up its waves." [/color]
This comes true literally. Waves of the sea come in succession. Tyre was
conquered by a succession of nations:
1. The Babylonians (Nebuchanezzar) 585-573 BC
2. Alexander the Great 333 BC
3. Antigonus 314 BC
4. The Moslems 1291 AD
V-4 "They will destroy the walls of Tyre and pull down her towers; I will scrape away her rubble and make her a bare rock."
(In 333 BC Alexander came to conquer Tyre. The people of Tyre escaped to the island of little Tyre before he arrived. He was so angry that he had his men level the city of Tyre, scrape up its rubble and throw it into the sea to build a causeway to little Tyre for his men to march across. History records that he then killed 8,000 and made 30,000 slaves.)
v-5 "Out in the sea she will become a place to spread fishnets..."
(Today, fishermen mend nets there)
v-8 This verse states that Tyre will be destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.
(This occured over the period of 585-573 BC)
v-12 "...they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea."
(Alexander did this in 333 BC)
v-14 "...you will never be rebuilt..."
(the immediate areas have been rebuilt as a fishing town unlike the glorious center of Med. Sea trade that Tyre once was. The original city has never been rebuilt)
In short, you are right in saying that Alexander is not mentioned by name in the prophecy, but he fulfills the prophecy to the letter.
Sorry, Mr P, but history proves you wrong. First of all the island city of Tyre was the main city and the coastal settlements, the daughter-cities, were also part of the city. I can find no historical reference to Little Tyre and Big Tyre.
Ez 26:5 says "It shall become, in the midst of the sea, a place for spreading nets."
This is clearly a reference to the island. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the city for thirteen years and never conquered it. Tyre would up paying tribute to Babylon.
Even if they were part of the prophecy, four kingdoms do not make many nations.
If Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed the coastal settlements, how then could Alexander come and raze it again a few hundred years later?
The prophecy specifically says that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre. He didn't.
It also says in verse 17-19 specifically say that the city will be covered with water. This clearly references an island. The coastal cities were never covered with water.
Alexander razed the coastal settlements and made a causeway to the island, making Tyre a peninsula. It's still there today.
I think my Brooklyn vs NYC analogy is valid.
I listed several sites where you can find this information. You show nothing to back up your claims.
The point I was trying to make is that, in addition to preaching fundamentalist christianity and teaching non-science as science, you were also very illogical in your discussions. I would not like to have anyone as confused as you teach my children or grandchildren.
-
-
I just reread the transcripts I could find and, theology and preaching aside, Paszkiewicz, in some parts seems very confused. He often contradicts what had just said a few minutes before. Please indulge me. My comments are in blue.
Student M1: What were the prophecies?
Teacher: What were they? There were actually hundereds of 'em...
Student M1: ...that came true...
Teacher: New Testament, Old Testament?
LaClaire: The ones that came true.
Student M2: Go with easier.
Teacher: I'll give you a major Old Testament prophecy, I'll give you
two. One, the children of Israel themselves. Moses in Genesis talks
about one day they're going to be in slavery for 400 years. Long
before the event, but God would deliver them. And then in Exodus,
they're in slavery, and He delivers 'em 430 years later. Things like
that. [ So god was off by thirty years. What's 30 years if you are eternal? Could it be that Genesis was written after the exodus--if it actually happened?]You have many prophecies, like, um, I'll give you an interesting
one, this is the Old Testament, this is in the book of Ezekiel. And
Ezekiel gives us prophecies concerning the nations. He talks about the
city of Tyre which would be off the coast of Lebanon in the ancient
world. Tyre still exists in Lebanon today. This is the Mediterranean
coast, where Israel would be here, Lebanon would be here, and he had
the city of Tyre right here. Ezekiel rants in his prophecy against this
king of Tyre and how evil he is and about how God is going to judge him.
