Westmoreland co-sponsors bill on the Ten Commandments and can't even name them

[DreamerTheresa]

from: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/15.html#a8728





Colbert was priceless last night. His guest was Republican Congressman Lynn Westmoreland and I guess he never heard of The Colbert Report before. He will now.


Colbert: You have not introduced a single piece of legislation since you entered Congress.

Westmoreland: That's correct.

Colbert: This has been called a do nothing Congress. Is it safe to say you're the do nothingest?

Westmoreland: I, I, ..Well there's one other do nothiner. I don't know who that is, but they're a Democrat.

Colbert: What can we get rid of to balance the budget?

Westmoreland: The Dept. of Education.

Colbert: What are the Ten Commandments?

Westmoreland: You mean all of them?--Um... Don't murder. Don't lie. Don't steal Um... I can't name them all. emailer Ruth asks: Does this guy deserve a $3,300 pay raise?

The guy co-sponsors a bill about the Ten Commandments and doesn't even know them. Priceless.





-------


Ha, ha!

 

[91T breezen']

Knowing the premise of the commandments, is all that really matters. I cannot name all ten,(verbatim) but I know when I'm breaking one of them! I'm really not surprised to see a thread like this from someone with a signature like yours.

 

[Supracentral]

Well I'd expect that if someone's faith is so extreme, so important to them that they are going to attempt to infringe on MY rights and use the force of law to try to stuff their religion down my throat, they'd know, verbatim, what they are trying to force into law.

The simple truth is this is political manuvering and this person believes in this law about as much as I believe in the Easter Bunny.

Time to stop trying to restrict people's rights via legislation and work on something meaningful.

I'm really not surprised to see a thread like this from someone with a signature like yours.

And I'm really suprised to see an ad homenim attack this early in one of these threads, doesn't it usually take two or three pages to get the "good and kind" people to start with the name calling and insults?

 

[Brewster]

what an idiot.

 

[Nick M]

Westmoreland co-sponsors bill on the Ten Commandments and can't even name them

I can.

Colbert: You have not introduced a single piece of legislation since you entered Congress.

And the Libertarian party is complaining?

 

[91T breezen']

And I'm really suprised to see an ad homenim attack this early in one of these threads, doesn't it usually take two or three pages to get the "good and kind" people to start with the name calling and insults?

Insulting, maybe, but you won't see any name calling from me. I agree that the polititians time would be better spent elsewhere. And I do not support them "raming" any religion, down anybodies throats. I just don't understand why some peole get so bent out of shape when God is mentioned.:aigo: Those people should give me all their money,:icon_razz cause' it says right on it, "In God we trust"...highly offensive and intrusive!

 

[DreamerTheresa]

I'm a God-believer, but I am a hypocrite loather.

 

[1TuffSupra]

Well I'd expect that if someone's faith is so extreme, so important to them that they are going to attempt to infringe on MY rights and use the force of law to try to stuff their religion down my throat, they'd know, verbatim, what they are trying to force into law.

The simple truth is this is political manuvering and this person believes in this law about as much as I believe in the Easter Bunny.

Time to stop trying to restrict people's rights via legislation and work on something meaningful.

I agree, if it is something that is so near and dear to his heart he should at the very least know the damn commandments. Its not like there are 50 of them, its just 10. Besides there is a seperation of church and state for a reason. What about all the folks that arent christians in this country? This guy hasnt even been active in congress, but he is putting his name on shit. Its people like that in office that make this country the way it is. Ive heard multiple times that when something comes across these guys desks that they dont even read it, this is coming from a few different congressmen, names werent given of course. If you dont want to be active and participate then you shouldnt get into politics.

And Im with that lady....do they really need to get another pay raise? When is there going to be a cap put on it or are they just going to continually raise their income indefinitely? Especially when we have countless schools in this nation who are now struggling to pay high gas prices. Most of them are moving money around in their transportation budget for now, but what happens when the fuel prices jump again? These lawmakers are already making over 150,000 a yr.

 

[Supracentral]

I just don't understand why some peole get so bent out of shape when God is mentioned.:aigo: Those people should give me all their money,:icon_razz cause' it says right on it, "In God we trust"...highly offensive and intrusive!

Description of Straw Man

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:


Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore person A and position X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

 

[Shytheed Dumas]

So here we go again. Sigh.

"I'm the anit-christ, blah blah blah." or... "I say say there's no God, but I waste an incredible amount of energy getting upset about people who do believe, completely in spite of myself." or... "I'm not going to be quite as bold as you guys, but I'll back up anybody who wants to slam God and/or Christianity."

