Orlando's WKMG-TV reports on an incident reminiscent of South Park's "Death Camp of Tolerance" [1]:
Eighth-graders with last names beginning with L
through Z at Apopka Memorial Middle School were
given yellow five-pointed stars for Holocaust
Remembrance Day. Other students were privileged,
the report said.
Father John Tinnelly said his son was forced to
stand in the back of the classroom and not allowed
to sit because he was wearing the yellow star. . . .
"He was crying," Tinnelly said. "I said, 'What are
you crying about?' He said, 'Daddy, I was a Jew today.' " . . .
"They were told that they could not use the water
fountains," Tinnely [sic] said. "There was even a
sign supposedly at one water fountain (saying) if
you're wearing a yellow star, you can't use this
water fountain." . . .
"I tried to talk to my son and I asked all of these
questions and the only thing he said is, 'Daddy,
the only thing I found out today is I don't want
to be Jewish,' " Tinnelly said.
To say the least, this does not seem like the right message for a Holocaust awareness program to be sending. Haven't the guys who run this school ever heard of the "paper clips" movie [2]?
Look at it this way, at least they didn't get sued. After all, if it were a public school and the cafeteria only served Fish and other non-meat items with respect to Lent or any other Catholic or Christian holiday, the ACLU would be there in a heartbeat with their lawyers and Newspapers.
In article , "Erasmus \"The Mannequin\" Brown" wrote:
Fact is, nobody is history until the verdict is read. Delay stepped down because he thought (like Gangrich) that he would only lessen the chance of a Republican winning the seat. He stated he would rather step down than allow a Democrat favor. Think of him what you will, but compare his unselfish act to Clinton. Clinton would have rather seen his entire party go down before he gave anything of himself. And many believe that's just what happened in the following years after he left the White House.
Liberals are strange people. When they have a convicted murderer at hand, they protest the Death Penalty. But before a Conservative gets his day in court, he is already guilty.
The only problem is that to the American Christian Taliban, being "free to worship" means having the right to impose their bullshit "morals", laws and ideology on everyone else. Welcome to Saudi America.
By banning scientific medical research, for example, such as in the stem cell case, by outlawing abortions, even in the case of rape and incest, by attempting to overturn euthanasia laws, by wasting the tax-payers' money on "faith based" projects, by preventing the homosexuals from having their full civil rights, i.e. marrying, by constantly attempting to introduce religious practices into the purely secular institutions, by never failing to support any military action anywhere as long as the targets are of different religion, by turning a blind eye to all sorts of violence in the country, while at the same time persecuting bullshit issues like nudity, and so on, and so on...
Well the Christians or anybody else for that matter didn't "impose" this on anybody. This is the job for the politicians and nobody else. Yes, they have opinions as to what direction this country should go, but they don't force their beliefs on anybody.
????????? Can we pleeeeeeeease have a Christer here with an IQ of more than 5? Do you actually read what you write, once in a while? Christians didn't do this, politicians did? And what are these politicians, religiously neutral, agnostic or something? Let me get this straight, you actually believe that the President of the USA banned the stem cell research out of the vacuum? Because he dreamt it up? Not because he applied his religious "morals" to the issue and not because he responded to his fanatical Christian base?
Nooooo, of course not. Neither do the Muslim religious fanatics. They all simply "have opinions as to what direction this country should go", that's all. Idiot.
Well let a person with a IQ lower than 5 and inferior to your superior IQ inform you on something, and that is GW is the only President of the United States to fund some of the Stem Cell Research. How much did Clinton contribute?
And since you're on a roll of learning here, I'll inform you of something else, and that is EVERY President caters to his support base--not just GW. We live in a country where you can sue anybody for anything, but I'll bet you didn't bitch when the trial lawyers donated billions to the Democrat party all of those years. Most of our Industry has left this country the past few decades, but I'll bet you had nothing to say when all of those Unions supported your favorite Democrat Representatives.
Sounds to me that even with your highly elevated IQ, you still know nothing about politics.
In article , "Erasmus \"The Mannequin\" Brown" wrote:
What's the difference? He is still the only President to lift a finger to help. Bush decided not to use Federal funds for such research which is what most people are in a uproar about. I'm kind of defending him and kind of not. After all, I've been diabetic for nearly 20 years now, and such research would help me and probably add a few years on my life. But I don't think it's a Federal Government issue--it's a Private Institution--Organization issue if anything. But again, Clinton did less than GW and nobody seems to blame him for anything in this matter.
