On Priscilla Owen

[JoyfulRook]

Who cares? The Supreme Court is already headed to hell with Jetrockets. Forget the handbasket.

 

[Zakath]

Who cares? The Supreme Court is already headed to hell with Jetrockets. Forget the handbasket.

Well somebody must care, they started a thread with her name on it and over 60 posts in it...

 

[Caille]

Not sure, honestly.

Thanks Granite, I appreciate the honest and straightforward answer.

 

[Granite]

Works better than a snow job, I've noticed...

 

[JoyfulRook]

Well somebody must care, they started a thread with her name on it and over 60 posts in it...

No they just like to criticize Bob as much as possible.

 

[Servo]

No they just like to criticize Bob as much as possible.

They talk about Bob more than the "Enyartians" do.

 

[Zakath]

They talk about Bob more than the "Enyartians" do.

Well, look around and honestly tell me whether it doesn't get things stirred up when they do so. It is a discussion forum, afterall... :chuckle:

 

[Servo]

Well, look around and honestly tell me whether it doesn't get things stirred up when they do so. It is a discussion forum, afterall... :chuckle:

Or is it obsession?

:think:

 

[Zakath]

Or is it obsession?

:think:

Could be... but I think it's more likely that a bit of iconoclasty is just an easy way to boost one's post count.

 

[jeremiah]

"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.


jeremiah: If you have no fear, then why didn't you answer the last question in my post, that has to do with your expression of fear, or let us say grave "concern"!!! You said something like, Bob was a nutcase, and AS harmful as the judges who sanction murder.



"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.


jeremiah: Nice cover!.... Hey I was just kidding! Can't you guys take a joke? If you guys had any guts at all you would go shoot someone, just like Paul Hill did. Now that I get it, I am ROTFL. Thanks granite for letting me in on it, that certainly was a great tongue-in-cheek.
No officer, you can't arrest me, I was not going to hijack this plane, I was just yelling HI, to my friend Jack. There is another great tongue-in cheek. Why don't you try that one down at your local airport next time granite. Let me know how it turns out.



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

Yeah pal, I'm shaking.


SEE ABOVE



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.

jeremiah: Boy, that sure clears up, whether or not you are being completely facetious, or completely serious. You don't make statements like that, to people you consider nutcases. Go ask Zakath, he is the psychologist. It is the equivalent of making a dare to an adolescent boy with his buddies, silently watching his next move.

So let's get to the bottom line. Bob is pro- life, and granite is pro- life. Bob opposed the murder of Terri Schiavo and Granite opposed the murder of Terri Schiavo. So Granite jumps into this thread and demeans Bob, and others who hold the same positions as he does, and calls at least one of them a nutcase, and the rest cowardly in their convictions as they relate to their rhetoric.
Please enlighten us as to how you are not even more cowardly in relation to your pro- life and anti euthanasia convictions. Bob has done much to save many babies and to persuade through his voice and influence, many others to do so as well. How is your strategy {and what is it} better, and more productive?

 

[Caille]

Works better than a snow job, I've noticed...

If only Ninevah would get the concept.

 

[Caille]

Could be... but I think it's more likely that a bit of iconoclasty is just an easy way to boost one's post count.

and neg rep count ! :banana: :banana:

 

[Zakath]

and neg rep count ! :banana: :banana:

Yes, that's certainly easy enough to do around here.

 

[Granite]

jeremiah: Boy, that sure clears up, whether or not you are being completely facetious, or completely serious. You don't make statements like that, to people you consider nutcases. Go ask Zakath, he is the psychologist. It is the equivalent of making a dare to an adolescent boy with his buddies, silently watching his next move.

So let's get to the bottom line. Bob is pro- life, and granite is pro- life. Bob opposed the murder of Terri Schiavo and Granite opposed the murder of Terri Schiavo. So Granite jumps into this thread and demeans Bob, and others who hold the same positions as he does, and calls at least one of them a nutcase, and the rest cowardly in their convictions as they relate to their rhetoric.
Please enlighten us as to how you are not even more cowardly in relation to your pro- life and anti euthanasia convictions. Bob has done much to save many babies and to persuade through his voice and influence, many others to do so as well. How is your strategy {and what is it} better, and more productive?

I took issue with Enyart's comments for a couple reasons: one, he was completely ignorant of history; two, he was using his ignorance as an apparent springboard for the execution of judges; three, I have zero use for the man's theology.

Why all the sudden you've decided to go after me on this thread and make your latest crusade Attack Granite day is beyond me, but all right--at least it keeps things interesting.

If Enyart thinks these judges "should" be executed he should explain who "should" be doing the executing. I suspect he'd favor his dictatorial/Christian monarchy fantasy and include this judges on the hit list. But I get real tired of these Christian paper tigers who tell us what "should" be done or who "should" pay or be executed, then promptly sit on their hands. Put up, or shut up.