Yes, anybody who is trying to enact law or change national policy should have a solid knowledge of what they're trying to pass, and it sounds like Mr. Westmoreland fell short by not being able to list the Commandments off the top of his head, regardless of his good intentions. Here's a question, though: Have any of you who complained here ever questioned the scientific knowledge or understanding of any enviro-freak senator or congressman who tried to pass half-cocked stupid policy, resulting in unrealistic solutions that do nothing to improve the environment, but instead end up passing needless cost to everybody? Where are those threads? There are many good examples of environmental policy/law stupidity that would blow your mind, and California is absolutely out of control. Just dig into regenerative thermo oxidizers (RTO's), which can burn more than a $1 million of natural gas every month to produce a corresponding amount of greenhouse gasses in order to "reduce" greenhouse gasses from various processes - sometimes with a negative net result. So who forks out the money to needlessly produce more GHG's for products we need, who holds those law makers accountable, and who's posting those threads?

We can talk about a lot of other supidity in lobbying and law making, too, but I think I've proven a point. So as you once again try to bait us with offensive anti-Christian drivel, I have one very simple thing to say: There is a single truth, as simple and debateless as saying water is wet, and gravity will make you fall, and you know where I'm heading here. One day that truth will hit you square between the eyes. I don't hate you for the way you feel or what you say, but in the same way I wouldn't wish anybody to be hit by a bus, I do hope you find a way to change while there's time.

Last thing for Ms. "anti-christ". Help me to understand one thing. As a Christian, I know that doing nothing more than believing in (and you say you believe), and trying to live the way the most generous and loving man that has ever lived, will mean an eternity of happiness nobody here could explain because it doesn't exist here. What does following the anti-christ hold for you? I have always wanted to know that. Do you hope for an eternity of suffering that nobody here could explain? Obviously you must believe in an afterlife if you believe in Christ and his "opposite", so what do you seriously hope for? Do you think you get to be one of the "cool" souls in hell that get to hand out the pain? What???? Heaven is paradise for anybody who allows themselves to enter it. What exactly does your eternity in hell promise? Explain it to me, because I just do not get it. I can almost understand the absolute disbeliever more than I can understand you. Almost.

 

[TONY!]

LouKY,
I can not tell you with absolute certainty why Theresa has The Anti-Christ as her 'custom user text' but I can give you one perception of it that maybe did not occur to you:
Maybe it means like "wildcat" or "she-devil" or other such terms that are used to denote someone as being a handful/blast/wild ride to be around. At least that is how I interpreted it.
I think you may be over analyzing her custom user text and I suppose it can be open to misinterpretation (not that she may want it to be open to misinterpretation).


SupraCentral,
I had to look up that term you used:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
That and "the Straw Man fallacy" are two terms I have never heard of before.
I can't help but wonder where you have been exposed to these analytical tools of argument.
I have to admit, the power to argue makes many people money (lawyers, salesmen, politicians, company representatives, and so on) and it is a skill that I do have a decent regard for.
The first job I ever had was to convince people to buy my lemonade when I was about ten years old, and possibly the last job I will ever have will be to convince people to buy securities.


As far as The Commandments, without looking it up and from a non Christian I will take a shot at them:
1 Don't kill
2 Don't steal
3 Don’t spread false info (sort of like slander)
4 Honor your parents
5 Honor the Sabbath (Sunday and go to church)
6 Don't covet your neighbor's wife (that means if you see her, go the other way; do not even look at here 'cause if you do, you will be scheming to jump her bones)
7 Don't use the Lord's name in vain. (OMFG is definitely wrong by that one, and should really be considered offensive to true believers.)

I forgot the other three....oh well.

But here they are in case anyone should be suddenly interested in them.
http://www.biblepicturegallery.com/free/Pics/10_Comm.gif

 

[91T breezen']

I'm a God-believer, but I am a hypocrite loather.

Well, this is a little off the original topic, but...the above quote, is non-sensical. If you are indeed a satanist(?) then you follow the biggest, hypocritical, liar ever! If you just did the sig to stir up contraversy,:icon_conf then you are probably enjoying this attention! Along the same lines as what Louky said; why would anyone want to follow a leader that has a losing track record? All of satan's henchmen have failed. Just to name a few, Julius Caesar,Genghis Khan, Joeseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Edi Amin, MaoSae Tung...I could go on and on. All these men, ruled through terror, and were responsible for the slaughter of tens of thousands+ (some millions!) of people, genocide. The same thing the anti-christ will try and do. Well, this will be my last post on this matter. You are entitled to your opinion, the fabulous thing about our wonderful, God blessed nation!
Oh, and by the way...Welcome to Supramania!:biglaugh:

 

[DreamerTheresa]

Hey, Mike...


