| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 12:37 pm Post subject: Re: PARTS of The Bible ARE Inspired by God. But *Not* ALL of |
 |
|
"(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas:
Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:fqida49g1gh5jpjr9n6p9ftrm1mb1081j9@4ax.com...
[snip]
| Quote: | No. The bottom line to all of the above is that MY God (and
that of all other actual Christians and Jews), it 'way too BIG to
be concerned about such TRIVIALITIES as **variations of
NORMALCY.**
|
One of Satan's favorite lies.
Nevertheless, GOD IS IN THE DETAILS AND MINUTIAE.
| Quote: | E.g. -- handedness, sexual orientation, eye
color, and skin pigmentation. Among other less apparent
aspects.
|
Notice how Satan lumps DEVIANT BEHAVIOR with PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS, as if
THEY WERE CONSIDERED BY GOD THE SAME WAY.
Ike |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:44 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 23:32:16 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
|
| Quote: | snip everything
There was NO disrespect meant to you by my making that
snip> just now. I simply want to get things back on track,
when it comes to proselytizing -- and I regard the Garden of
Eden account... Cain, Abel, and all, to be allegorical at best.
I don't care WHICH way you "take it"--literally, figuratively, or
allegorically--it STILL DENOUNCES THE "IT'S NOT YOUR BUSINESS"
MENTALITY OF FRAUDS LIKE YOU.
|
(1) I see that one of two things is still true. Either:
(a) Your Caps Lock Key is broken.
(b) You are pretty *desperate* to make a fool of yourself.
(2) Someone delusional enough to take the obviously-
allegorical "Garden of Eden" story literally -- calling some-
one else a "fraud" is enough to break any Irony Meter
within 100 miles.
(3) Anyone who is astute enough to condemn the abject
stupidity of those who are mindless enough to butt into
other people's business is doing quite the OPPOSITE of
something that any *sensible* person would ever even
BEGIN to denounce. (If all the busybodyism and
control-freakism in the world disappeared overnight,
this world would be utopian in the morning!)
<FACTS **restored**>
(... so that the Readers can see your inability to deal with reality.)
| Quote: | For anyone to take that seriously, we'd have to dispense
with the reality of hundreds of thousands of years of cave-
dwelling humanity.
THIS, from a thread I initiated yesterday, gets to the
nitty-gritty of the proselytization issue:
If the Bible were to tell us *everything,* it would have to be
trillions of volumes long. So obviously, a LOT of significant and
important things have been left out.
One of the MOST important things probably has to do with
the way God deals with the problem of people who die without
ever having HEARD of Jesus Christ. Much less ever had a chance
to accept Him.
Let's assume, from what the Bible has said, that children
who die while below the age of "accountability" (and only GOD
knows what THAT is, case-by-case) go to heaven. That just
leaves the VAST majority of people who survive childhood, and
become adults.
If we consider just China (1.3 billion people) and India (1.1
billion), we have about 2/5 of the entire world's population in
those two countries alone. Two countries that have only a TINY
percentage of Christians. It's probably a safe bet that in those
countries, fewer than 10% have ever even HEARD of Jesus.
And that is probably being quite generous. That leaves at least
1/3 of all of humanity alive today who know NOTHING about
Jesus.
There are MANY things that we know about, that the Bible
doesn't cover. Such as nuclear fusion. How bacteria cause
disease. The fact that there's no atmosphere on the moon.
And the jobs we'll have throughout eternity, after we die. (You
know... that fascinating information the Bible COULD have
provided, if only Revelation had been a few chapters longer!)
Etc., etc. And perhaps its most PROFOUND omission has to
do with the way a LOVING God who has, as Jesus, proclaimed
that people can come to Him ONLY through Christ -- can keep
FROM watching billions of people who never heard of Jesus
from winding up in hell.
The ONLY thing that seems reasonable, to fit that require-
ment, would be for there to be a process -- one that the Bible
*omitted* -- by which those billions of people COULD still come
to Christ... AFTER they die.
God created a LOT of angels, and it's not unreasonable to
think that one of THEIR tasks IN heaven (or perhaps some form
of ante-chamber) is to present the gospel message to all those
billions of souls, and give them the choice after that, to either
accept or reject Christ.
Now -- as for the billions who DO learn of Jesus while still
alive, and then have that same choice -- they are surely at
great peril. Because if they learn the gospel message while
alive, and then happen to REJECT it, as countless millions of
people regularly do, then there is no reason to think that they
would get another chance after death. Having NOT gone to
their deaths innocent of that knowledge.
Jesus almost surely commanded His followers to spread the
gospel as an act of faith. BUT -- it just may be possible that
those who are recipients of that effort who then choose NOT
to accept Christ, have been done NO favors!
Proselytization's DARK side!
|
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:00 pm Post subject: Re: PARTS of The Bible ARE Inspired by God. But *Not* ALL of |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 02:37:10 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
lsenders@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
| Quote: | [snip]
The problem with you is that your god is way too small.
No. The bottom line to all of the above is that MY God (and
that of all other actual Christians and Jews), it 'way too BIG to
be concerned about such TRIVIALITIES as **variations of
NORMALCY.** ...
