published Tuesday, November 19th, 2013

Heritage Plaza

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

132
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
soakya said...

you should try it too Clay. don't like free speech when it's something you disagree with do you Clay? university students belly aching about someone exercising free speech where a diversity of ideas are supposed to be tolerated. the students are claiming they pay good money to attend UTC and shouldn't be subjected to such hate speech, wrong, taxpayers are paying the majority of your education thru the hope scholarship, pell grants, and other tax dollars typical liberal hypocrisy.

November 19, 2013 at 12:31 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

The Left is all about diversity of ideas. Not. Put a burka on that toon figure, and the students would be paying rapt attention.

November 19, 2013 at 1:51 a.m.
jesse said...

Con man in DRAG!!!

November 19, 2013 at 5:33 a.m.
caddy said...

Truth is Tyranny in the nation of lies. Clay doesn't like free speech or the constitution. This is one of the bedrock ideas of this nation; and Soakya is right. Soakya is right, if she were muslin and wore a burka, it would better fit Clays idea of multicultural success.

November 19, 2013 at 6:52 a.m.
JStephens81 said...

If she did practice what she screeched, she wouldn't be up there screeching at all. Her own book tells her that women are to remain quiet and not teach. 1 Timothy 2:11-12 Of course, like most believers, she only follows the parts she likes in the Bible.

November 19, 2013 at 7:07 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

One should approach such things as comedy. I watched a group of seminarians destroy a street preacher once, using only the bible.

November 19, 2013 at 7:10 a.m.
conservative said...

Good job soakya!

Don't know what is going on at UTC but unlike the intolerant left I bet she is not destroying property like the Liberals of the OWS crowd.

November 19, 2013 at 7:38 a.m.
librul said...

No, Con-Man - she's all about destroying minds.

"Imagine the people who believe such things and who are not ashamed to ignore, totally, all the patient findings of thinking minds through all the centures since the Bible was written. And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us, who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. I personally resent it bitterly." -- Isaac Asimov (1920-1992)

When will these people ever even begin to understand that they are the single worst intellectual ambassadors their mythical skydaddy could ever imagine? To stand in the middle of an institution of higher learning built on a foundation of free inquiry and science and claim to have all the answers or be so arrogant as to believe that one can teach anyone anything by accusatory and demeaning rhetoric must the exclusive province of the smallest of minds.

November 19, 2013 at 7:38 a.m.
chatttownvol said...

@ soakya and the rest- How is he against free speech? By making a cartoon about the hypocrisy of street preachers? If there was a Muslim acting like a jerk, liberals wouldn't appreciate that either. I think what you don't understand the concept of appropriateness. Why should the university have anyone with that kind of attitude, that is intentionally annoying the students, on campus? I went to UTK and we had droves of street preachers. People would carry crosses and scream in our faces. But they were never given a special area from where they could preach. They were free to say what they wanted as long as they didn't break any laws. And the students were free to say what they wanted too. When the crowds grew large, the police would come observe. But they never had to arrest any students because AGAIN- everyone was free to speak, yell or whatever. It was truly free speech.

November 19, 2013 at 8:24 a.m.
soakya said...

how is he and the students against free speech! they want to shut her up. if it was a muslim preaching in the middle of UTC we wouldn't be having this conversation. he would not have been approached.

November 19, 2013 at 8:34 a.m.
jesse said...

The toon appears to me to be more about hypocrites than about free speech!IMO!

November 19, 2013 at 8:50 a.m.
mnmoniz said...

From what I understand this cartoon explains what is going on quite nicely. It is not what she is saying (though I understand that it is hate-filled) that has caused severe problems, but rather the volume her voice is when she says it. She is literally drowning out the voices of the professors to the point they have cancelled some classes because the profs don't see the point of shouting over her. Have you ever attempted to study for a final without the class being taught? Or read a book while someone is shouting at you? She could be singing about unicorns and rainbows - it would still be a problem.

November 19, 2013 at 8:53 a.m.
Maximus said...

Clays depiction of the preacher looks curiously like Libruls lesbian Mother. Hmmm.

November 19, 2013 at 8:56 a.m.
caddy said...

"Go, wondrous creature! mount where science guides; Go, measure earth, weigh air, and state the tides; Instruct the planets in what orbs to run, Correct old Time, and regulate the sun; Go, soar with Plato to the empyreal sphere, To the first good, first perfect, and first fair; Go, teach Eternal Wisdom how to rule-- Then drop into thyself, and be a fool!"

~Alexander Pope

The Problem with people like librul: he believes Science ( and he ) have complete understanding.

Sad the thought that we were created by No one, here for nothing, going nowhere.

Funny how no one lives their life consistently by that false idea.

November 19, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.
caddy said...

Thus, according to “Qohelet, [ The writer of Ecclesiastes ] the human race does not progress. We may develop more perfect instruments, pull more strings, engage in more activities. But we are nothing more. Our life does not change. We remain trapped in our condition, by our time and space. People today are no more intelligent than five thousand years ago. Nor are they more just, or superior in any other way. We are not even better informed, since today’s mass learning is largely offset by what we lose with respect to nature, instinct, intuition, and relationships. Furthermore, the things we learn these days fail to become part of our culture or personality.

We citizens of lightning twentieth – century progress cannot make ourselves believe this warning, but it should lead us to take very seriously what is probably the fundamental question of our century: What is the effect cost of each step “forward” ? What do we lose each time we think we gain something ? What disappears with every invention ? What new danger lurks in every technique ? As Qohelet would say, what is the ultimate “profit” ? Until we can respond thoroughly to these questions, we must stop talking in a way that exalts progress.

No, those of us who live in the 1980s are in no way superior. We are not even new; we simply arrive and pass on. This is all we can say about ourselves—the same that was said about previous generations. We leave no trace after we are gone. No one remembers ancestors. True, we leave the traces of things we have used, but what about us and our generation ? We will not be remembered by those who come after us ( Eccelesiastes 1:11 ). We must become aware of the significance of this fact with respect to our triumphalist ideologies. As Christians, we need to recognize that we in no way “progress” toward the Kingdom of God. History does not produce the Kingdom. The Kingdom will not come when the world at long last is Christianized, converted, or when society becomes more just, etc.

Reason for Being, Jacques Ellul, p.64

Obviously, we haven't grown any since the 80s...either.

There is NOTHING new under the Sun.

November 19, 2013 at 8:57 a.m.
caddy said...

