Jeff Binkley -> Ed Hulett wrote:



 JB>>>>>>> speech and religion ?  Do you assume your
rights are more
 JB>>>>>>> important than  someone else's ?  Your
answer appears to be
 EH>>>> that they lose  DC> their
 JB>>>>>>> rights  so that you may be comfortable.

 DC>>>>>> Wrong, Jeff.  Freedom of Religion does not give
anyone the
 DC>>>>>> right to push their religion in a public venue.

 EH>>>>>> You are mistaken. The First Amendment only
limits the power
 EH>>>>>> of government WRT religion. If you are offended
by someone's
 EH>>>>>> display of religion, remove yourself from their presence.

 DC>>>>> Sure, if the dislay is on private property.

 EH>>>> Even if it's on public property. You aren't required to
 EH>> participate.

 DC>>>>> Having that crap displayed on public property is an afront to
 EH>>>> each and every person who
 DC>>>>> has the right to be on that public property that doesn't buy
 DC>>>>> into that particular religious poiny of view.

 EH>>>> Huh? Where is the right not to be offended come from?

 JB>>> And he's only offended if it is on public property.  So when he
 JB>>> sees any religious symbol he can instantly tell whether it is on
 JB>>> private or public property to know whether he should be offended
 JB>>> or not ?  Wow.  I don't know about you but I often can't tell by
 JB>>> glancing at a building who owns it.  He's got some apparent
 JB>>> special power that the rest of us don't have.  Of course if it
 JB>>> exists then I believe the solution is for the government to own
 JB>>> many less buildings and pieces of property.

 EH>> There you go. The government should divest itself of all the
 EH>> property. What is the government doing owning property anyway?

 EH>> I can tell from how Ceppa behaves that he would be just as offended
 EH>> if the display was on private property. It's just that he couldn't do
 EH>> anything about it.

 JB> Exactly.  This is where his bigotry is on display for the entire world
 JB> to see.  He and Sauer are just blind to it.

What do you expect from those two? They don't have enough sense between the
two of them to come in out of the rain.

Ed

-- 
"Wise politicians will be cautious about fettering the government with
restrictions that cannot be observed, because they know that every
break of the fundamental laws, though dictated by necessity, impairs
that sacred reverence which ought to be maintained in the breast of
rulers towards the constitution of a country."

--Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, 21 December 1787

Linux User #416016
Linux Machine #385030

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)