One of Satan's favorite lies.
|
Ah. Speaking for Satan now, are you?
I just LOVE it when fundies use the ol', "The Devil made
'em do it" excuse for supporting their agendas of ignorance.
CLUE: My statement is 100% factually accurate, whether
or not you OR Satan chooses to disagree with it.
KUDOS to all people who are sensible and intelligent
enough to recognize FACTS when they see them, and to
accept those facts as the truths that they are.
| Quote: | Nevertheless, GOD IS IN THE DETAILS AND MINUTIAE.
|
"Caps Lock" key's still on the fritz, I see. Either that, or
you're becoming rabid again...
| Quote: | ... E.g. -- handedness, sexual orientation, eye color, and
skin pigmentation. Among other less apparent aspects.
Notice how Satan lumps DEVIANT BEHAVIOR with PHYSICAL
CHARACTERISTICS, as if THEY WERE CONSIDERED BY GOD
THE SAME WAY.
|
Hmmm. Probably rabid, given the ludicrousness of what
you're saying. FACTS:
(1) Sexual orientation IS determined by variations of
NORMALCY, just as handedness is. If you are too
dense to see that OBVIOUS fact, that's tough. It's
the way it is.
(3) All aspects of normalcy were instituted by God, or
they wouldn't exist. About 10% of people are left-
handed. (30 million Americans). And around 5%
of people are gay (15 million Americans). Completely
normal.
(2) That which people choose to do in private, sexually,
with their of-age and consenting partners of choice,
is in NO WAY "deviant." NOR is it the slightest bit
ANY of your business whatsoever, busybody. Or that
of anyone else mindless and ignorant enough to be a
control-freak.
(3) Facts are FACTS, and your LAME attempt to blame
Satan for them is duly noted. (Accompanied by a
LOT of laughter. ROTFL!!!)
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Their Inability to Answer THESE Two Questions
with FACTS Indicts the RRR Cult, and PROVES
it to be a Crowd of Ignorant & Hateful Bigots.
The questions that NO one who opposes fully-legal same-sex
marriage, has EVER, to the best of my knowledge, been able to
answer factually:
"If a same-sex couple that's been cohabitating in a
community for 20 years gets the right to become
legally married to one another, and then ties the knot,
HOW could that possibly be detrimental in ANY way
to the marriage of any opposite-sex couple in that
community?
And...
"Congress, and several states have passed so-called
"Defense of Marriage Acts" (DOMA). Just WHAT suppos-
edly-detrimental factor could possibly affect opposite-
sex couples' marriages negatively, which could thus
justify so draconian a law? What do such laws "defend"
opposite-sex marriage AGAINST? What is the THREAT?"
Hey!! RRR Cultists! Inquiring SENSIBLE minds want to know.
And as MarkSebree said on Aug. 7, 2008 --
Same sex marriage does not harm anyone, and does not
infringe on the rights of heterosexuals, and it does not confer
onto homosexuals any rights that heterosexuals do not already
have. Therefore, there is no valid argument against homosexuals
having the same right to marry the consenting single adult of their
choice in the same manner and for the same reasons as hetero-
sexuals currently enjoy, and having that marriage recognized as
legally valid and binding just as widely the marriage between a
heterosexual couple.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bill Baker
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:23 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Sunday 17 August 2008 01:09 am H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
<xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:<g88bqa$b89$1@registered.motzarella.org>...
| Quote: | "Bill Baker" <wbaker@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:eMOdnd-WzNse_TnVnZ2dnUVZ_qDinZ2d@earthlink.com...
On Tuesday 12 August 2008 03:28 pm H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.
xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote in message
news:g7so8d$jno$1@registered.motzarella.org...
[snip]
But jealousy caused Cain to murder Abel.
There he goes again, ignoring THE SPECIFICS OF THE STORY.
|
There you go again reading too much into the story.
| Quote: | One more time for the clueless: JEALOUSY IS NOT AN END UNTO ITSELF.
WHAT WAS CAIN JEALOUS ABOUT?
PROPER PROCEDURE and AUTHORITY.
|
No. He was jealous of God's perceived favoritism toward Abel.
| Quote: | He didn't want to DO what was right, and he didn't want to be SUBJECT TO
HE WHO DID RIGHT, be it GOD or HIS BROTHER, ESPECIALLY WHEN DIRECTLY
CONFRONTED ABOUT THE PROBLEM.
And THAT was what he was JEALOUS ABOUT.
[snip]
You're clearly confused.
No, YOU are clearly BOUND AND DETERMINED TO SKIRT THE ISSUES, because they
PROVE YOU WRONG, just like every other liar who TRIES TO RATIONALIZE HIS
OR HER SINS.
|
There are no issues to skirt. The fact remains that nothing in the Cain and
Abel story is about trying to scare others into believing your way.
| Quote: | Just because Cain had an authority and
responsibility for his brother doesn't give you justification to tell
others what to believe.
LOL
2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove,
rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
|
That still doesn't give you justification to tell others what to believe.
| Quote: | [snip]
GO BACK AND READ THE STORY.