So Republicans didn't believe all that crap about running the most ethical administration ever, and being a born again Christian who is responsible to a higher moral authority, etc. either. So exactly why did you vote for this two legged cabbage then? Because he was pliant enough to do whatever he was told by powerful people?
And just what Representative doesn't cater to their supporters? You have to take the good with the bad. I'm not much of a religious fanatic, but I'm sure all in favor of getting rid of this Church and State garbage. But as a person who now has to pay to get the Howard Stern show, I'm not in favor of this censorship stuff.
Now I don't know where you come up with this "powerful people" stuff, but the Democrat party gets just as much money from Big Business as the Republicans, if not more. But GW attacked business with his "Do Not Call" list that limits businesses calling your home, and some businesses weren't real happy with the Republicans expanding Daylight Savings time. In fact, Continental Air Lines claims they will lose millions of dollars because of this change.
He contributed by not banning the research. Idiot.
I don't give a shit who gives what money to whom as long as this country is not being run by increasingly fascistoid politicians, as is the case with the present administration. There is a reason why "they hate us". And no, it's not because "we're good" or because "we're free".
I know enough to realize that all politicians are self-serving assholes, especially in the two-party system, while you, otoh, would vote for Ayatollah Khomeini if he promised to make the Bible the law of the land.
Of course. Had the court gone the other way, you would have celebrated and called the election just. If you wish for a CNN report of the recount going to Bush, let me know, I still have that on my computer. When the Supreme Court votes your way as they have for many years, you call it Gospel. When they vote against you, it was a scam.
Wrong again, Buffalo Breath! Unlike you rightwingnuts, I like one set of rules for everyone - no appointing presidents in the Supreme Court for openers.
And just who appointed GW? All the Supreme Court did was rule against the lower courts. That's what a Supreme court does, make sure the law was followed accordingly.
BTW, if you like one set of rules for everybody, you should be a Conservative not a liberal. Liberals believe in different rules for different people.
Very well, where am I wrong? In Florida, the law is that you have to have the ballots turned in and registered in 10 days. You can have all the recounts you like, but you still have to have those ballots turned in. The biased Florida courts gave Al Gore additional time beyond the 10 days and not only that, they only recounted ballots in Democrat areas which is also a violation of their law.
The Supreme court did not "select" anybody for President. What they did was return the ruling asking the lower courts for an explanation. The lower courts couldn't explain their decision because what they did was "create" a new law on the Bench. That's not the job of our judiciary.
To put it another way, let's say you got a speeding ticket for driving 20 MPH over the limit. The maximum fine is $200.00. But the judge hates speeders so she gives you a $1000.00 fine. It's not the job of the judge to create new laws, that's the job of the legislatures. The judge simply makes rulings within the constraints of the law. So when you appeal this decision to a higher court, that court rules in your favor because the judge did not adhere to the laws.
But put all that aside. The Clinton News Network (CNN) went there and recounted those ballots only to find that Bush won anyway. CNN is one of your very own people, it's not like FOX news did the recounts.
States rights? You believe that States rights means the Judicial legislation? There is no State in the Union that believes in that. But still, what would be the point of having higher courts if States Rights violated the Constitution or the rules the State themselves created?
In article , "Erasmus \"The Mannequin\" Brown" wrote:
Naaaa. That didn't happen yet, but I'm sure the Democrats will regain power someday in this country so who knows? But what you did miss was societies that prayed in the street, in the schools, at just about any public place. What you missed was couples to be wed taking an oath to God and witnesses in court placing their hand on the Bible to tell the truth. What you missed was a ban to sell alcohol products on Sunday with no vulgarity in home or on TV. People respected Sunday as the lords day. What you missed was the majority of children having respect and fear of their adults.
Blablabla, idiot, as if "the Democrats" are somehow atheists or communists. There is a difference between standing up for a modern secular state and persecuting religion.
Yeah, like for example right before they lynched a few blacks or burned a witch. Ha, good old times...
Right before getting a divorce a few years later. You know, to dissolve the "sanctity of marriage".
And why not Tuesday? Or maybe every second Thursday evening in May from 10:15 to 11:35? What's so special about Sundays that certain otherwise perfectly legal products should not be sold on that day?
