Posts by J. Neil Schulman

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Does the Third Amendment Speak to the George Zimmerman Case?

    04/25/2012 2:47:38 PM PDT · 15 of 18
    J. Neil Schulman to Hemingway's Ghost

    MarkTwain reposted my article before I added the following paragraph:

    “I’m suggesting the Third Amendment opens a window to the context and mindset of the Framers regarding a standing paramilitary police department embedded among the people — beyond the literal and narrow text of the Third Amendment. The Supreme Court might well call this the “penumbra” of the Third Amendment.”

  • A Very Personal Message to Glenn Beck

    06/08/2010 5:03:17 AM PDT · 1 of 17
    J. Neil Schulman
  • Fort Hood soldier deployed in Iraq calls for giving guns to American soldiers and families on base

    11/24/2009 2:50:09 AM PST · 1 of 13
    J. Neil Schulman
  • The American Humiliation Buried at Fort Hood

    11/13/2009 1:51:01 AM PST · 1 of 19
    J. Neil Schulman
  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/10/2009 12:47:23 PM PST · 45 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman to Dutchboy88

    Dutchboy88 wrote:
    “’The American solution is to let a free people defend themselves — and that certainly applies to the American army.’

    “If this is that pot-smoking hazy America of Woodstock, then we don’t want any. Hold hands and sing KumByYa with the Dums.”

    Wow. It sounds like you’re an army officer who hates America almost as much as Major Hasan.

  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/09/2009 4:13:19 PM PST · 37 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman to Billthedrill

    Billthedrill wrote:

    “While I agree whole-heartedly with the idea of allowing anyone who is capable to bear arms, the ban didn’t originate with Clinton. It was like that all during my active duty service from 1970-1980 and on every base I can recall during the next 15 years spent working for the Navy in one capacity or other. It isn’t new. Frankly I don’t care whose fault it was. Fix it. Fix it now.”

    Before Clinton it varied by service and by post. I think you’d find Army and Marine bases had different policies than Naval and Air Force bases

    But I agree with your bottom line. Whether it’s DoD policy or command SNAFU, it needs to be stopped.

  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/09/2009 4:09:27 PM PST · 36 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman to Dutchboy88

    Dutchboy88 wrote:
    “’He wouldn’t have opened fire in the first place if he knew armed soldiers in the room would immediately shoot back.’

    Then arm every man woman & child under the same logic.

    I say we isolate the Islamocists. We did something like this in WWII with the Japanese because we did not know if they were going to do something or not. If they don’t like the isolation (until the war is over in 25 years), let them leave the country. Otherwise, you are inviting the trouble from every kook ball that gets mad at the traffic. One guy here in AZ just drove up to the photo radar car and shot the attendant through the window. He was mad at photo radar. So, is this better?”

    Even the Supreme Court found that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s detention of American citizens of Japanese descent was unconstitutional. That you would recommend that makes me think you’re as much of a fascist as FDR.

    The American solution is to let a free people defend themselves — and that certainly applies to the American army.

    As for your traffic-light incident, for each of these there are ten times as many cases where a defensive gun use saved a life or stopped a crime. You must be reading only the Brady campaigns lying anti-gun propaganda.

  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/09/2009 1:17:52 PM PST · 23 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman to kittykat77

    kittykat77 wrote:
    “What was the policy before the Clinton directive? Were all soldiers allowed to carry weapons at all (or some) times on US bases? What was the policy regarding personal (civilian) guns on US bases?”

    I’m not 100% but I believe it was up to the base commander.

  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/09/2009 1:01:03 PM PST · 13 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman to Dutchboy88

    Dutchboy88 wrote:

    “The guy that pulled the trigger is a terrorist. He would have gotten 4 armed men by the time they unslung their weapons and fired. Would you then be happy?”

    He wouldn’t have opened fire in the first place if he knew armed soldiers in the room would immediately shoot back. But if he was dumb enough to do so, four casualties is better than fifty-two.

