DanKroh

"However, if the man were within the law, he has a right not to be harassed, regardless of how nervous it makes people." Respectfully, I disagree. Not when the presence of the gun is coupled with a sign that all but calls for blood. And not when it potentially jeopardizes the safety of the President (and yes, I feel that way about the safety of any President). "I just heard on TV that 83% of Americans are satisfied with their healthcare. Why don't we focus on the other 17%, instead of making 100% unhappy." I think I'd have to see the original numbers before I believe that. A Jun

Ok, now that I'm not rushing out the door to pick up my son, I would like to clarify my last post. Brent and scoutldr, Nowhere, nowhere, have I advocated that this man's (or anyone's) second amendment rights should be abrogated. What I am saying is that there is a time and a place for displaying a firearm, and that this was not the wisest choice (yes, my word was stupid and I still stand behind that, too). There is a difference between the law and good judgement, and one does not replace the other. Personally, I do not care for guns, even though I learned how to fire one and at

"I'm sure there were plenty of police and Secret Service officers there, carrying guns as well. I'm guessing that didn't bother you. They carry because it is part of their job. Well, which is more important/ sacred to you - a job requirement or a right?" Secret Service, nope, can't say I'm afraid of their guns, because I have some reasonable assurance about their stability. This guy, not so much. Especially given the level of ideologically motivated violence lately. "But are you advocating the suspension of a Constitutional right as a condition of being allowed your right to petition

"So much for tolerance... " All righty then.

scoutldr, I really don't want to get side tracked by a discussion of constitutional rights, or GITMO. I didn't say that what the guy did should be illegal, I said I though it was wrong, and I still do, for the exact same reasons I gave Brent. Because the situation is volatile enough without someone increasing the stakes of someone doing something monumentally stupid. I don't happen to agree with NH's "open carry" law, never have. Which is one of the reasons I don't live in NH.

Brent, my problem with it (combined with the sign he was carrying) was the not-so-subtle threat of violence. My problem with it is that you don't bring a loaded weapon to an event that you know is going to be contentious, highly charged, with the potential to turn nasty, without the implication that you are willing to use it. Now answer my question, sir: What exactly did bringing that gun add to the debate on health care reform?

"That's not restricted to Christians." No, it's not.

"So which of the other Constitutional rights should we make "optional" if they don't seem "right" to someone? Speech? Assembly? Religion? Once you open that box, it will be VERY hard to close again." How about habeas corpus? Oh wait....

Why do so many Christians assume that those of us who aren't are only so because we don't know better? Have you given Lugh the same courtesy?

scoutldr, they guy in NH who brought the gun to a presidential event was within the law. However, just because something is legal doesn't make it right. What exactly was he hoping to accomplish? He certainly made an impression, especially the gun display coupled with the sign he was carrying, gave off a certain message, one of implied violent intent. So one has to ask, what exactly did bringing that gun add to the debate?

"These are scary times." Ok, now I am beginning to agree with this statement. When there are two incidents in as many days of protestors bringing guns to town hall meetings on health care reform (one as a concealed weapon, or at least, it was concealed until it fell out of the person's pocket), then I agree we have entered scary times, indeed. The other brazenly displayed his weapon along with a sign about watering the tree of liberty with blood, outside of a venue where the President was due to appear. Can we now agree that it is time to ratchet down the violent, divisive rhetoric i

If you have the equivalent of a Dollar Store, I'd try there. You can usually get colored rope in fairly small quantities (as opposed to the humungo lengths at the hardware store). You don't really need pieces bigger than about 12 inches each.

Vol_scouter and Hal, Nicely said, gentlemen. Hear, hear. Vol_scouter, I spend some time while pursuing my Psy.D. doing work with sex offenders. Unfortunately, while a very interesting field, it was not to my liking for personal reasons. I have some personal observations from that time, but it is completely anecdotal and I have nothing published to back it up. Let me just say that I truly feel just as comfortable sending my sons off to spend time alone with their gay, married godfathers as I do with their heterosexual aunts and uncles.

"She's clearly connecting the demonstrators with Nazis or skinheads." Sorry, Kahuna, but that wasn't my interpretation at all. To me, she was clearly unhappy with the demonstrators trying to connect health care reform to fascism/nazism, and Obama to Hitler. You say tomayto, I say tomahto.

