Law to force you attend a church ?

[oggbashan]

The day I'm forced to attend a church is the day I develop a hacking, phlegm-spraying cough.

That wouldn't have worked in England at the time. Churches had a squint so that those unable to mix with the congregation could watch the elevation of the host from the churchyard. It was usually for lepers and other people with infectious diseases.

http://www.britainexpress.com/images/attractions/editor/Great-Washbourne-6905.jpg

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I think you just agreed with JBJ.

Most people come to a choice: Agree with JBJ or surrender to the assclowns.

 

[BotanyBoy]

And your nattering notwithstanding, government spending is an integral part of most, if not all, economic theory.

I never said it wasn't....that's not what my bat shit lefty economy professor pushed on a daily basis though.

Yes, yes, we'll just have to disagree about what I "really" think, which of course makes you wrong.

I never said anything about what you "really" think...

But lets be honest.....you....Rob....the closest thing to a scorch the earth Democrat I've seen, would be blind to a SIGNIFICANT amount of liberal bias.....

So I'm sure you see no liburhul bias......you could be at University Pinko, taking a class on "Why you shouldn't even earn an income and should live in G.I. Barracks" and I would never expect it to register as anything but pure American apple pie to you.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I never said it wasn't....that's not what my bat shit lefty economy professor pushed on a daily basis though.

Okay, valid point. Not to special plead or anything (special plead much, anyway), but economics professors are typically strong proponents of whatever school of economics they happen to favor, and the luck of the draw gave you a classical Keynesian economist.

In any event, you've provided two solid examples when I asked for some. Good for you. I wonder if any research has been done quantifying suspected bias.

I never said anything about what you "really" think...

So I'm sure you see no liburhul bias......you could be at University Pinko, taking a class on "Why you shouldn't even earn an income and should live in G.I. Barracks" and I would never expect it to register as anything but pure American apple pie to you.

So let me see if I understand you here...you seem to take umbrage about my claim that you're assigning me a position....

....and then in the very next sentence you criticize me for a position you've assigned to me.

That's deep, man. Deep.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Okay, valid point. Not to special plead or anything (special plead much, anyway), but economics professors are typically strong proponents of whatever school of economics they happen to favor, and the luck of the draw gave you a classical Keynesian economist.

Much like a number of academic disciplines, it's really professor dependent if you get a slant to one side or the other. I've also had professors that you could tell they made it a point to provide both sides to the story and let the students come up with their own ideas. Others were worse than televangelist with a "share my views or fail" policy.

It's all just people...

In any event, you've provided two solid examples when I asked for some. Good for you. I wonder if any research has been done quantifying suspected bias.

I imagine it's very departmental/regional/funding biased just like everything else. And from campus to campus you will find a lean one way or the other but despite the minority parties outrage to the contrary I bet there are relatively very few public schools that are too far away from center at sum total.

Obviously private institutions generally cater to the more extreme type who don't want any RePohez/Liburhul spin in the education they are paying for. LMFAO!!

So let me see if I understand you here...

No you don't.....you keep trying to make me a vetteman ascription/ridicule move but it's not, no matter how bad you want it to be.

Heavily political/religious/corporate etc. folks rarely see bias of their own flavor for their rose colored glasses. Rose colored glasses was a coined term to describe aspects of being biased in some way before we had clinical terms to describe and laboratories to prove it.

So I'm not at all shocked you don't see liburhul bias in our education system. Esp living in TX. Hell you do everything you can to minimalism/marginalize the existence of LW bias/spin on a regular basis right here on lit.

So again I say OF COURSE you don't see any LW bias where you economic/political interest and pride lay.....you're highly politicized left, you're not going to see LW spin/bias anymore than vettey is going to see bias for the GOP in the defense industry and FOX. You got your liburhul spin proof rose colored shades on....we all have a few pair on in some capacity. You're no exception.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Heavily political/religious/corporate etc. folks rarely see bias of their own flavor for their rose colored glasses. Rose colored glasses was a coined term to describe aspects of being biased in some way before we had clinical terms to describe and laboratories to prove it.

So I'm not at all shocked you don't see liburhul bias in our education system. Esp living in TX. Hell you do everything you can to minimalism/marginalize the existence of LW bias/spin on a regular basis right here on lit.

So again I say OF COURSE you don't see any LW bias where you economic/political interest and pride lay.....you're highly politicized left, you're not going to see LW spin/bias anymore than vettey is going to see bias for the GOP in the defense industry and FOX. You got your liburhul spin proof rose colored shades on....we all have a few pair on in some capacity. You're no exception.

Pfft, I'm fair 'n balanced (albeit in a Fox News sorta way).

