Rhomal

> a) prove that i'm a republican, or conservative for that matter. I dont think the forum would allow me to quote the vast majoity of your posts defending bush in all the polititcal threads into a single msg. > b) just pointing out an obvious parallel that folks such as you overlook when criticizing anything that's not liberal. i make no bones about the probability that both bush and clinton had "favors" done for them. it is not unusual for people of privelege to get treated differently, particularly 30 years ago (they're better at hiding it now...). i agree that it is not correct, but it is also not correct to make a point out of something that applied broadly to all of our big-wig politicians, not just bush. On that level we shall agree. I have no bones with that.

> an insult indeed... If the shoe fits.. and in this case I feel it does. Dont like it? Tough. > oh, and by the way, you still haven't shown how i've spun anything, the quote from your "respected" resource is: If you want to dispute his obvious take on the matter thats fine. Go right ahead. But dont make a broad statement coloring the entire site as biased because one editior does not kiss his arse as you do. People are allowed to disgaree with you oh so shining view of bush. Deal. > you're obviously PO'd because bush doesn't accept your belief system as valid. big freaking deal. get over it. 95% of the country doesn't. nothing unusual. And you have some links to back up that statistic? I think your more ignorant on the topic then you think. > just because you don't understand his religious beliefs does not make my comments spin... How many times do I need to drill this into your head? As a former CATHOLIC I am well aware of his beleifs. What I was taught was christianity was about acceptance and tolorance and love. Sadly those ideals in some xian circles are being replaced by just the opposite. Makes me glad I got out when I did. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yes, really. his SAT scores alone qualified him... he was in the lower half, however. that is true. and commissar, i never said he didn't get any help from his parents getting into yale, i just said he qualified without it. it is not uncommon. even mr. clinton had a shady "get out of vietnam free" past... taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Typical.. whenever the water starts getting a little to hot republicans bring out the 'ol smoke and mirrors in the form of 'well clinton did this (insert unrelated actions here)'

> so tell me, how exactly did i spin what they said? your "neutral" website did some "off the cuff" interpretation of what bush said. sorry, bud, but THAT is spin... not what i said. The editor clearly marked his own view of the matter at hand. He did not present his comments as fact just informed opinion. I see no issue with that. > btw, just because you think something is neutral and respected does not mean it is... If just I had that opinion it then may be true. But the fact remains religious tolorance site remains one of the most respected sites with it comes to detailing all the various religions even handly. Just because you do not wish to accept that does not make it so.

Insult? Where? Just fact as I see it. Or do you dispute you say anything you can to defend the guy any time someone has a critism of him? Hence yes, you are his offical forum PR man, End of discussion.

Leave it to a the 'official obsidian forum bush spin doctor' to find bias in one of the most neutral and respected religion database sites on the net. Sometimes it is what it it no matter how badly you dont want it to be.

where did i say that? i simply noted that wicca is not widely-recognised as a religion. arguing that people shouldn't demean other religions is fine, but - as a moral standpoint - people at least have to agree that such-and-such is a religion before that rule can take effect. whether bush's ignorance is excusable, is another matter. bush is ignorant of a lot of things so the fact that, as commander-in-chief, he doesn't seem to be aware of US military guidelines on paganism doesn't exactly surprise me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Fair enough. If I read too much into your previous statement my apologizes.

no. most people in western countries haven't heard of it. so your evidence that wicca is a widely-recognized religion is (1) a chapter in the US chaplain's handbook; (2) recognition for tax purposes; (3) borders has a paganism section; (4) the existence of student groups; and (5) references to wicca in a couple of genre shows. LOL. whatever buddy. that's okay, you don't strike me as terribly objective on the matter. hmm, empirical stuff... so what? sikhism and jainism have millions of followers, but i doubt most people in western countries could tell you what the fcuk a jain is. how am i advocating anything? i'm merely stating sociological fact. most people in western countries don't recognize paganism or wicca as a religion. if you want to get huffy, fine. makes no difference to me. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I dont think I was the one getting huffy.. *chuckle* But that aside I was just trying to understand your statement. It seemed to me your of the stance if a religion is not considered a 'major' one it ok's to demean or/and not consider it a valid religion. As least thats what I took away from it. I have been offering you many chances to clarify.