LOL: Maximus FTW !

November 19, 2013 at 9:01 a.m.
librul said...

I know this ... you are wrong, Caddy... in so many ways. And as for Max, pfffffft!

November 19, 2013 at 9:32 a.m.
tbs1015 said...

i'm trying to imagine Jesus needing cones and security guards to preach the good news. Things probably would have turned out differently

November 19, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

Maximus prattled:

"Clays depiction of the preacher looks curiously like Libruls lesbian Mother. Hmmm."

Maybe so Max, except looks can be deceiving. She's a Republican...and a Conservative.

DOH!!

November 19, 2013 at 9:33 a.m.
chatttownvol said...

@ soakya- wrong. he wanted to make fun of her for being an idiot. You and people like you are a big problem for Christians, Republicans, and Conservatives. You obviously never hear great Christian speakers. And most likely you are not very educated. Otherwise you wouldn't be so quick to defend this lady. Instead of being attractive to others by following Christ's principles and being "Christ Like"- you are repellent and drive people away. That preacher drives people away. And then you have to insult liberals, the students and Muslims? Why? Because like the preacher, you are just looking for a fight. And ironically this comment section has turned into extension of the original joke. Thanks everybody for proving that many can't practice what they preach

November 19, 2013 at 9:36 a.m.
caddy said...

There is no person so narrow as the person who is sure that he is broad; indeed, being quite sure that one is broad is itself a form of narrowness.

~ G. K. Chesterton

Reminds me of Clay

November 19, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.
librul said...

tbs: I'm trying to imagine Jesus as a blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryan product of Palestinian parents. Verily, I say unto you Hee Haw!

November 19, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.
caddy said...

Chatttonvol

Keep this in mind:

The Light of the Gospel 2 Cor 4

4 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God,[a] we do not lose heart. 2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice[b] cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants[c] for Jesus' sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

There is a Veil over the eyes of unbelievers. Preaching and teaching effects the change God intends. It is always effective for whom it was intended. All men are deserving of Death and Hell. Fortunately, God is merciful and opens the ears ( and eyes ) of some. Nowhere are we to assume all will come or that most will be interested in Christ's message.

John Owen stated it as follows:

FOR WHO DID CHRIST DIE? John Owen

The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:

All the sins of all men.
All the sins of some men, or
Some of the sins of all men.

In which case it may be said:

That if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so, none are saved.

That if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world, and this is the truth.

But if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?

You answer, "Because of unbelief."

I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!"

November 19, 2013 at 9:49 a.m.
soakya said...

chatt, you need to brush up on your reading comprehension before you accuse others of being not as smart as you. I didn't defend her, I defend her right to speak. you don't like what she says, move on. But the likes of you can't stand to hear others voice opinions that differ from your own so your answer is to shut them up with the help of the media and government intervention.

folks didn't like how john the Baptist preached either. was he an idiot also? was he or Jesus as educated as you or for that matter was any of his original 12 disciples? we see what the so called educated did to all of them. they responded the same way the likes of you, clay and the majority of liberals do, shut them up regardless of what it takes.

November 19, 2013 at 9:49 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Nothing exposes the hypocrisy of liberals like a forum on a religion based topic.

November 19, 2013 at 9:57 a.m.
caddy said...

"Only individuals who reject the fallen nature of human beings can believe in utopia. Empirically, however, the propensity for evil in human nature, and the impossibility of utopia, can no more be denied than the law of gravity. Thus, sooner or later, every multiculturalist dream inevitably results in a Balkan nightmare." Alvin J. Schmidt, "The Menace of Multiculturalism."

Clay believes in Utopia, that the state can usher it in. Clay is a fool. Some never learn from history. Why ? Because people like Clay assume men are born "blank slates", naturally good. History and observation proves him wrong, proves ALL liberals / progressives wrong. They keep hoping against hope, however, touting the benefits of the state. That project has been tried on numerous occasions. It has never worked and never will.

November 19, 2013 at 9:58 a.m.
caddy said...

Indeed, PlainTruth. Everyone's a Hypocrite save for the liberal. He has no innate ability to look inward, absolutely no ability to see his sin and fallenness. None.

November 19, 2013 at 9:59 a.m.
librul said...

PT: Noting exposes the hypocrisy of Bible-thumnpers like their simple act of opening their mouths.

It's a real conundrum how a forum on an issue even peripherally associated with religion can so quickly devolve into a discussion between the fervent believers resembling a round-table in a church basement in front of a platter of fried chicken where someone FINALLY says "we all say so, so it must be true".

November 19, 2013 at 10:29 a.m.
librul said...

Caddy - Chesterton also said: "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions."

The Bible is a great example.

November 19, 2013 at 10:36 a.m.
caddy said...

Librul

Chesterton was a Firm Believer in Christ. There are plenty of atheists from which to draw your examples for unbelief. Chesterton is not one of them, sir.

November 19, 2013 at 10:41 a.m.
caddy said...

"Autonomy and understanding are mutually exclusive....Having the mind of Christ requires humility (cf Phil 2:5, 8), and thus renunciation of self-sufficiency in order to obey the truth of God. One can only come to a knowledge of Him who is Truth (John 14:6) when the Son grants him the understanding which is lacking (1 Jn 5:20). - Greg Bahnsen

November 19, 2013 at 10:42 a.m.
caddy said...

BUT....

For you Statist men, Iibrul

"If you like your head, you can keep it." ( Picture of Henry the VIII in the Background ).

November 19, 2013 at 10:43 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Librul, you make my point. The toon is only peripherally associated with religion, yet you enlightened atheists can't wait to jump on the bandwagon and make lame jokes about believers. Fried chicken indeed. What are you having for Sunday dinner? Scones and Lattes? You guys are are soooo hokey. And perfectly predictable.

November 19, 2013 at 10:52 a.m.
librul said...

What is this, Copperhead radio?

November 19, 2013 at 11 a.m.
tbs1015 said...

why the hell is predictable a bad thing PT? Means we stand by what we say and believe. You republicans and conservatives are just as predictable. What a horrible argument.

November 19, 2013 at 11 a.m.
conservative said...

caddy:

Some Liberals self destruct on their own without any prompting.

November 19, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

tbs: Seems as if you just agree with me.

November 19, 2013 at 11:15 a.m.
librul said...

Two words, Con Man: Christine O'Donnell.

November 19, 2013 at 11:26 a.m.
ojanitsirk said...