And in the ancient world, the people of this city was really
impregnable, because what would happen was, there was a tiny island a
quarter mile off the coast. Whenever they were going to be invaded,
the people of the city would get on boats and go to what they called
"Little Tyre", a walled rock [...?] out off the coast, and it had a
water supply, and it had food stores and stuff, there. [so was the city of Tyre off the coast of Lebanon or on the coast?] Ezekiel said that they would come, that they would be conquered, that Tyre would be raized - that every stone would be overturned, and cast into the sea, and the men of the sea would be slaughtered, and it would be known as
a place were fishermen mend their nets (??). You can look it up in the
older Encyclopedia Brittanica, look up Tyre, and it will say that it's a
place where fishermen mend their nets. Not the newest one, but the
older one, the ones they had the old [???]. [Ezekiel specifically states that Nebuchadnezzar would do this. He never conquered Tyre. Also, the bible says nothing about Little Tyre and Big Tyre. What P is saying would be like someone saying "I am going to conquer New York City and then they take over Brooklyn and say they conquered New York City. This sounds like the Chewbacca defense. The newer Encyclopedia Brittanica editions may have dropped the part about the nets because the found out it wasn't true. Just a hunch on my part.]Alexander the Great comes down the scene of history. He's not a military guy, he's a soldier. [Huh? Soldiers don't count as "military guys"? ] He gets to Tyre, he wants to conquer the city, and he is so frustrated that the city has escaped. [He is trying to conquer a city that Nebuchadnezzar had already conquered and levelled? ] And he's [??] that, he has his men take every stone of the city and throw it into the sea to build a causeline [Not a real word] from
the mainland to Little Tyre and slaughters the men of the city. [...??] [so Big Al takes all of the stones from a city that is no longer there and builds a "causeline"? Keep in mind that Ezekiel says that Nebuchadnezzar was going to destroy Tyre.]
Student N1: Did Alexander the Great read the Bible?
Teacher: No, this occured before his time. [P said earlier that Genesis was written in 1440 bce--a number he pulled out of somewhere dark and smelly--so Alexander very well could have read the Hebrew Scriptures.] It was predicted as a prophecy then - but it was that specific. Now the coastline of Lebanon looks like this. Because there's a causeway there. It's no longer an
island. And you have Little Tyre out here and Tyre on the mainland, and
that's how it was formed. And history records that Alexander the Great
came and raized the city and threw it into the sea. [Again, Alexander is not mentioned in Ezekiel] Where were we
goin, anyway?
The transcripts quoted are from dranger.com.
For more information, check out these websites:
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/.../2/992tyre.html
davematson.edwardtbabinski.us/prophecy_tyre.html
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_tyre.html
http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/th...16-20/16-06.htm
Here is just a little more idiocy.
Teacher: Nah, he just told Moses. You get it?
LaClaire: And we know - wait, wait, and we know -
Teacher: Yeah, for 6 days, there was only him and man. [Huh? Did man exist from Day 1? Why isn't this mentioned in Genesis?]
Teacher: ...(w)here did Moses' conception of the universe come from? Cause it was unlike anything he'd been taught in school. And he had the order
scientifically correct. You start with light, and then you go to -
because you can't live without light generated from the sun. The
energy that we get from the food that we eat, ultimately finds its way
back to the source, the sun. Plants and photosynthesis, the beef that
we enjoy eats the plants, and we get that energy from the beef. It
transfers, and Moses had the order correct. [but Genesis says that light was created on the first day. Then god created plants on the third day. Plants need the sun for photosynthesis, but the sun wasn't created until the fourth day.]
Paszkiewicz doesn't know history. He doesn't even know "biblical history." He just comes off as a pompous, ignorant raving radical fundamentalist.
Now, people like Bryan will come back and try to tell us that this is all taken out of context. I think this is plenty of context for any rational person. I used to think that the biggest problem our society was that people are stupid. Now I think the problem is that some people want to be stupid. Why is this man still teaching?
-
-
-
No, we hate to read lies about American military successes. How many Iraqi battalions are ready to take over for us? 95? 30? 10? 2?
How many times have we captured the Number Three man in Al Qaeda? Do we have a catch-and-release policy?
A few years ago Condi Rice reported that we had captured x% of the leaders of Al Quaeda. She was asked what whole number that prepresented. She repeated x%.
A percentage is a part of a whole. It is meaningless without knowing the whole number.
And remember "Mission Accomplished"?
-
-
Matthew handled himself rather well. For those of us who are moderate Christians, this is a good example of the extreme Christian fundamentalism regarding which many on the board take offense (i.e., everyone in America is Christian, etc.). I would venture to say that better than 95% of the people on this board find their beliefs system to lie somewhere between Matthew's beliefs and the interviewer's beliefs.
Ryan Davis is a satirist. This interview is satire. Sad to say, though, I have no problem believing that a radical fundie would say things like that.
Here is Ryan's blog: www.huffingtonpost.com/ryan-j-davis/matthew-laclair-is-cool_b_69030.html.