"You and the media would, correctly along with myself, gone ballistic. Asking people to send their recounts of casual conversations, emails, et cetera is the same things that Stalin and others have done. What will be done with the emails? Will the people originating the offending opinions be effected? Will their names be kept? Remember, political speech is the most important speech to be protected for good reasons. This will have a chilling effect on free speech. This is wrong!!!!" vol-scouter, thanks, but I was busy enough being horrified over the Patriot Act and Gitmo. I didn't see the

"I cannot remember a president asking Americans to turn each other in to the White House over their political views. These are scary times. " Just to inject a few facts, here is what the White House blog actually says about the flag@whitehouse.gov email address: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we cant keep track of all of them here at the White House, were asking for your he

Brent, actually, yes I did miss it. Is there some reason I shouldn't have? Or is there some reason that I deserved your special shout out? Before this thread started, I had somehow happily missed this entire issue. I haven't entirely plugged back into the world since returning from summer camp. However, from reports I've seen while catching up on news today, it does appear that being disruptive and shouting down speakers definitely is the new fad at town meetings. Personally, though, I'd just characterize such behavior as extremely rude.

Kahuna, do you have a link to the text where she made that implication? I haven't been able to find it. I watched the video of her comments, which were: "I think they're Astroturf... You be the judge. "They're carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on healthcare." Given that I have seen a lot of accusations of socialism and fascism tied to Obama, and a lot of Hitler/Nazi imagery associated with Obama by right-wing extremists, I assume she meant that she thought it was inappropriate for them to be making those associations at that place and time. Sorry, but I

Ok, thanks Kahuna, what I missed was Pelosi's implication that the demonstrators were themselves skinheads. Now it makes more sense.

Kahuna, I'm a little confused, since I haven't been following this story (and never, ever listen to Rush, although I have read some "interesting" transcripts), but when I went to the link you posted, there were two pictures there, one of a person holding a sign with a swastika, and another of a person with an pair of SS symbols on it. Were these not the photos that Pelosi was referencing? I have no love for Pelosi, but I have also read reports of swastikas and nazi imagery showing up at health care town meetings.

"Dan, you are so very dismissive of this subject that you are frightening me!" I'm not sure what "this subject" is; if you are speaking of the problems that plague homosexuals, I am anything but dismissive, since it is my life's work. What I *am* dismissive of, Mr. Boyce, are citations from sources of propaganda, like the Traditional Values Coalition and NARTH, which are the only sources you have cited here so far. When you throw out pejorative and derogatory statements, I'm going to call you on them. That's not being dismissive, it's being intellectually honest. "Here are sources:

Can't get the edit button to work, but I made a typo, it should read: "Are there homosexuals who engage in inappropriate relationships? Yes, a very small minority, just as there are a very small minority of heterosexuals (men and women) who engage in inappropriate relationships with teenagers of the opposite gender."

scoutldr, unfortunately, I think any attempt to reclaim the swastika from it's infamy is doomed to failure. It's unfortunate for the religions that it was stolen from, and it's unfortunate for B-P and his "thanks badge". Some things are just a little too drenched in blood to ever been seen in a different context.

"So for a reasonably fit black scouter, they are not setting a bad example. HPV rates are related to the number of sexual partners so if the inference is scouters having sex with multiple partners - that has been covered in other discussions here and I don't wish to go into that area myself at this time." So, for blacks and women, you are willing to qualify that if they, as individuals, do not engage in the unhealthy lifestyles that are rampant in within their groups, then it would be ok for them to be scouters. Yet, you are not willing to extend that same courtesy to homosexuals who do n

"It was not made up by Cameron whoever he is. So sorry, it is you who are wrong." I guess my statement was not clear. I didn't say that Cameron made it up. I believe the term was actually coined by Kazal in 1976. However, it is Cameron's legacy because he popularized it in the mainstream in the late 1980's and made it a popular urban myth and rallying cry among the anti-gay activists. (edited to address the "whoever he is"; SPLC has devoted an entire "Intelligence Report" to him: http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=587) "It is not a fallacy that many (most