The issue isn't about her free speech. It's about her disrupting student's education by screaming insults and telling them they are going to hell unless they repent. She can not only be heard in that area, but INSIDE buildings where student's are trying to learn. On top of this, when one student VERY POLITELY commented on her "message", exercising his own free speech, he was tackled, pepper sprayed, and arrested - with no explanation, and multiple rights being violated. I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't need a coned off area and security to feel safe spreading HIS message. This is another sad case of so-called "Christian" zealots tarnishing true Christians' reputations.

November 19, 2013 at 11:27 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

You leftist loons take one isolated kook and paint the entire Christian community.

November 19, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

PlainTruth said,

”Nothing exposes the hypocrisy of liberals like a forum on a religion based topic.”

Conversely:

”Nothing exposes the closed minded ignorance of Conservatives like a forum on a religion based topic.”

Which is so wonderfully illustrated by your 11:35 post. Not too cognizant of what you say from one minute to the next are ya? There, is that better?

Thus; the latter of the two statements proves to the strength of its validity -- every time.

Ojanitsirk, I completely agree. Well said.

November 19, 2013 at 11:45 a.m.
tbs1015 said...

I what all us "leftist loons" want is for you people to actually admit that she is a crazy kook PT. Being a liberal, and a Christian I can definitely say that she does paint a bad picture of what Christianity actually is. Just don't sit there and defend her because what she preaches, is not what Christianity is about.

November 19, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Rat says "Not to (sic) cognizant of what you say from one minute to the next are ya?"

Fairly cognizant, Rat. And know the difference between to and too. You ignoramus.

November 19, 2013 at 11:55 a.m.
soakya said...

free speech is all it is about. its the message you liberals despise. if she was preaching for a woman's right to choose or the right to marry anyone of your choosing or advocating for the confiscating of guns from law abiding citizens or demanding everyone had a right to free health care then there would not be a petition to remove her, as a matter of fact you would think she needed to speak to each class. its all about free speech.

November 19, 2013 at 12:28 p.m.
limric said...

That’s a pretty funny cartoon. I love the look on the people’s faces. LOL.

It is NOT about freedom of religion.

It is NOT about freedom of speech.

Ikeithlu has it right, ”One should approach such things as comedy.”

Look at the people, they’re holding their ears. To me that indicates she’s just really really annoying. There’s no pro or con (to the exclusion of Angela Cummings screeching) message in this cartoon at all.

November 19, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
una61 said...

Bennett in drag.

November 19, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

It's just another toon-boy deflection from the diabolical ACA. Plus, he knew it would draw out the Left from their spider holes.

November 19, 2013 at 12:40 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

America surviving as a nation is dependent on being able to solve quadratic equations as opposed to the ability to sink a 25 ft jump shot. -Dr. Ben Carson

November 19, 2013 at 12:41 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

WAAHHH!! I'm PlainTruth, and I want Obama care cartoons to criticize and attack. WAAHHH!!

November 19, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Good point, ojanitsirk. Those defending her right to free speech are claiming that libs defend it only when it's the sort of speech we want to hear. But they are totally ignoring the fact that a student had just recently been pepper-sprayed and arrested for merely speaking out against her. He didn't threaten or attack her in any way or even come within proximity of her. If someone is going to make themselves the center of attention with hate speech in public, then they must be prepared for people to FREELY speak out against them. There is no law that says the public must remain silent and simply "move on" if they don't like what they hear. Anyway, what she is doing exceeds the bounds of free speech. Her noxious screeching and yelling (which is what most street preachers do) is disturbing the peace.

As for what PT said: "Put a burka on that toon figure, and the students would be paying rapt attention." Not hardly. If a Muslim were saying things as reviling and hate-filled as that woman bigot, and doing so in a loud and disruptive manner, I'm sure there would be just as much of an uproar from passersby. If we non-believers seem to focus more on the Bible thumping Christians it's only because they are always at the center of the controversy with their hate speech and the stupid things they say. There is not a lot of difference between fundamentalists of Christianity or Islam - they are both at the bottom of the gene pool; it's just that here in America it is the Christian fundies that we have to contend with most.

November 19, 2013 at 12:55 p.m.
jesse said...

Somebody give that woman a SNAKE!!!

November 19, 2013 at 1:04 p.m.
soakya said...

I watched the 13 minute video I didn't hear her screaming nor screeching. She was loud but not screaming. if its about her screaming then why not ask her to bring the volume down or fine her for violating a ordinance, if she was indeed in violation of a noise ordinance. Because its not about the volume of her voice its about the content of her message, and that's why a petition has been started by some UTC students. plain and simple free speech issue.

November 19, 2013 at 1:15 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

This toon is based on the recent confrontation at UTC so let’s review some of the details of that event. First what is the legality of UTC allowing speakers on campus.

From the Tennessean:

A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of a south-central Kentucky preacher who said the University of Tennessee violated his First Amendment rights by barring him from speaking without approval.

John McGlone, a preacher with Pinpoint Evangelism ministry, has fought the university since 2011, when it told him he no longer could speak on campus without sponsorship from an official student group. He sued the university in federal court, but lost.

McGlone appealed and, last week, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the university's policy was inconsistent and unfair. By requiring sponsorship, the court ruled, the university "opens the door to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement." "In addition to failing to ensure fair notice to the citizenry and to set out a clear standard for enforcement, the University's vague sponsorship requirement threatens to chill speech," the court wrote.

It's the second favorable ruling McGlone has received from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals against a university. In May 2012, the appeals court ruled that Tennessee Tech in Cookeville violated his rights when it kicked him off campus. The college had said McGlone wasn't welcome to speak because he didn't get approval two weeks in advance and disclose what he planned to talk about.

Looks like UTC didn’t want to go down the same road as UTK and Tennessee Tech. They were required to let her speak within certain legal boundaries. As a result they needed to provide a safe place for her to speak as the last time she was there there was the potential for injuries due to student confrontations with her.

November 19, 2013 at 1:28 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

As to the posts about her volume level being disruptive of classes. UTC has obviously set a limit on the volume of her speech but they are not allowed to arbitrarily set it too low.

From the TFP:

Lt. John Boe, one of the four UTC officers who arrested Montalvo on Friday, was standing 50 feet away from Monday's sermon with a microphone in his hand. As Cummings spoke "passionately" about heaven and hell, he was quietly measuring her decibel level.

"If she reaches a certain level, where we realize it is a detriment to the educational process, we can make her leave," he said.

