The Sir

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2011 -> 08:20 AM) Depends on the context, I'd say. Overhauling the entire Illinois State Website to support Allah is one thing. Listing public events at a Mosque is another. You might be able to get me more annoyed if Perry launched, you know a state funded ad campaign to support the thing, but I'd hope most taxpayers would get annoyed with that too. This. Rick Perry simply endorsed an event he's attending (similar to listing the mosque events as mentioned by Balta) on his website. And then responded to the criticism of the event using the same platform. I'd say that's totally legitimate.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 14, 2011 -> 08:09 AM) I'm doing the same with California. You beat me to it. Add Massachusetts in there too.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 14, 2011 -> 07:49 AM) The Governor of Texas is presumably allowed to spend state funds to attend events that the Governor of Texas wants to attend. The Governor of Texas is also allowed to spend funds to publicize actions of the Governor of Texas. Given those 2 facts, I can't really criticize strongly the use of state funds to publicize an event involving the governor of Texas. Really? I did not know this. Well, have a blast, Rick Perry!

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 14, 2011 -> 07:39 AM) Here's the press release from FFRF It shouldn't be linked from the Governor's official website, imo. And there needs to be a clear difference between Rick Perry the Governor of Texas and Rick Perry, Evangelical Christian in the promotion of the event. I think that's where there problem lies: he's using his position to endorse and promote a religious event, blurring the line. I disagree. No one is forced to attend, and no tax dollars are funding this thing. The Constitution doesn't prohibit politicians from being openly religious. That's not the goal of the First Amendment.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 10:04 PM) So while it may protect freedom of religion, it also explicitly states that the State of Israel is a Jewish state. As to what that means, Im not sure. And I was clumsy referring to it as a state religion, I more meant that the State of Israel is a Jewish state, or that is how it perceives itself. As for returning the land taken in the 1967 war, sometimes you have to be brave. I believe that Israel can defend itself with or without those territories. Why do I believe that? Because in 1967 Israel didnt have those territories and was able to defend itself. In fact in every war with the Arab nations, Israel has come out ahead. So I do not fear the Arab world. If anything, historically the Muslims/Arabs have treated the Jews as good as the rest of the world. Far to many people hate Jews to just focus on the Arabs, Im not even sure if you add all murders by all Arab nations together for the history of time, it comes even close to what a handful of European countries have done. Our friend today, could be our enemy tomorrow. Time for the Palestinians to be given a chance to be free, I'm not sure what the point of proclaiming themselves a Jewish state is if they also clearly respect freedom of religion. Seems more like a rhetorical thing than any tangible discrimination against non-Jews. Kind of a moot point, IMO. The rest of the world hasn't been very good to the Jews either, sadly. Jews seem to have been the whipping boy for every culture on Earth at some point in time. But the idea that the Christians behaved outright murderously against the Jews hundreds of years ago (and even more recently, I'll admit) does not alleviate the current Arab community's vile rhetoric and actions against them today. That doesn't make the ongoing hatred alright. For me, Palestinian recognition of Israel is crucial to peace. There can be no settlement if groups like Hamas exist, with their horrible intentions of pushing Israel into the sea. That s*** has got to stop.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 09:12 PM) I think its a strained argument at best. If Perry went to his regular church and got on stage and said a few words, Im not sure that really is the equivalent of state sponsored religion. So as long as there is no connection between Texas and the event, I dont really see why Perry being Governor is relevant. I can respect that. You actually respect freedom of religion, even when it's not your religion and your beliefs at stake. I'm cool with that.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 09:08 PM) So to believe that the Israeli's would just be "fine" if the Palestinians stopped attacking them, is just not true. Some Israeli's will never be fine until the Temple can be built. The problem is that in order to rebuild the temple you would have to tear down one of the top 3 most holy sites in the Muslim world. Others will never be fine if Israel gives up the West Bank or Gaza. Some will never be fine if they give up Golan Heights. And some of them would never consider a country where the state religion wasnt Judaism. Israel's borders would be indefensible if it gives up the West Bank, the Golan Heights and Gaza. Those territories were seized to deter Arab aggression in 1967. They can't be given back until the Arab world abandons its violent rhetoric against the Israelis. And there isn't a state religion in Israel. Israeli law clearly protects the freedom of religion.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 09:08 PM) 35. Whoa. Golden oldie right there. And no, I didn't get that reference at all. Check out my post in the thread about popular movies we haven't seen. I win by a long shot.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 08:56 PM) Not a problemo. Tell her I said this, "Hey, Woman. Hey, Woman! Listen here. Since your old man ain't got no heart, maybe you like to see a real man. I bet you stay up late every night dreamin' you had a real man, don't ya? I'll tell you what. Bring your pretty little self over to my apartment tonight, and I'll show you a real man." Oh, and if you're too young to get that, f*** you. Geez. What are you...OLD???

