On Priscilla Owen

Status
Not open for further replies.

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Unfortunately this analogy's worthless in that lynching and rape have been consistently illegal throughout at least our own nation's history. At the very least parental consent laws provide a stop gap, more or less a last ditch effort to prevent the girl from going through with it. Better than nothing, anyway.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
granite1010 said:
Ah. Forgot about that. At the rate we're going the list of those who "should" be impeached is going to be fairly considerable.
Yup. Any judge who makes any decision someone doesn't like is eligible.

“It is tenure for life as long as you behave well . . . as I know that Justice Kennedy and Justice Souter and Justice Breyer and Justice Ginsburg and the rest of that crowd have not done.” Michael Schwartz, chief of staff for Senator Tom Coburn, quoted by the Washington Post, April 11, 2005

Has the pro-life community started any action in calling for the impeachment of any "activist" judges? I'm not aware of any, doesn't mean someone hasn't had the bright idea, though.
I know that DeLay has mentioned it as has Michael Schwartz...

“I'm in favor of mass impeachment if that's what it takes.” - Schwartz, quoted by the Washington Post, April 11, 2005.



The following quotes are from the "Confronting the Judicial War on Faith Conference"...Source - Washington Post, April 9, 2005



From Edwin Vieira, a lawyer and author...

"Ominously, Vieira continued by saying his “bottom line” for dealing with the Supreme Court comes from Joseph Stalin. “He had a slogan, and it worked very well for him, whenever he ran into difficulty: ‘no man, no problem,’” Vieira said. "


As a sidebar, "...the full Stalin quote, for those who don't recognize it, is “Death solves all problems: no man, no problem."

Vieira sounds a bit like Enyart in what he was proposing... so now our "godly" leadership is looking to Joe Stalin for their political methodology... :think:
 
Last edited:

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
That's convenient but not especially fair; if the bench was stacked with conservatives and the left was calling for "mass impeachments," Rush, Dr. Laura, and the rest of the crowd would be screaming for blood.
 

one4christ

New member
zakath said:
IMO, using "dramatic language" or even hyperbole is fine. Particularly in an entertainment context. But it's quite a bit different from stating a piece of misinformation, over and over, trying to lend validity to one's point.

Far from lending to the credibility of one's argument, continual misstatements of fact tends to erode it.

granite1010 said:
And what definitely does not help is the inability to admit a mistake and move on. Dramatic license is one thing but it's certainly not something you should mix with history.

Has Bob refused to note the error, or not address it? In either case, what I meant by dramatic was the repetition of the statement (re-enforcing the analogy), not making a 'mis-statement'.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
one4christ said:
Has Bob refused to note the error, or not address it?
Couldn't tell you since I don't listen to his show. I haven't seen anything posted here about it...

In either case, what I meant by dramatic was the repetition of the statement (re-enforcing the analogy), not making a 'mis-statement'.
Thank you for clarifying.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
one4christ said:
Has Bob refused to note the error, or not address it? In either case, what I meant by dramatic was the repetition of the statement (re-enforcing the analogy), not making a 'mis-statement'.

He's not on TOL terribly often and I have no clue if Jefferson's brought this error to his attention. Tend to doubt it; both men have bigger fish to fry.
 

one4christ

New member
granite1010 said:
I would agree that from a consistent pro-life position somebody or something should hold these judges accountable...but considering they're in there for life the only thing one can do is vote for candidates who will (hopefully) make the right appointments.
Since you know your way around this forum pretty well, you probably have at least seen the title of Bob's Open Letter To James Dobson. This addresses the reason that 25 years of hoping candidates will appoint the right judges hasn't worked.

BTW, A libertarian who supports Pro-life? Is that a contradition (at least from a party platform perspective?)
 

jeremiah

BANNED
Banned
granite1010 said:
"Was it not about a year ago that you renounced your belief in Jesus Christ? Why are you still even here on Theology Online.?"

About a year. I enjoy stirring the pot.

jeremiah: IMHO, I would say, you minor on stirring the pot, and major on attacking Christians, almost exclusively. There are far more inconsistencies, and inaccuracies in the beliefs and statements of the other religion types on this board, yet you, and Zakath, leave those potshots unfired. You both seem to have a particular distaste and fear of Christians.



My comment was deliberately facetious: if Enyart and his followers are so riled up pull a Paul Hill and put your money where your mouth is. Otherwise shut up and quit spilling your bloodlust over the airwaves.

