Have we crossed the line yet?

[edwardmurphy]

If many such cases start happening and people aren't prosecuted for such crimes then police will no doubt in the future just stand around and do nothing. Why bother if it is just going to get thrown out anyway.

Is it better policy to prosecute every petty crime anyone ever commits, without ever considering any other alternatives? Does it make sense to rely on prosecutorial discretion, at least to a point? What about situations where the person broke into an abandoned property to sleep, or stole food for their family? Does it make more sense to prosecute and jail them (both of which are extremely expensive) or to help them find housing (which is far cheaper)? What about an addict who deals to support his habit? Is jail ($$$$) a better option than treatment ($)?

As I said, I understand what Rachel Rollins is trying to do but I'm not entirely on board with her policy. I think that these are questions worthy of open and honest debate. We're all in this together and our resources aren't infinite.

It's a terrible policy and will lead to chaos and societal breakdown in whatever area it is implemented.

Maybe, maybe not. There's still no reason to publish (or post) hysterical, melodramatic stories loaded with misinformation and lies.

But fabulous spin by the way, you always do a great job of that.

I didn't spin a thing. I posted what your article claimed, and then I followed the link in that same article to read the actual policy. Then I posted that and compared the two. Finally, I pointed out that your source wasn't describing the policy honestly. Calling a liar out on his lies isn't spin.

Why can't you support your beliefs (or criticize mine) without relying on lies? It it really so hard to come up with an honest, informed, data-supported refutation to a liberal policy?

[Stu]

TEXANS RESPOND TO LIBERAL #BANTHEBIBLE BILL EFFORTS

Austin, Texas – After Texas Values Action sounded the alarm on Democrat bills filed before the Texas Legislature that would effectively #BanTheBible, conservatives from across Texas and around the country have responded in force. Through our action center at NoBibleBan.com Texans have sent over 37,000 messages and phone calls to the Governor, Lt. Governor, State Senators, and State House members. These efforts have garnered attention from national news agencies and high profile bloggers. Conservative commentator Erick Erickson discussed the issue, The Federalist and Empower Texans published blog pieces about it, PJ Media, LifeSite News, CBN, One News Now, The Stream and many others also wrote about these highly controversial bills.

Despite this overwhelming support to stop #BanTheBible Bills, some are not getting the message. More #BanTheBible bills; such as HB 978 and HB 1190 were introduced shortly after Texas Values Action called attention to the first round of #BanTheBible bills. And just this week Carrolton, Texas passed a #BanTheBible ordinance.

Hiding under the disguise of “sexual orientation and gender identity” these bills would create new government power and protections which ban the free expression of Biblical beliefs, especially it’s teaching on marriage and sexuality. Numerous bills seek to ban religious beliefs and force people of faith to conform to the personal and political activities of others. Those who do not comply will face fines, possible jail time, or other criminal charges.

More

[edwardmurphy]

Ok, somebody explain something to me -

In the Ten Commandments there's one that says "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." My understanding is that that commandment is generally taken to mean that God says that Christians shouldn't tell lies.

The claim that there are bills in Texas aimed at banning the Bible is a bold faced lie being pushed by some of the most conservative, "Bible-believing" Christians in The US.

So how does that work? Does God have a problem with liars or doesn't he? Is there some kind of exemption in the fine print saying that you're allowed to tell lies if you believe very strongly that it's necessary to do so?

Anybody want to clarify that?

[RickD]

Anyone have a link to the actual bill/bills, so we can see if Stu's claim actually matches the bill?

I'm sure Stu's claim has to be accurate this time, since he knows better after the last 20 times he's made false claims, right?

[RickD]

Ok, somebody explain something to me -

In the Ten Commandments there's one that says "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." My understanding is that that commandment is generally taken to mean that God says that Christians shouldn't tell lies.

The claim that there are bills in Texas aimed at banning the Bible is a bold faced lie being pushed by some of the most conservative, "Bible-believing" Christians in The US.

So how does that work? Does God have a problem with liars or doesn't he? Is there some kind of exemption in the fine print saying that you're allowed to tell lies if you believe very strongly that it's necessary to do so?

Anybody want to clarify that?

No Ed. The 10 Commandments were given to Israel.

[edwardmurphy]

Don't the Ten Commandments still apply? I seem to recall something about jots and tiddles or something.

Regarding the supposed Bible-banning bill, it turns out that it's actually a variety of gay rights and anti-discrimination bills that a group called Texas Values is targeting with their #BanTheBible social media campaign. In the words of the group's communications director:

“‘Ban the Bible’ doesn’t have to mean confiscating physical Bibles. LGBT activists aren’t that obvious with their intentions (yet). But it does mean something even worse: stripping Texans of their right to practice biblical teachings in their day to day lives. Just like at the Alamo, Texans must once again stand and fight for our freedoms. We must dare liberals to ‘Come and Take it!’”