Oh, yeah, that's a big fucking problem. Vulgarity. This country is lied into an immoral, illegal and unjustifiable war with thousands dead as a result, while the real objective of catching the 9/11 suspects is conveniently forgotten, and all you have to whine about is "vulgarity on TV". What a loon.
Yeah, especially the black children, eh? Ha, good old times. I say, bring back the lynchin' and mandatory prayers for everyone.
We simply must make this country as similar to the Islamic world as possible. Only, we'll use Jesus instead of the pedophile prophet.
And what would that difference be? I certainly can't tell. With the help of the ACLU, they have managed to pull the word of God from every corner it was once acceptable. This is not persecution?
Oh I'm sure in your mind, that's exactly what you see.
Yes, divorces that doubled right after the hippy 60's movement.
It was societies (formerly called Democracy) way the public honored the Lords day-- Sunday. Not all that bad of a thing. In many states, they still have laws where you can't sell alcohol after a certain hour of any given day. Or do you have a problem with that too?
A loon is a person who drifts off in a entirely different direction from a discussion. If you want to discuss the war, start a new post.
Well we had this "Islamic World" as you put it many years ago. Society did just fine, in fact, in many ways better. Of course you couldn't realize it living in this fantasy world of yours.
That's because you're an ignorant ass who hasn't bothered to read anything else other than the Bible. Hey, you qualify for the White House!
No, it isn't. Once it was also acceptable to lynch a nigger. Today it isn't. That doesn't mean that the Southern KKK assholes are being persecuted. Nor does it mean that your religion is being persecuted because you're not allowed to cram it down everyone's throat at all times and in every place.
What is wrong with you people? You have practically an unlimited freedom to practice your superstition in the confines of your homes and churches as you wish, but that is never enough, is it? Religious fanatics are not satisfied unless the whole world is forced to worship their particular deity. If it takes genocide and massive suppression of human rights, so be it - the bloodier, the happier their god is.
All I see is that in every civilized country in the world, the huge breakthroughs and great leaps in human rights have coincided with the removal of the religion from the secular life. It happened in the US in the 60's as well. It will happen in the Islamic world one day, too, although it may take a few hundred years.
Yes, I'm sure keeping 'em barefoot and pregnant, jobless and illiterate worked wonders in the pre-civil movement era. Much like it works wonders for the women in Islam today. But, hey, why are you a hypocrite? If fags are not allowed to marry because of the so-called "sanctity of marriage", shouldn't you be out there advocating outlawing of divorce?
If you want to honor your "Lords day" or any other fucking day, for that matter, no one's stopping you. Don't buy alcohol on Sunday, no one's forcing you. I just fail to see why I should be forced to "honor" your fucking day. I have nothing to do with your lords, gods, angels and talking snakes.
Of course I do. What are we, children, that the state is supposed to regulate when we can or cannot buy legal products? Or any other products, for that matter, that I choose to insert into my body, while not endangering anyone else in the process. What are you, nuts?
What are you, post police? I am pointing out the hypocrisy and idiocy of the far right Christian lunatics in this country who raise a shitload of hell over a half of a tit on TV, yet when the country is lied to a war (where people die, you idiot), they cheer and re-elect the asshole who did it.
Yeah, sure it did. When was this exactly? When blacks could not take a piss in the same toilet as the white folks? When women could not vote? When witches were burned at stake? When Jews, Irish or Asians could not hold office positions? When teachers were indicted for teaching science?
You miss the point; the Puritans set sail from Godless England which would not permit them to persecute their neighbors for being insufficiently Holy, so that God could bring them to a new land where they could persecute everyone to God's satisfacton, and kill redskinned heathens as a bonus.
Speaking of which, check out the 1637 Pequot massacre in Mystic, CT.
"The pleasant town of Mystic, Connecticut, has a well of darkness in its past. It was here, in 1637, that one of the ugliest massacres of Indians by European settlers took place. The Pequot tribe, whose territory lay east of the Fresh River, were makers of sewan, or wampum, which tribes farther north and west valued highly. Recognizing this, the Dutch worked out an arrangement with the Pequots in which they would trade European goods for wampum, and then trade wampum with other Indians, particularly the Mohawks, for furs. This continued for several years, until the English arrived and decided they wanted a piece of the action. As tensions increased, a series of murders ensued: Indians killing Indians, Dutch killing Indians, Indians killing Englishmen. The horrific climax caim on May 26, 1637, when a contingent of Englishmen under Captain John Mason attacked the Pequot village, burning it to the ground, and killing as many as 700 Indians."
