Updated 02:59 pm.EST, Fri November 20, 2009

Society|Fri, Oct. 23 2009 09:10 AM EDT

Senate Passes Hate Crimes Bill; Obama Expected to Sign

By Jennifer Riley|Christian Post Reporter

After a decade-long struggle, Congress passed a bill Thursday evening that would make it a federal crime to attack someone based on the person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Senate – in a 68-29 vote, with most Republicans opposed – approved the measure that was attached to the $680 billion defense spending bill. It adds sexual orientation, gender, gender identity and disability to the existing list of categories which include race, religion, color or national origin. The measure now heads to President Obama’s desk, who has vowed to sign it.

Though proponents of the bill celebrate its passage as a historic civil rights moment for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender movement, conservatives and some Christian groups fear the measure will infringe on their right to freedom of speech.

Opponents of the bill, dubbed by some as the “thought crimes” legislation, argue that it is unnecessary because gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are already protected under existing state laws. They also say the bill could be used to prosecute Christian broadcasters and pastors who preach homosexuality as sin because they could be accused of inciting violence.

“This hates crimes provision is part of a radical social agenda that could ultimately silence Christians and use the force of government to marginalize anyone whose faith is at odds with homosexuality,” said Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, following the bill’s passage.

But Attorney General Eric Holder has asserted that the federal hate crimes law would only be used to prosecute violent acts based on prejudice, not speech or beliefs.

The hate crimes measure is named after Matthew Shepard, a gay University of Wyoming student who was kidnapped and beaten to death in October 1998, and James Byrd Jr., a black man who was dragged to death behind a pickup truck in Texas in 1998.

“We look forward to President Obama signing it into law: our nation’s first major piece of civil rights legislation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people,” said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the largest group in the country advocating for LGBT rights.

Obama in a recent address to the Human Rights Campaign called for the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which bans gays from openly serving in the military; the passage of the Domestic Partners Benefit and Obligations Act, which would extend family benefits to the partner of gay and lesbian federal workers; and the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines legal marriage as between a man and a woman.

Sort by: Newest | Oldest | Agree | Disagree
All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Christian Post or its staff.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
  • Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:21 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    believer »Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:55 pm al, you are truly presenting yourself as one narcissistic individual, well I hate to pop your bubble but the world does not revolve around you or your secular hyper-babble!!
    -------------------------------------------------
    In Response: LOL
    TFR

  • Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:55 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    al, you are truly presenting yourself as one narcissistic individual, well I hate to pop your bubble but the world does not revolve around you or your secular hyper-babble!!

  • Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:35 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    believer »
    Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:21 am Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    al, can you see how ridiculous your remark is, one minute you say were not a Christian nation and then you say the f&es are in control, sure sounds like you're saying we are a Christian nation if the f&es are in control!! By the way neither of which are true, we indeed are not a Christian nation and by no means are the f&es in control!!
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: believer, you are too funny. You keep trying to make a current situation into something it is not. What is so difficult about understanding that in congress we have people like Bachman, Virginia Fox, and some other who continue the work of earlier Senators and Representatives who have managed to get some thing passed, like Reagan's National Day of Prayer, Like we see in Lodi CA where they pray at City Council meetings, etc.

    This does not make America a "christian nation" by any means but it certainly does move us closer to a theocracy which is the problem I spoke of, that you are having difficulty in understanding.

    The Treaty of Tripoli confirms that America was not a christian nation nor founded on christian principles, but more modern efforts by Congress, State and local governments are trying to force your nonsense on all of us.

    It is quite simple when you allow yourself the the ability to see it unbiased and not with your confused beliefs getting in the way.

    Take care now and remember when I tell you something to just accept the fact of it, unlike your pulpit puppets spreading revisionist history and worship of a non existent person, I give you the factual truth and they give you nonsense. If it were true, then independent historical evidence would be found and you can't get passed the terms of the challenge and just gave up.

