The organizers of Go Topless 2010 wants the law books to specifically promise “constitutional equality between men and women on being topless in public.” To let their cause be known, they have planned protests in nine American cities over this summer. At these protests, all of the women will go almost topless (they wear fake nipple stickers over their actual ones to protect themselves from the laws they’re trying to overturn) while the men all wear bras and bikini tops.
I don't really care if that happens, I just wish the federal court system would let states decide for themselves and do it right. Not let judges decide what the law should be. Judges are there to tell what the law says, not change the law because they don't like what it says.
So, you believe that a law cannot be overturned on Constitutional grounds? Careful what you wish for.
**NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.
Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.
Actually, here's my final say: Anyone who tries to claim that I or the vast majority of those who stand in opposition to the location of the mosque are trying to abridge their freedom of religion can go breathe underwater.
Keep an open mind. Just don't be so open-minded that your brain falls out.
So, you believe that a law cannot be overturned on Constitutional grounds? Careful what you wish for.
There is a huge difference between overturning/reinterpreting a law because a specific judge or panel of judges doesn't like what it says and rejecting a law or part of a law because the constitution doesn't allow the federal government to regulate/control something.
Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.
Sports Allegiance:NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton
There is a huge difference between overturning/reinterpreting a law because a specific judge or panel of judges doesn't like what it says and rejecting a law or part of a law because the constitution doesn't allow the federal government to regulate/control something.
Well, since we're in the US and not elsewhere, I can tell you that it is most certainly a fundamental right that you can plop a mosque at any location you could also plop a church. Any restrictions on such land uses would have to apply equally to any faith.
And sorry, I just don't buy your sensitivity argument.
Tell me, was Ike really protecting the south's "dewy Scarlett O'Hara way of life" when he sent the 101st Airborne into Little Rock and federalized the Arkansas National Guard to remove them from Governor Orville Faubus' control?
I'm going to try to get off this mosque topic. I've registered my issues that I have with it, and there have been people, good friends of mine, that then complain about it.
I'm really getting sick of the "all Muslims didn't attack on 9/11 or celebrate it" excuse. You know what? All Catholics weren't in the IRA or supported them, but that doesn't make it a good freaking idea to build a massive cathedral in East Belfast, now does it?
Idea! Let's build a mega-church right outside the abortion clinic Eric Rudolph bombed in Alabama. We'll get a fiery Protestant minister to run the joint, some guy who refused to say whether James Kopp was wrong to kill Dr. Barnett Slepian and has rubbed shoulders in the past with the so-called "Army of God." Kosher? Surely it must be.
ZOMG THERE'S A STRIP CLUB NEAR GROUND ZERO? STOP THE FREAKING PRESSES!
All muslims didn't perpetrate 9/11...
but
how many of them agreed with it?
how many of them denied it was done by Muslims?
how many then claimed it was done by Jews?
and of those how many thought it was a **** good idea anyways?
------
BTW, for those not paying attention, it would seem that the imam involved is a "moderate"... as seen in the Islamic world... not how we would define a moderate.
blockski a "sliver of believers"... yes, a sliver of people participate in the action
from this what do we see? we see that the moderate view is that 9/11 was bad... ok... some hope... but then, yeah, the moderate view is that Arabs didn't do the attacks... presumably this implies that Muslims didn't do the attacks... bother.... the moderates believe that the west does not properly respect Islam.... oh, and back to the first one... when you are ringing in at 36% it would then appear that 9/11 being justifiable is a moderate stance.
---
Here's the thing... we've been lying to ourselves... many of you want "moderate" muslims because you know there are a whole lot of nutters and you want to bridge the gap. Foolhardy... but that's what you are aiming for. I want "liberal" muslims and I want them to win the day because "moderate" is in the eye of the beholder and CAIR is going to dress up a lot of wolves in sheeps clothing because that's what you are willing to accept because they're appropriately sanctioned... by an organization funded by the Muslim Brotherhood... the MB are not moderate nor are they your friends.
We need a "liberal" Islam... an expansive organization that desire to expand is not going to moderate because it believes it is ascendant... we have to shock Islam into believing they are wrong either by hurting them on their rules (the Alinsky Doctorine as applied to islam and not anti-socialists) or making them take ours (reshape their society on our rules). Until the Islamic society in general sees themselves at a weak spot they will not change or moderate.
The elements of liberal Islam need to be encouraged... and we do it no favor by making moderates out of extremists... WORSE we do OURSELVES no favor by not using our own definitions of moderate and extreme... using them let their definitions is only a call to failure.
BS UML '04, PhD UConn '09
Jerseys I would like to have:
Skating Friar Jersey
AIC Yellowjacket Jersey w/ Yellowjacket logo on front
UAF Jersey w/ Polar Bear on Front
Army Black Knight logo jersey
The elements of liberal Islam need to be encouraged... and we do it no favor by making moderates out of extremists... WORSE we do OURSELVES no favor by not using our own definitions of moderate and extreme... using them let their definitions is only a call to failure.
Do we do ourselves favors by making moderates out of liberals?
Tell me, was Ike really protecting the south's "dewy Scarlett O'Hara way of life" when he sent the 101st Airborne into Little Rock and federalized the Arkansas National Guard to remove them from Governor Orville Faubus' control?
I'm glad I'm not the only one old enough to remember that!
Take the shortest distance to the puck and arrive in ill humor
I'm all for topless chicks in public, but any dude who voluntarily wears a bra in public needs to turn in his balls.
This.
What's Obama's view on topless girls in public?
Jordan Kawaguchi for Hobey!! Originally posted by Quizmire mns, this is why i love you. Originally posted by Markt MNS - forking genius. Originally posted by asterisk hat MNS - sometimes you gotta answer your true calling. I think yours is being a pimp. Originally posted by hockeybando I am a fan of MNS.
There is a huge difference between overturning/reinterpreting a law because a specific judge or panel of judges doesn't like what it says and rejecting a law or part of a law because the constitution doesn't allow the federal government to regulate/control something.
My comment still stands. Be careful what you wish for.
I can accept the court system preventing the over reach of the federal government even when they pass a law I like. I can handle the fact that things I want changed need to be done by constitutional amendment, not crappy legislation and judicial activism.
Michigan Tech Legend, Founder of Mitch's Misfits, Co-Founder of Tech Hockey Guide, and Creator/Host of the Chasing MacNaughton Podcast covering MTU Hockey and the WCHA.
Sports Allegiance:NFL: GB MLB: MIL NHL: MIN CB: UW CF: UW CH: MTU FIFA: USA MLS: MIN EPL: Everton
Comment