 

[jeremiah]

I took issue with Enyart's comments for a couple reasons: one, he was completely ignorant of history; two, he was using his ignorance as an apparent springboard for the execution of judges; three, I have zero use for the man's theology.

jeremiah; By "completely" ignorant, I assume you are exaggerating for effect. He was correct in stating that there were Nuremburg trials for judges specifically! That judges were found guilty for the reasons he stated, and that they were sentenced. He was correct in remembering that many war criminals were executed, and lastly he made a mistake and his point is blunted, by the fact that none of the judges were executed. Instead some were given life sentences, and others terms.
Also I will assume you are using hyberbole, when you say you have "zero" use for his theology. His theology, and that of myself, and many others is very useful for you. It is the main reason that you stick around TOL. And at least he has a theology. When one has one , he is accountable to God and man, to practice what he says he believes in. When one does not have a defined theology, he is free to take potshots at those who do, without having to defend their own. In that respect you have it preety easy here.
I believe that Bob is bound by his theology to do everything that he can to decry, and rail against and expose the wickedness in himself and others, and our government. That theology also keeps us from doing what Paul Hill did.
I do not know Bob beyond his radio programs and internet postings. I only read part of his manuscript, The Plot. My opinion however is that his ministry can be compared to John the Baptist. He announced that the Kingdom of God is at hand, and that therefore he desires, and strongly urges people to REPENT! John told Herod, the ruling authority, that it was unlawful [by God's law} to have his brother's wife. Bob is saying that it is unlawful {by God's law} to have babies, or the infirm, put to death, even if you are the ruling authorities, who are following the rule of law. Rather, that they should be put to death by some "other" established ruling authority.
Granite, it seems to me that you are taking one of the few pastors who puts his beliefs in action, has risked, or actually been arrested or been assaulted at Abortion clinics, and other, in your face political rallies. A pastor who is currently under attack from both political parties, the press, and many leading Christian leaders and talk show hosts! A man who follows his motto, do right and risk the consequences. And you are accusing him of being a paper tiger, and lacking the courage of his convictions, because he won't act according to your beliefs, rather than his own. Beliefs which he has clearly stated, in advance.
Maybe you know Bob Enyart better than I do! Or maybe you have him mixed up with the thousands of other pastors, who have never been a "single" time, to an abortion, or political protest action.




Why all the sudden you've decided to go after me on this thread and make your latest crusade Attack Granite day is beyond me, but all right--at least it keeps things interesting.

jeremiah:
That is an easy one. It is like my kids, when they were little used to ask, why is there a Mother's day and a Father's day, but there is no children's day? Answer: because every day is children's day. Likewise look through the thread's here on the BEL forum. Just about everyday, is Attack BOB day. I guess I thought it was about time that we had a special Attack Granite day.



If Enyart thinks these judges "should" be executed he should explain who "should" be doing the executing. I suspect he'd favor his dictatorial/Christian monarchy fantasy and include this judges on the hit list. But I get real tired of these Christian paper tigers who tell us what "should" be done or who "should" pay or be executed, then promptly sit on their hands. Put up, or shut up.

I understand your peeve. Feel that way myself sometimes. We are not God, and God has left man in charge over the planet. How are we doing? :hammer:
Specifically God has given the authority to governments of man, to execute justice. Occasionally the righteous rule, and the people rejoice. Usually the wicked rule and people like you, and I, and Bob, and many others, mourn over the abortions and the euthanasia! I only know that God is holding back His judgment for our good, so that all "might" be saved. I know someday all the scales will be balanced for the ungodly, and all who call upon the name of God will be saved! {Is God a paper Tiger?}
I don't know, with your beliefs, what hopes you can hold onto, so you are probably only resigned to be more peeved than me. But what of Granite! But what of Granite!

 

[Granite]

"I believe that Bob is bound by his theology to do everything that he can to decry, and rail against and expose the wickedness in himself and others, and our government."

Enyart is reasonably consistent, I'll give you that.

"My opinion however is that his ministry can be compared to John the Baptist."

Oy. Don't inflate the man's ego!:chuckle:

"A pastor who is currently under attack from both political parties, the press, and many leading Christian leaders and talk show hosts! A man who follows his motto, do right and risk the consequences."

Enyart's a showboat for attention and he lives for it. He doesn't mind being under attack, he relishes it.

 

[Zakath]

I was checking to see if the person whose name is the title of this thread had been confirmed or not yet...

I ran across a comment by current US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales regarding Judge Owen... that her dissent in a Texas parental notification law case was an "unconscionable act of judicial activism". Source

An interesting comment about a Bush nominee from the head of the Bush Justice Department...

 

[Jukia]

I ran across a comment by current US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales regarding Judge Owen... that her dissent in a Texas parental notification law case was an "unconscionable act of judicial activism". Source

An interesting comment about a Bush nominee from the head of the Bush Justice Department...

Once again, it depends on who is goring whom's (?) ox.

Judicial activism is fine and dandy if it meets the desires of the right wing but not of the left. And, I am the first to admit, that while I may decry Justice Owen's activism I would, being of the left slant, applaude someone else's activist decision.

 

[Zakath]

Perhaps it's "who's ox"???? :think:

Judicial activism seems to be a bit like the old saw about "rebellion" always being in the third person. It's always "their rebellion", never "my rebellion".

 

[Zakath]

Well, Owen's appointment was confirmed by the Senate a few minutes ago by a vote of 56-43.

Looks like this thread is OBE (Overtaken By Events)...