I have. Several times.
Not through godly eyes, you haven't, but THROUGH THE EYES OF ONE TRYING TO
DENY THE TRUTH.
|
So in order to have read it through "godly eyes" I have to come to the exact
same conclusion you did?
| Quote: | WHAT WAS HE "JEALOUS" OVER?
God accepted Abel's sacrifice over his.
...AND...?
|
That's it.
| Quote: | [snip]
GO BACK AND READ WHAT GOD SAID TO CAIN (which is underscored by Cain's
ironic question, "Am I my brother's keeper?"
You're reading too much into it.
No, YOU AREN'T READING WHAT'S THERE, because THE MINUTE YOU DO, YOU'LL BE
REVEALED TO BE A LIAR.
|
I read what's there. I just didn't come to the same conclusion you did.
| Quote: | NOW, WHAT DID GOD SAY?
Ge 4:6-7
And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy
countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if
thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his
desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
|
"Him" was talking about sin, not Abel.
| Quote: | Cain was trying to avoid answering God's
question.
NO, CAIN CREATED THE QUESTION, for SINNERS OF ALL TIME.
|
Again, you're reading way too much into it.
| Quote: | That still doesn't mean you have to try to scare gullible and
ignorant people into believing something.
The ROD or THE STAFF, it doesn't matter: THE WORD WILL ACCOMPLISH WHAT IT
WILL ACCOMPLISH, to some life to life, and to some death to death.
|
That still doesn't mean you have to try to scare gullible and ignorant
people into believing something.
| Quote: | [snip]
CRAIG REJECTS THE AUTHORITY OF GOD AND MAN, JUST LIKE CAIN DID.
Craig is a Christian,
Craig is about as far from being a Christian as Satan is.
|
Liar.
| Quote: | so he does not reject the authority of God.
Sure he does--EVERY TIME HE RATIONALIZES HIS SINS instead of CONFESSING
THEM.
|
His sins are between him and God and are none of your business.
| Quote: | To my
knowledge he has not been in jail, so he does not reject the authority of
man.
Craig rejects BOTH THE AUTHORITY OF GOD AND MAN--THAT'S why he is always
HARPING ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCH (which itself is only ONE of the SEVEN
"authorities" of man).
|
Liar.
| Quote: | The only responsibility we have is to care for others.
NO, SHIT, SHERLOCK.
BUT "caring" INCLUDES OBEDIENCE TO LAW AND ORDER.
Obedience to the laws of man.
NO. OBEDIENCE TO THE LAWS OF GOD, pilgrim, EVEN IF THAT RUNS COUNTER THE
LAWS OF MAN ("we should obey God, and NOT man").
|
But we should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.
| Quote: | But trying to scare gullible and ignorant
people into a belief system is not "caring" for people.
It is WHEN THE FEAR IS REAL.
|
No, fear only instills a false sense of religion and takes you far away from
God.
| Quote: | [snip]
Whether it's the ROD OR STAFF, the END RESULT IS THE SAME.
Sounds like you have some very disturbing S&M fantasies.
Typical perversions of the perverse.
"Thy ROD and STAFF, they COMFORT ME."
Rod = LAW.
Staff = COMPASSION.
And the OWNER determines JUDGMENT.
|
But you'd rather go around passing judgment on others and trying to scare
them into believing what you believe instead of allowing them to come to
God in their own way.
| Quote: | [snip]
So why would the death penalty be a punishment for murder if they're not
equal, then? In both murder and the death penalty, someone winds up
dead.
MURDER IS THE CRIME.
EXECUTION IS THE COUNTER-BALANCING RESOLUTION TO THE CRIME.
|
So then why did you say, "MURDER does NOT EQUAL THE DEATH PENALTY"?
| Quote: | [snip]
Jesus did NOT take "a stance against that." He was taking a stance
AGAINST
HYPOCRISY, not THE LAW.
(Once again, you don't pay attention to the DETAILS of the story.)
What hypocrisy? He was taking a stand against paying someone back equal
for a crime they committed.
NO, HE WAS ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF HYPOCRISY, NOT THE LAW.
|
What hypocrisy?
| Quote: | Jesus NEVER took issues WITH THE LAW--JUST THE APPLICATION OF THEM BY
THOSE WHO WERE THEMSELVES BREAKING THEM.
|
How many times did Jesus say, "You have heard it said this, but I say that."
| Quote: | [snip]
IT WASN'T TELLING OTHER PEOPLE THAT WAS THE ISSUE, oh, clueless one--IT
WAS WHAT THEY WERE TELLING THEM.
Yes, they were telling them what to believe.
One more time for the clueless: IT WASN'T THE "TELLING" THAT WAS THE
PROBLEM. JESUS "TOLD THEM" TOO. IT WAS "WHAT" THEY WERE TELLING THEM THAT
WAS THE PROBLEM.
|
Yes, they acted all pious and righteous and told others what to believe.
Kind of like right-wing Christians of today.
| Quote: | [snip]
Sic sequitur. The religious ruling class tells people what to believe.
