New Page 0

Live Action Responds to Community College's Censorship of its Pro-Life Magazine

The left tried to silence the critic...again:

"Kingsborough Community College has reversed their ban on student Joseph Hayon's :BRAVO: distribution of a pro-life magazine after receiving a letter from the Alliance Defense Fund.

On September 24th the Kingsborough Community College, located in Brooklyn, New York, ordered Joseph Hayon to stop distributing copies of Live Action's national pro-life magazine, "The Advocate". Live Action encouraged Hayon to call the Alliance Defense Fund to ensure that his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech were upheld." Full text: Live Action Responds to Community College's Censorship of its Pro-Life Magazine

Would the left prefer that the First Amendment go away altogether--when you disagree with them?

"We're trying to use the power of persuasion and if that doesn't work, we're gonna use the persuasion of power...(Andy Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union)."

They cannot win with arguments. They call their opponents a name and dismiss them so that they do not have to deal with the issues and facts.

"Would you? I've seen you post about content on TV and in advertising that you think should be censored...."

That discussion was regarding filth. Being a make-believer and a leftist, you cannot distinguish what is appropriate and what is inappropriate. The courts, as godless as they are, have decided on this.

Now that you mention it, the courts should be filled with Christians--the ones who still know right from wrong.

John Jay: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers [emphasis mine]." John Jay, one of the framers of the Constitution, was appointed by George Washington in 1789 to be the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (and later served two terms as governor of New York). He wrote, in a private letter (1797) to clergyman Jedidiah Morse).

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]: [Ad hominem] "Against who? You still haven't figured out to use that phrase have you?"

Isn't that about the one thousandth time you've used Serpent

? You are shortening it now--that's good.

It is typical of the left--not to argue the issue--but to attack people. That is because your arguments are weak.

"..The left does not argue; they coerce. Take a stop watch with you the next time you speak with your leftist family member. See how long it takes for them to call you a: sexist, Islamophobic, xenophobic, homophobic, racist, bigot. The left is a theocracy..." Prager, radio program 25 Mar 2010.

They cannot win with arguments. They call their opponents a name and dismiss them so that they do not have to deal with the issues.

Ever hear? "You're a fascist..."

"Jonah Goldberg reminds us that the original fascists were really on the left, and that liberals from Woodrow Wilson to FDR to Hillary Clinton have advocated policies and principles remarkably similar to those of Hitler's National Socialism and Mussolini's Fascism.

Contrary to what most people think, the Nazis were ardent socialists (hence the term "National Socialism"). They believed in free health care and guaranteed jobs. They confiscated inherited wealth and spent vast sums on public education. They purged the church from public policy, promoted a new form of pagan spirituality, and inserted the authority of the state into every nook and cranny of daily life. The Nazis declared war on smoking, supported abortion, euthanasia, and gun control. They loathed the free market, provided generous pensions for the elderly, and maintained a strict racial quota system in their universities--where campus speech codes were all the rage. The Nazis led the world in organic farming and alternative medicine. Hitler was a strict vegetarian, and Himmler was an animal rights activist... (Sleeve of his book, Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg)."

Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals (the liberal's favorite playbook)

"Rule 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

"By doing this the radical attempts to marginalize key figures in the opposition by isolating these figures and making them unpalatable, thereby separating leadership from the conservative base. This either wins converts or at least neutralizes the ability to mobilize around a countering viewpoint.

Nonsensible’s Counter – These personalizations must be pointed out for what they are – the attempt to avoid real debate on issues by demonizing legitimate viewpoints that at the very least should be debated on their own merits.

If liberals can’t stand up to real debate on their ideas or ours, then their ideas must lack credibility beyond ridicule and derision. Demand factual debate. Challenge them to discuss and when they refuse they will rightly be portrayed as afraid, unprepared or intellectually incapable of honest debate..." Full text: The Conservative Papers Part V: Defeating Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”

[That discussion was regarding filth.] "Nope. It was about censorship of things that you don't like."