  • Clinton-Bush Gun Control Enabled Fort Hood Massacre

    11/09/2009 12:50:07 PM PST · 1 of 48
    J. Neil Schulman
  • "Repent, Roman! A Modest Solution to the Polanski Problem"

    10/21/2009 6:32:31 PM PDT · 13 of 18
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    Obviously only a person who worships the State like you do would dissemble and try to divert the issue, which is that it’s the individual victim who wants her rapist set free.

    And you — who don’t even have standing, except on the Communist premise that a crime against one is a crime against all — wants punishment where the actual, real-life, and sole victim wants none.

    Maybe you’re not a Communist. Maybe you’re just so incapable of reason that you don’t even understand the communist principles you’re using to argue.

  • "Repent, Roman! A Modest Solution to the Polanski Problem"

    10/20/2009 9:19:47 PM PDT · 11 of 18
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    Oh, so you believe in collective State rights rather than individual sovereign rights. Individual victims mean nothing to you, just pawns for the greater glory of the State. Useful to know there are communists on Free Republic.

  • "Repent, Roman! A Modest Solution to the Polanski Problem"

    10/20/2009 4:07:54 PM PDT · 9 of 18
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    That’s why there was an American Revolution — to get rid of kings. To make the individual sovereign. Polanski’s victim here was Samantha Geimer and no one else. Her desire is that Polanski’s original conviction/plea-bargain be voided because of judicial misconduct. That quashed, flight from jurisdiction to avoid sentencing also goes away. Screw the king.

  • "Repent, Roman! A Modest Solution to the Polanski Problem"

    10/20/2009 12:17:58 PM PDT · 1 of 18
    J. Neil Schulman
  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/30/2009 10:16:57 AM PDT · 184 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed

    TruthInThoughtWordAndDeed wrote:

    “I was reading the article, pretty much agreeing with the author’s points, until he listed “Abortion is murder” as a lie. At that point (#3), he lost me (my interest in reading any more of his article).”

    So you stop reading when you reach something you disagree with.

    C.S. Lewis wrote an essay called “On Watchful Dragons.” He was talking about how some people stop reading or listening the moment they see the word “Christian” or “Christianity” or “Jesus.”

    You have your own Watchful Dragon that prevents you from reading or listening.

    Robert A. Heinlein said, “You can only learn from someone you disagree with.”

    If you stop reading because you reach a point of disagreement, you’ve decided that you’ve learned all you’re going to learn, and you might as well put an “Out of Business” sign on your brain.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/29/2009 10:27:00 PM PDT · 174 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to SQUID

    Human rights adhere to self-conscious beings capable of making volitional moral choices.

    How these beings got that way is a matter of debate between those who believe in creation and those who believe it happened by a series of natural accidents.

    I believe in both. God created the universe and natural law did the rest ... with a little Divine tweaking once in a while.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/29/2009 10:22:49 PM PDT · 173 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Republic of Texas

    Republic of Texas wrote:

    “If you aren’t sure, then NOT killing the baby seems to be the prudent choice. If you aren’t sure and still kill the baby because you THINK the soul hasn’t entered yet, you are simply a murderer with a good rationalization.”

    If you’re not sure, where do you get the balls to impose your guesstimate on others by force of law?

    The American position is individual freedom of conscience because one man’s opinion is another man’s snort of derision.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/29/2009 10:18:19 PM PDT · 172 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    “Just curious. Absent a police force paid by taxes, how are the free market investigators paid?”

    I see. You favor robbing Peter to Pay for Paul’s protection. Good to know there are socialists here on Free Republic.

    “Most crimes are committed against poor people, who don’t have the money to pay for an investigation.”

    Let’s compromise and give the poor gun stamps.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/29/2009 10:15:26 PM PDT · 171 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to carmody

    carmody wrote:

    “You’ve declared unborn babies have no soul based on your personal belief and then use that belief to justify abortion.”