And you said:

I could have and chose not to. So what. Free country last time I checked. I think Roe v. Wade opened the floodgates to murder and I believe that Terri Schiavo should have been placed in the care of her parents. That said, it doesn't change my original opinion that nutcases like Enyart who pound their shoes on the table and clamor for the execution of judges are just as harmful as judges who sanction murder.



jeremiah: Let's see, you are advocating murder for people like Bob Enyart and myself I suppose, a la Paul Hill, over people expressing outrage, either over the public airwaves, or in my case the internet! Then in the next statement you note that you can post, or not post, whatever you want, because after all it is still a free country, last time you checked. This all coming from a Libertarian.
Might I suggest to you that someone advocating that judges be tried, and if found guilty, in the context stated, be put to death, falls under the heading of free speech, even if spoken with great passion. Your suggestion that Enyart and his followers sicken you by their bloodlust, and that they should go out and kill someone, is not free speech, but could be taken as incitement to violence. You are the one who had best be careful with your words. Since you are a person of little repute, you probably need not fear a knock on your door. Any talk show host would be in serious trouble saying what you have posted here.
BTW, I have never gone to his Church, but I have listened to him for many years on the radio, and I have heard him condemn the actions of Paul Hill, specifically by name , many times!
Again, I hate to keep bringing this up, but are these remarks, examples of the kinder-more compassionate, and Christ-like Granite, in his post Christian form!
I certainly applaud and praise you, for your remarks concerning Roe v Wade, and Terry Schiavo! However those kind of remarks, and your advocation of murder, above free speech, even under the cloak of exasperation, would have most libertarians equally exorcized. Don't you think? Live and let live?



"After that you could have done a little research like your alter ego, and said, BTW we did not execute any judges at Nuremburg..."



jeremiah: I already apologized for my lack of research, at the bottom of page one. I am surprised you missed that.
;)

P.S. Can you make any case for your belief that when Bob Enyart advocates the execution of the judges that sanction murder, that he is AS dangerous as the judges who did the sanctioning? :think:
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
one4christ said:
Since you know your way around this forum pretty well, you probably have at least seen the title of Bob's Open Letter To James Dobson. This addresses the reason that 25 years of hoping candidates will appoint the right judges hasn't worked.

BTW, A libertarian who supports Pro-life? Is that a contradition (at least from a party platform perspective?)

I'm not a member of any party but "libertarian," in the truest sense of the word, is what sums up my political philosophy. Abortion is a human rights issue, as far as I'm concerned. Very straightforward and self-evidently murder.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"You both seem to have a particular distaste and fear of Christians."

Distaste, yes, fear, no. You guys had your teeth pulled a long time ago.

"Let's see, you are advocating murder for people like Bob Enyart and myself I suppose, a la Paul Hill, over people expressing outrage, either over the public airwaves, or in my case the internet!"

:kookoo:

A couple words for you: tongue-in-cheek. Brother.

"You are the one who had best be careful with your words."

Yeah pal, I'm shaking.

I think you've completely misunderstood what I said. If Enyart and his followers had the strength of their convictions they WOULD go vigilante and start killing judges (and, frankly, anyone else who disagreed with them). They don't. Enyart's all bark and no bite, and windbags and stuffed shirts are people I have little tolerance for.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
jeremiah said:
granite1010...There are far more inconsistencies said:
I cannot speak for Granite, but from my perspective, it's a fundy Christian web forum... if I wanted "take potshots" at Muslims, or Catholics, or JWs I'd go to one of their web forums. In a barrel containing 98% trout and 1% bass and 1% catfish, you rig your line for trout, not bass.

I certainly do not fear any religionists as a group, I'm just cautious about the lunatic fringe associated with them.
 

Caille

New member
granite1010 said:
I'm not a member of any party but "libertarian," in the truest sense of the word, is what sums up my political philosophy. Abortion is a human rights issue, as far as I'm concerned. Very straightforward and self-evidently murder.



Don't want to open a can of worms here Granite, but can I ask you if your views on abortion extend back (gestationally) to the fertilized but unimplanted egg stage ?
 

JoyfulRook

New member
granite1010 said:
I think you've completely misunderstood what I said. If Enyart and his followers had the strength of their convictions they WOULD go vigilante and start killing judges (and, frankly, anyone else who disagreed with them). They don't. Enyart's all bark and no bite, and windbags and stuffed shirts are people I have little tolerance for.
Do you need a link to Bob's vigilante worksheet?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Caille said:
Don't want to open a can of worms here Granite, but can I ask you if your views on abortion extend back (gestationally) to the fertilized but unimplanted egg stage ?

Not sure, honestly.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
So it looks like ole Prissy's going to get voted on today... think she'll be confirmed, or not?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top