Are you on some sort of medication that causes this extreme fantasy thinking of yours? To equate Freedom of Religion with lynching niggers in the South can only be caused by mind altering substances.
Your view of this structure our society has is somewhat warped. Although we are a Elected Republic, we have always had (until the late 60's) the basis of Democracy in this country and our States. The problem with "you people" is that you wish the minority to control the majority in this country.
Long before you came along, people celebrated religion openly. Our City Halls had nativity scenes and even religious symbols during the Holidays. But that just killed people like you; it ate at your heart. So along comes one....just one liberal to bitch and whine and the entire community has to change to THEIR way of doing things. But I'm sure you see nothing wrong with this.
In your opinion, religion should be "confined" as if it were some sort of social ill--as if it were affecting our society in a negative way. But let somebody tell the queers in our country that they should "confine" their display of affection within the walls of their homes, and people like you march on the street. Confine Gays to stay in the closet? Why, that's discrimination! We shouldn't do that, we should only confine people of Religion in this free country.
Yes, it has also happened in Communist countries as well. Communist leaders didn't want their people to believe in God making Government viewed as the highest form of power. That worked out well too, didn't it?
Fags are not allowed to marry because again, it's this "majority" thing you so oppose and really don't understand. But more than that, marriage is the union of a man and woman--that's it. We don't call a lamppost a flashlight. That's because it's a lamppost. We don't call a chair a couch. That's because a couch is a couch. We don't call the union of Man and Man a marriage. We call the union of Man and Woman a marriage.
As for this "Islamic" type society we once had, the mothers of our Nation were quite content with that lifestyle. They took pride in raising their children and keeping a tidy home. They raised a respectful family and monitored their children's activities in school and home. A terrible thing this family unit, but regardless of your negative views of Happy Days, we didn't need metal detectors in our schools and our children were not giving blowjobs to their fellow students on a school bus. But I guess that's just simple "pre-civil" thinking here.
Yes, I see that. Your ancestors came from Apes. But my point here is that people as a Democracy elected to not sell alcohol on Sunday based on their religions. Of course, people who wished to drink simply purchased their alcohol before Sunday, but of course, that was way too much trouble for Liberal America.
I thought I was at one time, but I later thought about it and decided I wasn't nuts.
This liberal society we had for years dictated that we are all Governments children. Today, they force us to wear Seat Belts, they have imposed a National BAL forcing states to comply. They tell us how we must protect ourselves from ourselves, they tell us how we must raise our children and how we must comply with Government guidelines as to how we punish our children.
It should be no surprise to you that the Government tit that we were all forced to suck on implement when we can purchase a legal product. After all, if they can sue manufacturers of a legal product, why should they not be able to tell us when and where we can buy it? But I appreciate your honest answer that you gave my question.
Very well. First off, you have to understand the meaning of the word "lie." A lie is when you tell somebody something but fully know otherwise. For instance, Clinton is a liar. Why? Because he stated he didn't have sex with a certain woman who later turned up physical evidence showing he did.
Now GW is not a liar. Why? Because he made a decision based on evidence pro and con about Iraq. One group of people told him Iraq was not a problem while the other group told him that Saddam was. All Bush did was make a decision based on all the information gathered.
As far as the Religious people go, there are many of them against this war as well. But they like the stance Bush and the Republicans have taken on Religion, therefore the Republican and Conservative movement gains ground all the time. Just because you are Conservative or Republican doesn't mean you agree with every single decision or policy they come up with. I for one don't like Bush's stance on our Borders or aliens in this country. I didn't care for his Prescription Drug Plan as well. But I will vote Republican again because I don't want to return to the days of Midnight Basketball and Government Air Conditioners as a way to solve our problems.
Do you read this stuff in books? Amazing.
This was a time when people could walk the streets at night without fear and sleep in their homes with their doors unlocked. This was a time when the worst thing a kid did in the neighborhood was accidently throw a baseball through their neighbors window. This was a time when prisons were prisons and the inmates were forced to work. This was a time when people accepted responsibility for their actions instead of blaming their ills on somebody else. This was a time that when two men had a problem, they just went in an ally and beat the hell out of each other with no police or lawyers involved.
