Politics: J'accuse!

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
That's nothing. I hear tell of a sect (that even has branches here in the US) that regularly pretends to be chewing the flesh and drinking the blood of their god. Yuck.

That's nothing. There's a band of heathens in the upper Midwest that seems to believe that they live inside a giant armor-plated frog, but you don't see me making fun of them. I guess sometimes moral relativism means you miss out on the fun.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Oh, dude, I've heard of those guys! Some of them are so nuts they don't even believe they are pretending, but after their shamans perform magical rituals they think what they are eating actually IS the flesh of their god. Yuck indeed.

The flesh and blood eating/drinking is nothing compared to the exorcisms.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I guess sometimes moral relativism means you miss out on the fun.

Naw. Just means you can't admit it's fun.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Not Me
But only if you are anti-abortion. If you are pro-abortion, they don't let you eat the flesh or drink the blood.

And yet the pro-death penalty adherents (like the president's brother Jeb) of this foreign-controlled sect get a free pass.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Not Bob
And yet the pro-death penalty adherents (like the president's brother Jeb) of this foreign-controlled sect get a free pass.

Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
That's nothing. There's a band of heathens in the upper Midwest that seems to believe that they live inside a giant armor-plated frog, but you don't see me making fun of them. I guess sometimes moral relativism means you miss out on the fun.

So you won't make fun of frog dwellers but will make fun of the polygamists. Now I understand why they call it moral relativism.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Not Bob
And yet the pro-death penalty adherents (like the president's brother Jeb) of this foreign-controlled sect get a free pass.

The bible says the death penalty is Okee Dokeey (but uses different phrasing). BTW - the bible says polygamy is OK, too. At least in some parts that is.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Not Me
Perhaps you are right and I misinterpreted his meaning. But when I heard the exchange, it came across to me as if he was condemning the war against terrorists who attacked us to the extent it is being waged against radical islam. If he didn't mean that, well, it wasn't clear to me.

If so, does this mean that Kerrey is no longer assholish? Or anti-American? If so, I've got to go back and modify the scorecard. Gotta start using pencil, not pen.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Gattigap
If so, does this mean that Kerrey is no longer assholish? Or anti-American? If so, I've got to go back and modify the scorecard. Gotta start using pencil, not pen.

He is still an asshole for calling Condi "Dr. Clarke" four times.

As for the anti-americanism, it depends on what he meant. I still think he meant what I think he meant, but am open to hearing other's alternative explanations. I haven't had time to read the WSJ editorial (and if it requires a subscription, I won't be reading it). Maybe the WSJ editorial clarifies what he meant. I don't know because I haven't had time to read it.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Not Me
The bible says the death penalty is Okee Dokeey (but uses different phrasing).

Considering the fate of its founder, Christianity has, at best, mixed feelings about the DP. Present official teaching in Catholicism is that bloodless means of incapacitating an aggressor, if available, must be used. So you can shoot a guy with a knife to your wife's throat, but the DP is not "okee dokey." And if that's what Catholicism says, you can imagine what mainline Protestants have to say. Evangelicals tend to have DP doctrines that reflect the redness or blueness of their state of residence.

If you have a cite for any official Jewish teaching in support of your statement, I'd be much obliged. The State of Israel allows execution only as punishment for genocide. Maybe you think this means "okey dokey," but it wouldn't go very far on Texas's death row.

BTW - the bible says polygamy is OK, too. At least in some parts that is.

Yeah, that's why the direct descendants of the people who wrote it are in such favor of polygamy and practice it so enthusiastically.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Not Me
The bible says the death penalty is Okee Dokeey (but uses different phrasing). BTW - the bible says polygamy is OK, too. At least in some parts that is.

Um, for Catholics, the Bible is Not Relevant.

Current Catholic dogma (don't make me go track down the Cathecism citations) teaches us that we are to be pro-life in all respects. This means abortion (and birth control), the death penalty, and euthanasia are all againt the teachings of the Church.

In the US as a practical matter, unless you are in a liberal parish, only abortion (and occasionally euthanasia) is a pro-life issue. All the "professional" Catholics who are saying that Kerry shouldn't receiveCommunion because he is pro-choice are no doubt just hunky dory with the death penalty, and -- although they don't admit this one as much in public -- the Pill.

So, the hypocracy toubles me a bit when the pro-life banner is waved by the same people who yell "fry em!" (Yes, I accept that one can make a principled distinction between innocent babies and callous murderers. But Holy Mother Church does not.)

