On Aug 26, 4:07Â am, "tooly"
bellsouth.net> wrote:> "turtoni"
fastmail.net> wrote in message
>
> news:9d383155-9955-4a5b-b8bc-ace7a43828c6@k7g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 25, 6:31 am, "tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> "Optagon"
mail.com> wrote in message>
>
>>>>....Sounds mid eastern, probably a radical of some sort?
>>>>Good to know who writes what as backgrounds are usually taletelling.
>
>>> Name-calling Ad hominem fallacy.
>
>> Where's the name calling? I am suggesting that a person's background and
>> roots can explain a lot as to viewpoint.
>
>>> If you'd like to take the course of a civilized, rational, individual,
>>> then, logically, assess the argument(s).
>
>> The courses I've come across in the university these days are totally
>> biased, lopsided, one point of view politically enforced distortions of
>> reality. Topaz has it right in his post in this thread. Society presently
>> has it's head in the ground not wanting to 'see'...so who am I to poke
>> anyone in the eye.
>> But I like to go with my own two eyes open anyway. But that Kenyan
>> representing the USA was corrupt on so many levels, ha...it was
>> ridiculous.
>> It reduces nationality to the sanctity of professional ball teams where
>> players can be traded in and out like sacks of potatos. Not me and mine;
>> my ties are familial in nature...and much deeper than uniforms. Call it
>> instinctive. [BTW, I silently cheer for the Ruckies and Scandanavians in
>> the sprint events, LOL...can't help it...that's simply where my moral
>> sentiments lay...not with Kenyans et.al., ha]. In other words, I argue
>> that
>> by deeper instincts your very premise as espoused in your subject line is
>> false, and in fact, it heritage that comes by way of familial anchor over
>> many generations that give us our keenest sense of 'nation', no matter how
>> scattered and politically split up things become. To reduce nationality
>> where familial background has no bearing is to result in nations with the
>> binding fabric of those professional ball teams...a temporary coming
>> together for the moment, but nothing that will last through time [well,
>> not
>> without misengenation (sp?) anyway].
>
>> NO use replying to this because you will never convince me...except to
>> affirm how we have been politically adulterated for reason of social
>> expediency and globalization.
>>>You just don't understand your own country.
>
> Propriety is necessary for order. Â Otherwise, a cacophony of interchange
> ensues where chaos rules where once order existed. Â Multiculturism across
> the entire human spectrum of diffrence is a formula to bring down human
> idealism and I believe, the ruination of human civil existence in time.
> We'll see.
>
>>>Which is based upon the principle of humanism.
>
> The foundation of values in the American heart was Judeo-Christian. Â If
> humanism finds any efficacy at all, it is only by way of that rooted
> foundation. Â And I have mentioned before of the great flaw in humanism as it
> has no logical Authority except human opinion. Â If there is any attempt at
> enforcement, it becomes only another elitist tyranny, much as political
> correctness has become.
"The values most commonly assigned to the Judeo-Christian tradition
are liberty and equality based on Genesis, where all humans are
created equal, and Exodus, where the Israelites flee tyranny to
freedom."
"Social equality requires the lack of legally enforced social class or
caste boundaries and the lack of unjustified discrimination motivated
by an inalienable part of a person's identity. For example, gender,
age, origin, caste or class, income or property, language, religion,
convictions, opinions, health or disability must not result in unequal
treatment under the law and should not reduce opportunities
unjustifiably."
>>>You can't even follow the basic principles of your professed religion.
>
> Which is what? Â To hand over my culture, and any right of way in the world
> my forebears may have wrestled from a predatory world, to any
> Johnny-come-lately who can twist my magnanimous patronage to human idealism
> to mean 'right of way' to their own?
>
> I'm not that stupid, thank you.
Your culture?
"Lambert (2003) has examined the religious affiliations and beliefs of
the Founders. Some of the 1787 delegates had no affiliation. The
others were Protestants except for three Roman Catholics: C. Carroll,
D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons. Among the Protestants delegates to the
Constitutional Convention, 28 were Episcopalian, eight were
Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two
were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists. The total number being
49. Some of the more prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical or
vocal about their opposition to organized religion, such as Jefferson.
Some of them often related their anti-organized church leanings in
their speeches and correspondence, including George Washington, John
Adams, Thomas Jefferson (who created the "Jefferson Bible"), and
Benjamin Franklin. However, notable founders, such as Patrick Henry,
were strong proponents of traditional religion. Several of the
Founding Fathers considered themselves to be deists or held beliefs
very similar to that of deists, including Franklin, Jefferson, and
Ethan Allen."
>>>You're corrupt. Bankrupt. AKA the devil.
>
> Something has indeed been corrupted, but by standing my ground to resist
> change that was awful to my own, I like to think I'm the one who was not
> corrupted [while everything else has been]. Â But I admit to my bankruptcy
> for every time I see a black man with a white woman, my soul has dripped
> blood upon the ground until now, I dare say I am empty of all
> vitality...bankrupted by a world  (and white woman)gone mad.
>
> Now...AKA the devil...I truly relate to, for all that has gone down now
> under , can only be the works of diabolical forces bent upon my
> destruction and that of western civilization. Â This is certainly not a time
> in the world for Godly things, but the very opposite as pornography,
> homosexuality, sexual promiscuity, and all things anti-family unit sweep the
> land.
"Civil rights can refer to protection against public (government) and
or private sector discrimination. In the United States, the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution protects citizens against
many forms of State discrimination, with its due process and equal
protection requirements. Civil rights can also refer to protection
against private actors or entities. The U.S. Congress subsequently
addressed the issue through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Sec. 201.
which states: (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal
enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages,
and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in
this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of
race, color, religion, or national origin or sex. This legislation and
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 are constitutional under
the Commerce Clause, as the Supreme Court has ruled that the
Fourteenth Amendment only applies to the State. States generally have
the power to enact similar legislation, provided that they meet the
federal minimum standard, under the doctrine of police powers.
The terms civil rights and civil liberties are often used
interchangeably in the United States. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "a free
people [claim] their rights aived from the laws of nature, and not as
the gift of their chief magistrate."
The United States Constitution recognizes different civil rights than
do most other national constitutions. Two examples of civil rights
found in the US but rarely (if ever) elsewhere are the right to bear
arms (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution) and the
right to a jury trial (Sixth Amendment to the United States
Constitution). Few nations, not even including a world organization
body such as the United Nations, have recognized either of these civil
rights. Many nations recognize an individual's civil right to not be
executed for murdering another, a civil right not recognized within
the US."
