<---- click here
Posted on 05/30/2007 7:19:37 AM PDT by Reaganesque
Flying carpets? LOL
LOL...I wonder where Coyote is? I wanna see what he does with THAT one!
<---- click here
So, if you didn't make the "cut" as a FR-theologian, are you an FR Grounded Outman? Is there an FR Licensing Division that gives us the power to write an officially sanctioned "FRatwa" edict about issues of concern to us?
Well, ya got me there. It is Imam , not Inman. I looked "Flying Inman" on google, and found so many entries that I thought it was the right spelling. I apologize.
Is anyone keeping a tally of the names we’ve been called today?
Far be it from me to call people names. That would be mean. The FR Flying Imam appellation is just a nickname, you know, like what GWB bestows on reporters and everyone else. It don't mean nothing. If those of you whose negative posting on Romney derive from your theological disagreement with Mormonism want to call yourself something positive, such as Crusaders for Truth, go ahead.
I support Romney, so I guess I am a Romneybot. I've also been a Borderbot. No problem having a name to describe your point of view, if you are proud of your position.
If Romney becomes the nominee, I think the DNC machine will have a difficult time directly attacking Romney as unqualified because of his Mormon faith, particularly since the de facto leader of the Democratic Party, Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, is Mormon as well.
You can’t legitimately claim Romney’s religion disqualifies him to be President, but doesn’t disqualify Reid to be Senate Majority Leader.
ROTFL! Good one!
"You do know that I'm a member of the NRA, and my position on the right to bear arms is well known...But I want you to know something else, and I am going to say it in clear, unmistakable language: I support the Brady bill, and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay." Ronald Reagan
"Listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of assault weapons.” Letter from Ronlad Reagan
“As a longtime gun owner and supporter of the right to bear arms, I, too, have carefully thought about this issue. I am convinced that the limitations imposed in this bill are absolutely necessary. I know there is heavy pressure on you to go the other way, but I strongly urge you to join me in supporting this bill. It must be passed.” -- Letter to former Rep. Scott Klug (R-WI), from Ronald Reagan
“Henceforth, you and your co-FR-theologians shall be known as the FR Flying Imams, because in a secular setting you make a big fuss out of religion, and are a threat to hijack.”
So, to be clear, Mormons who start threads promoting Bishop Mitt as the perfect secular being are okay, but non-Mormons who point out that a Mormon Bishop running for President is unlikely to be secular, are FR-Theologians, but atheists who promote secularists like, perhaps, Giulani are ok, though atheistic secularism is an anti-religion and therefore a religion.
Otay, that makes a whole lot of sense.
I suggest you read the secular Nauvoo Expositor, which when it got too near the truth about Joseph Smith being a tin-pot general, was shut down and destroyed to keep hidden his misuse of the local government. That ought to be a model for you, how to censure free expression by claiming religious figures who are in government are off limits to a full blown discussion of the impact of their deeds.
And then perhaps you can come to Vegas where I live and help shut up the press about one Dario Herrera, who was converted to Mormonism by Harry Reid and turned into his political protege in the 2002 run for congress. Now then Councilman Dario it turns out was taking bribes from an assortment of people, working a no-show PR position for HUD, but most explicitly getting free lapdances and money from one Mike Galardi, titty bar owner extraordinaire. The end fallout was the G-Sting scandal which sent a bunch of people to jail, and should have sent more, including likely Harry Reid (through a complex line of scandal plagued land deals involving Dario, Erin Kenny, et. al.).
There is much more dirt to this that I don’t have time to rehears.
However, I just want to point out that some of the arguments used to keep Dirty Harry out of the slammer revolve around his being a clean Mormon and how it would be bigoted to assail him or his saintly lapdancin lapdog/Mormon convert Dario Herrera for their complicity in outright corruption. And of course their connection to real mafioso mayor Oscar Goodman have also been hushed up.
So when people like you claim we should be called the “FR Flying Imams”, I will accept that as as a moniker as long as you are willing to accept a similarly disparaging title, something like the “FR Flipping Idiots”.
Of course that is just a suggestion. I’d rather not try and insult you the way you are insulting us by comparing us to some crazy Muslims who would love to slit American throats. I’m sure that was just an ill thought comment. Wasn’t it??
“Coyote, I seem to remember you getting the brunt of the attacks today. Were there some new nasties aimed at you?”
Just the usual lie that I’m a liar (and supposedly proud of it). Probably some other things too, but since I try and be loaded for bear with backup documentation before I say things, it’s pretty hard to make the insults stick.