NON SEQUITUR: IT'S NOT WHETHER OR NOT ONE WILL BE TOLD. IT'S WHO IS DOING
THE TELLING, AND WHAT THEY'RE TELLING.
|
And they were telling people what to believe.
| Quote: | FIRST, you have to prove A CONNECTION between THE PHARISEES, SADDUCEES,
AND HERODIANS, and certain Christian leaders.
See, Paul spoke well of people like you, saying that you would SPEAK
EVIL of DIGNITARIES, and that WITHOUT MAKING A CASE, but just PASSING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
What evil have I spoken against the Pharisees?
NOT THE PHARISEES, dimwit: THE CHURCHES.
|
What evil have I spoken against the churches, then?
| Quote: | BY WHOSE AUTHORITY DO YOU JUDGE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCHES?
|
What authority, in your opinion, should churches have?
| Quote: | I just stated the fact that
they were part of the religious ruling class that tells people what to
believe.
...IN A BLANKET ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THOSE TO WHOM GOD HAS GIVEN
AUTHORITY.
|
Who has God given authority to and how do you know?
| Quote: | WHO THE HELL ARE YOU?
|
I might ask the same question of you.
| Quote: | [snip]
WHAT?!?
Joh 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath
everlasting life.
That would be a YES, oh, clueless one.
Where in that verse does he say to tell others what to believe?
HOW ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE?
OSMOSIS?
|
They can hear the word and come to their own conclusions. Not be beaten
over the head with a Bible or frightened into submission.
| Quote: | ...and Paul and the prophets ADDRESSED your idiotic notion...
Ro 10:13-15
For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how
shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they
hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?
As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the
gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
[snip]
HE IS THE "GOOD NEWS," dolt.
No.
YES.
|
NO.
| Quote: | The Good News is that God loves everybody and that Jesus destroyed sin.
Another satanic lie: At no time did Jesus ever say HE DESTROYED SIN.
He destroys DEATH in those whom HE DOES NOT DESTROY.
|
Jesus destroys none and saves all according to 1 Cor 15:22-26
| Quote: | [snip]
WITH THE CONSEQUENCE BEING DEATH, oh, clueless one.
Nope, he never said that.
THE HELL HE DIDN'T...
Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the
righteous into life eternal.
|
"Everlasting punishment" is not an accurate translation.
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternalPunishmentNotTrueToGreek.html
| Quote: | Joh 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that
believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on
him.
|
No mention of death here.
| Quote: | Mr 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that
believeth not shall be damned.
|
Nor here.
| Quote: | Let me guess: Now you're not only going to rationalize away your sins, but
the CONSEQUENCES OF THEM AS WELL.
|
There are consequences, just not the ones you imagine.
| Quote: | But of course: One goes with the other, doesn't it.
[snip]
RIGHT.
Wrong.
RIGHT.
|
WRONG.
| Quote: | THE PROBLEMS HAVE ALWAYS BROKEN DOWN ALONG THREE LINES THROUGHOUT HISTORY,
AS TYPIFIED BY THE PHARISEES, SADDUCEES, AND HERODIANS, AND NO MATTER
WHERE YOU GO, THERE THEY ARE.
NO RIGHTEOUSNESS IN ONE THIRD.
NO COMPASSION IN ONE THIRD.
NO JUDGMENT IN ONE THIRD.
And these three form the "antitrinity."
The PROBLEM breaks down along THREE LINES--FALSE COMPASSION, FALSE
RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND FALSE JUDGMENT.
And you have demonstrated all three.
No, I'VE told you the truth, which you don't want to hear, just like God
told Cain, who didn't want to hear, either.
|
I already have the truth. What you've been saying is just heretical
nonsense.
| Quote: | [snip]
Thus saith the fools...
Typical response from one who lacks a logical argument.
I've made every "logical argument," from the source of all true logic.
|
False.
| Quote: | [snip]
RIGHT AGAIN.
No, wrong.
NO, RIGHT AGAIN: THE ANSWER OF CAIN TO GOD IS THE SAME ANSWER YOU'RE
GIVING HIM.
|
Wrong again.
| Quote: | "AM I MY BROTHER'S KEEPER?" = IT'S NOT MY BUSINESS (WHEN, in fact, IT
WAS).
Completely different.
SO YOU WISH.
|
So I know.
| Quote: | Lying about murder is not the same as not telling
them what to believe.
CAIN KILLED ABEL BECAUSE GOD TOLD HIM WHAT TO DO ***AND*** WHAT TO
BELIEVE.
And Cain KILLED ABEL ANYWAY.
|
Cain was jealous and likely thought that if he got rid of his brother that
his offerings wouldn't be rejected.
| Quote: | [snip]
In fact, you're just another bullshit artist like Craig.
The only bullshit I've seen so far has been coming from your end. Not
from me or Craig.
Nope.
|
Yup.
| Quote: | The bullshit is all yours: You're another self-deceived liar trying to
rationalize his sins instead of confessing them, just like Craig.
|
You're rationalizing your own actions as well. Everybody does. You just
think that you're right and that anyone who doesn't believe the same way
you do is going to hell.
| Quote: | ...and the irony is you short-circuit your own salvation in the process.
|
I have no need for your brand of "salvation."