    I’ve done no such thing. The burden on a person using religious premises to outlaw abortion is to prove by that a soul is present. Whether or not a majority interprets their religion’s scripture or church fathers as supporting their view, those who disagree should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority. Rights are individual, not collective.

    You don’t want to have an abortion you have the right not to have one. The individual conscience of someone who disagrees with you should have no less standing under any theory of human rights.

    Your right to decide a fetus is human rests only with you and your life. Your opinion is binding on no one else.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 5:49:19 PM PDT · 145 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to carmody

    carmody wrote:

    “True. I should have phrased it another way: if the secular government determines that none of us have a soul (separation of church and state) what would keep the government from passing laws to kill old people who are sucking up resources and infants who are disabled? For that matter, why not forced abortions to keep the population in check?”

    You answered your own question. If the people delegate enough of their power to the government to forbid abortion, they have delegated enough of their power to the government to do all the rest of the things you list.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 3:10:51 PM PDT · 140 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to ROCKLOBSTER

    Ah. No wonder I didn’t get it. I’ve never been a Democrat.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 3:05:14 PM PDT · 137 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Repeal The 17th

    Repeal The 17th wrote:

    “All I know is that I reviewed your posting history.
    You signed up a few years ago to shill a book...
    A year or so later you posted to shill another book...
    6 months or so later you posted to shill another book...
    No posts in between and no commentary in between.
    It makes it look like you are using FR
    as a resource to shill books.
    Correct me if I am wrong.”

    You’re wrong. The book I linked for free downloads is not new. It was first published in 1979.

    And I have, without asking for compensation, cross-posted my professionally-published articles numerous times on Free Republic.

    But thanks for revealing yourself as a communist who is opposed to anyone supporting their family as a professional writer.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:54:56 PM PDT · 134 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Brugmansian

    Brugmansian wrote:

    “No one is denying freedom or religion to anyone. No one except those who claim Christians are out to get people. As you just suggested they are.”

    I make no such claim regarding “Christians” since as an individualist I would not make such a collectivist generalization.

    But some individual Christians certainly have. It is to them I addressed my remarks.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:51:14 PM PDT · 133 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Republic of Texas

    Republic of Texas wrote:

    “If this man is going to convince me the he alone knows when the soul enters the body, I’m gonna need a miracle as proof.”

    I don’t need to assert that I know for my statement to be true. I merely need to assert that the charge of murder requires knowing ... and I note a great deal of debate and theological disagreement on that point within this forum’s discussion.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:47:58 PM PDT · 132 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to aruanan

    aruanan wrote:

    “41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.”

    So your argument to me is that the proximity of Jesus to Elizabeth’s fetus certainly and in no event could have produced anything extraordinary, divine, or miraculous? Or is the point of this passage precisely that?

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:35:50 PM PDT · 130 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to HalfFull

    You also want to enforce Exodus 21 17 and Exodus 22 17-19?

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:31:21 PM PDT · 129 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Codeflier

    Codeflier wrote:

    “The reactions to your list demonstrate all that is wrong with contemporary debate of issues. Everyone is looking for 100% agreement without discussion. If people disagree on just one topic - that’s it! Finished! No more discussion.”

    Excellent point well said.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:30:12 PM PDT · 128 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to rlmorel

    rlmorel wrote:

    “Please describe to me a genocidal event in history where people were systematically rounded up throughout an entire continent using modern communication and mechanization, shipped like commercial product to multiple centralized hubs to be processed as cattle in meat packing and slaughtered by the millions in a matter of a few short years.”

    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn calculated the death count of Soviet victims who were shipped to gulags and labor camps at 60 million — ten times the number of Jewish victims of Hitler. The events overlap so similar “modern communication and mechanization” were used in both cases.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:23:06 PM PDT · 126 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to rlmorel

    I write precisely. The statement “Abortion is murder” is the assertion that all abortions are murders. I did not argue that no abortion can constitute a homicide.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:16:26 PM PDT · 124 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Tribune7

    Tribune7 wrote:

    “What would be the difference between that and killing it in the womb i.e. an abortion 61-minutes earlier?”