Please tell me I'm delirious from having been outside in the hot sun for too long today?


Please...?




``Theresa, dying a little inside.

 

[jtamulis]

Athiests don't need "God" to tell them what is right and wrong. Two quotes I
see an awful lot:

1) God, Allah, Please save me from your people.
2) More people have been killed in the name of religion than every other form of
death combined throughout the entireity of human existance. Including natural
death.

 

[Supracentral]

Actually, the whole "I am the anti-christ" thing in Theresa's tagline is a private joke between her and I and has nothing to do with her beliefs.

Once again, I'm amazed that you guys bring a knife to a gun fight. I think it's been proven around here time and time again that engaging in a combo straw man/ad homenim attack makes you look pretty pathetic around here.

Don't like what the poster posted? Attack the poster. Can't argue the matter at hand, ascribe a belief to the poster, then attack that invented belief, not the topic at hand... DT a satanist? That's truly funny...

With that said, back to the topic.

The entire point, once again, is that you folks, by falling for the lies the people tell (ie. thier professed faith) and voting these idiots into office, force the hand of people who value freedom.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, when religion and politics ride in the same cart, it's a seriously dangerous situation. Take the firm believe in the righeousness of god, put behind that the force of law, and you've got a real threat to life, liberty and property. Because the proponents of this feel they CAN'T be wrong, they are backed by god.

The reason you shouldn't put your ten commandments in a courthouse (this is what the bill proposes) is that it gives government backing to one religion over another.

I'll bet if we were proposing bills to allow the display of the koran, hindu holy texts, or some other religion's propoganda, you guys would be out there protesting your asses off. Freedom is ok as long as it's your freedom, not someone elses.

Courthouses should not display these things. Nor should they display an athiests creed, or an agnosic's manifesto. None of it. Religion & politics make very dangerous bedfellows.

If you display the ten commandments at a courthouse, you establish a defacto state religion. And that is specifically prohibited by our constituion.

Can you defend that? Logically? I doubt it.

 

[Supracentral]

SupraCentral, I had to look up that term you used:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

That and "the Straw Man fallacy" are two terms I have never heard of before.
I can't help but wonder where you have been exposed to these analytical tools of argument.

Since I was about 12 years old, I've had a love for the human mind, and what it is capable of when actually exercised. I've found one of the best ways to do this is to continue to learn, every day, as much as you can. I read voraciously. I average about two fiction novels a week plus at least part of one educational text.

The mind needs exercise, just like the body. Stop using it and it will fall victim to atrophy, just like your body will.

Ask DarkPhoniex, he stopped by my house the other night, and I was sitting on the porch reading "The History of Western Philosophy" by Bertrand Russel. This is what I do with my free time rather than watch Survivor or American Idol. (Two activities guaranteed to turn your brain to jello.)

For anyone interested in logical thought, I'd suggest picking up a copy of the wonderful text "Introduction to Logic, by Irving M. Copi and Carl Cohen". I believe it's currently on the 12th edition, so you can likely pick up slightly older versions that are off the current university curriculum for a pittance.

A quick Amazon search turned up everything from the current release @ over $100 to some older used copies for under $13. It's over 700 pages, so be prepared for a long read.

Most of the precepts of logical reasoning are covered in that work.

One thing I would like to point out is that if knowledge is your goal (as opposed to a degree), you don't need money or a university to get there. You can educate yourself for pennies on the dollar. Starting with works like the one above can move you a long way towards being educated. Learn how to reason, everything after that is easy. Educations makes you a more formidable opponent overall. Politicians, scam artists, life in general will find it harder to "put one over on you" after you've educated yourself.

 

[91T breezen']

Actually, the whole "I am the anti-christ" thing in Theresa's tagline is a private joke between her and I and has nothing to do with her beliefs.

Once again, I'm amazed that you guys bring a knife to a gun fight. I think it's been proven around here time and time again that engaging in a combo straw man/ad homenim attack makes you look pretty pathetic around here.

Don't like what the poster posted? Attack the poster. Can't argue the matter at hand, ascribe a belief to the poster, then attack that invented belief, not the topic at hand... DT a satanist? That's truly funny...

With that said, back to the topic.

The entire point, once again, is that you folks, by falling for the lies the people tell (ie. thier professed faith) and voting these idiots into office, force the hand of people who value freedom.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, when religion and politics ride in the same cart, it's a seriously dangerous situation. Take the firm believe in the righeousness of god, put behind that the force of law, and you've got a real threat to life, liberty and property. Because the proponents of this feel they CAN'T be wrong, they are backed by god.