Was it all perfect? Of course not, but like anything else, it had it's good points and had it's bad. And I'm sure that in 50 years from today, somebody will be able to construct a dirty laundry list of our days today just as you have about the days before us.
Ultimately, religion is best left to the individual, and I believe religion should be no further organized than the neighborhood community church. However, there is a difference between forcing a non-Christian child to pray in school, and reciting a Pledge while omitting two easy-to-not-say words. Having a big rock in a courthouse is not an issue of the separation of church and state, but an episode of "Trading Spaces" gone wrong.
The greatest civil rights leader in U.S. history was a reverend by profession. Most of history's greatest humanists, philanthropists, and Nobel Peace Prize winners have believed in a higher power of some sort.
Then what is a union between two men and two women? There are many homosexuals who are far more worthy of being genuinely "married" than many heterosexuals, and like religion (or the lack thereof), is really nobody's business but their own.
And if that happened, why who knows? Some day we may get a presidential candidate who gets more votes yet still the other guy "wins!" What a disaster that would lead to.
Well, Christianity, anyway. And with my tax dollars. Nowadays they celebrate Christianity openly, but have to pay for it themselves, and weep for their persecution. This is known as fiscal conservatism.
None of your tax dollars at all. If anything, less of your tax dollars. How many times did we hear of schools getting attacked by the ACLU draining school tax dollars to fight them in court? How about the cities who had to do the same? Those are tax dollars too!
And just how many tax dollars did it cost you when a crowd at the school football stadium were led in silent prayer?
They spend the money on decorations anyway; just not the religious type. So what's the difference if they spend money on a lighted bell or a Nativity scene?
In article , "Erasmus \"The Mannequin\" Brown" wrote:
No? The ACLU never attacked schools or public places that had the most scant association with religion?
So what? You believe none of those tax dollars were contributed from people with religious beliefs of background? Besides, my point here is that it doesn't cost one red penny more for people to say a prayer for a student who was hurt or died.
What an idiot... A KKK white supremacist party also contributes tax dollars. Should they be able to monopolize public institutions for their religious bullshit and why?
Actually, Freedom of Religion is a Constitutional right that was trumped by "Separation of Church and State" which isn't in the Constitution. But for some reason, Church and State gives the ability of the minority to rule over the majority.
If a message is cross posted to several groups likely to have different opinions then it is just a troll looking to start a flame war. Before responding to any message just take a quick look at which groups are being cross posted to.
See this message was sent to both politically correct and politically incorrect groups. It is flame bait. Now you know, don't respond to cross posted messages in the future.
There is little need for replying to an obvious nonsense, which is what you're spouting here. First of all, you are trying to redefine democracy as nothing more than a simple "50% +1" vote, which is total bullshit. In actual democracies, various human and civil rights of minorities are fully protected from the tyranny of majority, including, to name the right relevant to this discussion, the right not to be forced to practice religions one chooses not to. Yes, freedom of religion includes at its very basis a freedom from religion, as well. When a country has no formalized and constitutionalized state religion, as the US doesn't, then any forcing of any religion (including the so-called majority's religion) on the public is illegal. Not to mention that the separation of church and state is the fundamental building block of a modern Western style society. Here are some countries with little or no separation between the church and the state: Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Kuwait, Sudan, etc. Clearly, in all these countries the majority has its way of having the state sponsored religion integrated into every pore of civil life. I guess it's working wonders for all of them, so the Americans just have to emulate the recipe, huh? And finally, the clause in the US Constitution that states that the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is clear - this was introduced in order to avoid the European style religious wars and genocide. Now, after all these years, some Christian fundamentalist fanatics are attempting to make this country as similar to the Islamic ones as possible. Why?
What they would like to do is "return" religion back to American Society--not introduce it to us. Obviously you have a problem disassociating Church and State from Religious Sponsored Governments.
The intent of our Constitution was indeed so that we never have a National Religion even though several States had an adopted Religion during the making of the Constitution. But in no way does that mean disassociation between Government and Religion. Take a look at your currency, do you see "God" mentioned anywhere on it? Did you ever see footage of Courts in sessions where a witness had to place his or her hand on the Bible and swear to tell the truth? The belief in God (not any specific religion) has always been part of our society.