You can also check out his page on MySpace:
profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=43838606
-
I've been following this issue from afar since the beginning. The people who think what Matthew did was wrong either recirculate arguments that have been proven wrong a thousand times, or they say something really, really stupid like "Kool-aid Alert" or they make fart remarks, or they call people names. I think that some of these discussions lead other people to think that Kearny is a backwards hick town full of radical right-wing fundies because most of the responses they see are written by people like patrat, 2dim, and brayn. Paul, Matt, and Strife sometimes seem like the only identifiable sane people in Kearny.
-
Finally something is happening that would make me actually to want to go to Kearny. What a coup! Congratulations to Matthew. And I hope Paszkiewicz's supporters show up to try to argue with any of the presenters. I hope they bring up Kirk Cameron's crocaduck!
-
"TALK-RADIO AUDIENCE FACTS" says the heading, pointing out the upscale demographics of talk radio listeners, and suggesting the latter usually:
* have an income over $75,000.
* have graduated college.
* read a newspaper daily.
* own their residence.
* are likely to use the Internet.
* have opinions that mirror those of the general population.
These are interesting statistics and, because they fit the profile of what sociologists call opinion leaders, they suggest why the DNC is concerned to—as the organization says elsewhere on its web site—"correct the misinformation and lies that are spread by extremist radio hosts and columnists."
http://nj.npri.org/nj99/06/media.htm
Bryan: Are you saying that you agree with the "Talk-Radio Audience Facts"? I fail to see the relevance of "Facts" that were published in a small newspaper in June of 1999. The article states that the "Facts" came from a Democratic website that is now inactive, so there is no way of proving that any Democrat even suggested that these "Facts" were true.
On liberal talk shows you can hear a variety of opinions. On radical right-wing radio, if you don't say you agree with the host, you are not put on the air. On BillO's show an dissenting voice is dismissed or trashed. His usual response to facts presented by the other side is, "Well, that's your opinion."
-
I still believe that the total lack of support for Paszkiewicz by any of the extremist right wing media shows that his case was indefensible. If the extremist right is willing to support a girl who got approval for one valedictorian speech and then decided to proselytize instead, they would have jumped on Paszkiewicz's cause in a heartbeat if they thought it had any merit.
-
Someone certainly has the fundies' attention.
Unfortunately, they're like fish. Catch a fish and throw it back, it will still bite next time. They know something is there, and it looks like food, but they never figure out what it really is no matter how many times they get caught. They don't have the brains to realize that it's bait on a hook.
This behavior is expected in fish, whose brains aren't sufficiently developed to allow them to reason. It's quite remarkable, however, in human beings, and disappointing.
Focus on the (straight, two-parent with the father as master and the mother is subservient) Family has its headquarters in Colorado Springs. They treat it as if it were their own fiefdom. Check out Matt's post about the valectorian who is suing her school board. She presented one speech to her principal and then read a different one, urging everyone to "know Jesus". Her father works for Focus on the
Family.
-
I found this in The Star Ledger Friday, August 31. I am curious as to what people think about it.
By Brian Newsome
Colorado Springs, CO.
- A 2006 Colorado high school graduate who mentioned Jesus Christ during a valedictorian speech and had her diploma withheld until she wrote an apologetic letter, has sued the district for allegedly violating her free speech.
Erica Corder was chosen to conclude a commencement speech shared by 15 valedictorians at Lewis-Palmer High School in Monument, Colo., in May 2006. Although students' 30-second speeches were first rehearsed for the principal, she added evangelical comments when her turn came during the ceremony.
''We are all capable of standing firm and expressing our own beliefs, which is why I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than you could ever imagine. He died for you on a cross over 2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven. His name is Jesus Christ. If you don't already know him personally I encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice he made for you so that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with him.''
Corder's diploma was withheld and she was ordered to meet with then-principal Mark Brewer to get it. He threatened to withhold the diploma until she apologized for the speech, according to the lawsuit and the family's statements to The Gazette. She did not apologize for the content, but did agree to write a letter of explanation for her actions. ''I'm sorry I didn't share my plans with Mr. Brewer or the other valedictorians ahead of time,'' she wrote.
In the lawsuit, Corder contends her First Amendment rights of free speech were violated when the district ''refused to present her with her diploma unless she issued an apology for mentioning Jesus Christ in her graduation speech'' and also required speeches to be rehearsed. The suit also says her 14th Amendment rights to equal protection were violated, in part because district practices ''treat religious speech differently than nonreligious speech.''
