www.ditl.org

Mikey wrote:I get the impression that he believes his zealotry isn't as nutty as religious fundie zealotry, because it's not based on religion. But in the final analysis, nutty zealotry is still just nutty zealotry.

All that means is he can't use "the bible says this" as a justification for his behaviour. Personally I think he's just trying to extend his 15 minutes, this time he lacks the appeal to emotion he had with his daughter being involved though.

One thing that I've never understood though, if all the religious stuff in America offends him, why does he not move? Seriously, Canada or any European country would likely take him. He's a lawyer, plenty of work for his type.

Because his type needs something to complain about. He'd be nothing without any soapbox material.

Lazar wrote:I am a Pastafarian, and I worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

May you be touched by His noodly appendage.

haha i like that. Do you have any literature on him?

Monroe wrote:haha i like that. Do you have any literature on him?

Link to his church http://www.venganza.org/

I have no particular problem with the challenge; I think it's pretty dumb, but he thinks its important so I don't see why he shouldn't have his say. The whole point of a democratic system is that if you don't like the way something works you can work to change it, after all.

Technically the state and religion should be completely seperate. If we are going to be die hard constitutionalists why not just let a computer run the country then? It wouldn't judge by sex, race, religion or anything else you can think of, and wouldn't give into personal bias. It couldn't do any worse than Bush anyways.

GrahamKennedy wrote:I have no particular problem with the challenge; I think it's pretty dumb, but he thinks its important so I don't see why he shouldn't have his say. The whole point of a democratic system is that if you don't like the way something works you can work to change it, after all.

Of course he has right to voice his opinion. What he's doing is initiating litigation, which is different than making your opinion known.

Running the country on the basis of reading chicken entrails couldn't do any worse than Bush.

Mikey wrote:

GrahamKennedy wrote:I have no particular problem with the challenge; I think it's pretty dumb, but he thinks its important so I don't see why he shouldn't have his say. The whole point of a democratic system is that if you don't like the way something works you can work to change it, after all.

Of course he has right to voice his opinion. What he's doing is initiating litigation, which is different than making your opinion known.

Well he has the right to do that, too, doesn't he?

Besides, surely we all know that he's only done it as a way of getting heard. He knows he won't win.

GrahamKennedy wrote:Running the country on the basis of reading chicken entrails couldn't do any worse than Bush.

Very true. Did I skip a page, or was this in reference to something?

Well he has the right to do that, too, doesn't he?

Yes, unfortunately, although IMHO it's a civic disservice - he's tying up the courts, wasting time, taking man-hours from local and state governments, etc. And along with all that, it's MY right to call him a dumb-a** for it.

Mikey wrote:Very true. Did I skip a page, or was this in reference to something?

What USSEnterprise said about having a computer running the country being better than Bush.

Well he has the right to do that, too, doesn't he?

Yes, unfortunately, although IMHO it's a civic disservice - he's tying up the courts, wasting time, taking man-hours from local and state governments, etc. [/quote]

Well that's what courts are there for, after all.

And along with all that, it's MY right to call him a dumb-a** for it.

And my right to respond to you doing so. So many rights, isn't it wonderful?

"Rights, rights... what is rights?"