--
Bushism 11-14:
"I need to be able to move the right people to the right place at the right
time to protect you, and I'm not going to accept a lousy bill out of the
United Nations Senate."
--South Bend, Indiana; October 31, 2002 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ray Fischer
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 13 Aug 2008 17:30:49 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
...NOTHING TRUTHFUL, as usual.
flush boring lies
|
Note #3
Here are some "fact-based" statements about chilton that
have not been refuted.
1) chilton has such a bloated ego that he will post and repost
the same garbage again and again and take offense when others
don't do likewise.
2) chilton is, by his own words, a criminal.
3) chilton is a coward who will run away from facts that prove
him wrong.
4) chilton is an irrational liar who cannot accept the facts
about immigration laws even when they stare him in the face.
5) chilton is insanely bigoted against immigrants.
6) chilton hates the Constitution and wants to discard key
protections in order to persecute immigrants.
7) chilton wants to see thousands of people die.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ray Fischer
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 9 Aug 2008 16:27:59 -0500,
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
snip everything
There was NO disrespect meant to you by my making that
snip> just now. I simply want to get things back on track,
when it comes to proselytizing -- and I regard the Garden of
Eden account... Cain, Abel, and all, to be allegorical at best.
|
Cafeteria "christian".
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:03 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On 18 Aug 2008 02:54:15 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> (Ray Fischer) wrote:
| Quote: | (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
|
| Quote: | ...NOTHING TRUTHFUL, as usual.
flush boring lies
Here are some "fact-based" statements about Chilton that have
not been refuted.
|
As usual, your statements about the points I've been making
on this topic are DEVOID of facts, and comprise a pack of LIES. Par
for the course for you. And I'm about to make quivering mincemeat
of ALL of those lies, below. (You really LOVE to make a public FOOL
of yourself, don't you, Ray?)
| Quote: | 1) Chilton is insanely bigoted against immigrants.
|
Wrong, and a very BLATANT lie. (That's Ray's stock-in-trade,
folks, as I'm sure you all know well by now.) With the exception of
native Americans (Indians), ALL Americans either are immigrants or
are descendents of immigrants. "Immigrants" came here LEGALLY.
And ILLEGAL ALIENS (*not* "immigrants") either SNEAKED into the
country, becoming criminals at that instant, or overstayed visas,
becoming criminals at THAT point.
It's time for ALL of the ILLEGAL-alien criminals to go back home
again. The Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, is getting them
DEPORTED in droves, and GOOD for him!
See: http://www.squidoo.com/JoeArpaio
But I think that MY plan is far BETTER, and would BOTH get the
ILLEGAL back home again... almost ALL of them... *without* the
need for either prosecution, deportation, asinine walls that won't
work and would cost billions, or additional border officers. That is
detailed in the SIG.
| Quote: | 2) Chilton hates the Constitution and wants to discard keep
protections in order to persecute immigrants.
|
Another absurd LIE. First of all, we're NOT talking about
"immigrants." We're talking about CRIMINALS. And I seek to give
them all an EASY way to go home again, without even facing prose-
cutions or deportations. That's the OPPOSITE of persecution.
Secondly, I, just like most other SENSIBLE people, recognize
that the Constitiution is a LIVING document, and not the DEAD one
that Ray wishes it were. And has been interpreted routinely by
the U.S. Supreme Court for almost as long as the USA has been
a country. (1804: Marbury vs. Madison)
| Quote: | 3) Chilton wants to see thousands of people die.
|
NO one would die, unless from other causes that would have
claimed them anyway, whether they stayed or left. (Another very
STUPID lie by Ray.)
| Quote: | 4) Chilton is, by his own words, a criminal.
|
Wrong again. A speeding ticket doesn't make a person a
criminal. But becoming an ILLEGAL alien DOES. As the above-
mentioned Sheriff has made VERY clear, in just those words, on
CNN and in print. (And in his position, he knows one HELL of a
lot MORE about the law than you probably EVER will, Ray.
| Quote: | 5) Chilton is an insane liar who cannot accept the facts about
immigration laws even when they stare him in the face.
|
Another blatant lie. Since I have PRESENTED those laws to
you before, and you are too DISHONEST to acknowledge that
they DO provide for CRIMINAL penalties of imprisonment and
fines.
But under the law that *I* propose, they would NOT be
subjected to that, as the SIG below makes very clear.
Thanks for coming out to play jacks on the freeway, Ray.
You just got the expected outcome for doing that.
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
FACTS about ILLEGAL Aliens
(1) ILLEGAL aliens did not belong here in the FIRST place.
(2) Federal laws prohibit undocumented entry into the USA.
(3) Federal laws STRICTLY prohibit WORKING in the USA without
proper and legal documentation (such as a Green Card.)
(4) Every ILLEGAL alien is a CRIMINAL by default, for entering
illegally, and even MORE of one if WORKING here.
(5) Throughout our history, tens of millions of people have
worked HARD to EARN residency and citizenship here.
(a) CRIMINALS should NEVER be *rewarded* for being
criminals.