did i say that? i said that wicca wasn't a widely-recognised religion, not that it wasn't a religion. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It isn't? Its reconized by the US Military (has its own section in the chaplins handbook) and there are several large pagan churches that are reconized as such on state/federal level. Go to Borders or B&N and a entire section is devoted to paganism. There are many collages and high schools have support pagan groups. Heck, its even gone main streem. The popularity of charmed and buffy come to mind. (While they certainly take a mostly fictional or dramatized look at wicca the point stands) I cant quite understand how you say this isnt a 'widely-recognised religion'. I have yet to meet someone who looks at me confused when the topic of religion comes up and I say 'pagan' or 'wiccan'. That aside, theres around half a million of us in the U.S. alone. Not bad for a religion that went fully public in the 70s. Estimated many millions world wide. With all that said, You stated: >no doubt you'd be criticized if you said such a thing about any of the widely-recognized religions. the point is that wicca isn't one of those religions. So your advocating a doubble standard then?

no doubt you'd be criticized if you said such a thing about any of the widely-recognized religions. the point is that wicca isn't one of those religions. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So if a religion isnt as large as christianity it does not count as a religion then?

Well, I think that depends if he lives in the bible belt or not. " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> LOL.. Live in Boston, Mass just a stone throw away from witch capitol salem, mass. So I am pretty safe here. But I have heard MANY stroies of pagans in the bible belt being harrased and persecuted due to their religion. A few documentated cases involve local church members erecting a cross in their front yard, being fired from their job and their house broken into and their altar vandilized/desacrated. Those bush loving bible belt christians are such a loving and tolorent bunch.. heh

never directly... you continually balk at the fact that he's christian and doesn't accept paganism as a valid religion. you continually confuse the meaning of the terms "tolerance" and "acceptance." you don't accept his religion yet you want him to accept yours... i can't be any more obvious. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You dont have to beleive/follow in a religion to accept it is a religion. Why does he not state he wants to military to stop supporting ALL religions except his own then? By your logic he should.

of course, you still don't know the difference between tolerance and acceptance so your whining should be taken with a grain of salt. you don't accept his religion, why should he accept yours? taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> When did I EVER say his religion is not such or invalid? Please quote me.

When I brought this up some people questioned if he said what I stated, to show I was not pulling this out of thin air... http://www.religioustolerance.org/wic_pres.htm http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/bushwicca.htm As a pagan witch I am needless to say angry this shrill of a man has the audacity to question my faith when he can't even recite one quote from the bible he claims to read every week. Edit: links fixed and I can use shrill any way I choose

As someone who has used chatboxes in the past. Unless theres some that exist I have never see, your ability to 'administer' them is quite limited. The ones I have used and seen allows little editing of the content and most dont have built in filters. Thus if someone says something naughty unless you want to hack the database the chat data is stored the only want to remove it is to fill the box with text until the offending text scrolls away. Of course registered ppls names are assoicated with the chat entry and you can easily track down and ban/warn the offender but once the damage is done its hard to undo. :/ My 2 coppers

> good god, it's a conspiracy i tell you! wait a minute... still banging the same drum are we? get over yourself. you aren't even original. i can find better conspiracies on the web... oh wait, that's where you get this from, isn't it? Glitch gave Bush extra votes in Ohio http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/05/...s.ap/index.html hhmm lets see.. multiply that 'error' by all the precincts of ohio.. and yes thats easily enough votes to win the state. Of course your going to come back with 'prove it', well you see oh town crier for bush, kinda hard to do that when they made sure there was no paper trail to ensure no fraud. I am always of the beleif, enough circumstantial evidence usally means something. But to you taks, bush is so perfect you'd be just as happy to crown him king for life. So what does it matter in the end if he stole another election, right? Ok to spend 80 mil invesigating a mans sex life, but this issue isnt important.

big deal. again, you're confusing acceptance with tolerance. apparently you didn't learn anything last time around. quick lesson: acceptance: "I agree that your religion is valid in spite of the fact that my religion tells me it is not" tolerance: "I agree you have a right to your religion, in spite of the fact that my religion tells me it is invalid" big difference. most religions do not accept the concept that other religions may be valid. nearly all in fact. they merely allow individual practitioners to put up with contrary beliefs. in christian religions in particular, paganism is seen as a sort of "anti-religion." so are you saying bush isn't allowed to follow his own belief system? taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Stop splitting hairs to defend this C student idiot. You must really enjoy being his PR whore here. As PRESIDENT he should be neutral and not be biased. He does not have to agree or accept but putting one religion over another while on his soapbox certainly only causes divides and harsh feelings. So much for uniter not a divider. Especially when hes tripping over himself giving federal money to religions he deems worthy but when someone from my faith asks the same they get the door slammed in their face and insulted. Nice guy you back.