    TFR

    TFR

  • Fri Nov 06, 2009 9:21 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    al, can you see how ridiculous your remark is, one minute you say were not a Christian nation and then you say the f&es are in control, sure sounds like you're saying we are a Christian nation if the f&es are in control!! By the way neither of which are true, we indeed are not a Christian nation and by no means are the f&es in control!!

  • Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:20 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    believer »Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:22 pm
    al, make up your mind, one minute you say were not a Christian nation and the next minute your blaming the f&e Christians for all our problems and that we're forcing people to adhere to our views, so which is it??
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: Try to follow believer, America is not a christian nation, never was never will be.

    Next, the government has been taken over by a large contingent of f&e plants who have infected this nation with a bunch of religious laws in order to force us into a theocracy.

    If you would learn to investigate what I say and look at the evidence, allowing yourself to realize what has happened then it would be clear to you. You have allowed yourself to fall into the revisionist trap and not realize nor examine the historical facts of what has happened in the last 50-60 years or so in this country.

    Just do you own investigation but you have to first put aside the blinders of your religious bias to do it.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:05 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "In response: Thank you for your honesty."

    Alocksee, congratulations! Your first post with no run-on sentences.

  • GMG »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:29 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    Believer,

    Yep, pretty crazy isn't it!!! But, it takes all kinds....... :)

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:24 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Hohnson, I bet you got that from "Dead Poet Society". LOL!! Good post by the way!!

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:22 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    al, make up your mind, one minute you say were not a Christian nation and the next minute your blaming the f&e Christians for all our problems and that we're forcing people to adhere to our views, so which is it??

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:20 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    al, I have no problems with commandments other than whose giving them and as for contradicitons you are a living contradiction. You make silly demands of people as if you have any authority, then you make up a challenge using only your rules, then you change the rules in the middle of the challenge and finally you refuse to follow your own rules.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:16 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    TLChild »Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:17 pm

    ----------------------------
    In Response: Here you go TLC, the real factual history of the United States of America, this comes from the Treaty of Tripoli:
    "There’s also the Treaty of Tripoli which clearly says the US was not founded on the Christian religion, and it was “endorsed by Secretary of State Timothy Pickering and President John Adams” and unanimously ratified by the Senate. Here is the quote from it:

    As the Government of the United States… is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion — as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity of Musselmen."

    http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/08/24/our-godless-constitution/

    There you go, for the Reality Challenged, this country never was a christian nation, nor was it ever founded on any christian principles. Try bouncing the truth off your local pastor and see how red faced they become. Notice that President Adams, Secretary of State Pickering and the entire Congress ratified(signed) the Treaty which meant it was fully supported. So anyone who told you this country at any time was even remotely christian have just been proved via real evidence to be completely false.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:14 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    GMG, OUTSTANDING POST AND THE SCARY THING IS I THINK HE BELIEVES HE DOES HAVE THAT AUTHORITY!! I SEE THE FLAG A COMING!!!

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:01 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Hohnson »Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:05 pm Alocksee,
    I have no intention of taking on any kind of challenge. I will readily admit I cannot produce any proof of anything.
    ------------------------------------------------
    In response: Thank you for your honesty.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:59 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Flagged as inappropriate. show GMG, You are cracking me up, I almost believed the post until I read Alockslee's name. hide

  • GMG »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:57 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

    Flagged as inappropriate. show ALL CP POSTERS TAKE NOTE THIS JUST IN FROM OUR SENIOR MODERATOR. HE HAS FULL AUTHORITY GRANTED HIM BY THE CP STAFF AND MANAGEMENT YOU WILL FOLLOW HIS INSTRUCTIONS TO THE LETTER, OR FACE THE CONSEQUENCE OF BEING BURIED TO THE NECK IN BLUE JELLO FOR A MINIMUM OF 2 HOURS. SHOULD THERE BE OCCASION OF A 2nd INFRACTION OF THIS RULE, ALL POSTS ADDRESSED TO HIM WILL BE IMMEDIATELY FLAGGED FOR 1 WEEKS DURATION. ***My questions, my conditions, don't comment if you can't follow the requirements and don't comment about my posts unless you first answer the original post from me. If you comment then you agree to answer according to what was asked.*** The above posted by King Moderator Alocksee, who has been granted full authority to set all rules, no matter how infantile his requirements are. hide