Obviously she did not reach that level so the volume issue is a non-starter.

November 19, 2013 at 1:42 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Jt6gR3hM said in her 1:28 p.m post,

”This toon is based on the recent confrontation at UTC.” Mmm yea, says you. Is that what Clay Bennett TOLD YOU?

The article you quoted from doesn’t mention Angela Cummings whatsoever. Thus your premise, as well as your conclusion is (but especially your premise) based on NOTHING!

What a hack!

November 19, 2013 at 1:48 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Even if the woman is within the limits of the law there is no law that says the passersby have to remain silent. Anyone who freely makes themselves the focal point of attention by appearing in public and saying controversial things must be prepared to accept the sneers, jeers, and heckling from those who disagree, as long as they don't threaten or physically harm her. You who are defending her right to free speech are saying that those who disagree with her are intolerant of speech that they don't want to hear. But they are only exercising their right to disagree with her and express their disagreements verbally. Even if they shout out that she needs to shut up and leave, they have the right to say so, as long as they don't try to physically remove her themselves.

November 19, 2013 at 1:59 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

As for the claim that the arrested student only wanted to respond to the preacher, was not confrontational with the police and was arrested for no good reason. You should review the several videos of the event. He obviously wanted a confrontation and he got his wish and a few bruises.

From the TFP:

UTC Police Sgt. Willie Trueitt arrested Cole Montalvo for disorderly conduct. According to Trueitt's incident report, Montalvo tried to get past a perimeter of cones set up around the evangelist.

"Due to some mishaps of the last visit from the evangelist, a perimeter was set up … to keep students from bothering or getting in the evangelist face/space," Trueitt wrote in the report.

Montalvo was trying to get past the perimeter to speak to the preacher, and also attempted to ride his bike through the perimeter, the report states. Trueitt said he told Montalvo five times to get back before arresting him. Trueitt wrote that he sprayed Montalvo once with mace, but missed his face.

The video shows Trueitt and three other police and campus security officers putting Montalvo face-down on the ground and handcuffing him.

November 19, 2013 at 2:07 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Are there not nuisance laws to prevent disturbing the peace, especially in a classroom environment? Do you need a license for this sort of deal?

November 19, 2013 at 2:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

Jt6gR3hM said in her (?) 1:28 p.m post,

”This toon is based on the recent confrontation at UTC.” Mmm yea, says you. Is that what Clay Bennett TOLD YOU?

Bennett didn’t have to tell me for unlike you I’m not operating under a handicap that prevents logical conclusions.

The article you quoted from doesn’t mention Angela Cummings whatsoever. Thus your premise, as well as your conclusion is (but especially your premise) based on NOTHING!

What a hack!

My 1:28 post served its purpose exactly in that it shows surrounding universities have already been dragged through the courts over this situation and had their heads handed to them. Obviously UTC didn’t want to have the same situation there. You either have no comprehensional capability or are willfully ignorant if you don’t see that.

November 19, 2013 at 2:20 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

A serious handicap you do have is one that doesn’t prevent you from making illogical assumptions. ”Obviously UTC didn’t want to have the same situation there.” Really? Obviously? NOT. You made up your own premise base on supposition and arrived at a conclusion based a conversation with yourself.

“Political (your) language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” :George Orwell

I’ll err on the side of Limerick and Ikeithlu. ”One should approach such things as comedy.”And, ”There’s no pro or con (to the exclusion of Angela Cummings screeching) message in this cartoon at all.”

November 19, 2013 at 2:52 p.m.
conservative said...

Hmm, no earrings, no nose rings, no lip rings, no tattoos,no purple hair,no hoodies, no jewelry,no I Pads, no headsets,no cell phones, no laptops, no bicycles, no skateboards, no security,no black folks, no Hispanics, no Asians, no Islamists and no burkas. Where is this suppose to be? It can't be UTC.

November 19, 2013 at 3 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

A serious handicap you do have is one that doesn’t prevent you from making illogical assumptions. ”Obviously UTC didn’t want to have the same situation there.” Really? Obviously? NOT. You made up your own premise base on supposition and arrived at a conclusion based a conversation with yourself.

"At this time, the campus has no legal basis upon which to deny permission for the speakers to access campus," UTC Chancellor Steve Angle

Since UTC is part of the UT system where do you think they got the idea that produced that statement?

You just can’t help yourself but to continually walk into it time after time.

November 19, 2013 at 3:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

Even if the woman is within the limits of the law there is no law that says the passersby have to remain silent.

No one has claimed otherwise ... have they?

You who are defending her right to free speech are saying that those who disagree with her are intolerant of speech that they don't want to hear.

From the TFP:

Fourth-year UTC student Alyssa Fjeld sent an email to the Times Free Press that said ... "It is hate speech that UTC itself is allowing," she wrote. "If someone spoke to our school as a member of any other hate organization I do not think UTC would allow it and I find it incredibly repugnant that they allow these people to come to our campus day after day."

"We students don't want (Cummings) here anymore," said UTC junior Taylor Ingro. "We've been asking students to come sit with us so she won't be able to use the space."

“UTC continues to provide shelter for this woman whom the student body has made very clear that she is unwelcome.” Nathan Robey UTC student

It sure appears that the students are not addressing the issues but are only expressing their intolerance of her presence on campus.

November 19, 2013 at 3:50 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

librul said...

To stand in the middle of an institution of higher learning built on a foundation of free inquiry and science and claim to have all the answers or be so arrogant as to believe that one can teach anyone anything by accusatory and demeaning rhetoric must the exclusive province of the smallest of minds.

Exactly

November 19, 2013 at 3:52 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Don’t try to change the subject honey.

You posited as fact Clay Bennett’s cartoon was quote: ”This toon is based on the recent confrontation at UTC.” You have NO EVIDENCE to back up such a claim. Nor does the cartoon in any shape or manner point to such to such a conclusion.

Your latest attempt at to bolster said conclusion is - devoid of the knowing the artists intent: ie. supposition!

”At this time, the campus has no legal basis upon which to deny permission for the speakers to access campus,” UTC Chancellor Steve Angle was added after your original premise. And, “Since UTC is part of the UT system where do you think they got the idea that produced that statement?”

Irrelevant

Yea I walk into it. It being the pasture of horse sh!t teabaggers like you lay down as fact.

You are doing exactly what every Christian does; have a preordained answer and then try to find a question to justify it.

Hack!