Robin Adair, the district's spokeswoman, Superintendent Raymond Blanch, and Board President Jes Raintree did not return phone messages left Wednesday evening. Board Vice President Dee Dee Eaton deferred a call from The Gazette to Adair. Adair said:''The events that are the subject of the case occurred over a year ago, at which time a complete review of the situation was performed by the District.
'Since then, representatives of the District have met on several occasions with the parents and the former student.’ While we are disappointed that this matter has resulted in litigation, we are confident that all actions taken by school officials were constitutionally appropriate. As a result, we intend to vigorously defend the claims. ‘Beyond that, it is the District's policy not to comment on pending litigation.''
Corder, now 19 and a student at Wheaton College in Illinois, said Wednesday, ''The main reason I did this is just because I want to make sure the school understands what they did was wrong. ''Her father, Steven, said that the lawsuit was a last resort. Steven and Thea Corder had asked the district to retract the disciplinary actions against Erica and adopt policies to protect student speech and eliminate confusion.
''Really, our hope is that any valedictorian would know clearly that they can speak about what is important to them,'' Steven Corder said. ''It's really so that the Constitution can be turned to as the governing document in this type of situation. ''The Corders have retained Liberty Counsel, which specializes in cases involving religious freedom. It has offices in Washington, D.C., Florida and Virginia. The suit also seeks unspecified damages.
I love the way the extremist fundies twisted this one. Erica was dishonest when she presented her speech to the principal and then snuck a different one in, one that she knew beforehand would have not been approved. Thanking Jeebus or anyone else is okay but proselytizing is not.
One wonders why it took them over a year to come up with the suit.
Erica said she issued the apology because she was afraid that it would hurt her chances of getting into college. Doesn't it seem odd that a graduating senior does not know by graduation what schools have accepted her application?
She was also dishonest, then, when she issued her apology. Instead of standing up for her principles she lied. What a testament to her faith. (I don't want to read people saying she was confused or frightened. Her own statements belie that.)
Her parents said they sued because they wanted the school board to "adopt policies that protect student speech and elimidate confusion." There was no confusion. She knew what she was doing was wrong.
Another interesting piece of information that was not reported in the story is the fact that her father, Steve, works for Focus on the Family, Dobson's gang of fascists.
Extremist fundies will do anything to advance their agenda. Shame!
-
What do you think they mean, Billy?
And why are you so eager to overlook plagiarism?
Plagiarism is not the issue here. Fundies will use words spoken or written by other fundies without citing them. They swallow their lies whole and then vomit them up to prove their point.
The bible quotes are clear. I don't find anything spiritual or hidden in them.
-
So what's your point? By your logic, we should just disband the police force. If the thief is caught, he's more likely to think twice about robbing again than if he knows everyone just looks the other way.
In the case at hand, the recordings accomplished several things:
1. They exposed Paszkiewicz's behavior for what it really was. This would not have been important, and would not have been done, had Paszkiewicz admitted his behavior, but he did not.
2. It sent a message to the students and to the community that religious proselytizing is not acceptable here.
3. It may embolden other students to speak out, not just in cases like this, but in other cases.
4. It has resulted in appropriate education programs to bring Kearny ahead of the curve on these issues, instead of behind the curve.
None of this would have happened had the classes not been recorded. None of it would have been necessary if the students and the community understood the issues in the first place. Don't get me wrong. Some do understand, but many do not. That is why things happened as they did, and why remedial measures are necessary, and are in fact being taken. What the people who keep arguing on the other side of this don't like is that the behavior was exposed for what it is, one of their own was caught red-handed, and they don't like it. As is often said, "the truth hurts," and it especially hurts to those who are opposed to the truth.
I was trying to present an analogy with what Paszkiewicz would have done if Matthew had put the recording device in the open. Paszkiewicz knew what he was doing (preaching in a public school classroom) was wrong. If he saw the recorder he would not have said anything controversial in that class. This does not mean that he would do this in every class. In the next class he would start preaching again. Putting the recorder in plain view would have solved nothing. What Matthew did was courageous. Confronting power always has risks. I applaud him for doing what he did.
-
That's right. It wouldn't have put Paszkiewicz in his cage. Case closed.
In his cage?
Imagine this, if a thief has a record for robbing convenience stores and he wants to rob another. He goes into the store and sees that there are a few police officers in the store. Does he go ahead and try to rob that store? No he simply finds another convenient store to rob.
the perpetual excuse
in Kearny
Posted
I wonder what the conservatives will say when the Democrats are in charge and they are the ones who do the wiretapping?