Evangelical Teen Rally OFFICIALLY CONDEMNED by San Fransisco City Council - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Evangelical Teen Rally OFFICIALLY CONDEMNED by San Fransisco City Council (Page 2 of 3)

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:14:57 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Hold on there, I was chided for not respecting first amendment rights when I said I voted against Bush Sr for saying atheists weren't citizens. I made the argument that while he had every right to make that statement, I had every right to vote him out of office for the statement. I also stated it might be better if he had remembered he was my president as Joe Christian's president.

I don't recall chiding you for that.

What he said is a personal opinion just like Bush's, yet the same people who thought it was no big deal that he said I wasn't a citizen (while I was serving in the Navy no less) are up in arms because they were called "loud, obnoxious, and disgusting"

seems like liberals aren't the only people with different rules for those they don't agree with

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning....

Did I "chide" you for saying you voted against Bush I?
Did I say you weren't a citizen?

No?

Then why are you trying to whip out the "hypocrisy" card?

No, but others did and it should be apparent from my post that Bush Sr. said I wasn't a citizen.

You are quick to jump on these people who did nothing more than state a personal opinion. Whether you agree with that opinion or not is immaterial. If what they did was wrong, they will get voted out of office by the Christians in San Francisco.

There was no misuse of power to prevent their gathering. There was no violent protest leading to riots in the streets. There was no crackdown by the police using batons and water hoses to drive them from the area. The national guard didn't swoop in and shoot a few dozen of them.

They held their meeting, 50 assholes from San Fran held their meeting, and a city councilman made an ass of himself.

If you go to any large gathering, there is usually someone outside protesting.

I still have been unable to find the "official denouncement" that was referred to, and noone has provided a link.

I said the only issue that concerned me was the official condemnation. Adam White said the big issue was the official condemnation and you appeared to agree with him. Unless you can show me the "official" statement denouncing them so I can see the wording, I can't find anything here that doesn't happen every day someplace in America.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:15:32 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

...The only part I find odd is the "offical condemnation" by the city council. I'm not able to find any more on it and I'm not sure if that isn't a reporter embellishment of a city council MEMBER stating his opposition to the group holding the rally.

I'd say THAT is the very part people have a problem with.

This group gives me weird vibe - all the talk about end times and such assures me they are the sam types who continuously accused me of being some sort of davil worshopper for studying evolution in college.

Still, when a major city shows such obvious bigotry in an official statement - all the while while calling for tolerance in the SAME SENTENCE - you gotta laugh. The comparison to Communist crackdown on "counter-revolutionaries" is spot-on.

These far left nutjobs - should they ever wield REAL political power - would crack down on evangelical / fundamantalist Christian groups in ways that would make the China / Falun Gong problem crackdown look mild. Of that I have no doubt.

Why do I believe this? Che Guevarra, the Sandanistas, etc. are virtually worshipped by these folks. We are dealing with a very scary fringe of society that has pretty much taken over a city.

That's just it. I can't find an official statement by the city government. Even if there was one, it would depend on how it was worded.

Saying that the views of the rally participants are not the views of the city of SF doesn't seem to be out of line to me. If anyone has a link to the offical condemnation, I would love to see it.

I'm tracking now.

I skimmed the article to quickly and didn't realzie that John_Wayne777 's thread title was indeed not supported by the article itself.

John_Wayne777: That's is a pretty cheap and inappropriate tactic, you emply the same tricks and BS the left does when you do such things.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:20:08 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
All I recall stating is that it is disturbing to see government officials call a group of people "disgusting" and to "leave San Fransisco" because of their religious beliefs.

I see calls like that every day on this board from Christians toward (insert religion/lack of religion here)

Is the problem that a public official made the statement? Do you lose your first amendment rights when you become a public official? Is it only elected officials or appointed ones as well?

My view is that if he said it as a private person, then that is his view and he is intitled to have it. If he misused his power to prevent the Christian gathering, it would be an issue.

If there was an official statement and it said simply that the views of the rally participants were not the views of the city or city council, I have no issue with it.

If the official statement said negative things about Christianity or Christians, I would have a problem with it and the members of the city council need a kick in the ass.

I'm still unable to find any official response. Everything I have found fall into personal statements.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:20:22 AM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
I'm tracking now.