November 19, 2013 at 4:20 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

I love how Soakya and Conservative draw the conclusion that if one goes to college they have to be a liberal. I never thought that it could be viewed a "bad thing" to attend college. Of course, the conservative pundits all echo how universities are attempting to corrupt the youth and make them vote Democrat.

When I attended UTC, the Gideon's would hand out bibles to students, but it wasn't necessary to set up cones to give them their (nor the countless other organizations that frequented the campus) own space nor did I hear students insulting or shouting at the Gideons. So because this woman is a "Christian", the students should just sit there and listen to some kook damn them to hell (heck they could just get an account on this site and listen to the mindless drivel of Conservative)?

How different the scenario would be if it was a Jihadist barking out their interpretation of the Koran (or maybe in Conservative's case, a homosexual denouncing all straight people); and then some bicyclist rode through the area in a display of protest. Soakya, Caddy, and Conservative would be championing the rider and "Christian" churches everywhere would be inviting said bicyclist to speak in front of the congregation.

November 19, 2013 at 4:24 p.m.
fairmon said...

One persons freedom ends where the other persons begins. Her subject and the school administrations fear of litigation results in her being allowed to disturb and interfere with the normal campus life. She is a well intentioned public nuisance and should be asked to cease and desist or be cited for disturbing the peace and harassment of those attending classes in the area. Students that are aggravated or interfered with should file a formal complaint.

I wonder how many churches have invited her to deliver her message at their church?

November 19, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.
conservative said...

GaussianInteger:

That is one long straw man you constructed.

November 19, 2013 at 4:41 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

OR, how about this GaussianInteger,

An Atheist preaching on a public sidewalk at or near a Baptist church or Mosque. How fast until there was a freedom of speech/religion beat down on the Atheist?

November 19, 2013 at 4:43 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I miss the days when streakers, not preachers, were the biggest attraction on campus.

November 19, 2013 at 4:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said...

One should approach such things as comedy. I watched a group of seminarians destroy a street preacher once, using only the bible.

Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

November 19, 2013 at 4:47 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

OR, how about this GaussianInteger,

An Atheist preaching on a public sidewalk at or near a Baptist church or Mosque. How fast until there was a freedom of speech/religion beat down on the Atheist?

Anyone who would participate in such an altercation would be the same as the narrow minded anti free speech types that are trying to shut this preacher down instead of countering her message in a rational and intellectual manner.

November 19, 2013 at 4:58 p.m.
conservative said...

MickeyRat:

What world are you living in? "An Atheist preaching on a public sidewalk at or near a Baptist church...” What would an Atheist be "preaching?" No Atheist would be ranting in front of my church for he would hear so much Scripture that he would stick his fingers in his ears and run (see cartoon above.)

As for the Mosque, the Atheist would be "preaching" to those just as lost as himself so what would be the point? This is one laughable straw man you have made up.

Furthermore, many of this religion do resort to violence in service to their god. Maybe you have not noticed.

You Liberals can really construct straw men.

November 19, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.
soakya said...

where did I draw that conclusion? those who confronted her and those who are organizing a petition are probably liberal nut jobs. however if one teaches at a university one is more likely than not a liberal. do you dispute this?

November 19, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Jt6,

Re. Your 4:58 p.m post

On this we can agree.

BUT, would the preacher listen to, or understand such a rational or intellectual counter?

Would it be immediately perceived as hostility?

Would it make any difference?

I don't know.

November 19, 2013 at 5:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

chatttownvol said...

I think what you don't understand the concept of appropriateness. Why should the university have anyone with that kind of attitude, that is intentionally annoying the students, on campus?

When it comes to free speech; annoyance, appreciation for and appropriateness of the message have no weight. You Fleabaggers just can’t seem to get that message when the speech is counter to your beliefs.

I went to UTK and we had droves of street preachers. People would carry crosses and scream in our faces. But they were never given a special area from where they could preach. They were free to say what they wanted as long as they didn't break any laws. And the students were free to say what they wanted too. When the crowds grew large, the police would come observe. But they never had to arrest any students because AGAIN- everyone was free to speak, yell or whatever. It was truly free speech.

The same applies to today so we must have a very hateful student population now that produces event as occurred recently.

BTW - Go Vols .... Beat the sh!t out of Vandy

November 19, 2013 at 5:16 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

That wasn't a 'straw-man' conservative.

It was an abstract, a hypothetical scenario. There's a difference.

November 19, 2013 at 5:21 p.m.
ojanitsirk said...

Poor God. I bet he's sad cause none of this was in his plan at all. "Love your neighbor as yourself." I suppose that means most in this thread hate themselves, because all that is happening is hate upon hate in response to a hate-filled "Christian" Sad times indeed.

November 19, 2013 at 5:31 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

MickeyRat said...

Don’t try to change the subject honey. (Are you female or just gay? - Jt)

You posited as fact Clay Bennett’s cartoon was quote: ”This toon is based on the recent confrontation at UTC.” You have NO EVIDENCE to back up such a claim. Nor does the cartoon in any shape or manner point to such to such a conclusion.

Your latest attempt at to bolster said conclusion is - devoid of the knowing the artists intent: ie. supposition!

You seem to be only poster that doesn’t know the connection. I would suggest you go review the video of the confrontation and then say this toon is not a representation of that area and the preacher that was involved, down to the red boots. I could suggest that but you have already shown no ability to comprehend what you see or read.

”At this time, the campus has no legal basis upon which to deny permission for the speakers to access campus,” UTC Chancellor Steve Angle was added after your original premise. And, “Since UTC is part of the UT system where do you think they got the idea that produced that statement?”

You are doing exactly what every Christian does; have a preordained answer and then try to find a question to justify it.

As I have already stated ... no comprehension on your part. It is an often and well stated claim on my part that I don’t believe in fairy tales.

November 19, 2013 at 5:41 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

ojanitsirk said...

The issue isn't about her free speech. (Nothing but -Jt) It's about her disrupting student's education by screaming insults and telling them they are going to hell unless they repent. She can not only be heard in that area, but INSIDE buildings where student's are trying to learn.

So far there has been no reports from UTC that they have received any formal complaints. Also the university has set a maximum sound level they will allow. Her speech is being monitored with a sound meter and so far she has not exceed that or she would have been removed.

On top of this, when one student VERY POLITELY commented on her "message", exercising his own free speech, he was tackled, pepper sprayed, and arrested - with no explanation, and multiple rights being violated.