    What’s the difference between shooting someone before they take out their gun and point it at you, shooting someone an instant before they pull the trigger, or shooting them after they dropped their gun and are running away?

    Timing is sometimes everything.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:13:37 PM PDT · 121 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    Thank you! :-)

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:12:14 PM PDT · 119 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Tribune7

    Thank you! :-)

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:10:23 PM PDT · 118 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to ROCKLOBSTER

    ROCKLOBSTER wrote:

    “Reason #1 why most Jews are RATs!”

    That’s an acronym for “Refuting Arrogant Twits”?

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:05:54 PM PDT · 117 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Repeal The 17th

    Repeal The 17th wrote:

    “Shilling for your book here on FR?”

    It’s a free download.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 2:04:33 PM PDT · 116 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Sherman Logan

    Cordoning off a crime scene for collection of forensic evidence, and analysis of the collected evidence, could be conducted by any number of NGO job descriptions. Legal standards for chain-of-custody can exist in a market-based system the same way other technical standards exist in any number of industries.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 1:58:06 PM PDT · 115 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to marktwain

    Thanks much! :-)

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 1:57:07 PM PDT · 114 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Hardastarboard

    Destroying the avenue by which a soul would have come into the world may well cause the ref to impose a penalty and hand the ball to the other team.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 1:52:48 PM PDT · 113 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Mr. Lucky

    I posted it first as plaintext and it posted too small for me to read without oversizing the screen text of everything else. I increased the type size to one comfortable to me and others who need reading glasses, so as not to require oversizing the screen text for everyone else.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 1:36:27 PM PDT · 112 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Billthedrill

    Billthedrill wrote:

    “Regarding your statement on abortion, I have two questions for you concerning the unborn child:

    “1. If it isn’t human, what is it?”

    You use the word “human” in your first question as an adjective. Using the word “human” as an adjective to modify other nouns, there are human beings, human artifacts, human events, human corpses. The “unborn child” in your question
    is either a human embryo or a human fetus. Using the modifier “human” does not answer the question of whether terminating the growth of a human embryo or fetus is murder. That question requires additional information within a fully-defined context.

    “2. If it isn’t alive, what is it?”

    Being alive is a necessary but not sufficient condition to being a creature endowed by its Creator with human unalienable rights.

    By the way, my argument that the statement “Abortion is murder” is a lie means that those who argue that “all abortions are murders” is a lie. I have not argued, nor have I eliminated the possibility, that some abortions — such as the termination of a fully-formed viable fetus — may constitute a homicide.

    JNS

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 1:19:02 PM PDT · 111 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to carmody

    Everyone has the freedom to commit murder, whether they are atheist or theist, and to stand before God’s judgment afterward.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 11:32:31 AM PDT · 103 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman to Night Hides Not

    I posted then went to bed. Woke up to find 100 messages in reply, which manage to debate the article nicely in my absence.

  • The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime

    09/27/2009 5:04:44 AM PDT · 1 of 184
    J. Neil Schulman
  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    03/02/2009 1:48:40 PM PST · 126 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote:
    “’I know I’ve been on touch with God.’

    “What does that mean exactly? You certainly don’t seem confident that the Holy Spirit is guiding you.”

    I’ve already answered that question by offering you a free read of my book I MET GOD and you answered that you weren’t interested in reading it. So stop pretending that you have any interest in anything other than patting yourself on the back and claiming personal omniscience.

    “My goodness, it really IS bothering you that someone is confident in the guidance of the Spirit and you are not.”

    There’s a difference between confidence and hubris — and the difference is self honesty.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/27/2009 1:46:54 PM PST · 121 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote:
    “’I won’t claim infallability for myself, as you do.’