I skimmed the article to quickly and didn't realzie that John_Wayne777 's thread title was indeed not supported by the article itself.

John_Wayne777: That's is a pretty cheap and inappropriate tactic, you emply the same tricks and BS the left does when you do such things.

Ahem:

More than 25,000 evangelical Christian youth landed Friday in San Francisco for a two-day rally at AT&T Park against "the virtue terrorism" of popular culture, and they were greeted by an official city condemnation and a clutch of protesters who said their event amounted to a "fascist mega-pep rally."

First paragraph of the article.

Skim a little harder next time.

Now whether or not the article got this detail right, I do not know. But I DO know what the article says.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:21:37 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
All I recall stating is that it is disturbing to see government officials call a group of people "disgusting" and to "leave San Fransisco" because of their religious beliefs.

If someone had said that about a Muslim group, the libbies would have gone berzerk.

Likewise, it's disturbing to see conservatives in government bash liberals, gays, or ANYONE that doesn't goose-step in synce with THEIR opinions and "values", telling them to move to Canada, etc. I can admit that I was a bit jumpy, but can you admit that those same instances, comming from "your side" are just as disturbing?

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:22:59 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm tracking now.

I skimmed the article to quickly and didn't realzie that John_Wayne777 's thread title was indeed not supported by the article itself.

John_Wayne777: That's is a pretty cheap and inappropriate tactic, you emply the same tricks and BS the left does when you do such things.

Ahem:

More than 25,000 evangelical Christian youth landed Friday in San Francisco for a two-day rally at AT&T Park against "the virtue terrorism" of popular culture, and they were greeted by an official city condemnation and a clutch of protesters who said their event amounted to a "fascist mega-pep rally."

First paragraph of the article.

Skim a little harder next time.

Now whether or not the article got this detail right, I do not know. But I DO know what the article says.

Agreed, you are simply passing on the article, but as right wingers we should all be aware how often those idiots in the press screw shit up.

"fully auto ar-15 machine gun"
"mossberg assault shotgun"

Until someone posts a link, I'm gonna have to call BS on the reporter.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:23:07 AM EDT

[#7]

The DU trolls are out in force today.

I wonder if they got tired of the circle-jerk over in their place and decided to come here and see how long anyone put up with their shit.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:24:04 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Would have made for a great earthquake, losing a bunch of religous zealots in training and the hippies that hate them...

"Religious zealots in training"????

Good grief, you people scare me.

I suppose if the 25,000 teenagers had shown up to see Phish while smoking lots of reefer everyone would have been much happier.

But some kids show up to a concert series with a message to not participate in the diseased thinking of the culture and people are claiming they are "zealots in training".

Remember, its ok to hate white christians.

Maybe not soon, but I forsee the highly religious sects of christianity(like pentecostals, hard shell baptists) being the next persecuted group. Why? There are ALOT of people out there who dont like us. From Islam, to the far left, to even the more moderate sects of christianity. Alot of people are going to screem "thats impossible!", but that is the exact additude needed to make it happen.

Mark my words, and read revelations.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:24:50 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
All I recall stating is that it is disturbing to see government officials call a group of people "disgusting" and to "leave San Fransisco" because of their religious beliefs.

If someone had said that about a Muslim group, the libbies would have gone berzerk.

Likewise, it's disturbing to see conservatives in government bash liberals, gays, or ANYONE that doesn't goose-step in synce with THEIR opinions and "values", telling them to move to Canada, etc. I can admit that I was a bit jumpy, but can you admit that those same instances, comming from "your side" are just as disturbing?

that was my point in the whole hypocrisy comment

liberals and conservatives differ only in ideolgy, they use the same tricks when it comes to getting their message out.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:27:05 AM EDT

[#10]

tag

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:28:59 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
I see calls like that every day on this board from Christians toward (insert religion/lack of religion here)

Is the problem that a public official made the statement? Do you lose your first amendment rights when you become a public official? Is it only elected officials or appointed ones as well?

No, public officials do not loose their 1st ammendment rights.

But as I pointed out, how many public officials would keep their jobs and not suffer a massive media outrage if they had made such statements about some other group? If someone said that about a group of black people, they would be run out of town on a rail.