Truth is truth independent from me. I get my values from the Bible. Where do you get yours? :idunno:

--Your wicked heart? (Jer 17:9).

The discussion was regarding Sodomite Superbowl ads

--what is decent and what is not.

"Sodomy", a generic term for copulation that is not ‘natural’ and heterosexual, derived from the story of Sodom whose inhabitants sought to have sexual relations with Lot’s visitors (Gen. 19:1-11). The Bible frequently condemns male homosexuality (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:27; 1 Cor. 6:9) as well as bestiality (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 18:23; 20:15-16; Deut. 27:21), presumably because it considered male and female to be natural correlates (see Gen. 1:27; 2:18-24). Lesbianism along with male homosexuality is condemned by Paul (Rom.1:26-27)."

Achtemeier, P. J., Harper & Row, P., & Society of Biblical Literature. (1985). Harper's Bible dictionary. Includes index. (1st ed.) (974). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

You stood on the side of pro-homosexuality and pro-filth. What else is new? Hos 3:1.

I made the argument that society is better off restricting the vile behavior that you promote. The courts, as godless as they are, agree with me:

[Being a make-believer and a leftist, you cannot distinguish what is appropriate and what is inappropriate.] "Now that is an ad hom, Serpent."

Who does not know how to properly use the word?

No, that is a statement of fact. If you are on the left, you can be sweet, you can be pleasant--but you cannot be wise (Eccl 10:2).

"You have no actual argument- you are saying that I am wrong because I am a liberal."

I'm a classical liberal myself. You are no liberal. You are a leftist--a pro-abort, pro-homosexual, humanist. Leftists change their terminology every ten years so as not to be found out.

"The fact is you are just fine with people's right to express themselves being quashed when what they say or do doesn't meet your standards. You are a hypocrite."

Ad hominem.

Like a typical leftist you project your inadequacies onto others. It is the right that stands for freedom of the individual and freedom of speech. Didn't Barney Frank spit this week, "[They] are just like bullies who drive teens to suicide." If he had his way, all public schools would promote sodomy (Oh wait...they do) and no one would be free to disagree with the left. That is "free speech" for the leftist--you are free to speak so long as you agree with them. It is the difference between Europe and America. You value European values. I value American, Judeo-Christian values:

"The left stands for: secularism, equality and multiculturalism. The right stands for (The American Trinity: found on any coin in your pocket): 'In God we Trust', Liberty and E pluribus unum, Latin for 'out of many, one'... (Prager)."

Response to comment from a "Christian"]: "You are the one who doesn't understand the issues..."

Liberals do not like information getting out which may make a persuasive argument (also why they wish to silence the critic).

Saul Alinsky Rules for Radicals (the liberal's favorite playbook)

"Rule 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

"By doing this the radical attempts to marginalize key figures in the opposition by isolating these figures and making them unpalatable, thereby separating leadership from the conservative base. This either wins converts or at least neutralizes the ability to mobilize around a countering viewpoint.

Nonsensible’s Counter – These personalizations must be pointed out for what they are – the attempt to avoid real debate on issues by demonizing legitimate viewpoints that at the very least should be debated on their own merits.

If liberals can’t stand up to real debate on their ideas or ours, then their ideas must lack credibility beyond ridicule and derision. Demand factual debate. Challenge them to discuss and when they refuse they will rightly be portrayed as afraid, unprepared or intellectually incapable of honest debate..." Full text: The Conservative Papers Part V: Defeating Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”

"...that is only marginally relevant or is strictly opinion in the first place."

I've never known you to actually debate issues. You spend most of your time attacking people (e.g. Ken Ham, scientists at Answers in Genesis, etc.) Usually, you only serve as an example of leftists tactics (Ge 50:20, Isa 55:11).

Response to comment [from a Satanist]: "SD is a rotten hypocrite. He freely admits content he doesn't approve of shouldn't air on TV, or be printed, yet he has the gall to accuse other folks of censorship. I think he's either too numb to genuinely know the difference or simply doesn't care."