I think we should start a Bigots against Bigots club for our detractors. Or perhaps Haters Who Hate Haters. Or Intolerants Against Intolerance. Or the Big Mama, Intolerant Bigoted Haters of Intolerant Bigoted Haters.
Of course, the Holier Than Thou name calling is pretty silly when you look at it. How about
Holier Than Thou Intolerant Bigoted Haters of Those We Just Labeled Intolerant Bigoted Haters Because Name Calling Is Easier Than Thinking
Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Mitt was not only a Bishop but a Stake President. So technically, since you think Mormons are pushing him for religious reasons you should refer to him as "President Romney". That is how we refer to Stake Presidents in our Church. I would think it would help your cause in warning others away from him that not only was he a mere local Bishop but Regional leader as well.
“The Nauvoo expositor called for non-Mormons to take up arms and kill Mormons. “
Not that I can see after having read through it multiple times. But why don’t you prove your point by quoting the pertinent passage? Unless it doesn’t exist.
http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs/exposit1.htm
All I read is a pretty reasonable call by some citizens of Nauvoo for Joseph Smith to stop the corruption. Here is a small snippet (which expressly says it is AGAINST action by any mob on eiter side):
*********************************************
THE EXPOSITOR. FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 1844.
SYLVESTER EMMONS, EDITOR.
INTRODUCTORY.
In greeting our patrons with the first number of the Expositor, a remark is necessary for the expression of some views, and certain principles by which we intend to be governed in our editorial duties. Many questions and surmises are made by those who suppose we will come in conflict with some of their darling schemes of self-aggrandisement. Others, more honest, desire to know whether our object is to advocate any particular religious tenets, or any favorite measures of either of the political parties of the country. To all such questions we answer in the negative. Free toleration in religious sentiments, we deem compatible with the organization of our government, and should not be abridged. On the other hand, we believe religious despotism to be incompatible with our free institutions.
What we conceive to be despotism, engendered by an assumption of power in the name of religion, we shall have occasion to show hereafter. In relation to politics, whatever our own views may be upon the federal measures that now, or may, hereafter agitate the country, the Expositor will not be the exponent threof; and all the strife and party zeal of the two great antagonistical parties for the success of their respective candidates for the Presidency, we shall remain neutral, and in an editorial capacity, inactive. Another party, however, has sprung up in our midst, the leader of which, it would seem, expects, by a flourish of Quixotic chivalry, to take, by storm, the Presidential chair, and distributat among his faithful supporters, the office of governor in all the different States, for the purpose, we presume, of more effectually consolidating the government. This party we may be disposed to treat with a little levity, and nothing more. As it respects the local questions which may arise in our own county, and the candidates for the legislature from this county, we reserve the right to expatiate upon the respective claims—not on account of their politics — be they whig or democrat, but on account of a combination which we believe has for its object the utter destruction of the rights of the old citizens of the county, who have borne the heat and burden of the day; who have labored hard as pioneers of the county; who have settled and organized the county; who have rights that should be respected by every principle of honor and good faith, and whose wishes should be consulted int he choice of officers, and not have men imposed upon them, who are obnoxious, for good and sufficient reasons. In relation of such questions, we intend to express our mind freely, as our duty dictates, regardless of consequences.
If a fair and honorable course be taken by the dominant party at Nauvoo, we will have nothing to battle against; but if they do not pursue that course, we shall be prepared for the warfare. We must confess, however, if we are to judge of the future by the past, we have little to expect from that quarter: but apart from local political considerations, we have a high and more noble duty to perform. We shall spread the banner to the breeze for a radical reform in the city of Nauvoo, as the departure from moral rectitude, and the abuse of power, have become intolerable. We shall speak out, and spare not, until certain grievances are redressed or corrected; until honor, virtue, and reputation shall take their accustomed habitations, and be respected; until we teach men that no exclusive privileges can be allowed to any individual under our form of government; that the law of the land, based upon the revealed laws of heaven, are paramount to all other earthly considerations; and he who sets the laws at defiance, and evades their operation, either by direct or indirect means pursues a course subversive of the best interests of the country, and dangerous to the well-being of the social compact.
That there does exist an order of things with the systematic elements of organization in our midst — a system which, if exposed in its naked deformity, would make the virtuous mind revolt with horror; a system in the exercise of which lays prostrate all the dearest ties in our social relations — the glorious fabric upon which human happiness is based—ministers to the worst passions of our nature, and throws us back into the benighted regions of the dark ages, we have the greatest reason to believe.