Religion is a set of standards and rules. Each religion is different. Nobody would like to see our Government run by any specific religion, but to say that it was the intent of the Fathers of this country to rid society of the word of God is nothing more than hippy hype.
We are a Republic with the underlying foundation of Democracy. But as you have stated above, Democracy is not a 50% plus 1 vote. Very well. Then you believe Democracy is a 2% ruling over the 98%? Because in many of these ACLU law suits against Schools and Cities across this country, that's exactly what transpired.
Oh ye stupid fundies (and happily so I might add). Check out the US currency pre 1953 and let us know if you see "God" on it, also the Pledge for "under God".
Hint, they weren't there but were added in the early 50's by another set of charlatans riding the same fundie train (it was commies then, not terrorists).
Or, if this is too much for you, you can go to Google Search--Images and type in 1950 Dime. And if you look at the close up of this coin, YOU WILL see the word "God" on it and of course, the year of 1950.
The url of the page is actually http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/1940/finds.htm.
Have you come across tinyurl.com, by the way. It creates a short url (24 characters including the http://) which points to the long url (337 characters for the url in your post). Instead of posting the full blown url, you post the short one like http://tinyurl.com/fpfrx. This url points to the long one from your post. You may have seen them in other posts and not realised what they were.
Nor do you seem to understand the difference betweens coins & currency:
A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. The first paper currency bearing the motto entered circulation on October 1, 1957. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) was converting to the dry intaglio printing process. During this conversion, it gradually included IN GOD WE TRUST in the back design of all classes and denominations of currency.
As a part of a comprehensive modernization program the BEP successfully developed and installed new high-speed rotary intaglio printing presses in 1957. These allowed BEP to print currency by the dry intaglio process, 32 notes to the sheet. One-dollar silver certificates were the first denomination printed on the new high-speed presses. They included IN GOD WE TRUST as part of the reverse design as BEP adopted new dies according to the law. The motto also appeared on one-dollar silver certificates of the 1957-A and 1957-B series.
BEP prints United States paper currency by an intaglio process from engraved plates. It was necessary, therefore, to engrave the motto into the printing plates as a part of the basic engraved design to give it the prominence it deserved.
One-dollar silver certificates series 1935, 1935-A, 1935-B, 1935-C, 1935-D, 1935-E, 1935-F, 1935-G, and 1935-H were all printed on the older flat-bed presses by the wet intaglio process. P.L. 84-140 recognized that an enormous expense would be associated with immediately replacing the costly printing plates. The law allowed BEP to gradually convert to the inclusion of IN GOD WE TRUST on the currency. Accordingly, the motto is not found on series 1935-E and 1935-F one-dollar notes. By September 1961, IN GOD WE TRUST had been added to the back design of the Series 1935-G notes. Some early printings of this series do not bear the motto. IN GOD WE TRUST appears on all series 1935-H one-dollar silver certificates.
Below is a listing by denomination of the first production and delivery dates for currency bearing IN GOD WE TRUST: DENOMINATION PRODUCTION DELIVERY $1 Federal Reserve Note February 12, 1964 March 11, 1964 $5 United States Note January 23, 1964 March 2, 1964 $5 Federal Reserve Note July 31, 1964 September 16, 1964 $10 Federal Reserve Note February 24, 1964 April 24, 1964 $20 Federal Reserve Note October 7, 1964 October 7, 1964 $50 Federal Reserve Note August 24, 1966 September 28, 1966 $100 Federal Reserve Note August 18, 1966 September 27, 1966
Nevertheless, the point I was making is that it was never the concept of the founders of this country to have total disassociation with Religion or the belief in God. Congress always started session with prayer and still does today.
Fact Sheets: Currency & Coins Distribution of Currency and Coins
Currency notes and coins are all produced by the Treasury Department. After production, the Treasury ships the coins and currency notes directly to Federal Reserve banks and branches. The Federal Reserve then releases them as required by the commercial banking system. The demand for money by the public varies from day to day and from week to week. There are even differences from season to season. Banks are usually first to feel the impact of the public's demand for cash. To meet the needs of the public, banks turn to their regional Federal Reserve bank for coins and currency when their supplies are low.