My view is that if he said it as a private person, then that is his view and he is intitled to have it. If he misused his power to prevent the Christian gathering, it would be an issue.

Yes, he is entitled to his view.

But as I have pointed out, if he had said it about some other group, there would be massive outrage and calls for his head aplenty.

If there was an official statement and it said simply that the views of the rally participants were not the views of the city or city council, I have no issue with it.

Supposing that such a statement exists (as the article alleges) and that it does say what you have suggested, that is STILL a concern. When did the government start putting out official statements that a private gathering on private property (assuming that AT&T park is private property) is not representative of the government's views?

Such a statement would not be sinister, but it would also be rediculous. After all, do they feel the need to put out such statements at all the other things that go on in that city?

If the official statement said negative things about Christianity or Christians, I would have a problem with it and the members of the city council need a kick in the ass.

Then we agree.

If the official statement ammounts to "Christians need not apply" then what we are seeing is a complete disregard of the principles of religious freedom our nation has depended on for many years.

Even at personal statements, I am at a loss to understand how on earth a well-behaved group of young people who are doing philanthropic work while at this gathering who are not doing anything but worshipping AS IS THEIR RIGHT end up drawing the ire of city officials.

"We don't like what you believe! You are not welcome here" doesn't seem to gel with what Mr. Jefferson said:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions..."

The kids, after all, didn't march on city hall, didn't parade in the streets, and didn't do anything but go to this gathering and help some people while they were there.

For that to receive such a hostile reaction is quite telling...

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:31:37 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm tracking now.

I skimmed the article to quickly and didn't realzie that John_Wayne777 's thread title was indeed not supported by the article itself.

John_Wayne777: That's is a pretty cheap and inappropriate tactic, you emply the same tricks and BS the left does when you do such things.

Ahem:

More than 25,000 evangelical Christian youth landed Friday in San Francisco for a two-day rally at AT&T Park against "the virtue terrorism" of popular culture, and they were greeted by an official city condemnation and a clutch of protesters who said their event amounted to a "fascist mega-pep rally."

First paragraph of the article.

Skim a little harder next time.

Now whether or not the article got this detail right, I do not know. But I DO know what the article says.

Wow - I am really off my game today. Maybe I can find a hole to crawl in.

I apologise - I skipped to the "meat" and missed the inference in the first paragraph. It definitely looks like either the editor or the original reporter failed to understand the difference between "condemnation by city council official" and "offical condemnation by city council."

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:35:41 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Likewise, it's disturbing to see conservatives in government bash liberals, gays, or ANYONE that doesn't goose-step in synce with THEIR opinions and "values", telling them to move to Canada, etc.

In fairness, several libbies actually threatened to move to canada if Bush was elected again. I don't think it at all inappropriate to demand that they follow through on their promise.

I can admit that I was a bit jumpy, but can you admit that those same instances, comming from "your side" are just as disturbing?

"My side"?

I don't recall ever advocating that anyone should be denied any of their Constitutional rights. In fact, I have tried to ensure that rights to speech, religion, property, and self protection are restored rather than trying to take them away.

That's "my side". My dedication is to preserving the best elements of our Constitutional system that have permitted freedom and prosperity in our nation.

What I find incredible is that somehow I am the one who is supposed to give an account of myself, as opposed to those who want to take away guns, abolish private property rights, and tell religious people to "get out".

As I have said many times before, if I am the boogey man you are afraid of, then you are in worse trouble than you realize.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:37:58 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Wow - I am really off my game today. Maybe I can find a hole to crawl in.

I apologise - I skipped to the "meat" and missed the inference in the first paragraph. It definitely looks like either the editor or the original reporter failed to understand the difference between "condemnation by city council official" and "offical condemnation by city council."

That is possible. Reporters often lack the intellectual power to come in out of the rain. Still, it would seem that an area newspaper would have sufficient familiarity with the city government to know what was official and what was not.

ETA -- Since I am trying to be more hip and modern,

PWNED!! jOO aRe tEh sUUUXXXOORs !111!

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:40:27 AM EDT

[#15]

fyi,
I checked both the city hall site and the site for the assemblyman in the article. No mention of the rally, much less a condemnation of the rally.

I emailed the reporter of the article and asked for clarification.