So they've redefined "ban the Bible" to mean something other than, y'know, banning the Bible. Since #BanTheBible isn't being paired with #ToBeClearWe'reSpeakingMetaphorically I'm calling it a misinformation campaign aimed at spreading fear and anger.

[Stu]

Anyone have a link to the actual bill/bills, so we can see if Stu's claim actually matches the bill?

I'm sure Stu's claim has to be accurate this time, since he knows better after the last 20 times he's made false claims, right?

What false claims have I made?

[PaulSacramento]

Ok, somebody explain something to me -

In the Ten Commandments there's one that says "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." My understanding is that that commandment is generally taken to mean that God says that Christians shouldn't tell lies.

The claim that there are bills in Texas aimed at banning the Bible is a bold faced lie being pushed by some of the most conservative, "Bible-believing" Christians in The US.

So how does that work? Does God have a problem with liars or doesn't he? Is there some kind of exemption in the fine print saying that you're allowed to tell lies if you believe very strongly that it's necessary to do so?

Anybody want to clarify that?

Lying is a sin, period.
There are degrees of course, a parent lying to a child to hide where they hid a present or to spare their feelings is one thing, lying to hide an affair or to cover up a crime, something else.

[Blessed]

I found this eye opening documentary on communism documenting the flight of the farmers (i.e the producers of that society) re Stalin's USSR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87KQfyLFhDU

Hopefully it will not be banned by You Tube like the others.

[Blessed]

I'm calling it a misinformation campaign aimed at spreading fear and anger.

Ah yes. Ignore it. It's just a misinformation campaign.

Sounds like a good way to get people to ignore it until it's too late.

Oh wait that's not your angle is it ?

[edwardmurphy]

My angle is that Texas Values is lying. I arrived at that point by comparing their statements with reality. They're trying to convince people that the Bible is in danger of being banned. That's not true. No Bible ban is being attempted. If it were to be attempted it would be struck down as unconstitutional. If a Constitutional amendment were to be attempted it would fail since most Americans, liberal and conservative, are Christians.

Also, sorry to hear about the Russian farmers, although 1) they didn't do much better under the Czars and 2) it's a non sequitur, since nobody in the US has any interest in implementing communism.

If the most "radical" of the "leftist" Dems were to somehow sweep the 2020 elections then the US would wind up looking a bit more like Canada. We'd get socialized healthcare, more liberal social policies, more research on global warming, and hopefully an infrastructure bill (finally). Massive, radical change simply cannot be implemented between election cycles, and any party that pushes too hard will lose the independent voters and therefore the House.

I think you're be better off if your fantasies were more pleasant and less paranoid.

[RickD]

EdwardMurphy wrote:
Don't the Ten Commandments still apply? I seem to recall something about jots and tiddles or something.

If you're serious about this question, we can open another thread about it. I believe your "jots and tittles", is in reference to Matthew 5:17-18.

[Philip]

Blessed: I found this eye opening documentary on communism documenting the flight of the farmers (i.e the producers of that society) re Stalin's USSR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87KQfyLFhDU

Hopefully it will not be banned by You Tube like the others.

Blessed, where have you been??? Did you ever leave Vegas?

[edwardmurphy]

EdwardMurphy wrote:
Don't the Ten Commandments still apply? I seem to recall something about jots and tiddles or something.

If you're serious about this question, we can open another thread about it. I believe your "jots and tittles", is in reference to Matthew 5:17-18.

I suppose, if you do it in this section.

[Stu]

They're talking about Tommy Robinson for instance.

SEC ENDORSES MASTERCARD’S IDEA OF CUTTING OFF ‘RIGHT-WINGERS’ – REPORT

Leftists pushing to financially suffocate opposition

Blocking payments to individuals or groups by financial service firms impedes freedom of speech in a free society, journalist Ben Swann has told RT, following reports that MasterCard is allegedly on course to censor the ‘far-right.’

The New York-based firm is reportedly being forced by left-leaning liberal activists to set up an internal “human rights committee” that would monitor payments to “white supremacist groups and anti-Islam activists.”

“The problem is that everyone has their own views and, in a free society, the idea of a free society is that you are free to have your belief systems, as long as you’re not harming anyone else physically,” Swann told RT America. “But your belief system belongs to you and you have the right be wrong. White supremacists have the right to be wrong.”

More