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:05 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Alocksee,

    I have no intention of taking on any kind of challenge. I will readily admit I cannot produce any proof of anything. My sole purpose was pointing out that you are an incompetent writer and and a tedious bore. I believe I have done so as you have no comeback other than to repeat what you've already written fifty times about tangible proof.
    I could not care less whether or not you believe in God. God doesn't care either. He told me on the phone today. I recorded it so I could send it to you, but of course God's voice can't be recorded. You'll just have to trust me on this.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:17 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 1

    Well, well, well, what do I have here: a quote from our first president, George Washington:

    “It would be particularly improper to omit, in the first official act, my fervent supplication to the Almighty Being, who rules over the Universe, who presides in the councils of nations and who providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the people of the United States…No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency…We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.”

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:43 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Daniel Paul »Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:30 pm AL---and neither have you given evidence that Thomas Jefferson actually existed.
    -----------------------------------------------
    In Response: Are you now claiming that your deity and Thomas Jefferson are equal in that they are both gods and have a religion based upon them?

    We have written work from Jefferson, none from your myth. We have records from Thomas Jefferson, independent, verifiable, secular evidence to prove he lived, unfortunately your jesus doesn't.

    LOL

    And I never complained about your typos, only your posting methods. Walk on water lately, didn't think you would try that one either. Don't worry about my posting you seem to manage to respond even if you can't comprehend what was said and correctly reply, you still respond to what I post.

    The real problem is you can't face the reality that I post about and that renders you with only childish babble in your replies. It is obvious you can't refute what I say, so you just try to insult me and hope that will cause me to leave. Sorry to disappoint you but insults prove I am very effective in reaching you and making you realize how ridiculous your beliefs continue to be. Face it DP you can't deal with reality and until you cure your problems you will not be capable of recovering from it.

    Keep coming back I will assist you in your recovery from the programming and it is obvious you want it or you would stop the attacks.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:31 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    believer »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:19 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    al, and you alone decide with regards to the evidence and once again who died and left you boss?? And while you're at it could you please cite your credentials that make you the authority in this area??
    ----------------------------------------------
    In Response First you complain about the amount of descriptive comments and then you complain about why I have to write in order to get a simple direct response to a simple direct question. If you would stop stalling and just tell the factual truth and your religious nonsense doesn't qualify under any of that , it would speed up the discussion.

    My questions, my conditions, don't comment if you can't follow the requirements and don't comment about my posts unless you first answer the original post from me.

    If you comment then you agree to answer according to what was asked. Your programming prevents you from answering truthfully since it would make you realize what you believe is complete nonsense and that would be too much for your fragile condition to deal with.

    So commandments and contradictions must really challenge you to the limit, but when faced with reality, believer all you can do is run and hide, since you won't admit to the factual reality I make you see.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:31 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    "In Response First you complain about the amount of descriptive comments and then you complain about why I have to be in order to get a simple direct response to a simple direct question. If you would stop stalling and just tell the factual truth and your religious nonsense doesn't qualify under any of that , it would speed up the discussion."

    Don't take this the wrong way please...are you ESL?

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:30 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    AL---and neither have you given evidence that Thomas Jefferson actually existed.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:29 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    " I asked you specifically what I wanted and you accepted those conditions with the response."

    You said you wanted tangible evidence. I agreed to give you tangible evidence. I gave you tangible evidence. :D

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 3

    Daniel Paul »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:54 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    "You forget I make the determination as to the evidence not you"

    Thank you for proving my point! You determine what is evidence...therefore you can ignore anything you want and still feel you are right.
    ---------------------------------------------
    In Response: I asked you specifically what I wanted and you accepted those conditions with the response. If you not going to give what I asked for then you also had an out by admitting nothing existed, would that be so difficult for you to admit there is nothing to produce. The answer was obvious and all it would have taken was for you to say it in those exact words.

