A Complete Waste of Space

Over 'Social Justice' Comments...........

"An evangelical leader in Washington called on Christians to boycott Glenn Beck, a week after the Fox News personality told his audience that "social justice," the term many churches use to describe their efforts to address poverty and human rights, is a "code word" for communism and Nazism.

On his "God's Politics" blog, the Rev. Jim Wallis urged Christians to switch off Beck's popular radio and television programs for good because of his comments about social justice."

Hmmm, Freedom of Speech, Separation of Church and State, Politics in the Pulpit, Beck in the Pulpit ?

Old Pudfark sez: "Seems like a nontaxable interference fit"

I used to be proud to be a christian (of sorts). Not any longer. And it's not just cuz of this d00d.

Pudfark wrote:Over 'Social Justice' Comments...........

"An evangelical leader in Washington called on Christians to boycott Glenn Beck, a week after the Fox News personality told his audience that "social justice," the term many churches use to describe their efforts to address poverty and human rights, is a "code word" for communism and Nazism.

On his "God's Politics" blog, the Rev. Jim Wallis urged Christians to switch off Beck's popular radio and television programs for good because of his comments about social justice."

Hmmm, Freedom of Speech, Separation of Church and State, Politics in the Pulpit, Beck in the Pulpit ?

Old Pudfark sez: "Seems like a nontaxable interference fit"

first off, Freedom of Speech. Beck is free to do what he does. I don't like it, or give it any credibility whatsoever, but would die defending his right to practice his profession. On the other hand, it is completely within the right of free expression for the Rev. Walls to urge the boycott. Free speech is free speech.
As neither represents any government entities, Separation of Church and State don't even enter into the discussion, unless you are an ignorant fool like Pud and remain clueless about the Constitution. For an example of the State ramming religion down the people's throats, one look no further than Pud's home state:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35839979/ns ... education/

now, before y'all condemn ALL Texans as fools, loons and conservative zealots, note, dear readers, that this decision will last all of 6 or 7 months, when they have run all of the Conservatives off the Board of Education,
two are already voted out and the other two aren't running. Like the rest of the nation, most of the citizens of Texas are sensible enough to be sick of the ideological zealotry and forced ignorance that the modern Conservative movement has wrought.

Who is Rev. Walls?
What "modern conservative movement" ?

Old Pudfark sez: " Really, who's a sayin msnbc.com is credible? "

1. should've read Rev. Wallis.
2. The modern Conservative movement is the claptrap which replaced real Conservatives, such as
William Buckley, Barry Goldwater, George Will, et al, with buffoons such as Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber
and the like.
3. As for MSNBC, not a real fan of the TV programming either, but let's get to the real story. Is it true or
not? Pick any newspaper, of any bent, they all reported on the story cited. I just found an easy link.

by the way, Pud, check out the poll in the El Paso Times(a paper I read for insight into military and conservative points of view). Thus far, by a 56-34 margin, the readers are opposed to the changes
proposed in the curriculum. So, we aren't just talking about MSNBC's viewpoint, these are Texas residents,
reading a paper which has avoided any negative writing on the subject to date.....

callmeslick wrote:by the way, Pud, check out the poll in the El Paso Times(a paper I read for insight into military and conservative points of view). Thus far, by a 56-34 margin, the readers are opposed to the changes
proposed in the curriculum. So, we aren't just talking about MSNBC's viewpoint, these are Texas residents,
reading a paper which has avoided any negative writing on the subject to date.....

Slick...El Paso Times = Juarez Times...A Texas border town...What percentage of the population is illegal?, is unknown....but the number is way up there...no disrespect, but a 56-34 margin from that location, is representative of nothing....anywhere.

"readers" are not voters....I understand your current desperation...

Old Pudfark sez: " Desperate times call...fer desperate measures.. "

so, the bottom line is, that you will dismiss any viewpoint that disagrees. If you ever read the EPT, you know they aren't some sort of left-wing mouthpiece. Just because a good percentage of the county are Hispanic, doesn't mean they aren't Texans, btw. And, if one reads that paper, the military viewpoint and conservative outlook predominate. That's why I read it, actually. I've always been of the view that one should base opinions upon a lot of different input. Dismissing, out of hand, those that disagree leaves a person vulnerable to serious stupidity. Sadly, you go a long ways to proving just that very point......

callmeslick wrote:Just because a good percentage of the county are Hispanic, doesn't mean they aren't Texans, btw.:

Hispanic or illegal? Cuz illegals aren't supposed to be able to vote................

Slick...you picked the place...not me...I am saying that it is not a true "reading" and mentioned why....

Sorta like going to a cardiologist...he takes a quick glance at yer pinkie finger...and says yer good to go....Yeah, you saw a doctor and yeah, you got an opinion...and ya never saw the stethoscope....Folks who submit to that and accept it...all have low blood pressure? Right?

Old Pudfark sez: " Now days, it's hard to get an accurate reading...without taking all the tests "