The question is asked, will you bring a mob upon us? In answer to that, we assure all concerned, that we will be among the first to put down anything like an illegal force being used against any man or set of men. If any one has become amenable to the law, we wish to have him tried impartially by the laws of his country. We are among the number who believe that there is virtue and integrity enough in the administrators of the law, to bring every offender to justice, and to protect the innocent. If it is necessary to make a show of force, to execute legal process, it will crate no sympathy in that case to cry out, we are mobbed. There is such a thing as persons being deceived into a false sympathy once, who, the second time, will scrutinize very closely, to know who, or which party, are the persecutors. It is not always the first man who cries out, stop thief, that is robbed. It is the upright, honest, considerate, and moral precepts in any class that will be respected in this or any other enlightened age — precepts which have for their end the good of mankind, and the establishment of fundamental truths. On the other hand, paradoxical dogmas, new systems of government, new codes of morals, a new administration of the laws by ignorant, unlettered, and corrupt men, must be frowned down by every lover of his country. The well-being of society demand it at our hands.
Our country, by whose laws we are protected, asks us for a manifestation of that patriotism which should inspire every American citizen—the interests of the State of Illinois require it, and as a citizen of Illinois, we intend to respond to the voice of duty, and stand the hazard of the die.
We believe that the Press should not be the medium through which the private character of any individual should be assailed, delineated, or exposed to public gaze; still, whoever acts in an official character, who sets himself up as a public teacher, and reformer of morals and religion, and as an aspirant to the highest office in the gift of the people of this glorious republic, whose institutions he publicly condemns, we assert and maintain the right of canvassing all the public acts and animadverting, with terms of the severest reproach upon all the revolutionary measures that comes to our notice, from any source. We would not be worthy of the name of an American citizen, did we stand by and see, not only the laws of the State, but the laws of the United States, set at defiance, the authorities insulted, fugitives from justice fleeing for refuge, asking and receiving protection from the authorities of Nauvoo, for high crimes committed against the government of the United States, the Mayor of a petty incorporated town interposing his authority, and demanding the right of trial for the fugitive on the merits of the case, by virtue of a writ of Habeas Corpus, issued by the Municipal Court of Nauvoo. It is too gross a burlesque upon common sense — a subterfuge too low to indicate any thing but a corrupt motive. — Such acts, whether committed in a private or public capacity, will be held up to public scorn. An independent Press is bound by every sense of duty, to lay before the public every attack upon their rights: we, therefore, in the exercise of our duty, expect the support and the aid of our fellow citizens in our enterprise.
***********************************
So Rameupton, you need to provide the quote where the Expositor calls for killing Mormons. I see just the opposite, a rather high minded call for the law. This is one of those “Put Up Or Shut Up” moments.
If you can find the quote, you will actually get an apology from me, but I can’t find it. I do get a sense of fear of retribution from The General.
Bttt!
Bttt!
Gun banner == Liberal, no escape.
Freedom and individual rights are the target of all gun banners. If they can’t trust you with guns then what can they trust you with? Your own health care? Your own money? Owning property? Choosing what car to drive? It’s all about responsibilities, individual rights and freedoms — Removing your responsibilities is the same as removing your rights, including the right to fail.
The NRA does all sorts of odd things for reasons that have a lot to do with getting the best they can from a bad Liberal situation. Does not mean we should give in to that temptation.
Being a governor of the most liberal state in the union is enough for me to say no thanks. Romney-care fits right in with removing your responsibilities. I think Romney is a fine person, did a lot of good things, Staples, the Olympics and some good in Massachusetts. But not for me. If he is the nominee, I won’t vote for him. Better to throw rocks at the real deal socialist than to try and defend the indefensible.
In Reagan’s time there was a Democrat congress, no hope. Reagan did what he could with that handicap. Democrats made simple, raise taxes, fund socialism and ban guns so you can’t do anything about it. Of course Liberals in law enforcement, police chiefs, sheriffs, state police just parrot what the Liberals in office want them to say, does not mean I should listen to them. So a bunch of Reagan’s throw away quotes mean nothing to me.
Gun ownership, it’s rooted in trust of the people — Rights, freedom and responsibilities, all inseparable. Without individual responsibilities there can be no rights, and no freedoms.
In Reagan’s time, who would have thought there would come a day, when 40+ states would allow citizens to carry concealed, given the era’s entrenched Liberal hysteria over guns. The notion that the average citizen cannot be trusted is a concept we should all reject. The need for more civics education is a concept we should all endorse. What it takes to be a citizen and what are the responsibilities that come with citizenship should be taught in every school. Sadly that is not the case, those citizenship teaching have been replaced by trite “paper or plastic” Liberal nonsense.