    The problem with discussing anything with you is that you lack a factual basis, I have never said that you don't have a right to believe in anything you want, no matter how ridiculous it is. You avoid, evade and then delay in providing a simple direct answer to a direct simple question and why because to admit it makes you admit that there is no rational basis for those beliefs. We both know that is exactly the case and it proves that your fear of doing so is additional evidence of the very reason to stop with this silliness.

    That is exactly your problem and every post I put up is yet one more example of that every fact. Your commandments order you to tell the truth yet you violate them in the face of the truth out of nothing but the knowledge and fear of admission.

    Since you will not come clean in your admissions it is left to me to express it, you certainly won't and most of the people here will jump in to prevent it if you did, so stop playing at the stalling any longer. This board is to discuss among other things,your christian religion so why do you run away when I ask, you know the reason is stated above so for once admit the truth and stop this nonsensical practice you and the rest of your f&e group employ to evade admitting the truth and lets move on to other things like proving the basis for your beliefs and the lack of historical evidence to support it under the terms of the challenge I issued but hasn't been satisfied. .
    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:52 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    HE DOES!!!! LOL ROF LOL...A

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    DP, look at his 12:47PM post to hohnson, if I'm reading it right in it he uses the term "fellow f&e member" who I assume is you and he states hohnson is an f&e as well!!

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:41 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 0

    believer »Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:19 pm
    "al, and you alone decide with regards to the evidence and once again who died and left you boss??"

    It's that whole insecurity thing. Insecurity requires that the person be right. His self value and worth are derived from it. Of course, for you and me...we get that from Jesus. Have you ever read "Search for Significance"? His position is common among intelectuals who want to reject responsibility to God.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:38 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    believer »Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:16 pm
    "al, did you really refer to hohnson as an f&e, that's rich!!!"

    Did he really??? Do we have two hohnson's on this site??? When did hohnson convert???

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:19 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    al, and you alone decide with regards to the evidence and once again who died and left you boss?? And while you're at it could you please cite your credentials that make you the authority in this area??

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:16 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    al, did you really refer to hohnson as an f&e, that's rich!!!

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:07 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    Al-Please, any possible resemblance to a qualified legal representative

    So, would that be why I tell people that I'm not a lawyer and what I do isn't considered legal advice? Is that why I have lawyers I refer people to? You see, I'm well aware of what I do and the limitations there of. Just, FYI, I have qualified legal counsel that I can contact by phone around the country and in DC. My goal is to get schools to provide the proper testing and services. If parents bring a lawyer then the school brings a lawyer and everyone gets to watch the lawyers play "whose the alpha dog" (much like you are trying here). Meanwhile, the students needs get lost in the suffle. If the school doesn't want to play ball then I simply turn it over to OCR and let them deal with it. That's their job. Mine is to gather data and get the school to actually look at it.

    Our state has never been better than 46th in the nation educationally. There are great reasons for this. Almost none of them have to do with money. Let me give you an example...a parent had an initial evaluation meeting for a 504 plan. The child had 3 medical diagnosis which were educational in nature...one was ADHD. They then listed that the student didn't finish his classwork on time, didn't finish tests in the appropriate time frame and was disorganized. The did NO testing to see how his disability impacted his education, listed no documents that showed he didn't need help, infact, they didn't even check the "evaluations" box! Yet, they said that he didn't need services and denied him! What does your expert opinion say about that?

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:54 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    "You forget I make the determination as to the evidence not you"

    Thank you for proving my point! You determine what is evidence...therefore you can ignore anything you want and still feel you are right. This isn't about proving heaven to you...this is about you convincing yourself that you are right!!! It's about your comfort zone of having to admit that there might be something you cannot control in your life. Your position is one of classic insecurity.

    You are more than welcome to ignore our warnings. It is your eternity. However, there are things that you will not find out until later. Everyone thought Gene Roddenberry was out of his mind for even suggesting that a communications device could be that small and you could store data on a media like they used. Does that mean I don't have a cell phone and a thumb drive now? Time proves the truth.