> Right, but case in point. My religion [Liberalism/Non-Christian Ideology] is being oppressed right now, by the state. At least your religion is just oppressed. Trying having the sitting president look into a camera and tell them he does not think your beleifs IS a religion. Talk about scary and history repeating itself. For clarity he was talking about paganism when he said that.

This country is going to be in shambles. If bush gets his way he will turn this into a american taliban. A religous fundie state. I am considering moving to italy for the next 4 yrs so I dont have to endure this idiot and is raping of the enviroment and joe public. And then theres the never ending quagmire in iraq.. He makes me embarbased to be a american.

Happy Samhain to the other pagans and witches here. What did you do for all hallows? I did my normal went to salem, mass for the day then had a quiet ritual at home

> exactly what does that have to do with anything i said in my (included) quote? *snip fluff* All you had to say was you disagree and leave it at that, or better yet, nothing at all. Rather then dive in a tirade of a self superior, 'I am better then you' speech. Your lack of tact, trying to belittle someone certainly speaks volumes. When I care what some stranger on the net thinks of me or my way to debate I will let you know. I am certainly not going to loose any sleep over it though I hope it made you feel better about youself. I stand by my previous comments.

tolerance does not mean acceptance. you're applying a double standard. it's OK for you to believe one way, but if someone else disagrees with you he is "intolerant?" just because you accept someone else's view on religion is valid, doesn't mean they are required to accept yours. i personally find ALL religion flawed, and pointless. yet i tolerate everyone's right to worship as they please. nowhere in the definition of tolerance does it say i have to accept such opinions as valid, however. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And you dont think to move forward its going to require more? Looking as us now becoming stagnet as a people certainly isnt getting us to where we need to be. When the guy in the whitehouse flat out states my religion isnt such I think we still have a ways to go in understanding, tolorance and acceptance. And saying 'well to bad in essence' just is not good enough, for me at least. As I know we can do better then that. But we are certainly not going to get their being complacient.

> No one could say paganism isn't a real religion by definition. Well bush looked into the camrea and did. And you support him? > It certainly is. However, the fact is agree with it or not it's fundamental to the doctrines of Christianity that the religion is exclusive to others. And thats my point. As a former catholic I am well aware of the beleifs. the beleif that its the 'true' religion is flawed IMO. That just a breeding ground for intolorance and religous persecution. As if christians need any more evidence then their own history for almost the past 1500 yrs to show that train of thought is in error. > Tolerance is being willing to accept that there are people who have other beliefs and to "live and let live" But it is certainly not to say that their views are equally valid. Ditto above. Your boy certainly does even go this far. I am not saying you have to accept my beleifs, but respect my choice. Which you seem to advocate, sadly many xians do not. > I don't know of any human being that honestly believes the views of another or equally valid, and I certainly don't believe that of you. You can beleive what you wish. And you have my pity for this apparent intolorant world you seem to live in. I certainly respest others beleifs and they are valid since they beleive in them. Hence who am I to say they are not just becasue I dont share said beleifs? Most pagans I know would give you a similar answer. Perhaps xians have a few things to learn from pagans (You 'stole' many of our holidays so you might as well take something other of substance )

Indeed. The crusades, the 'burning times' aka Witch hunts that saw tens of thousands innocent (mostly women) burned, drowned and tortured to death, and thats for starters. In fairness all religions have they dark periods but the christians on their soap box is the hight of hypcrosity. As a Pagan Witch I realize the pagans of long ago certainly had their short commings. (ie pagan rome feeding xians to lions for sport). But neither am I on a soapbox trying to tell anyone my beleifs are any more valid then yours. And I find it telling, not one xian or bush supporter even touched the topic I bought up of him stating paganism "isnt a real religion". Yes, many of those christians like he have so much 'tolorance'.

Yeah, it was stupid but cops shouldn't be shooting any type of guns at unarmed people. That is what we have tazors for. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well if those people in the crowd didnt throw bottles at the mounted police he wouldnt have turned around and fired into the crowd. Who ever threw the bottle at the officer is clearly responsible for her death.