Waiting on a response.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:42:45 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

If there was an official statement and it said simply that the views of the rally participants were not the views of the city or city council, I have no issue with it.

Supposing that such a statement exists (as the article alleges) and that it does say what you have suggested, that is STILL a concern. When did the government start putting out official statements that a private gathering on private property is not representative of the government's views?

Such a statement would not be sinister, but it would also be rediculous.

Agreed, but cities do it for other organizations they don't agree with.

I don't believe such an official denouncemnt was ever made though.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:43:42 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
fyi,
I checked both the city hall site and the site for the assemblyman in the article. No mention of the rally, much less a condemnation of the rally.

I emailed the reporter of the article and asked for clarification.

Waiting on a response.

I assumed by the article's use of the word "assemblyman" that the gentleman in question was a member of the state legislature rather than an elected official in the city of San Fransisco. By looking at the pure text of the article, it seemed to me to indicate that action had been taken to "condemn" the event by the city, and that the assemblyman had offered his 2 cents.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:53:03 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
It's truely sad to see a gathering of people who are trying to
do good be berated by the scum of the Earth .

It's truely(sic) sad to see that people have been so brainwashed to think that a bunch of narrow-minded, judgemental, superstitious bigots are actually "trying to do good."

Quoted:
Actually no, that is not the way that it is supposed to work. Not in the mind of the ~~liberal~~ evangelical.

The ~~liberal's~~ evangelical's purpose is to push an agenda forward. Anything counter to that agenda angers them and motivates them to push even harder to forward their agenda. There is nothing new here. The communists called people like these evangelicals "counter revolutionaries", and subjected them to ~~horrible~~ well deserved abuse and execution.

Fixed it.

javaman is possessed by the spirit of a minor stump demon. prolly wussed out when it came time to bury kittens in the ground and run over them with a lawn mower. prolly ran to mommie when he was given a bat in order by bite its head off. prolly he only got as far in his evolutions to burning up ants with a magnifying glass..

poor minion material indeed... still posses the rhetoric in some causes.. but needs some serious improvements if he wants to upgrade his demon possessed status....

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:54:26 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
queers suck

First hand knowledge?

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:55:47 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
javaman is possessed by the spirit of a minor stump demon. prolly wussed out when it came time to bury kittens in the ground and run over them with a lawn mower. prolly ran to mommie when he was given a bat in order by bite its head off. prolly he only got as far in his evolutions to burning up ants with a magnifying glass..

poor minion material indeed... still posses the rhetoric in some causes.. but needs some serious improvements if he wants to upgrade his demon possessed status....

Ummmm........

Perhaps you have had one too many cups of coffee this morning, or perhaps I didn't get enough sleep....But I don't understand any of that.

Posted: 3/27/2006 10:56:18 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
First hand knowledge?

We really do need a rimshot smiley.....

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:01:06 AM EDT

[#22]

Well John_Wayne777, old buddy.

This one isn't exactly going as one might think, now is it.

You post a good post that, I imagine about 98% of the fine folks on AR15.com, would totally agree with you on.

But a few fruitcakes, goofballs, and trolls that normally troll here, come on and spew their usual nonsense.

Pay no attention. They do not understand this issue anymore than they understand firearms. Nor do they care about this any more than they do firearms.

They are nothing but

's and ought to be ignored.

(Actually, they ought to be banned, but I ain't in charge, lucky for them.)

Fine post, BTW.

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:10:28 AM EDT

[#23]

tag

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:10:46 AM EDT

[#24]

I imagine the rally would have had much the same reaction had it taken place in Sodom and Gommorah in about 2069 BC. (destroyed in 2070 BC according to archaeologists.)

At least San Francisco is in the right geophysical location should a re-enactment need to occur.
They were near a fault in the earths crust as well.

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:20:11 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
javaman is possessed by the spirit of a minor stump demon. prolly wussed out when it came time to bury kittens in the ground and run over them with a lawn mower. prolly ran to mommie when he was given a bat in order by bite its head off. prolly he only got as far in his evolutions to burning up ants with a magnifying glass..

poor minion material indeed... still posses the rhetoric in some causes.. but needs some serious improvements if he wants to upgrade his demon possessed status....