Granite

, why do you counter my argument when I am on your ignore list? Are you afraid of a two-way debate?

It's ok, Granity-boo. You can sit at the big-people table.

"He freely admits content he doesn't approve of shouldn't air on TV, or be printed..."

Thankfully the courts have agreed with me. For you, perhaps there are no standards.

I take it back. Maybe you'd better stay at the kiddie table.

Some things should be censored (like above) and some things should not (like disagreeing with the left).

Can you see the difference?

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "The majority of the Roe vs. Wade Justices claimed to be Christians."

Many people claim to be Christian (Mt 7:16) but they do not obey God (Ac 5:29). Look at the Supreme Court today--not one justice is pro-life.

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]: "You are the one who doesn't understand the issues..."

:Patrol: Elite alert. You lefties always say the same thing. We tell Obama, "We don't want socialism because it violates God's Commandment 'Thou shall not steal' (Ex 20:15)."

He says "I see. You don't understand. I must not have made myself clear. Let me help explain it to you peons again. I've been on the road, you see."

I love the first line of Laura Ingraham's book "They think you're stupid."

Believe it or not, we can differ with the left and understand our positions.

When you reject a claim, it's ok to stand erect (Ec 7:29) and say "I disagree." We know you have a visceral reaction to truth (Jn 14:6).

Conservatives don't whine. Whining if for the left: "We want to kill babies," "We want to be a Sodomites;" "We want to be our own gods..."

You'll have an eternity of whining if that is what you choose (Mt 25:46).

Truth comes from God's word (Jas 1:18). What is your source of truth? Your wicked heart? (Jer 17:9).

Response to comment [from a "Christian"]: "I've had it with your hit-and-run lies, serpent

. A Christian takes responsibility for their words and the truth of them. You have refused to defend your assertions. You are scum."

Leftists claim to be all about freedom--you are free to agree with them. If you don't, you'd better remain in the "shadows". They give you your name (ad hominem) so that they can marginalize you.

..."Rule 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

"By doing this the radical attempts to marginalize key figures in the opposition by isolating these figures and making them unpalatable, thereby separating leadership from the conservative base. This either wins converts or at least neutralizes the ability to mobilize around a countering viewpoint.

Nonsensible’s Counter – These personalizations must be pointed out for what they are – the attempt to avoid real debate on issues by demonizing legitimate viewpoints that at the very least should be debated on their own merits.

If liberals can’t stand up to real debate on their ideas or ours, then their ideas must lack credibility beyond ridicule and derision. Demand factual debate. Challenge them to discuss and when they refuse they will rightly be portrayed as afraid, unprepared or intellectually incapable of honest debate..." Full text: The Conservative Papers Part V: Defeating Saul Alinsky’s “Rules For Radicals”

"...because you were told to stay in the shadows but yet you don't acknowledge your own post previous which led to that remark do you?"

Conservatives--because of your views (pro-life, pro-marriage, God fearing), you must stay in the shadows. Once you are enlightened like us on the Left, come on out.

Response to comment [from other]: [Who's moaning?] "You were, as evidenced by your blathering rant."

I suppose I could say the same to you? You sure waste a lot of time without making a point.

If I believe a point has been sufficiently made, I move on. I move on faster if it appears people are interested in attacking people not issues.

"Your lies are there for all to see, but by all means, "let the reader decide"."

You'd need to provide proof.

But we know, being on the left means never having to say you're sorry.

Response to comment [from other]: "There's a 'right wing zealot' option on here so stop being so "liberal"!"

"Right wing" is fine (Eccl 10:2). Right, far right--does it matter? We believe in moral absolutes based on God's word. Do values become more absolute?

Response to comment [from other]: "...[Y]ou attempt to deflect away from an argument by talking about "leftist" tactics."

"I've argued, and will continue to argue no doubt, with those who overall have more conservative opinions than myself."