The United States Mint is responsible for producing coins and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) produces currency notes. Both bureaus must produce coins and currency in quantities sufficient to fill the needs of the public.
1. money in actual use in a country. Ex. Coins and paper money are currency in the United States. 2. a passing from person to person; circulation. Ex. People who spread a rumor give it currency. 3. general use or acceptance; common occurrence. Ex. Words such as "couldst" and "thou" have little currency now. (SYN) prevalence, vogue. 4. (Australian.) Australianborn whites as a group.
Gee, I'd have thought that, although the majority was Christian, the ones who are determined to spend tax money to doll city hall up like a cathedral were the minority.
owed to cram it down everyone's throat at all times and in every place.
Learn to read for comprehension, idiot. When you fail to connect a fairly logical flow of conversation involving comparisons, anything you have to say later is pretty much irrelevant.
No, idiot. Your personal view of "democracy" involves the simple majority vote that overrides anything. If we had it your way, we'd still had slavery. Learn to distinguish between a democracy with a simple +1 vote and a democracy with full protection of civil rights.
As I said: You have practically an unlimited freedom to practice your superstition in the confines of your homes and churches as you wish, but that is never enough, is it? Religious fanatics are not satisfied unless the whole world is forced to worship their particular deity.
Get in in your thick skull: there are people in this country who don't share your superstitious delusions. Maybe they have different delusions, maybe none. If you entertain on set of superstitious delusions, you have to entertain them all. How would you like the equivalent of nativity scenes in 50 different religions in the City Halls? Why should we have your Jesus myth shoved down everyone's throat? Just because you happen to be in the majority? Fuck you. Put your "nativity scene" where it belongs - in your church. Keep the City Halls secular, as they should be.
What the fuck are you talking about? You deny gays a basic human right - to marry legally and enjoy all the privileges of the recognized marriage, from hospital visits to joint property laws. This simple right gives them their dignity and affects you not one single bit. How this compares to your whining about being unable to monopolize the public property for your parochial display of religious kitsch, is beyond my comprehension.
You don't know a first thing about communism other than what you learned in Rambo movies, so stop making a fool of yourself. Once you spent half of your life in the communist system, like I did, maybe you'd be able to discuss it.
Yes, like I oppose and really don't understand this "majority" thing from the Confederacy times. I'm sure all the South voted overwhelmingly for keeping the institution of slavery.
Got any other bumperstickers?
Who gives a shit what "you" call anything? There is a certain decency in this world, which you, as a fundie Christian, knows nothing about. It's called compassion for your fellow human who doesn't comply with your standard of a lifestyle. Btw, not so long ago, just to remind you, "you" (and assholes like you) called a marriage a union of a Man and a Woman of the same race. That was when interracial marriage was forbidden by law. This, too, was heavily supported by Christian fundamentalist lunatics, but was eventually thrown on the garbage pile of history. If two men or two women want live together as a family, who the fuck are you to forbid them from doing it? And who the fuck are you to forbid them to visit their life partners (or spouses) in the hospital? They should be unable to adopt children because "you" read in some fucking book that it's a "sin"? Go fly an airplane into a building, you freak.
Yeah, as if this is in any way connected. Blow jobs were, I'm sure, invented right after civil liberties were introduced and after women got jobs. Idiot.
No, there was this bearded dude in the sky who created it all, then went berserk and drowned it all, only to change his mind later and decide he really loves us all, so he sends down a dude with wings to inseminate a virgin who gives a birth to the son of God who is actually God himself, a third of God actually (there's a holy spirit dude), and then he dies on the cross later to redeem all of our sins. [snicker] Shit, you have to stoned to actually believe this bullshit.
But my point here is
Almost as much trouble as not buying alcohol when one doesn't wish so?
Nothing but whining bullshit about the so-called big government from a conservative cunt who is allegedly sooooooo anti big government, yet when it comes to who's fucking who and who's injecting what into his veins, no government is ever big enough.
Yeah, sure he did. And this you know because, [snicker] he told you that as well. Bwahahahahahahaha... unbelievable. After all these memos surfaced, from Downing to the White House, after knowing full well the Neocon Iraq war plans years in advance, after knowing the yellowcake story was a fabrication, after this, after that... But hey, he told you he wasn't a liar, so what are you gonna do, eh?
Yeah, it's amazing that some people actually read books, I know.