Ummmm........

Perhaps you have had one too many cups of coffee this morning, or perhaps I didn't get enough sleep....But I don't understand any of that.

just a sarcastic reply hoping to confuse the troll that made the reply hoping that in the ensuing brainlock he might forget to feed himself or to take in fluids and thus bring a timely end to a poor lost soul's existence...

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:22:05 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Well John_Wayne777, old buddy.

This one isn't exactly going as one might think, now is it.

You post a good post that, I imagine about 98% of the fine folks on AR15.com, would totally agree with you on.

But a few fruitcakes, goofballs, and trolls that normally troll here, come on and spew their usual nonsense.

Pay no attention. They do not understand this issue anymore than they understand firearms. Nor do they care about this any more than they do firearms.

They are nothing but 's and ought to be ignored.

(Actually, they ought to be banned, but I ain't in charge, lucky for them.)

Fine post, BTW.

Actually, anyone that labels a poster with a dissenting opinion as a

should get an automatic 2 week vacation.

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:24:18 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Well John_Wayne777, old buddy.

This one isn't exactly going as one might think, now is it.

You post a good post that, I imagine about 98% of the fine folks on AR15.com, would totally agree with you on.

But a few fruitcakes, goofballs, and trolls that normally troll here, come on and spew their usual nonsense.

Pay no attention. They do not understand this issue anymore than they understand firearms. Nor do they care about this any more than they do firearms.

They are nothing but 's and ought to be ignored.

why?

(Actually, they ought to be banned, but I ain't in charge, lucky for them.)

Fine post, BTW.

Actually, anyone that labels a poster with a dissenting opinion as a should get an automatic 2 week vacation.

why?

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:26:34 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

...The only part I find odd is the "offical condemnation" by the city council. I'm not able to find any more on it and I'm not sure if that isn't a reporter embellishment of a city council MEMBER stating his opposition to the group holding the rally.

I'd say THAT is the very part people have a problem with.

This group gives me weird vibe - all the talk about end times and such assures me they are the sam types who continuously accused me of being some sort of davil worshopper for studying evolution in college.

Still, when a major city shows such obvious bigotry in an official statement - all the while while calling for tolerance in the SAME SENTENCE - you gotta laugh. The comparison to Communist crackdown on "counter-revolutionaries" is spot-on.

These far left nutjobs - should they ever wield REAL political power - would crack down on evangelical / fundamantalist Christian groups in ways that would make the China / Falun Gong problem crackdown look mild. Of that I have no doubt.

Why do I believe this? Che Guevarra, the Sandanistas, etc. are virtually worshipped by these folks. We are dealing with a very scary fringe of society that has pretty much taken over a city.

That's just it. I can't find an official statement by the city government. Even if there was one, it would depend on how it was worded.

Saying that the views of the rally participants are not the views of the city of SF doesn't seem to be out of line to me. If anyone has a link to the offical condemnation, I would love to see it.

www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/34089/

Supervisor Tom Ammiano, who authored the condemnation resolution, said of the rally and its objectives, "Even if it is done by a Barnum & Bailey crowd with a tent and some snake oil, I think we need to pay attention to it. We should not fall asleep at the wheel." I couldn't agree more

ETA here's another "condemnation" by the SF BofS, "060371 [Condemning upcoming rally to be held by anti-abortion groups in front of City Hall on Friday, March 24, 2006]
Resolution condemning upcoming rally to be held by anti-abortion groups in front of City Hall on Friday, March 24, 2006. Supervisors Ammiano, Ma, Maxwell, Daly, Peskin, Mirkarimi presented. ADOPTED.

These guys are really comfortable in their little bigot suits

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:42:25 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
And that is why Kalifornia is so fucked up. We've been overrun by all the libtards that were driven out of all the normal states.

Well speaking personally, I have never "driven" anyone out of anyplace, and neither has anyone else I know.

But it does say something about the liberal mindset that they feel so put upon that they must flee people who advocate moral positions.

Oh teh noes!11!

Yep, I see this bullshit persection complex all over the front range of CO, merely because our state won't instantly change the way we do things to suit the socialists who have just moved here, fleeing their "utopia".