(b) According LEGAL status to ILLEGAL, criminal aliens
without their INSTEAD applying for it through proper
channels and EARNING it would be a massive **insult**
to the millions who did it the RIGHT and LEGAL way.
(6) Urge your Congressperson to SUPPORT H.R. 1940.
More information:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
If the URL doesn't work, combine its components,
below, in your browser:
http://
apifar.blogspot.com/
2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:09 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On 18 Aug 2008 02:54:43 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote:
| Quote: | (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeickleberrybooks@msn.com> wrote:
snip everything
There was NO disrespect meant to you by my making that
snip> just now. I simply want to get things back on track,
when it comes to proselytizing -- and I regard the Garden of
Eden account... Cain, Abel, and all, to be allegorical at best.
Cafeteria "Christian".
|
Nope!! Read ON, dishonest moron ---
| Quote: | For anyone to take that seriously, we'd have to dispense
with the reality of hundreds of thousands of years of cave-
dwelling humanity.
THIS, from a thread I initiated yesterday, gets to the
nitty-gritty of the proselytization issue:
If the Bible were to tell us *everything,* it would have to be
trillions of volumes long. So obviously, a LOT of significant and
important things have been left out.
One of the MOST important things probably has to do with
the way God deals with the problem of people who die without
ever having HEARD of Jesus Christ. Much less ever had a chance
to accept Him.
Let's assume, from what the Bible has said, that children
who die while below the age of "accountability" (and only GOD
knows what THAT is, case-by-case) go to heaven. That just
leaves the VAST majority of people who survive childhood, and
become adults.
If we consider just China (1.3 billion people) and India (1.1
billion), we have about 2/5 of the entire world's population in
those two countries alone. Two countries that have only a TINY
percentage of Christians. It's probably a safe bet that in those
countries, fewer than 10% have ever even HEARD of Jesus.
And that is probably being quite generous. That leaves at least
1/3 of all of humanity alive today who know NOTHING about
Jesus.
There are MANY things that we know about, that the Bible
doesn't cover. Such as nuclear fusion. How bacteria cause
disease. The fact that there's no atmosphere on the moon.
And the jobs we'll have throughout eternity, after we die. (You
know... that fascinating information the Bible COULD have
provided, if only Revelation had been a few chapters longer!)
Etc., etc. And perhaps its most PROFOUND omission has to
do with the way a LOVING God who has, as Jesus, proclaimed
that people can come to Him ONLY through Christ -- can keep
FROM watching billions of people who never heard of Jesus
from winding up in hell.
The ONLY thing that seems reasonable, to fit that require-
ment, would be for there to be a process -- one that the Bible
*omitted* -- by which those billions of people COULD still come
to Christ... AFTER they die.
God created a LOT of angels, and it's not unreasonable to
think that one of THEIR tasks IN heaven (or perhaps some form
of ante-chamber) is to present the gospel message to all those
billions of souls, and give them the choice after that, to either
accept or reject Christ.
Now -- as for the billions who DO learn of Jesus while still
alive, and then have that same choice -- they are surely at
great peril. Because if they learn the gospel message while
alive, and then happen to REJECT it, as countless millions of
people regularly do, then there is no reason to think that they
would get another chance after death. Having NOT gone to
their deaths innocent of that knowledge.
Jesus almost surely commanded His followers to spread the
gospel as an act of faith. BUT -- it just may be possible that
those who are recipients of that effort who then choose NOT
to accept Christ, have been done NO favors!
Proselytization's DARK side!
|
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:21:47 -0400,
slate <slate1947@hotmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
| Quote: | A more perplexing question would be:
Where did Cain find a wife?' If Adam and Eve were the first humans,
and Cain and Abel were their offspring, there would logically be no
women around for Cain to marry. The exception of course would be Eve,
his mother. The Bible doesn't say who Cain's wife was or where she
came from. With Eve as the only female in existence, the pickings were
pretty slim at best.
|
That's another reason why the "Garden of Eden" story can only
be allegorical. Unless incest were the order of the day, with God's
approval.
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
juanjo
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Aug 18, 7:38 am, "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's
Loathsome Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu2...@mchsi.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:21:47 -0400,
slate <slate1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
A more perplexing question would be:
Where did Cain find a wife?' If Adam and Eve were the first humans,
and Cain and Abel were their offspring, there would logically be no
women around for Cain to marry. The exception of course would be Eve,
his mother. The Bible doesn't say who Cain's wife was or where she
came from. With Eve as the only female in existence, the pickings were
pretty slim at best.
That's another reason why the "Garden of Eden" story can only
be allegorical. Unless incest were the order of the day, with God's
approval.
|
The Bible says that Cain journeyed to the Land of Nod where he married
a woman and they had children. Apparently another deity had carried
off another creation there. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:18 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:52:53 -0400,
slate <slate1947@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
slate <slate1947@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
[ ... ]
| Quote: | A more perplexing question would be:
Where did Cain find a wife?' If Adam and Eve were the first humans,
and Cain and Abel were their offspring, there would logically be no
women around for Cain to marry. The exception of course would be Eve,
his mother. The Bible doesn't say who Cain's wife was or where she
came from. With Eve as the only female in existence, the pickings were
pretty slim at best.