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 08:51 PM) I read the whole article and couldnt find a mention of lawsuit (federal or otherwise). I read that people were critical of his decision and I believe that they, like Perry, are free to express their opinions. Did I post the wrong damn article? Whoops. Here ya go. I read about the lawsuit, and then searched for other articles to find out where the funding came from. Which I managed to do with the NYT one. And then I sort of forgot that the NYT didn't mention the lawsuit that was my big issue to begin with. Criticism is fine, but this lawsuit is clearly a move to deny Perry of his beliefs and that is not acceptable. My bad.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 08:33 PM) I'll talk to your GF, what's her #? PM it. You don't know what you're up against. And I'm not even talking about me. I'm talking about her.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 07:49 PM) I hate people that mispronounce words on purpose. I hate republicans My girlfriend says "LAYzier" instead of "leisure". She's also even more conservative Republican than I am. I guess you'd really hate her. Which is good...I don't want you talking to my girlfriend anyway.

Freedom From Religion Foundation files federal lawsuit against Rick Perry for Prayer Day. EDIT: This is the correct link. The other one is relevant and interesting, but this is the lawsuit one. I'm sure most of you will think it's silly that he's going to an event to pray our problems away. Hell, I'm a fan of God myself, but He's not going to make the debt go away or reduce the deficit. So I'd prefer more practical solutions from our politicians. That said, he's entitled to his religious beliefs. It'd be one thing if he were using taxpayer funds for this. But he's not. As the article states, it's privately funded. So he's going on his own time, on his own dime. No one is being forced to attend. So this group's claim that he's breaking the constitutional prohibition against the establishment of a national religion is just idiotic. It seems to me that this group and others like it just want to ban acts of Christianity. Seven in Heaven Way in Manhattan, and a politician attending a religious event on his own time and dime, etc...these are not acts that establish a national religion. They are just people expressing religious beliefs which isn't outlawed anywhere. Not in this country, at least. Also, it's funny that the same group that raised a fuss about that street in NYC went out on the 4th of July and flew planes with banners saying "Godless America" and "Atheism is Patriotic". They're free to do that as far as I'm concerned, but it looks incredibly bad when the same group rages against similar displays of Christianity. Hypocrisy, anyone? Again, I will stress that I don't really care if people are atheists. I don't care if atheists want to spend their own time and money throwing conventions and Days of Non-Prayer and Non-Fasting. Your atheism doesn't affect me; that's between you and God. And if you believe He doesn't exist, well, that's your perogative. But I've always been annoyed by atheists who try to stop Christians from practicing their beliefs, which is what is going on here. And the fact that the do things like I mentioned in the previous paragraph, where they're holding themselves to one standard and Christians to another, that just pisses me the Hell off.

Damn. It's blacked out in my area. Well, I'll watch Boys In The Hall on FSSouth. It's on Bob Feller right now; he sounds like an awesome dude.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 05:24 PM) As we've seen over the last 5 years or so, Kenny usually ends up acquiring players that he's been linked to in the past. With that said, who are some of these players that he's been linked to that are still in the majors (and weren't members of the Cleveland Indians of the 1990s)? Players I can recall are: - Hunter Pence (almost got him in a deal for Garland) - Adrian Gonzalez (yeah...that's not going to happen) - Brett Wallace (KW loved him in the Gordon Beckham draft) - Gio Gonzalez (what's one more trade) - Carlos Gomez (I still think he'll be acquiring by Sox in next year or so) - Torii Hunter - Chone Figgins - Erik Bedard - Michael Young I'm a moderate KW supporter right now, but if he goes out and gets Carlos Gomez (or Figgins, or Bedard, or Hunter), I'm done with him. Straight up. Michael Young, on the other hand, I have always liked. As far as I'm concerned, he's one of the most underrated players in baseball and always has been. I'd love to see him on the southside.