Posted: 3/27/2006 11:45:42 AM EDT

[#30]

The FR hought

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:03:58 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Actually, anyone that labels a poster with a dissenting opinion as a should get an automatic 2 week vacation.

Everybody's got their opinions...even if their opinion is that other people are trolls.

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:23:21 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
fyi,
I checked both the city hall site and the site for the assemblyman in the article. No mention of the rally, much less a condemnation of the rally.

I emailed the reporter of the article and asked for clarification.

Waiting on a response.

I assumed by the article's use of the word "assemblyman" that the gentleman in question was a member of the state legislature rather than an elected official in the city of San Fransisco. By looking at the pure text of the article, it seemed to me to indicate that action had been taken to "condemn" the event by the city, and that the assemblyman had offered his 2 cents.

he is a state assemblyman, but I wanted to check if perhaps he condemned the group on his website

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:26:19 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Simply, if gays, transexuals, peace activists and anarchists can protest and gather, so should evangelists.

+1

What is wrong with worshipping together? If gays can be gay, the Run of the Breakers you can be naked, lesbians can munch carpet, why can't Christians be Christians. What hypocrites.

Max

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:29:16 PM EDT

[#34]

Should not the name of the city be changed? Is not the naming of a city after a Catholic saint a Church/state seperation thing for these liberal nutjobs?

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:32:12 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Actually, anyone that labels a poster with a dissenting opinion as a should get an automatic 2 week vacation.

Admit it, you write zero tolerance policies for schools, don't you?

Posted: 3/27/2006 12:59:11 PM EDT

[#36]

"they're loud, they're obnoxious, they're disgusting, and they should get out of San Francisco."

That sounds a lot like the usual people in San Fransisco...

SF city supervisors are a bunch of communist shitbags!

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:00:40 PM EDT

[#37]

Who cares if evangelicals suck? I don't like them very much...but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to have a rally when gays and communists are allowed to do so on a daily basis.

Quoted:
Quoted:
It's truely sad to see a gathering of people who are trying to
do good be berated by the scum of the Earth .

It's truely(sic) sad to see that people have been so brainwashed to think that a bunch of narrow-minded, judgemental, superstitious bigots are actually "trying to do good."

Quoted:
Actually no, that is not the way that it is supposed to work. Not in the mind of the ~~liberal~~ evangelical.

The ~~liberal's~~ evangelical's purpose is to push an agenda forward. Anything counter to that agenda angers them and motivates them to push even harder to forward their agenda. There is nothing new here. The communists called people like these evangelicals "counter revolutionaries", and subjected them to ~~horrible~~ well deserved abuse and execution.

Fixed it.

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:06:17 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Simply, if gays, transexuals, peace activists and anarchists can protest and gather, so should evangelists.

+1

What is wrong with worshipping together? If gays can be gay, the Run of the Breakers you can be naked, lesbians can munch carpet, why can't Christians be Christians. What hypocrites.

Max

They did get to be Christians. RIF. They had their rally.

so far the only proof of a condemnation by the Board of Supervisors is from the original article posted. The links the others have posted point back to that article.

www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_index.asp
is the link to the Board's webpage.

I did find that Tom Ammiano is a gay activist. I looked at the resolutions from 2006 and was unable to find one condemning the gathering.

His press releases on his personal website and his governmental website say nothing about it.

If anyone finds a link to the actual resolution, please post it.

thanks!

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:07:06 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Who cares if evangelicals suck? I don't like them very much...but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to have a rally when gays and communists are allowed to do so on a daily basis.

They were allowed to have their rally. RIF

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:08:52 PM EDT

[#40]

Sounds like a war on Christianity at the home front. If San Francisco disappeared tomorrow, Id throw a keg party.

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:11:30 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Who cares if evangelicals suck? I don't like them very much...but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to have a rally when gays and communists are allowed to do so on a daily basis.

Quoted:
Quoted:
It's truely sad to see a gathering of people who are trying to
do good be berated by the scum of the Earth .

It's truely(sic) sad to see that people have been so brainwashed to think that a bunch of narrow-minded, judgemental, superstitious bigots are actually "trying to do good."

Quoted:
Actually no, that is not the way that it is supposed to work. Not in the mind of the ~~liberal~~ evangelical.