You obviously did not view the video of the event. He’s lucky they didn’t “taze” his bad-a@@ self.

I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't need a coned off area and security to feel safe spreading HIS message.

He would be “crucified” - LMAO !!

November 19, 2013 at 6:01 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

Nooo, Unless you have specific knowledge of Clay’s intent, there is no connection to your premise or conclusion. You may want there to be one, but the cartoon does not in any shape or form point to such.

The illustration only shows people holding their ears, wincing and trying to not to listen to one woman’s annoying proselytizing. It’s about one woman - Angela Cummings. That’s it.

You, and others that see monsters under the bed, have expended considerable effort trying to prove something that just ain’t there; no matter how much you want it to be. And my contention that It’s about one woman - Angela Cummings stands.

Then again I suppose your line: ” I don’t believe in fairy tales.” is really code for ”to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

November 19, 2013 at 6:14 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tbs1015 said...

I what all us "leftist loons" want is for you people to actually admit that she is a crazy kook PT.

You being a Christian would qualify you being classified as a “crazy kook” in many places in this country.

Being a liberal, and a Christian I can definitely say that she does paint a bad picture of what Christianity actually is.

So you biggest concern is how she represents and depicts, to the general public, your fairy tale beliefs and how it reflects on you?

Just don't sit there and defend her because what she preaches, is not what Christianity is about.

Many of us don’t defend what she preaches but the fact that she is entitled to do so but you Fleabaggers just can’t tolerate her having that right .... can you?

November 19, 2013 at 6:18 p.m.
limric said...

”Right down down to the red boots.”

HEY

Didn’t Nancy Sinatra have boots? I knew it! The connection!

It’s about the tyranny inherit in atheism isn’t it? RIGHT?!?!

”These boots are made for walking, and that’s just what they’ll do.”

Angela Cummings is using them as a metaphor for going against God by saying,

”One of these days these boots – are gonna walk all over you.”

Good gawd! How could we have missed that?!?!

November 19, 2013 at 6:31 p.m.
tbs1015 said...

jt6gr3hm.....I was responding to a response by another person earlier in the conversation. I think you are taking what I said out of context

I am by NO means a tea party member. I'm about as FAR left as it gets. But yes, i'm also a Christian and as someone that believes such, my biggest concern is how she paints Christianity yes. It is absolutely not like that. And your right she is entiteld to say what ever she wants, but I was talking to the other guy, who was a Christian, because he was supporting her religious views. Please read the context before you jump to hasty conclusions. Thanks

November 19, 2013 at 6:42 p.m.
tbs1015 said...

actually you whole entire post is very crazy haha. Have you read what you actually quoted of me?

November 19, 2013 at 6:46 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"Many of us don’t defend what she preaches but the fact that she is entitled to do so but you Fleabaggers just can’t tolerate her having that right .... can you?"

Hey JT, do you support the Westboro Baptist Church protesting at soldiers' funerals?

November 19, 2013 at 6:49 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

Unbelievable. I can't believe you actually posted this.

Nowhere in constitution does it say that people can't poke fun at someone when they make an ass of themselves in public. Sorry, making a RELIGIOUS ass of yourself is not exempt from public ridicule.

November 19, 2013 at 7:15 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

"where did I draw that conclusion? those who confronted her and those who are organizing a petition are probably liberal nut jobs. however if one teaches at a university one is more likely than not a liberal. do you dispute this?"

I don't know what their political beliefs are and personally, I never cared when I was in college. Both of my degrees are in mathematics and I can't ever really recall any of my professors bringing up politics. I guess I was more worried about trying to prove that Cauchy sequences are bounded or proving the Fundamental Theorem of Cyclic Groups.

November 19, 2013 at 7:19 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said... Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

No where is there in the constitution that says people can't poke fun at someone when they make an ass of themselves in public. Sorry, making a RELIGIOUS ass of yourself is not exempt.

Wait! What!! ... I mentioned the constitution? ... Really?!?

November 19, 2013 at 7:20 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Public humiliation of someone who is making a public spectacle of themselves is hardly "mean", Jt6.

Unless, of course, they are mentally ill, in which case you call the police and they are quietly removed and evaluated in a hospital. Which category do you place this woman in?

November 19, 2013 at 7:23 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

"Many of us don’t defend what she preaches but the fact that she is entitled to do so but you Fleabaggers just can’t tolerate her having that right .... can you?"

Hey JT, do you support the Westboro Baptist Church protesting at soldiers' funerals?

No I don’t support the WBC’s messages or beliefs but I most definitely support their right to free expression .... don’t you? If not doesn’t that make you anti-American and anti-free speech .... Right?

If they protested at any funeral in my area I would be there cursing and condemning them to no end but I would never call for their rights to be suppressed. Undoubtable you Fleabaggers would do so.

November 19, 2013 at 7:28 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

If they protested at any funeral in my area I would be there cursing and condemning them to no end but I would never call for their rights to be suppressed.

And this is different from poking fun at someone like this woman? How?

November 19, 2013 at 7:32 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

fairmon said...

One persons freedom ends where the other persons begins.

You have no right to be protected from ideas you find disagreeable.

Her subject and the school administrations fear of litigation results in her being allowed to disturb and interfere with the normal campus life.

No, I think it’s that pesky constitution thing.

She is a well intentioned public nuisance and should be asked to cease and desist or be cited for disturbing the peace and harassment of those attending classes in the area.

She has been informed that she will be removed if she violates any rules concerning her appearance.

Students that are aggravated or interfered with should file a formal complaint.

UTC has encouraged people to do so but that will not carry any weight until she violates some rule. She appears to be a veteran at her “craft” so she will be tough to catch in a mistake.

I wonder how many churches have invited her to deliver her message at their church?

About the same number as the left wing web sites that are making the perp a cause celebre.

November 19, 2013 at 7:41 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said...

If they protested at any funeral in my area I would be there cursing and condemning them to no end but I would never call for their rights to be suppressed.

And this is different from poking fun at someone like this woman? How?

Where did I state that no one has a right to mock and make fun of this preacher?

November 19, 2013 at 7:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said...

Public humiliation of someone who is making a public spectacle of themselves is hardly "mean", Jt6.

Its not?!? I guess you Fleabaggers aren’t as righteous as you claim for yourselves.

Unless, of course, they are mentally ill, in which case you call the police and they are quietly removed and evaluated in a hospital. Which category do you place this woman in?

Watching the video, she seems to be the only person present that is in full control of her emotions and actions.