I don't have an issue with what McDain's is doing. If someone like Mrs. Kelley abhors the restaurant's policy so much, she's free to eat somewhere else. If enough people take offense to the same extent, then McDain's will lose business and Mr. Vuick (or whatever his name is) will probably reverse his decision. Or he can be stubborn and go out of business. It's his perogative. Either way, the free market will solve this issue just fine.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 04:14 PM) I'd also add that I could give a flying f*** what the world thinks of us. We're the hegemon of the world and we'll ALWAYS be disliked by someone, regardless of what we do. So why bother caring?

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 09:18 AM) Argue what you want, but if the arabs never fired another shot, launched another missle or blew up another bomb, there would be zero aggression from Israel towards them. If Israel were to drop their weapons, they would be committing suicide. This. Benjamin Netanyahu has said it himself, "If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Israelis put down their weapons, there would be no more Israel." The Israelis don't hate the Palestinians from the get go. Israel is a democratic state that would accept any person, regardless of their creed, as long as that person didn't insist on murdering them. But do you see any Jews living freely and openly in Palestine? Or in other Muslim lands like Saudi Arabia and Egypt? Nope. That's because those people hate Jews. They want nothing more than to see them all dead and it really doesn't even have much to do with the Israelis living in their space. From 1921-1948, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was Mohammad Amin Al-Husayni, a devout Palestinian nationalist. He told his followers to kill Jews wherever they found them, and he certainly did his part in that statement by helping recruit Muslims to the Waffen SS. A core value of Palestinian nationalism is anti-semitism. Israel's harsh treatment of the Palestinians is purely defensive. If Palestinians just let their hatred go, everything would be fine. There wouldn't be any Jews going out to murder Muslims just out of some psychotic, intrinsic hatred for their very existence. But vice versa, it'd be a bloodbath.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 09:33 AM) One festival? Really. How do you know the people involved with that festival aren't Christian? Maybe they are just putting a spin on their own religion. Let me know when the gay community tries to ban christianity or christians from getting married. Oh, so it has to meet your standards of bigotry which is somewhere before summary execution yet beyond making dick jokes about religious figures. Got it. And StrangeSox, google it. However, I'll give credit where credit is due for your apparent realization that evangelical atheism is as bad as evangelical Christianity. Props for that.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 08:29 AM) He would be a bigoted discriminating asshole. He's free to be that, and the rest of us are free to criticize that. Free speech doesn't mean freedom from criticism. Tell me, what do you think of San Francisco's Hunk Jesus Festival? I've mentioned it before. It's an annual thing where gays get together and mock the Hell out of Christian beliefs. Is that not an example of them being bigoted assholes? Or is it OK because they aren't white, conservative Christians? Tolerance is a two way street. Yet why do I feel you're going to claim this sacrilegious festival is completely acceptable? Please, feel free to prove me wrong.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 13, 2011 -> 07:41 AM) While you are correct about the prohibition about in-uniform military appearing at political events, unless you're talking about a case other than Lt. Dan Choi, you're incorrect about why he was discharged. The official memos in his case are publicly available and are 100% clear that he was being discharged honorably for being in violation of the Military's policy regarding open homosexuality. I stand corrected. That said, I still don't want Lt Choi back, because he obviously doesn't know how to use discretion and separate his political views from his military career. Chaining yourself to the White House fence in uniform is unacceptable and he knew this.