    “LOL Way to twist what I’ve said. Of course you know I’ve never said I was infallible. What I said was I know whom I am listening to. HE is the one who is infallible.”

    Then admit that you might have got it wrong and stop using the mantle of the Holy Spirit to in insist you can’t have a wrong interpretation of scripture.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/27/2009 1:42:12 PM PST · 120 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to GSWarrior

    GSWarrior wrote:

    “I started to read your book, The Rainbow Cadenza, but couldn’t finish it. I can’t remember the specifics, but I cast it aside where the heroine watches a youngish woman being raped and sort of gets turned on by the act.”

    My heroine is not turned on and is in fact repelled by what she is forced to watch. You quit reading too soon. Here is dialogue from the following scene:


    Later that night, after they returned to Charlotte Amalie, he took Joan into his house and stopped her. “You didn’t like the hunt, did you?” he asked.

    “I thought it was reprehensible,” she said.

    “Excellent,” he said.


    The point to the scene is one of the villain’s manipulations of the heroine to degrade her ... a degradation that she survives and triumphs over.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/27/2009 1:32:44 PM PST · 119 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote:
    “’Yes. I won’t blame the Holy Spirit for my own interpretations of scripture. I won’t claim infallability for myself, as you do.’

    “So what you are saying is that it upsets you that I know Who I am listening to and you don’t. Got it.”

    You’ve got it wrong. I know I’ve been on touch with God. But I won’t demand others worship God through me, as does anyone who claims the authority of scripture or of the Holy Spirit to demand others regard what is their human — and therefore incomplete and error-prone perceptions and opinions — as divine.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/25/2009 2:43:26 PM PST · 115 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote:” I’ve already said repeatedly the Holy Spirit is the only correct interpreter of scripture. I know who I’ve been receiving teaching from - Him. And you’ve told us that you are the one doing the interpreting for yourself.”

    Yes. I won’t blame the Holy Spirit for my own interpretations of scripture. I won’t claim infallability for myself, as you do.

    I do, nonetheless, inform anyone who finds it relevant that I’ve been the object of divine guidance. But no one is required to believe me.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/24/2009 10:46:18 AM PST · 113 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote in Message 65: “It isn’t me who is the ‘arbiter’ but the Holy Spirit, and he’s already shown you are out on a limb with your ‘interpretation.’”

    You’re claiming you can tell me that I’m “out on a limb” with my interpretation of scripture because the Holy Spirit has shown you the true meaning.

    OK, if that’s not a claim that MEGoody has a direct revelation from the Holy Spirit to understand the meaning of scripture then what is it?

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/23/2009 9:32:52 AM PST · 111 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to Canedawg

    Canedawg wrote:

    “In your snarky, smirky manner you claimed that a “Hebrew” teaching as to the soul filling a person does not occur until they take their first breath, and that is hogwash.”

    That was, in fact, the belief of the Biblical Hebrews, whether you choose to believe it or not.

    “Your intellectually perverse reasoning to support your maladjustment to conventional morality is a transparent attempt to justify barbaric and abominable behaviors.”

    MY maladjustment to conventional morality? I was married to a woman and procreated. You have a problem with that?

    “Dont bother responding, because i have no further interest in reading your crap.”

    I am not posting to you privately. You write to me in public I’ll respond to you in public. If you’re incapable of making a compelling argument I want others to be exposed to the inadequacy of your challenge.

  • Why gay rights activists need to straighten up

    02/23/2009 9:20:24 AM PST · 110 of 127
    J. Neil Schulman to MEGoody

    MEGoody wrote:
    “’Really? The Holy Spirit posted a reply to me in this discussion?’

    “How droll. You make light of the Holy Spirit and expect me to believe He leads you in interpreting scripture. Sorry, but no.”

    It wasn’t the Holy Spirit I was making light of in this discussion. It’s people like you who invoke the name of the Holy Spirit to spread their own poisonous bigotry.