That's another reason why the "Garden of Eden" story can only
be allegorical. Unless incest were the order of the day, with God's
approval.
Fair enough. My problem has always been the lack of any evidence for
the existence of a God. Actually, any of the gods. I've been told by
countless others that there is only one TRUE God, and that statement
with few exceptions, comes from Christians. I read a quip that I found
humorous yet relevant to the "God" question:
"Religions are like farts. Yours is good, but everyone else's stinks."
[Picket Fences]
There is a lot of truth to that statement. Why is Ra or Mithras for
example, any less valid than the monotheistic God of Judaism,
Christianity, or Islam?
|
All of those believe there is just ONE God. And, very interestingly,
they all believe in the SAME God. The Moslems, call Him "Allah," for
example, but Allah is the SAME God that the Jews and Christians believe
in.
| Quote: | Ultimately though, isn't the Bible irrelevant
without tangible evidence of God? Using the Bible to 'prove' God puts
the cart before the horse, yet the Bible is constantly used as proof.
I find blind-faith in something that has no basis in fact... useless.
I want to KNOW.
|
You're really gonna hate this -- but all you really need to do is ASK
Him for that proof. That's what I did -- several times, and He responded
beyond all possible doubt, every single time, in short order. And often
quite dramatically and unforgettably.
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:29 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:47:20 -0700 (PDT),
juanjo <jonpetry@mindspring.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction!" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
slate <slate1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
|
[ ... ]
| Quote: | A more perplexing question would be:
Where did Cain find a wife?' If Adam and Eve were the first humans,
and Cain and Abel were their offspring, there would logically be no
women around for Cain to marry. The exception of course would be Eve,
his mother. The Bible doesn't say who Cain's wife was or where she
came from. With Eve as the only female in existence, the pickings were
pretty slim at best.
That's another reason why the "Garden of Eden" story can only
be allegorical. Unless incest were the order of the day, with God's
approval.
The Bible says that Cain journeyed to the Land of Nod where he married
a woman and they had children. Apparently another deity had carried
off another creation there.
|
"Battle of the Gods!" Now THERE'S some interesting
food for thought! :)
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ray Fischer
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:32 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On 18 Aug 2008 02:54:15 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> (Ray Fischer) wrote:
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
...NOTHING TRUTHFUL, as usual.
flush boring lies
Here are some "fact-based" statements about Chilton that have
not been refuted.
As usual, your statements about the points I've been making
|
Bullshit deleted.
| Quote: | 1) Chilton is insanely bigoted against immigrants.
Wrong, and a very BLATANT lie.
|
chilton wants to drive millions of immigrants out of the country for
no better reason than irrational hatred.
| Quote: | 2) Chilton hates the Constitution and wants to discard keep
protections in order to persecute immigrants.
Another absurd LIE.
|
chilton wants to eliminate the ex post facto protection of the
Constitution in order to deny people born in the US their citizenship.
| Quote: | 3) Chilton wants to see thousands of people die.
NO one would die, unless
|
"Unless" chilton causes them to die by forcing them to leave the
country or die trying.
| Quote: | 4) Chilton is, by his own words, a criminal.
Wrong again.
|
chilton has claimed that violating the law makes one a criminal. By
that standard chilton is a criminal.
| Quote: | But becoming an ILLEGAL alien DOES.
|
That is a another outright lie.
| Quote: | 5) Chilton is an insane liar who cannot accept the facts about
immigration laws even when they stare him in the face.
Another blatant lie. Since I have PRESENTED those laws to
|
Laws which have directly contradicted chilton's bigoted claims.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ray Fischer
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:34 am Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Advocate for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas
| Quote: | Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote:
There was NO disrespect meant to you by my making that
snip> just now. I simply want to get things back on track,
|
The control freak wants to dictate the discussion.
| Quote: | when it comes to proselytizing -- and I regard the Garden of
Eden account... Cain, Abel, and all, to be allegorical at best.
Cafeteria "Christian".
Nope!!
|
Which are you? The priest or the Levite?
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into
the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him
and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be
going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on
the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and
saw him, passed by on the other side.
Luke 10:30-32
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:55 pm Post subject: Re: First "contradiction" explained, showing how it's not a |
|
|
On 19 Aug 2008 06:32:00 GMT, rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
| Quote: | (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
On 18 Aug 2008 02:54:15 GMT,
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> (Ray Fischer) wrote:
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- Rx for RRR Cult's Loathsome
Agendas: Extinction! <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Ray Fischer <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote...
...NOTHING TRUTHFUL, as usual.
flush boring lies
|
[[[ READERS: Wherever you see text, below, that is
enclosed id double brackets, it is RELEVANT text that
REFUTED Ray... which he deleted before making
stupid and/or lying responses. So I've RESTORED
that text -- so you can see just HOW BIG a fool he's
making of himself -- and just HOW CLUELESS he truly
is. ]]]
| Quote: | Here are some "fact-based" statements about Chilton that have
not been refuted.