November 19, 2013 at 7:55 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Where did I state that no one has a right to mock and make fun of this preacher?

When you said: Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

Unless of course you are now going to argue about rights vs what is right. I see no difference in mocking this preacher and mocking (or yelling at) the WBC.

November 19, 2013 at 7:58 p.m.
soakya said...

agreed Jt6 she definitely is the only one under control

November 19, 2013 at 7:59 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Jt6 (from your 4:58 pm post): "Anyone who would participate in such an altercation would be the same as the narrow minded anti free speech types that are trying to shut this preacher down instead of countering her message in a rational and intellectual manner."

Jt6 (from your 7:28 pm post): "If they protested at any funeral in my area I would be there cursing and condemning them to no end"

Is "cursing and condemning" synonymous to "countering a message in a rational and intellectual manner"? It seems like you are attacking students for using the same behavior you said you would personally use; a bit contradictory.

Soakya, it's predictable that you are going to take the side of the "Christian" kook as opposed to those evil liberal college students. If she was a "Muslim" kook, you'd be singing a different song.

November 19, 2013 at 8:11 p.m.
fairmon said...

I think the school could stop the preacher lady if they wanted to and received good legal counsel. They should be treating this the same as they would if someone was there advocating against the school and government, perhaps even recruiting terrorist under the pretense of assisting some cause in another country.

The best thing would be for students to avoid and ignore her. The school could establish another a second parameter around her that prevented her being near the target audience.

November 19, 2013 at 8:24 p.m.
yddem said...

GI, from the words you quoted, it appears that cursing and condemning is JayTee's concept of a rational and intellectual manner.

November 19, 2013 at 8:31 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Fairmon, I agree about students ignoring her. However, they have allowed her to set up shop in the busiest part of campus. The library, student center (where the bookstore and food court are located), and Grote Hall are right where she is. I would estimate that thousands of people and many, many bicyclists pass by that spot everyday. Why not a place that is not going to have so much traffic (for the safety of all parties)?

November 19, 2013 at 8:34 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

That she has a constitutional right to blather on so may not be debatable; however, hypocrisy always finds a comfortable home. I believe this may be the point Clay was making with his cartoon.

The humorous thing is many of the people who support her are the ones in the 60's and 70's who tried so hard to stop the free speech movement on university campuses.

The sad thing is her behavior is counter to the all examples of Christian behavior found in the NT. What is so puzzling is why a person of faith would undertake counterproductive behavior. Standing on a soap box calling people names and condemning them can do nothing more than alienate the people she purports to want to change.

November 19, 2013 at 8:38 p.m.
soakya said...

gauss, If she was a "Muslim" kook as you say then we wouldn't be having this conversation because the students wouldn't have approached her and there certainly wouldn't be a cartoon mocking her. Muslims doesn't take lightly to being mocked and liberals are like mice.

fairmon, how is someone treated that advocates against the school and government?

November 19, 2013 at 8:49 p.m.
soakya said...

inquiringminds,

what did john the Baptist preach?

November 19, 2013 at 8:52 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Soakya, give it a rest. When was the last time you were on a college campus? I would say approximately 85% of the students at UTC would classify as Christians. You are delusional to believe that college campuses are nothing but liberal atheists or Muslim devotees. There are plenty of Christian associations (Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, etc.) on campus. There are also conservative and republican student groups that are attended by many students. It would behoove you to quit listening to everything conservative talk-radio tells you about college campuses and visit one and see for yourself.

November 19, 2013 at 8:58 p.m.
conservative said...

John the Baptist, the many prophets and the Apostles were the "street preachers" of their day.

And of course Jesus Christ was the greatest and had the largest audiences of them all!

November 19, 2013 at 9 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

But neither John or Jesus spent the better part of their sermon damning people to hell. Surely you are not comparing that woman to those two. I would think Jesus would encourage the woman to buy a needy student lunch as to chastise students.

November 19, 2013 at 9:04 p.m.
soakya said...

no gauss I won't give it a rest, who do you think you are. I'm not your wife/husband or children who you can push around.

would you classify those students in the video has Christians or yourself for that matter?

November 19, 2013 at 9:10 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

would you classify those students in the video has Christians?

Would they be TROO CHRISTIANS (TM)? Most incarcerated criminals are also Christians. Would you consider a street preacher or the members of Phelps' church to be Christians? Who gets to rubber stamp Christians?

Sorry, folks, but religious belief is not supported by physical evidence. An individual decides what his or her "religious identity" is. No one else has that privilege. Many think they do, and try to exercise it all the time.

November 19, 2013 at 9:14 p.m.
yddem said...

Soakya, would you classify Angela Cummings as a "christian"?

November 19, 2013 at 9:15 p.m.
GaussianInteger said...

Uh oh, the keyboard tough guy Soakya is PO'ed. Listen man, I am just someone that went to college and telling you what you are saying is false. That's it. No need to get your panties in a bunch. Go visit UTC yourself if you think I am wrong.

November 19, 2013 at 9:56 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

soakya, JTB was not Jesus as Herod discovered.

November 19, 2013 at 10:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said...

(Jt said) Where did I state that no one has a right to mock and make fun of this preacher?

When you said: Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

Unless of course you are now going to argue about rights vs what is right. I see no difference in mocking this preacher and mocking (or yelling at) the WBC.

Man it’s hell dealing with people that have zero attention span, do not understand context, and can not comprehend what they read. So I guess I’ll start with you.

Here is the original statement from you that began that series of posts between us.

lkeithlu said...

One should approach such things as comedy. I watched a group of seminarians destroy a street preacher once, using only the bible.

I then stated:

Public humiliation of a fellow human does seem to be such a fine source of hilarity and an expression of religious empathy and kindness ... Right?

If you will notice that post in no way related to the preacher at UTC. It was a bit of sarcasm that dealt with you finding it comical that a group of seminarians “destroyed” a street preacher. You would think that you being a caring Fleabagger and them being educated religious students that it would be beneath all of you “destroying” that person and finding it comical .... but I guess not.

I on the other hand am not a caring Fleabagger or religious student so I’m not required to live to you self-righteous standards.

November 19, 2013 at 10:47 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

GaussianInteger said...

Jt6 (from your 4:58 pm post): "Anyone who would participate in such an altercation would be the same as the narrow minded anti free speech types that are trying to shut this preacher down instead of countering her message in a rational and intellectual manner."

