On 10-10-10, ROSS SAUER said to TIM RICHARDSON:   
      
      
      
   TR> I've explained this to you before, many times, but you are too   
   TR> thick-headed to catch on. You let your religion-hatred get in the way   
   TR> of your common sense, a problem that seems to be pretty ingrained with   
   TR> your type.   
      
      
   TR> However.......I'll try again.   
      
      
   TR> To be a Christian means to be `Christ-like'.   
      
      
   RS>Does being "Christ-like" include hatred based on religion?   
      
      
   Obviously, you have never studied the New Testament and the life of Jesus   
   Christ, you are just shotgunning bullshit out there. Which is one of the   
   *many* reasons you are considered inconsequential.   
      
      
   RS>Because I keep seeing self-proclaimed Christians, including yourself,   
   RS>spew absolute hatred of *ALL* Muslims.   
      
      
   Secondly, you are a bald-faced liar. You get these little images of what   
   others think or opine, and you post them out here and try to force   
   the person you are targeting at the moment into `that' image as `what they   
   are'. A trick Klahn employs on a pretty regular basis, which is one of the   
   reasons I don't ever talk to him. He's a jerk. So are you.   
      
      
   Oh, and by the way.....I have more than once pointed out that *I* am not   
   exactly what you'd call a "Christian". I align with Christians because they   
   are not only good people, and enrich my life in ways that like...say...you or   
   Klahn, for instance, do not. I would align with Christians any day of the week   
   before I'd *ever* align with the likes of you.   
      
      
   TR> Studying Christ and his life and ministry, you see a way of living   
   TR> that is non-violent, non-criminal, and deeply charitable.   
      
      
   RS>You mean like the megachurch preachers who preach about how sick our   
   RS>society is, yet they are so corrupt they stink on ice?   
      
      
   You surely know how to read, and you are aware at this point in your life that   
   words mean things.   
      
      
   So.....when you read that sentence of mine up these that says:   
      
      
   "Studying Christ and his life and ministry, you see a way of living that is   
   non-violent, non-criminal, and deeply charitable." ....   
      
      
   Quite obviously I was talking about *Christ-like* behavior.   
      
      
   As for those you call "megachurch preachers who preach about how sick our   
   society is.....", I am not the one who judges their activities, nor am I   
   responsible for what  they ascribe to their particular version of   
   `Christianity'. That is left to Another of much Higher Authority than I.   
      
      
   I do not take part in their megachurch, nor do I support them with money or   
   verbal endorsement.   
      
      
   `They' are ultimately responsible for what they do, not I.   
      
      
   So you can take me out of your little scenario.   
      
      
   RS>> Osama Bin Laden is described as a Muslim.   
   RS>> Meir Kahane was described as a Jew.   
      
      
   TR> Studying the life of Mohommad, you see a life of anger,   
   TR> forced-conversion, war, death, slavery, demeaning of women, hatred.   
      
      
   RS>Studying the life of Moses and the other "heroes" of the Old Testament,   
   RS>you see the same thing.   
      
      
   Again.....you obviously know nothing about the bible, either the old testament   
   or the new.   
      
      
   TR> Osama bin Laden is a Muslim. Islam is about conquering, slavery, hate,   
   TR> suicide, war, .........   
      
      
   RS>Likewise the Old Testament.   
      
      
   We do not live in the days of the old testament. This is the 21st century. All   
   new norms and customs govern people who live today than several thousand years   
   ago.   
      
      
   TR> I have a question for you:   
      
      
   TR> Each time someone brings up the fact that the world of Islam is trying   
   TR> to force their `world' on the rest of the world......Klahn or you, his   
   TR> sock puppet, pop up with `well.....it isn't *all* Muslims, only a   
   TR> select few. The rest of the Muslim world is against that'....or words   
   TR> along that line.   
      
      
   RS>Oh, and Christians aren't?   
      
      
   It wasn't Christians who hijacked jumbo jets and flew them into the World   
   Trade Center and the Pentagon, murdering thousands of Americans in a suicide   
   attack.   
      
      
   It was Muslims.   
      
      
   Where the world may have been outraged at it, the Muslim world has been   
   strangely silent on condemning the radical muslim terrorists who roam the   
   world murdering people in the name of Islam.   
      
      
   It is said that many `good' Muslims do condemn those who did 9\11.   
      