Another thing I need to note: My political views on DADT are irrelevant. The President of the United States has given us our marching orders and that's the end of it. If I heard of this decision and decided to do anything short of ensuring equal rights for all Soldiers regardless of sexual orientation, I would be guilty of disobeying a direct order and I'd really just be a terrible leader undeserving of Army officership. There are a lot of very opinionated, very conservative people in the military, and I am one of them. However, I know better than to mix my political beliefs with my career. There was a Lieutenant Colonel a little while ago who failed to see this line, and openly refused to join his unit on its upcoming deployment unless Obama released his birth certificate. Debate on the birther movement aside, this guy's an idiot. He knew the consequences and yet he decided to use his career as the basis for a political stunt. He got released from prison a month or two ago, but his career is obviously over. He will likely face a dishonorable discharge (good luck finding employment with that one!) and a loss of all pension and benefits. Stupid, stupid move. There was a First Lieutenant who came out as openly gay a few years ago and, in order to support his cause, he went and chained himself to the White House fence in uniform. Any Soldier knows that you don't attend political rallies in uniform. I wouldn't even go to an NRA conference in uniform. That's against UCMJ. Well, anyways, this guy got the boot. He wants to rejoin now that DADT is gone, but that's not why they booted him. They booted him because he was a goon who couldn't separate his personal political beliefs from his duties as an officer. They're both pathetic and they both have no place in the Army. So, no matter what I think of DADT or any issue for that matter, I am sworn to follow the orders of the POTUS (whether I like him or not) and anything short of that is conduct unbecoming an officer.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell and then it's repeal: I don't like the idea that professional politicians who never served in the military are trying to use the military as a social experiment to advance gay rights and add bullet points to their political resumes. The military exists to defend America and win the nation's wars. So I don't really like when I have to use time that could be spent at a range improving marksmanship skills or out in the COF (company operating facility) working on tactical maneuvers that will help more of us come home alive when we eventually deploy, to instead educate the troops on how to accept gay people. I think that's silly. But I'm glad that gay Soldiers can now inform their superiors that they are facing sexual orientation harassment without having to fear that that same superior will have them chaptered out of the military. That doesn't help that situation at all. Gay marriage? You find a priest who will marry you and fine, you can be wed. But if you find a priest who believes gay marriage is absolutely prohibited, you cannot do anything to force him to change that and cave to your demands. That's my big fear here. That people who don't believe gay marriage is allowed will be forced to cave to the demands of gays and their supporters. The rights of those people need to be protected too. Assuming gay people don't try to squash the free expression of their adversaries, I don't really care. My solution to the gay marriage debate is that I won't get one. But this is far different from my personal relationship with my son. That's my son. I have expectations for what he should be. I'd really like it if he was a far-right, America loving, gun toting (I'm gonna teach him how to shoot) man who has endless ambitions and as much interest in the world as I do and aspires to join the military some day. But if I'm not that lucky, I'll still love him as a son. I think any father has some dream of what he wants his son to be like. This is mine, but it doesn't determine whether I'll love the kid.

Wow, Quin. You weren't kidding about the long post part. My dad is a great guy. He's a loving, caring father who raised me well and has given me what has generally been a great life. But when I hit that low point, I didn't want to tell him. Not because I thought I'd be ridiculed or shunned by him, in fact I think it'd be just the opposite. But I didn't want my dad, a vet and a badass if there ever was one, to think I was anything less than he was. I was embarassed by my own weakness. That was just me trying to impress my father. And dude, I had some reasons to keep bringing up the atheist part. I thought he was one. Guess I was wrong, but the point was to bring up a potential personal belief of his that he would not appreciate if I made judgments on. I was trying to highlight the outright hypocrisy of him judging me when we all know he wouldn't appreciate it himself. As for the last part, it was he who said that not all opinions are "valid and equal". So yeah, if you've served, I take you a bit more seriously. And really I was just tired of defending myself to someone like that. Comparing me to a Nazi troll and being such a hypocrite, I was fed up. That's all I've got.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 12, 2011 -> 07:16 PM) lol tell me more about how I'd act like a big baby, just like you! No, I didn't compare your beliefs to nazism, or say you'd disown the kid. stop lying. What am I whining about? I'm stating my beliefs and facing constant judgment from leftist extremists like yourself. You're the one whining about my personal beliefs. As for what I said, think what you want, dude. The "red blooded" part has nothing to do with it. So take it anyway you want. I know what I believe, and you don't, although you'd like to think that you do so you can continue to judge. Then you were called out for judging my personal beliefs and calling me a bigot, and your response was to bring up a normal reaction to a Stormfront troll. Really sounds like you're comparing me to a Stormfront Nazi, which is just lame. I'm done with you. I'm never going to agree with you, and frankly, I find you detestable. You can judge me when you've bothered to serve your country. Bye.