    Hbr 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

    How many clients do lawyers deal with who don't believe the judge will throw the book at them? Doesn't change reality now does it. It just takes time to prove.

    So...good luck with that....

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:29 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Daniel Paul »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:05 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 1 Flag

    AL...the dictionary says I've already provided tangible evidence. You only want to use one definition of the word. What a limited scope.... :D
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: You forget I make the determination as to the evidence not you, you lousy example didn't meet the minimum standards, so keep trying eventually you will learn what it takes to satisfy my requests.

    For someone who claims to work in the legal field you certainly have lax requirements in the venue you claim to work in. If you tried that worthless prank in any real legitimate venue you would have been laughed out of the building and probably be held in contempt.

    So whats your next trick trying to convince a parent you have their best interests at heart while you fumble you way through the next disaster you work on. Please, any possible resemblance to a qualified legal representative is only in your own schizophrenic mind.

    TFR

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:20 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

    Daniel Paul »
    Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:01 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    RE: caritaspromundi »Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:11

    Now, that's real interesting because I have a brother-in-law (and family) who is a pastor in AB and Uncles (and their families) in ON. They seem to have a different news service from you.

    Secondly, your statement doesn't make any sense:
    ----------------------------------------
    In Response: Yes DP I agree YOUR statements never make sense.

    Since you refuse to properly quote the original post/poster it is next to impossible to understand your reference.

    Try quoting the time date stamp AND the original comments , then start your rant, unless of course that would prevent you changing the prior post to enable your rant to make sense in the first place.

    The facts and reality of the event makes no difference to you since you continue to change what was said and manipulate the facts into an out of context representation of the original and thus prevent the reader from understanding what was said to what you have changed it into under some skewed version that fits your agenda.

    Just to make crystal clear, I provided an example to illustrate your techniques.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:05 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    AL...the dictionary says I've already provided tangible evidence. You only want to use one definition of the word. What a limited scope.... :D

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

    Guys...Al is a lawyer.... He's use to trying to get sentences to run together (concurrent).... :p

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:01 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

    RE: caritaspromundi »Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:11

    Now, that's real interesting because I have a brother-in-law (and family) who is a pastor in AB and Uncles (and their families) in ON. They seem to have a different news service from you.

    Secondly, your statement doesn't make any sense:

    "he was emphatic that government authorities suppress Canadian homosexuals , using any means necessary . This spells violence."

    He wanted the government to do this. He didn't say for the people to do this but rather the government. Are you suggesting the government would use violence against homosexuals in order to suppress them???

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:11 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Significant correction of a religiously inspired lie : Rev. Boission was not fined or taken before a Canadian Human Rights Council for speaking his religious views on homosexual persons. It couldn't happen.Period. Freedom of religion is covered by the Charter.What happened is as follows :during an interview with a British Columbian news journalist , he was emphatic that government authorities suppress Canadian homosexuals , using any means necessary . This spells violence. And you can't encourage violence against any group or individual , under Canadian law. We are a secular democracy , and for purposes of extending rights and responsibilities to each and every citizen-taxpayer ; the contents of the Bible or any other faith oriented policy and procedure manual ; are irrelevant. Religion is based on faith ; not facts.Gays are facts , full citizens , and are entitled to human and civil rights , and the respect owed to any human being. I suspect that religious conservatives eat a lot of British beef , as they do not understand these simple facts , and try to convince themselves they are victims In reality , they ARE victims , but not of what they think they are. Gene transplants can't come soon enough , for those poor souls whose learning propensities are limited by self imposed blinders.

  • Wed Nov 04, 2009 12:47 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Hohnson »Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:47 pm
    ---------------------------------------------
    In Response: I will remember you said that the next time your fellow f&e member demonstrates his lack of comprehension skills.

    Thanks again for your interest and now let see how you do answering the challenge of proving the existence of your deity, certainly such a brilliant individual like yourself should easily be capable of following the rules and refuting the essay.