It is admirable that you are willing to argue with those who differ with you. Not everyone will. It is a trait of the Left to silence the opposition. They do not wish to hear opposing views. On the right, we seek out their positions and attempt to counter them with effective arguments. You cannot say the same for the Left.

"I've never felt inclined to reduce a person to the sum of their political opinions..."

You can get a pretty good idea about the state of a person's heart by asking them a few simple questions: Is is ok to murder unborn children? What did God intend marriage to be? Do you believe in moral absolutes? etc. Claiming to be a Christian does not make you one. Jesus warned us of his followers. Did Mohammad do that? No. Jesus said many would come in his name, but they would not be of him (Enyart). "Many will come using my name (Lk 21:8)."

You do not have to be a Christian to recognize that one who stands for: murder, homosexuality and self-will does not have the spirit of God (1 Jn 4:3) no matter what their profile page says.

You do not represent yourself here as something you are not (Mt 5:37, Re 22:11).

Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Your views on people on the left and right are rather simplistic and severely overgeneralized..."

Response to comment [from other]: "[Y]ou have your own misconceptions and try to pass it off as a general "truth"..."

[PB] "[I]t's apparent that he doesn't think it's ok to murder unborn children and believes in moral absolutes."

[Re: abortion (requiring nurses to provide the "morning after pill"against their will)]

"Religious freedom doesn't cover the "freedom" not to do your job...If the law requires that this service be offered to rape victims than you can bet it most certainly is a conflict."

"[R]eligious freedom doesn't include the freedom not to the job you agreed to do when you were hired."

"When they signed up for the job they agreed to do those things which the job requires- in this case dispensing emergency contraception to rape victims. Don't like the terms of employment- work somewhere else...The law trumps the religious affiliation of the hospital providing services."

"I am pro-equality and so is the constitution of this great nation-- if you don't like it, I'm sure you can find a border..."

[Will not answer the following: Is homosexuality an abomination? (1 Kin. 14:24). Did God made us male and female? (Mt 19:4). Is is disgusting to God to act differently than we were created? (Deut 22:5).]

"I won't apologize for loving truth...Hiding behind a book won't change reality...[P]eople come to associate Christianity...with anti-science dogma and superstition."

[Did we evolve from monkeys? (Ge 1:26, Jas 3:9)] "[W]e share a common ancestor [with monkeys]."

[So a monkey was not created a monkey and a man was not created a man? Man became a man over millions of years through the process of evolution?] "That is what the evidence indicates..."

[What hermeneutic do you use to oppose a six normal day creation? (Ex. 20:11; 31:17).] "The use of mythic imagery and symbolism, particularly combined with the scientific evidence, show that Genesis is not meant to a literal, historical revelation but an allegorical presentation containing spiritual truth...I use reason and evidence..."

[You do not represent yourself here as something you are not (Mt 5:37, Re 22:11).] "Are you speaking to someone in particular with this?"

Because you are not a Christian, no one expects you to be able to discern who is and who is not of Christ.

It's wonderful that you have so much in common with PB. Meanwhile, Christians grow in Christ-likeness.

Who said this regarding Christian views: "...outdated, demonstrably untrue, and often, in their various manifestations, deleterious to individuals and to society." Hint: although it sounds like PB, it was not.

Response to comment [from other]: "I can recognize positive and negative from both the left and right..."

Recognizing patterns is necessary to have wisdom. God calls people righteous or wicked. Why call someone righteous when they are wicked? Obeying God is a good start if you are interested in living with him forever (Deut. 6:25; Job 33:26).

[Feedback] "...[T]he "general" consensus that your accusations are silly, trollish and unfounded."

The term Christian refers to one who follows Christ. Christ followers (those with a biblical worldview) do not support: murder, homosexuality, and self will.

"There are many on this board who reflect the tenents of faith and your behaviour frankly doesn't."

Do those who support abortion, homosexuality and humanism reflect Christ-likeness in your opinion? Who is Jesus to you?