Edited to note that the someone reminded me via PM that the Catechism actually gives a (very, very narrow) loophole for the death penalty, but then notes: the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
I believe he and a few other of the commissioners are acting more in their own self-interest and their political party's interest than in the best interest of the American people.

Lemme guess -- the Democratic commissioners, right? Cause the Repubs are pure?

I have in several posts and even provided a link to a transcript of the exchange in one of my posts.

And the one thing Kerrey said about "radical Islam" is that we are underestimating that it is radical Islam, and not simply terrorism, that is the enemy here. I read that as absolutely correct, and absolutely as it should be.

Perhaps you are right and I misinterpreted his meaning. But when I heard the exchange, it came across to me as if he was condemning the war against terrorists who attacked us to the extent it is being waged against radical islam. If he didn't mean that, well, it wasn't clear to me.

First you said you didn't hear the exchange, because you had to work. Now you heard it. Curious.

Why on Earth would you think that Kerrey supports "radical Islam"? Give me a fucking break.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Considering the fate of its founder, Christianity has, at best, mixed feelings about the DP. Present official teaching in Catholicism is that bloodless means of incapacitating an aggressor, if available, must be used. So you can shoot a guy with a knife to your wife's throat, but the DP is not "okee dokey." And if that's what Catholicism says, you can imagine what mainline Protestants have to say. Evangelicals tend to have DP doctrines that reflect the redness or blueness of their state of residence.

If you have a cite for any official Jewish teaching in support of your statement, I'd be much obliged. The State of Israel allows execution only as punishment for genocide. Maybe you think this means "okey dokey," but it wouldn't go very far on Texas's death row.



Yeah, that's why the direct descendants of the people who wrote it are in such favor of polygamy and practice it so enthusiastically.

(edit) crap. totally not-on-point response. sorry.

[Gattigap]

Ah, Antonin. Just when you appeared to have emerged from the duck blinds with your reputation somewhat intact, you had do go do something arrogant and dumb again.

Two reporters were ordered Wednesday to erase their tape recordings of a speech by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia at a Mississippi high school. Scalia has long barred television cameras from his speeches, but does not always forbid newspaper photographers and tape recorders. On Wednesday, he did not warn the audience at the high school that recording devices would be forbidden. During the speech, a woman identifying herself as a deputy federal marshal demanded that a reporter for Associated Press erase a tape recording of the justice's comments. She said the justice had asked that his appearance not be recorded.

Even from a Justice who tells his detractors where to get off with a well-timed "quack, quack," this is particularly stupid. Apparently Scalia is alone among SC justices in demanding that his speeches not be recorded,* but when you forget to make the demand, directing federal marshals to go back and confiscate the tapes from reporters is, shall we say, a poor way to demonstrate one's fidelity to the Constitution that you appeared to discuss and hold in such high regard.

Can't wait to read his dissent (or his majority opinion) in the Cheney case.

Gattigap

* For now, I'll take the LA Times' word for it, but I suspect that we'll have to wait until Thomas actually makes public remarks before we can make this statement conclusively.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Lemme guess -- the Democratic commissioners, right? Cause the Repubs are pure?

I didn't say that.

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
And the one thing Kerrey said about "radical Islam" is that we are underestimating that it is radical Islam, and not simply terrorism, that is the enemy here. I read that as absolutely correct, and absolutely as it should be.

Was that in the WSJ article? Because that is not what I read in the transcript of the hearings.

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
First you said you didn't hear the exchange, because you had to work. Now you heard it. Curious.

I read the transcript and saw news clips. How did you get your information?

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Why on Earth would you think that Kerrey supports "radical Islam"? Give me a fucking break.

I didn't say he supports it. That was never my point and nothing I said could be construed to mean that.

My point is that the political correct morons dictate to the rest of us that we cannot single out islam radical or otherwise as the root cause of the terrorism. Kerrey's comments came across to me as making the war on terrorism out to be a war against radical islam (which is exactly what it is) but that somehow this is wrong for us to go after a religious group that attacks us and murders our citizens and continues to plan attacks against us.

The PC morons dictate to the rest of us that we cannot racial profile because it is in their eyes morally wrong. This is why the FBI was afraid to act on the information that Arab muslim males were taking flying lessons in the US. If you want to blame someone for 9/11 other than the murderers themselves (which it appears that some on the 9/11 commission want to do) blame it on the liberal PC crowd who made it off limits to racially profile muslims as potential terrorists.