    Please remember that you must adhere to the rules exactly and do not deviate in any response to it. You will of course understand that no one has yet undertaken the challenge and been successful at refuting it.

    So if you can stick to the rules of the challenge, let us all read how you do. When you fail please be kind enough to admit that you failed just like all the others who attempted it previously. How does say a week sound to you for a time limit in your attempt? Certainly a person of your special talents and apparent knowledge can complete this and adhere to the rules of the challenge without the need to cheat in any manner.

    Looking forward to read what you can come up with and then find out if you can admit defeat when you fail. Remember strict adherence to the rules and I have recently clarified them to make it even easier to follow them.

    TFR

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:46 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    al, I find it comical how you have no problem chastising others but heaven forbid, oh strike that last remark since you don't believe in heaven, make that earth forbid that someone should chastise or appear to make a demand toward you and you get totally bent out of shape!!

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:47 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Alocksee,
    One does not need a degree in English to know how to recognize a run-on sentence. I think "the kids" begin to learn this in the 2nd or 3rd grade. Let's take a look shall we? You write:


    "It's difficult enough trying to translate a normal vocabulary into the necessary limited babble so DP can have any chance at understanding my comments, I don't need another critique the next candidate for the popping fresh pilsbury pulpit puppet award to inject more interruptions into an already dysfunctional discussion."

    The word "comments" should mark the end of a sentence. You need a period here.

    "I don't need another critique the next candidate"

    Again, a child would understand this phrase is incomprehensible. I'm only asking you to do some proofreading before you hit "submit."

    Secondly, you write: "I will try to remember in the future to spell things out to you. I got the sarcasm, I understood what you had posted."

    Clearly you didn't. Why would you write an entire paragraph about the picture not being "verifiable proof" if you understood the joke? You are a simpleton masquerading as a sophisticate.

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:21 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Hohnson »
    Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:35 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    Alocksee,

    Along with an inability to write clearly, you apparently also lack the ability to recognize sarcasm. The clue was the phrase "They don't just put anything on the internet."

    I'm not sure what you mean by f&e (fun and energetic perhaps?) but if you ask some of the more fervent members of this community you will discover that they would not consider me one of their squad.
    I will try to explain my jokes in the future in a way that even you can understand.
    ------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: Guess you are a little touchy, I will try to remember in the future to spell things out to you. I got the sarcasm, I understood what you had posted.

    Since you continue harping on my writing style, perhaps you can tell me where you received your masters or PHD in English, otherwise leave it alone.

    It's difficult enough trying to translate a normal vocabulary into the necessary limited babble so DP can have any chance at understanding my comments, I don't need another critique the next candidate for the popping fresh pilsbury pulpit puppet award to inject more interruptions into an already dysfunctional discussion.

    If you want to help then help keep the kids here in line and focused on the topic, instead of allowing them to run amok and ignore the issues.

    Does that work for you or should I find some puppets to help make it easier for you to understand?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx1XIm6q4r4
    Try that....
    TFR

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:35 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

    Alocksee,

    Along with an inability to write clearly, you apparently also lack the ability to recognize sarcasm. The clue was the phrase "They don't just put anything on the internet."

    I'm not sure what you mean by f&e (fun and energetic perhaps?) but if you ask some of the more fervent members of this community you will discover that they would not consider me one of their squad.
    I will try to explain my jokes in the future in a way that even you can understand.

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:33 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    Hohnson »
    Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:49 pm Agree: 0 Disagree: 0 Flag

    "If you have a pic then post it it would be a first provided it could be verified as fact."

    http://jesusphotos.altervista.org/Jesus_in_the_clouds.htm

    So ends another argument. This is from the Internet. They don't just put anything on the internet. Also, space restrictions are no excuse for disjointed sentences.
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: "If you have a pic then post it it would be a first provided it could be verified as fact."

    Let me know when you can understand and provide what was asked for.

    Verifiable proof requires independent experts so none of your programmed f&e squad qualifies, leaving the problem still in your hands to comply. When you get that and I am convinced the pictures are judge authentic then you are done, until then thanks but no thanks as to this nonsense.