As usual, your statements about the points I've been making
on this topic are DEVOID of facts, and comprise a pack of LIES. Par
for the course for you. And I'm about to make quivering mincemeat
of ALL of those lies, below. (You really LOVE to make a public FOOL
of yourself, don't you, Ray?)
1) Chilton is insanely bigoted against immigrants.
Wrong, and a very BLATANT lie. [[ (That's Ray's stock-in-trade,
folks, as I'm sure you all know well by now.) With the exception of
native Americans (Indians), ALL Americans either are immigrants or
are descendents of immigrants. "Immigrants" came here LEGALLY.
And ILLEGAL ALIENS (*not* "immigrants") either SNEAKED into the
country, becoming criminals at that instant, or overstayed visas,
becoming criminals at THAT point.
It's time for ALL of the ILLEGAL-alien criminals to go back home
again. The Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, is getting them
DEPORTED in droves, and GOOD for him!
See: http://www.squidoo.com/JoeArpaio
But I think that MY plan is far BETTER, and would BOTH get the
ILLEGALS back home again... almost ALL of them... *without* the
need for either prosecution, deportation, asinine walls that won't
work and would cost billions, or additional border officers. That is
detailed in the SIG. ]]
Chilton wants to drive millions of immigrants out of the country for
no better reason than irrational hatred.
|
ROTFL!!!! You have a PROFOUND reading comprehension problem.
| Quote: | 2) Chilton hates the Constitution and wants to discard keep
protections in order to persecute immigrants.
Another absurd LIE. [[ First of all, we're NOT talking about
"immigrants." We're talking about CRIMINALS. And I seek to give
them all an EASY way to go home again, without even facing prose-
cutions or deportations. That's the OPPOSITE of persecution.
Secondly, I, just like most other SENSIBLE people, recognize
that the Constitiution is a LIVING document, and not the DEAD one
that Ray wishes it were. And has been interpreted routinely by
the U.S. Supreme Court for almost as long as the USA has been
a country. (1804: Marbury vs. Madison) ]]
Chilton wants to eliminate the ex post facto protection of the
Constitution in order to deny people born in the US their citizenship.
|
LOL!! Seeing your responses AFTER the text you have deleted
has been *restored* is QUITE the spectacle, Clown Prince!
| Quote: | 3) Chilton wants to see thousands of people die.
NO one would die, unless [[ from other causes that would have
claimed them anyway, whether they stayed or left. (Another very
STUPID lie by Ray.) ]]
"Unless" Chilton causes them to die by forcing them to leave the
country or die trying.
|
[[[ See above, Readers. Where would Ray be without his
abject DISHONESTY? ]]]
| Quote: | 4) Chilton is, by his own words, a criminal.
Wrong again. [[ A speeding ticket doesn't make a person a
criminal. ]]
Chilton has claimed that violating the law makes one a criminal.
By that standard chilton is a criminal.
|
Funnier and funnier!!
| Quote: | But becoming an ILLEGAL alien DOES. [[ As the above-
mentioned Sheriff has made VERY clear, in just those words, on
CNN and in print. (And in his position, he knows one HELL of a
lot MORE about the law than you probably EVER will, Ray. ]]
That is a another outright lie.
|
[[[ And as we can all easily see, it was not. I never lie in
my posts -- but Ray makes a HABIT of it. ]]]
| Quote: | 5) Chilton is an insane liar who cannot accept the facts about
immigration laws even when they stare him in the face.
Another blatant lie. Since I have PRESENTED those laws to
[[ you before, and you are too DISHONEST to acknowledge that
they DO provide for CRIMINAL penalties of imprisonment and
fines.
But under the law that *I* propose, they would NOT be
subjected to that, as the SIG below makes very clear.
Thanks for coming out to play jacks on the freeway, Ray.
You just got the expected outcome for doing that. ]]
Laws which have directly contradicted Chilton's ... claims.
|
Wrong. As the Readers -- whose reading comprehension in
most cases is probably EXPONENTIALLY better than yours -- can
easily see for themselves:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title8/chapter12_subchapterii_partviii_.html
-- Craig Chilton
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
FACTS about ILLEGAL Aliens
(1) ILLEGAL aliens did not belong here in the FIRST place.
(2) Federal laws prohibit undocumented entry into the USA.
(3) Federal laws STRICTLY prohibit WORKING in the USA without
proper and legal documentation (such as a Green Card.)
(4) Every ILLEGAL alien is a CRIMINAL by default, for entering
illegally, and even MORE of one if WORKING here.
(5) Throughout our history, tens of millions of people have
worked HARD to EARN residency and citizenship here.
(a) CRIMINALS should NEVER be *rewarded* for being
criminals.
(b) According LEGAL status to ILLEGAL, criminal aliens
without their INSTEAD applying for it through proper
channels and EARNING it would be a massive **insult**
to the millions who did it the RIGHT and LEGAL way.
(6) Urge your Congressperson to SUPPORT H.R. 1940.
More information:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
If the URL doesn't work, combine its components,
below, in your browser:
http://
apifar.blogspot.com/
2008/01/almost-all-of-usas-14-million-illegal.html
And here's a real EYE-OPENER!! --
http://www.immigrationcounters.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