The reason you shouldn't put your ten commandments in a courthouse (this is what the bill proposes) is that it gives government backing to one religion over another.

I'll bet if we were proposing bills to allow the display of the koran, hindu holy texts, or some other religion's propoganda, you guys would be out there protesting your asses off. Freedom is ok as long as it's your freedom, not someone elses.

Courthouses should not display these things. Nor should they display an athiests creed, or an agnosic's manifesto. None of it. Religion & politics make very dangerous bedfellows.

If you display the ten commandments at a courthouse, you establish a defacto state religion. And that is specifically prohibited by our constituion.

Can you defend that? Logically? I doubt it.

Well, I said I was done posting on this, but I am back for more abuse! I still don't see how having a set of rules visible, that when followed, or at least considered, make people treat each other a little better? How can that be a bad thing? Oh well, if that is offensive to people, and the inscription on our currency is not, I'd say that is hypocrisy. On to the ad homenim attack. When someone writes something on a public forum, that is either contraversial, or offensive, to some, then they must be aware that comments will ensue. Also, why would someones first post on a car forum, be about a political subject, that has little bearing on anything to do with what most of us, are really on here for? Lastly, seperation of church and state, maybe it was to protect freedom of religion, from governmental intervention. Have you ever considered that? I have no ill will towards your attack on me, or the other individual that supported my viewpoint. I am again, thankfull, that I live in a country where these things can be freely expressed, without fear of retribution by our government. God Bless America!

 

[Nick M]

There are more than 10 commandments that were given on Sinai anyway.

 

[Supracentral]

Well, I said I was done posting on this, but I am back for more abuse! I still don't see how having a set of rules visible, that when followed, or at least considered, make people treat each other a little better?

Hrm...

Let's see:

Commandment #1 - Do not worship any other gods other than the christian god. - Yea that one really helps everyone out. I bet the hindu's love it.

Commandment #2 - Do not make any idols - apparently this one is safely ignored by catholics, so maybe other religions can too....

Commandment #3 - Do not misuse gods name - god damnit I find that offensive.

Commandment #4 - Keep the sabbath holy.

Constitutional Amendment #1 - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

There's the harm in your first 4 commandments - they are all about YOUR religion. They are exclusive & prohibitive to those who don't believe what you follow.

How can that be a bad thing? Oh well, if that is offensive to people, and the inscription on our currency is not, I'd say that is hypocrisy.

First and foremost, again, you are making a straw man. Nobody who opposes your position has yet taken a stand on "In God We Trust" on currency. You are assigning an opinion and arguing against that invented opinion. This is a logical fallacy.

On to the ad homenim attack. When someone writes something on a public forum, that is either contraversial, or offensive, to some, then they must be aware that comments will ensue.

That doesn't cover your attack. I find your views dangerous & offensive. But I don't insult or attack you. I debate against your ideas. There is a big difference.

Also, why would someones first post on a car forum, be about a political subject, that has little bearing on anything to do with what most of us, are really on here for?

Firstly, this isn't DT's first post. However she does post almost exclusively in off-topic, so she gains no post count for each post. As for your using it as a justification for attack.. Well.. It's really amazing how "christian" you are...

Lastly, seperation of church and state, maybe it was to protect freedom of religion, from governmental intervention. Have you ever considered that?

That is EXACTLY the point of it. Don't you get it? You do not hold a monopoly on religion. Everyone does not believe what you believe... Every time government puts your religion before another, it does, by it's action, interfere with other religions.

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or are you just typing before thinking? I'm finding it difficult to believe that you could write what you have written having putting even the smallest amount of thought into it.

I have no ill will towards your attack on me, or the other individual that supported my viewpoint. I am again, thankfull, that I live in a country where these things can be freely expressed, without fear of retribution by our government. God Bless America!

Last I checked, I didn't attack you. I did however attack your ideas, which I find narrow minded, short sighted and very dangerous to liberty. However, you do have your right to your opinion, and I will defend to the death your right to hold them. However I will also fight with my last breath to keep you from making them the law of the land.

 

[DreamerTheresa]

I'm glad Tony gets it.

I'm also glad I no longer have faith in the human race, or that faith would have been crushed because of some of the people in this thread.
For the bazillionth time.







edit: Though to really stir the pot (since we've totally digressed from my original post), I've added one of my favorite avatars. May the fundies begin praying for me. Or whatever it is they do.