    Funny with the logic your ilk employs it 's a wonder they didn't photoshop a sign in those fakes and pass it off as some religious relic to the masses of programmed members of your local f&e house pretending to be a real church.

    TFR

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:49 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

    "If you have a pic then post it it would be a first provided it could be verified as fact."

    http://jesusphotos.altervista.org/Jesus_in_the_clouds.htm

    So ends another argument. This is from the Internet. They don't just put anything on the internet. Also, space restrictions are no excuse for disjointed sentences.

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:27 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

    hohnson, like I've told several others I do indeed hope you're right, but I also wonder if this Pastor in Canada assumed the same thing!!

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:25 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

    al, hohnson has been here a whole lot longer than you have and he and DP have had numerous discussions and debates with one another, so he is well aware of DP!!

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 2:21 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    Hohnson »Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:51 am And Alocksee, enough already! We get it, (despite having to decipher your sometimes incoherent run-on sentences) you don't believe in heaven. If I send you a photograph of Jesus waving to you from heaven, will you stop?
    --------------------------------------------------------
    In Response: Hohnson, I don't know how long you have been on here, but the problem with DP goes back a bit. He doesn't follow the posting etiquette and will not unless pressed give a straight direct answer to a simple question.

    He often changes the original post in order to make it fit his response, out of context usage is the norm for him, which causes the original to be confused and then it takes several posts to correct what he did.

    My writing style is adapted to cut down on the space problems. You have to explain things so much to narrow it down to remove the people here from missing what was said. The practice is to make conclusions without understanding what was said and then go off on a tangent. So it requires that you cover the subject so specifically to remove that from happening.

    So that is the reason why I post in the manner I do and you will note I include the post with the time date stamp to fact check while DP and others here don't to allow them to get away with many things. I am honest in my responses, they aren't in their style and it lead to confusion and interruption of the discussion to fix their changes..

    If you have a pic then post it it would be a first provided it could be verified as fact.
    TFR

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:08 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

    Hi, MWalsh. As I have posted before:

    1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you

    I answer questions not out of reasoning with them but rather to post the truth of the Gospel. As I have posted to HM more than once I really like the way he gives me opportunity to post from the Bible how people can be free in Jesus.

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:51 am Agree: 4   Disagree: 1

    "But if the case in Canada is any indicator, it appears one does not have to advocate violence to be charged with a hate crime, but to just speak out against the sins of homosexuality can get one charged with a hate crime!!"

    Once again, the U.S. is not Canada. They do not have the First Amendment, but we do. Many brave men and women have died to ensure that we have freedom of speech rights protected by this amendment . Why do you just dismiss it so cavalierly?

    I am never a fan of what fundamentalists of any religion say, but if preachers start getting put in jail for saying homosexuality is a sin in this country then I'll be first in line with my carbine on, ready to bust them out.

    And Alocksee, enough already! We get it, (despite having to decipher your sometimes incoherent run-on sentences) you don't believe in heaven. If I send you a photograph of Jesus waving to you from heaven, will you stop?

  • Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:24 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

    mwalsh, excellent wisdom to not only DP, but to all true believers in this matter!!

Please help us to monitor our message boards by flagging comments that are unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.
Contact Us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Comment on this story
ID Password

Don't have a Christian Post ID? Signing up is easy. Click Here

  • icon1
  • icon2
  • icon3
  • icon4
  • icon5
The Christian Post reserves the right to terminate the account of any User who violates our Terms of Use.
Also on CP
Advertisement
Advertisement
CP Shopping
  • Jewelry
  • Health
  • Gifts
  • Music
  • Coins

Bracelets | Chains | Crosses | Earrings | Gemstone |

Featured contents & Giveaways
Joolwe :
Cross-pendant necklace
Zondervan

Struggling to succeed in the Nashville music scene, talented singer/songwriter Parker James finds the competition fierce even deadly. A young woman's murder, industry corruption, a

Featured Advertiser Links