      
   Really? Where are they? We keep `hearing' about them from different people..   
   ....but where are they? Why are they so silent?   
      
      
   RS>One of the heads of the Southern Baptists wants yoga outlawed, since it   
   RS>has elements of Eastern religions in it sometimes.   
      
      
   When the Southern Baptists get it on a ballot, and it ends up in the Supreme   
   Court.......get back to me.   
      
      
   RS>Also look up "Christian Reconstructionism," and "Dominionism."   
      
      
   `Reconstructionism' really has nothing whatever to do with your line of   
   argument. I know what it is, and you obviously don't.   
      
      
   By the way......neither does `Dominionism'.   
      
      
   RS>Then tell me again how only Muslims want to take over the world.   
      
      
   You are off here by several orders of magnitude. You better stop digging.   
      
      
   TR> If this is true......where (oh...where!) is all this outrage from the   
   TR> part of the Muslim world who are against the violence? I haven't seen   
   TR> any. Have you?   
      
      
   RS>Yes, in the Sufi Muslim faith.   
      
      
      
   Oh really? You'd be the only one, then, `cause I haven't seen any outrage from   
   Muslims.   
      
      
   When one of these ragheaded imams issues a death sentence for someone who drew   
   a cartoon `dissing' Mohommad, where was the outrage? Why isn't the U.S. press   
   jumping all over it? We have a reporter here in the US in hiding with her   
   whole family because of a death sentence issued by a raghead in a foreign   
   country! Where's the outrage!   
      
      
   RS>> Also, should the 1rst Amendment apply to Phelps' stunts?   
      
      
   TR> The 1st Amendment applies to everyone.   
      
      
   RS>> I say it does, since the same people that censor Phelps, can sensor   
   RS> anyone else for any reason.   
      
      
   TR> Do you think some soldiers attending a funeral for a fallen comrade,   
   TR> should surround a few of the pukes holding the signs and shouting vile   
   TR> insults at their comrade's family, and beat the shit out of them?   
      
      
   RS>No.   
      
      
   RS>It gives Phelps grounds for lawsuits, and that is how he and his brood   
   RS>make money.   
      
      
   RS>It also is free speech suppressed by a mob.   
      
      
   What `mob'? Unless you mean Phelp's `mob' waving the hate signs and shouting   
   `hate' speech. One of the Phelp's group'd be bound to swing a sign at a   
   soldier's face or head, and the reaction would be self-defense in a mutual   
   combat situation. If it were a platoon of Marines from Camp Pendelton, or a   
   platoon of Navy Seals.....all the better. I'd have no problem with it.   
      
      
   Or all the better......get up in a sign-waver's face `Drill Sergeant' style,   
   and shout stuff like `YOU LITTLE MAGGOT! YOU COWARDLY EXCUSE OF AN AMERICAN!   
   YOU LEFTIST PIECE OF PIG DUNG! YOU JOCK-STRAP-SUCKIN` PUNK!'   
      
      
   See now......thats also protected speech......even if it `is' true! And I'd   
   have no proble with that, either.   
      
      
   But none of that's gonna happen. I wouldn't initiate any of that for the same   
   reasons I have objections to what Phelps and his bunch are doing; simple   
   common decency. A trait the leftwing democrats appear to lack.   
      
      
   See......if it were a funeral for some deserter who either made his way back   
   to the US from a war zone after going AWOL, or some ass clown who was   
   virulently vocal against the war......and a bunch of people who believed in a   
   strong military, and a strong reaction to terrorist act, were standing nearby   
   waving signs in support of the war on terror at *their* funeral, the outrage   
   of the press and TV talking heads would be enormous!   
      
      
   With democrats in power....they'd be trying to pass even stricter `hate   
   speech' laws to cover that......probably get one or more through, to!   
      
      
   Let me ask you another question:   
      
      
   Some nutcase shoots and kills an abortion clinic doctor.   
      
      
   How many Christian churches organize large groups with anti-abortion signs to   
   picket that doctor's funeral, shouting insults at the family?  Or loudly   
   reading off the names of the `mothers' who's pregnancies the dearly departed   
   doctor ended with his\or\her abortion procedure?   
      
      
   I wouldn't do that, either, but........would that be jake with you?   
      
      
      
   ---   
   *Durango b301 #PE*    
    * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)