Jt6 (from your 7:28 pm post): "If they protested at any funeral in my area I would be there cursing and condemning them to no end"

”but I would never call for their rights to be suppressed. Undoubtable you Fleabaggers would do so.” ... Why did you cut that part of my 7:28 post? A fairly slimy tactic wouldn't you say?

Is "cursing and condemning" synonymous to "countering a message in a rational and intellectual manner"?

Yes it most certain can be when they are mixed in with rational and intellectual points.

It seems like you are attacking students for using the same behavior you said you would personally use; a bit contradictory.

If you will go back and read my posts, I never attacked them for how they said it but for what they said which was intolerance and the desire to censor a speaker they disagree with.

November 19, 2013 at 11:02 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

yddem said...

GI, from the words you quoted, it appears that cursing and condemning is JayTee's concept of a rational and intellectual manner.

Are you such a candy a%% that a little salty language upsets your fine self. If so it would appear that you are so thin skinned that people could easily see that you have no guts. Toughen up sister.

November 19, 2013 at 11:11 p.m.
yddem said...

jaytee, I am not surprised by your attempt to belittle someone to cover your cowardice, your lack of the intellectual capacity to understand my comment, and your feeble effort to ignore the truth.

I will explain so that EVEN YOU might understand: "cursing and condemning [a protester] to no end" is not "countering [the protester's] message in a rational and intellectual manner."

November 19, 2013 at 11:51 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

yddem said... jaytee, I am not surprised by your attempt to belittle someone to cover your cowardice, your lack of the intellectual capacity to understand my comment, and your feeble effort to ignore the truth.

I will explain so that EVEN YOU might understand: "cursing and condemning [a protester] to no end" is not "countering [the protester's] message in a rational and intellectual manner."

You obviously have no concept of context but that is your burden to carry and not mine.

November 19, 2013 at 11:59 p.m.
conservative said...

Ike:

You wrote: "Most incarcerated criminals are also Christians." Just like most incarcerated criminals are innocent, just ask them. That statement is just mind boggling wrong! You can't justify calling yourself a Christian when you are engaged in criminal activity.

"Sorry, folks, but religious belief is not supported by physical evidence."

Sorry, but Christianity IS supported by behavior. If ones's beliefs and overall behavior does not comport with Biblical doctrine then that one is not a Christian.

Jesus said "You shall know them by their fruits."

November 20, 2013 at 6:29 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Nice dodge, but no cigar, jt. You goofed and you should own up to it.

Sorry conservative, but there is NO physical evidence whatsoever for your religion or any other. People's belief systems are in their heads, no where else. What you are talking about is "church membership" and adhering to "church rules"; it means diddly. There are tens of thousands of variations of Christianity. They are neither "right" or "wrong", but each thinks they know the "TRUTH"(TM), of course with no evidence to back their claims.

November 20, 2013 at 7:13 a.m.
conservative said...

Well you certainly have demonstrated the confused mind of a professing Atheist.

We have Scripture and non Biblical historical records of Jesus and places mentioned in Scripture as well.

The doctrines of Christianity are contained in Scripture and there are not "tens of thousands of variations of Christianity"

There are those who claim to be Christian who oppose the doctrines of Scripture but they only have a false claim. This is just common sense.

If a Muslim claimed to be a Christian he would not be accepted as a Christian by Christianity nor would he be accepted by Muslims as a Muslim. One must adhere to the doctrines of a faith to claim to be one of that faith. This is just common sense.

This latest absurd comment of yours is close to that of your calling Hitler a Christian!

November 20, 2013 at 7:49 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Scripture is written by people, most of it thousands of years ago and the historical record cannot prove divinity, conservative. And no church community has any proof or evidence that they are "right" and everyone else is "wrong". You have already claimed that no matter how good one's behavior is, if they are not a believer they are damned anyway. So I am not buying your current notion of "behavior defines Christian".

November 20, 2013 at 8:01 a.m.
conservative said...

Christianity and Christian doctrine is derived from divinely inspired Scripture.

To have contrary beliefs to Scripture and call oneself a Christian is absurd!

November 20, 2013 at 8:15 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

I don't call myself a Christian. And you have zero evidence beyond your own beliefs that anything, including Christianity and Christian doctrine, is divinely inspired.

November 20, 2013 at 8:45 a.m.
conservative said...

Well nothing in Scripture has ever been refuted by you or any other Atheist.

Many prophecies concerning Jesus Christ were written hundreds of years before they were fulfilled.

And then there is the irrefutable proof of the changed lives of Christians.

November 20, 2013 at 8:59 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Please. Scripture is full of inaccuracies and contradictions. Most are vague or were written after the fact. Your problem is that, like most fundamentalists, you can't accept any error in scripture because it casts doubt on all of it. Most believers can manage this, accepting that the bible is a collection of writings, much of which is attempts by ancient people to describe the world around them and is completely outdated. They find the mystery of human existence transcends the bible. But I am not going to get into a protracted argument, since you long ago revealed your psychopathology on this forum. I have better things to do today, like all atheists: Kill kittens, torture babies, and spread mayhem and pestilence.

November 20, 2013 at 9:11 a.m.
conservative said...

You cannot refute one word of Scripture.

Saying there are errors is far from proving there are errors.

Again for someone to claim they are a Christian and hold beliefs contrary to Scripture is absurd and lacks common sense to say the least.

November 20, 2013 at 9:50 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Oh, yeah. The universe and earth were not created in 6 days 8000 years ago. That alone refutes Genesis. Of course, there are two different versions of creation in Genesis. Which is correct? (Neither, although creation stories are wonderful and varied, but ancient Jewish scribes had to limit what oral traditions they were going to record) Details matter. Of course, if you understand the bible for what it really is, you would not have a problem with this.

Again, though, I will not argue this with you again, and I pledge to the onlookers here that I will go away now. Carry on.

November 20, 2013 at 10:06 a.m.
soakya said...

most believers accept that the bible is outdated? believers of what?

November 21, 2013 at 1:14 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

soakya, how old is the earth? Did humans evolve or are they specially created in their present form? Was there a flood that covered the whole earth? Did a man (who was hundreds of years old) build a big wooden boat and put two or seven of every type of creature on it, floating for a year and then landing somewhere in the Middle East? Your answers will determine whether you take the bible as literally true, or if parts of the bible, describing the world as people thought it was thousands of years ago, is outdated. (and whether or not it is worth my continuing this conversation)

November 21, 2013 at 6:19 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.