You're just enamored of the concept of balance fallacy (i.e. "busybody/miles/Vetty slant hard to the right, so I gotta find someone equally as bad on the left, because.....reasons. I know! I'll pick Robdownsouth!")

Take a look at the sheer quantity of outrage manufactured by the hard right here on a daily basis. Then take a look at the quantity of the same on the left hand side of the aisle. They are in no way, shape, or form remotely similar and I welcome you to try and prove me wrong.

Your "both sides do it" claim simply doesn't hold up to serious scrutiny.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Pfft, I'm fair 'n balanced (albeit in a Fox News sorta way).

You're just enamored of the concept of balance fallacy (i.e. "busybody/miles/Vetty slant hard to the right, so I gotta find someone equally as bad on the left, because.....reasons. I know! I'll pick Robdownsouth!")

No I'm not....and that's not what I'm doing.

Besides you might be an asshole but you're not as bad as the RWCJ...DanC/LT..KO is borderline sometimes....but not you.

Take a look at the sheer quantity of outrage manufactured by the hard right here on a daily basis. Then take a look at the quantity of the same on the left hand side of the aisle. They are in no way, shape, or form remotely similar and I welcome you to try and prove me wrong.

I never said otherwise....this is totally irrelevant to the fact that the more passionate you are about a subject you are the less likely you are to see any bias in the favor of your views.

Your "both sides do it" claim simply doesn't hold up to serious scrutiny.

What that both sides wear rose colored shades? Sorry but your rant about situational outrage did nothing to undo centuries of psychological study. All humans fail to see at least some if not large amounts of bullshit when it's bullshit they want to hear. We all do it....

So I say once again...OF COURSE you don't see liburhul bias/spin where your passionately and prideful liburhul interest are favored. You're not supposed to.....

It's like me saying I see no bias in pro MJ articles/documentaries/organizations/legislation and that it's just doing what is right and just in a free country.....

No fucking shit I got rose colored glasses on and I don't care to see the thousands and thousands of republicans that are going to lose their jobs if they don't get to lock tens of thousands of potheads up every month. Because fuck them it ain't my problem they chose to be professional assholes.

 

[LadyVer]

I'd like to see this kind of law enacted. It should go over real well.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

I'd like to see this kind of law enacted. It should go over real well.

You can bet if it were it wouldn't be long before they were amending the law with a list of "approved churches". Which would be left out I wonder. The Satanic Church of course, since morality is the goal.

Perhaps just form an official Patriotic Church of God Fearing Americans. Get your weekly dose of hell fire and righteous fury with a good measure of flag waving and a monthly burning at the stake of an unwed mother, minority community organizer, or IRS agent followed by a pot luck dinner.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

LMAO

Our Usual Suspects ignore how all the mainstream denominations are aboard the faggot train, and losing members every week because of the fag infestation.

 

[oggbashan]

I'd like to see this kind of law enacted. It should go over real well.

In the city of Canterbury in Kent, they have a historic example of what can happen with an unpopular law:

During the Commonwealth, led by Oliver Cromwell, Parliament passed a law banning the celebration of Christmas because it led to excessive eating and drinking, public music and Horror! lascivious dancing.

Some of the citizens of Canterbury ignored the law, despite the mandatory sentence for conviction being death. Since they celebrated Christmas in the streets, they were known, and arrested. When they came to trial the jury was made of other local citizens who refused to convict the accused despite overwhelming evidence.

The judge threw the accused and the jury into jail. The jury were asked to deliver a verdict or go back to jail until they did. The choice they were given was decide 'Guilty' as strongly directed by the judge, or if they chose 'Not Guilty' they would go back to jail.

The jury's verdict, given in Latin, (juries were made up of substantial and well-educated citizens in those days) was "We don't know".

The exasperated judge sent the accused and the jury back to jail and tried to get another jury.

During the night, a riotous assembly of citizens broke open the jail to release the accused and the jurors, who went back to their houses and their normal way of life.

Cromwell's government sent soldiers to enforce order in Canterbury. They had some difficulties getting past the medieval walls, but the accused and jury were missing by the time the soldiers entered the city.

The government fined the City Council a large sum for failing to enforce law and order, but the accused and the jury were never found (despite everybody in Canterbury knowing where they were!). The army demolished one third of Canterbury's walls so they couldn't delay troops in future.

Canterbury's jury had established an essential principle of English Law - the jury has the right to decide what it likes, even if the judge doesn't like it, or it is apparently wrong-headed.

Canterbury's jurors were not going to send their neighbours and fellow citizens to the gallows for celebrating Christmas.