One of the first on the list will be the religious paranoid misantrophy affecting all pores of the society, even seemingly normal people.
Here's the way it works. We are trying to have (somewhat) of an adult conversation here. If the extent of your vocabulary is that of a "teen chat room" then please don't respond, go to the teen chat rooms. I scanned the replies here and have yet to see one of yours without a personal insult within it.
I understand you are not a religious person and perhaps one who descended from Apes; to some point, we agree. And you were probably raised in a single parent home which explains your lack of mannerism. But if you have any intelligence at all, you would not participate in these conversations because all it does is anger you to the point of casting insults at people you don't know or disagree with.
I'll leave you with that and will not respond to any of your posts that contain these adolescent insults.
What are you complaining about? I'm doing you a favor. Instead of focusing on the issues and the topics of discussion, you are now able to evade all this by bitching about my "vocabulary" and by acting as an Internet psychiatrist, as evidenced below:
Typical response of a religious nutcase. When in trouble, pull the "insult" card. We don't want to face our demons of truth, do we? Why, it could shatter the entire cozy and pink dream world we managed to carefully construct ever since we had been told Santa Claus was fake.
Outside of the epistles, there is not a single mention of anyone resembling the alleged Jesus from any of the contemporary writers, including the very detailed Roman records from that era. In addition, the epistles (written well after the alleged Jesus' death) wildly contradict each other. To top it off, extraordinary claims in the New Testament about the "miracles" require extraordinary evidence. All Christers have to offer is begging the question - the Bible is the evidence of itself.
If memory serves me correctly, Charles & Mambo Duckman wrote:
Historians often reinterpret and sometimes obscure history; even the Bible has been revised to suit the whims of popes and kings. There are certainly tall tales spread about modern-day historical and public figures that people believe despite the facts.
Was Jesus the true Son of God who walked on water and brought the dead back to life? Maybe, maybe not, and I'll be the first to admit I wonder how true those stories are. Was there a guy who came to be known as Jesus Christ who was walking around Jerusalem 2,000 years ago trying to spread a positive message and a good way to lead your life? I absolutely believe that 100%. Unfortunately, there are those who want to take that part away from believers, and that just smacks of desperation.
So what? Jesus was a common Jewish name at the time and I'm sure there was some guy in Palestine some 2000 years ago who vaguely served as a model for the myth. What does this have to do with the "Jesus Christ existed" hypothesis? I'm not saying that someone called Jesus did not exist - I am saying that the Jesus Christ as described in the Bible did not exist, for the reasons mentioned above.
No. What we do here is exchange ideas and perhaps give insight to a different point of view. Personal insults add nothing to this concept. I don't expect to change your mind and most likely, you won't change mine. I would assume that you don't go to bars, get into conversations with people you don't (or barely) know and start insulting them. You would most likely end up with a black eye if this is the way you conduct yourself in public.
I'm more than happy to have conversations with people who disagree with me; having conversations with people who agree with me all of the time can be boring. I will state my point and provide proof of evidence when necessary, I will admit if I am wrong and I will debate points of view. What I won't do is tolerate constant insults. Once in a while, I can let that go because I understand the environment of some of these groups. But there is no need to insult somebody every time you reply to them unless they are doing the same.
I really don't have a religion sort to speak. Even though I was raised Catholic, I don't participate in their doings and haven't attended a Mass in well over a decade if not two. I believe in God but not in the religious sense that adheres to the Gospel. You automatically assume that I am some sort of devout Christian or Catholic simply because I defend religion. That's not the case. I am not wealthy either, but if you read other posts that I have participated in, you will find that I defend them as well when it comes to tax issues.
I am staunchly against the ACLU's coming into your home and churches and preventing you from experiencing the word of God, and I wish to go on record that they shouldn't be doing that.
Gee, I pass people praying in the street every day. True, everybody thinks they're crazy, but they seem free to do so. Nobody even asks what religion they are.
Must have been fun for athiest witnesses. "You swear to tel the truth so help you God?" "Sure, what have I got to lose, heh heh."
Except those bastard Jews and those son of a bitch seventh day adventist and those children of satan muslims.
Children had to pray to adults? What religion are we speaking of?
Unless their elders viewed Saturday or Friday as the Lord's Day and needed to do the shopping on Sunday, of course. Then they were heathens, or at least Theologically Misguided.