The ~~liberal's~~ evangelical's purpose is to push an agenda forward. Anything counter to that agenda angers them and motivates them to push even harder to forward their agenda. There is nothing new here. The communists called people like these evangelicals "counter revolutionaries", and subjected them to ~~horrible~~ well deserved abuse and execution.

Fixed it.

+1. Imagine if the condemnation was for a muslim rally, or an "afrocentric achievement" ceremony. It would be international news and backlash.

Posted: 3/27/2006 1:46:54 PM EDT

[#42]

John_Wayne777,
Is there a full moon out tonight ,or are you wearing your
troll bait T-shirt ?

Posted: 3/27/2006 2:43:35 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
just a sarcastic reply hoping to confuse the troll that made the reply hoping that in the ensuing brainlock he might forget to feed himself or to take in fluids and thus bring a timely end to a poor lost soul's existence...

Okie dokie then.

Posted: 3/27/2006 2:46:11 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
John_Wayne777,
Is there a full moon out tonight ,or are you wearing your
troll bait T-shirt ?

Now that one made me laugh out loud...

Posted: 3/27/2006 2:56:44 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Well John_Wayne777, old buddy.

This one isn't exactly going as one might think, now is it.

Actually, it has gone better than I expected.

Nobody has use the "taliban" word! ....................Yet.

You post a good post that, I imagine about 98% of the fine folks on AR15.com, would totally agree with you on.

But a few fruitcakes, goofballs, and trolls that normally troll here, come on and spew their usual nonsense.

Pay no attention. They do not understand this issue anymore than they understand firearms. Nor do they care about this any more than they do firearms.

They are nothing but 's and ought to be ignored.

(Actually, they ought to be banned, but I ain't in charge, lucky for them.)

Fine post, BTW.

Things like this need to be voiced so that people can see what is really going on here. You have government officials reacting with hostility to what basically ammounts to a worship service.

I can't imagine the founders throwing a conniption fit because 25,000 Christian teenagers had the unmitigated temerity to gather together in a city for a worship service, can you? As a matter of fact, the Great Awakening was a RELIGIOUS movement crucial to the development of the revolutionary ideals that allowed our freedom in the first place!

But I suppose few know this since they don't teach history anymore.

So the question becomes: If a group of teenagers who are behaving themselves and doing nothing more sinister than worshipping together are yet targeted by officials as being what is wrong with society, what remains of the Republic?

How did a group of well-behaved teenagers worshipping become public enemy number 1 in an American city??

If people don't see a danger in that, then I really fear for the future.

As I have told others repeatedly, if the boogey man hiding under their beds looks like you and me, then those who really do want to destroy freedom in our nation are winning.

In any case, one would think that government officials would have something better to spend their time on in a city like San Fransisco where there are enormous civic problems, instead of getting all worked up about a group of teenagers who aren't doing anything even remotely wrong....

Posted: 3/27/2006 3:06:14 PM EDT

[#46]

.

Posted: 3/27/2006 3:20:33 PM EDT

[#47]

I was in those parts for 9-11 too. Joined the Army half to whoop hadji's ass and half to get away from the hippy stench of SF Bay Area colleges

Posted: 3/27/2006 3:29:28 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
I was in those parts for 9-11 too. Joined the Army half to whoop hadji's ass and half to get away from the hippy stench of SF Bay Area colleges

There is nothing quite like the faint aroma of patchouli oil in the air....

Posted: 3/27/2006 3:33:31 PM EDT

[#49]

In this day and age, no religion is bashed, no figure is hated, more than Christianity, and Christ. And Christianity is the only religion that can even be bashed by a government, in America, and they get away with it.

There is something afoot there, and it goes beyond what you and I can truly understand. It's because Christ is real, the devil is leading the sheep, and people just don't frigging get it.

ETA - this is my opinion only, and I do NOT wish to debate it. There it is, I'm done.

Posted: 3/27/2006 7:55:25 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Sounds like a war on Christianity at the home front. If San Francisco disappeared tomorrow, Id throw a keg party.

places like SF and Key West serve a purpose. Id much rather have the buttrangers and carpet
munchers confined in areas , then spread out all over the place.
Let them have SF

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Evangelical Teen Rally OFFICIALLY CONDEMNED by San Fransisco City Council (Page 2 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us