BTW: I don’t think tanks should be kept at home — But then who is to decide who gets to keep what? I limit my view of the Second Amendment to weapons the U.S. Army foot soldier would carry. It’s all up to the individual to be responsible for their actions, and held accountable for those actions, regardless what they drive.
Idealistic, probably so, but what’s wrong with ideals?
You left out this part out of the Expositor, do you agree with this assessment?
"In the dark ages of Popery, when bigotry, superstition, and tyranny held universal sway over the empire of reason,.."
And this quote which gets to the heart why William Law wrote the Expositor.
"On thursday evening, the 18th of April, there was a council called, unknown to the Church, which tried, condemned, and cut off brothers Wm. Law, Wilson Law,"
Somebody had some sour beans over their excommunication. Not much new under the sun.
Well since we are playing “Put Up Or Shut Up” moments. Perhaps you'd also like to apologize for this comment. Where you take an expereince you had and ignorantly applied it to all Mormons. Claiming that wikipedia verified your assertion that I worship Holy Crickets. I was wrong abot the name of the Expositor and Signal papers and have quickly apologized. How many more months do we have to wait for an apology from you on this one. (5 months and counting)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1764328/posts?q=1&;page=51
Boy were they pissed about me stepping on the Mormon crickets that infested the place - what a superstitious lot. 78 posted on 01/08/2007 4:38:35 PM PST by FastCoyote
And you are a fat headed donkey, because I have indeed been told not to kill mormon crickets because they fed the seagulls that - whatever. I can't remember all the Mormon superstitious gibberish. Oh wait, here to prove my point that you are an ass, here is wikipedia: ...
So dear readers, I have been called a liar for pointing out the superstitious beliefs of Mormons about Mormon crickets - only to be vindicated by the wikipedia. So, believe who you will, but I am certainly not the liar here. 133 posted on 01/08/2007 5:35:44 PM PST by FastCoyote
Later in the article you "flip flop" and claim you never generalized and technically didn't use the word "all" mormons. A nuetral reading of the thread shows you do generalize, do insult and have no clue what you are talking about.
So how long for an apology do I have to wait.....?
....cue.... Cricket sounds here....
All the arguments you apply to Reagan (times have changed, worked with Dem's) apply to Romney as well. With 85% Dem's he got quite a bit done. Some of the statements he made in 1994 need to be taken in context of the time period. This was before the immorality of Clinton was sweeping the nation and gays were marrying.
Your welcome! : )
“I apologize it was the Warsaw Signal that called for the killing of Mormons not the Nauvoo Expositor.”
And YOU ALSO left out the part about the Warsaw Signal being threatened with destruction after the Mormon mob had already destroyed the Nauvoo Expositor. Hyrum Smith apparently threatened to kill the Warsaw Signal’s editor. Since General Smith had a secessionist army of 2000, I can see why they called (selectively) for the deaths of the Mormon hierarchy IN DEFENSE, lest they themselves be killed.
“Now are you going to apologize for the mob that destroyed the Mormon’s printing Press, tarred and feathered the printers, beat them and shot at the girl’s who saved the manuscript from the bonfire?”
Show me a citation and I’ll look at it. I have no idea what you are talking about, but I’ll be happy to read the history.
[You left out this part out of the Expositor, do you agree with this assessment?]
“In the dark ages of Popery, when bigotry, superstition, and tyranny held universal sway over the empire of reason,..”
Ummmm, duhhh. That was why they called it The Dark Ages, perhaps you’ve never heard of it.
“On thursday evening, the 18th of April, there was a council called, unknown to the Church, which tried, condemned, and cut off brothers Wm. Law, Wilson Law,”
[Somebody had some sour beans over their excommunication. Not much new under the sun. ]
Well, Joseph Smith WAS under some heat for being a whoremaster of other men’s wives, so it isn’t unusual that he would excommunicate dissenters and they would be pissed.
And what’s up with the cricket stuff? I’ve answered your petty question fifty times the same way over the last five months. You must have some weird feedback loop that won’t let you take a simple answer.
Here’s the deal, if you find a linguist who can find where I said “ALL Mormons believe you can’t kill crickets because they are magical”, I’ll send you a hundred bucks. If you can’t find someone qualified to attest to that, I get a hundred bucks from you. WILL THAT SHUT YOU UP ABOUT THE CRICKET THING???
“A neutral reading of the thread shows you do generalize, do insult and have no clue what you are talking about.”
Well, you just snippeted me out of context, insulted me and generalized that I ‘have no clue what [I am] talking about’, so I think we know who the Miss Manners delinquent is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.