Christian hate group terrorizes Texas town

[Accidental Martyr]

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/04/texas-taliban/

[Ladewig]

From their website's list of appropriate targets: "4. Breast cancer events such as 'Race for the Cure' to illuminate the link between abortion and breast cancer." WTF? People are trying to deal with all the issues related to cancer and now they have to face these idiots? Jesus was right - sanctimonious people are total a-holes.

[Skeptical Greg]

I just don't understand why God can't deal with all these preverts like he did with Saddam And Gemorah ..

[Roadtoad]

Seems to me this is one of the reasons I left the Church. I couldn't stand to be around people who pulled this kind of hateful crap, and who behaved like this. Frankly, if I were an employer, and I found out one of my people was involved in this, I'd fire him. I don't need the headaches that go with this kind of mental and emotional abuse.

[pgwenthold]

From their website's list of appropriate targets: "4. Breast cancer events such as 'Race for the Cure' to illuminate the link between abortion and breast cancer." WTF? People are trying to deal with all the issues related to cancer and now they have to face these idiots? Jesus was right - sanctimonious people are total a-holes.

Our local catholic church is opposed to the American Cancer Society because they support the use of fetal stem cells.

[Manopolus]

Led by a man named David Grisham, a security guard at a nuclear-bomb facility called Pantex,

This is the scary part... maybe they should fire him for dangerous terrorist beliefs.

[Puppycow]

This is the scary part... maybe they should fire him for dangerous terrorist beliefs.

According to its website (http://www.pantex.com/empInfo/index.htm):
The Company is committed to having a diverse workforce of highly skilled, motivated individuals dedicated to the accomplishment of the Pantex Plant mission. The Pantex Plant workforce must exhibit the highest standards of ethical behavior. The Company does not discriminate based on race, age, color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, veteran status or disability.

[Roadtoad]

They should, but it's highly unlikely that they will. This thuggish behavior will likely continue until someone is killed, at which point they'll try to justify the murder.

They'll likely wind up enlisting the aid of supporters of Fred Phelps and his ilk, and they'll do so in the name of "righteousness," claiming some sort of warped version of martyrdom. They'll likely get plenty of supportive press, and any negative press will be blown off as being from "the Liberal Media Elites."

Sadly, they'll get their message out, and most folks will ignore the reality that what they are doing is simply wrong.

[Roadtoad]

From their pastor's blog... (http://www.ravenamarillo.blogspot.com/)

We began the year with a witnessing outreach/stand for righteousness at the Route 66 Swinger's Club. This effort lasted most of the year. The effect of this action was explosive, to say the least, and it led to many of the witnessing opportunities we have had throughout the year. The media attention it garnered put our warfare map "on the map" quite literally. We still receive 60,000-75,000 hits a month on our Repent Amarillo website. We have witnessed to literally hundreds of people throughout the year by phone, by e-mail, by myspace and facebook messaging, and in person because of the controversy of our site and warfare map. It has been very spiritually eye-opening to see the controversy a prayer map could generate. Our website has been linked to on nearly every witchcraft, pagan, and swinger site in the world. We pray that some of those attracted to our site by the controversy surrounding our stand at the swinger's club and the map will come to Christ. Our website has planted many seeds. Thank you Lord. At this moment the swinger's club is up for sale as it is bankrupt. As far as we can tell, this is the first time in U.S. history that a swinger's club was shut down by direct actions by Christians rather than through law enforcement. The Lord has broken ground through our efforts. We know the physical locations of other swinger's clubs in other cities and we intend to use our experience to teach other ministries to shut down these clubs in their city. Amarillo has become a seed to be sown for the destruction of these demonic strongholds throughout the nation.

You know, I am not a swinger, nor do I have any interest in participating. But the insipid imagery, the open hatred of the Repent Amarillo website (http://www.repentamarillo.com/) leaves me thinking that this group's agenda goes well beyond shutting down a private club. It's almost an act of patriotism to open such a place, simply because these hateful cowards need to be countered. It makes you wonder whatever happened to a light on a hill where all can see it.

[Manopolus]

They should, but it's highly unlikely that they will. This thuggish behavior will likely continue until someone is killed, at which point they'll try to justify the murder.


Yeah, they're trying to do that here in Kansas with the trial of the guy that killed Tiller (abortion doctor). I believe it.

[learner]

As an English person I dont know much about American spring breaks. I am picturing kids having a good healthy time. Why do these dullards object?

[Ladewig]

As an English person I dont know much about American spring breaks. I am picturing kids having a good healthy time. Why do these dullards object?

Drunkenness, fornication, immodesty are condemned by the Bible. U.S. spring break often involves these activities.

[Cainkane1]

I hate these people. Hopefully enough resistence to this bullying and harrassment will cause them to cease and desist and disband.

[learner]

Drunkenness, fornication, immodesty are condemned by the Bible. U.S. spring break often involves these activities.

Thanks, I was being lazy. Should have Googled it. I assumed it was camping, marsh mallows and stuff.
More raunchy it appears. :eye-poppi

[Marquis de Carabas]

They have a handy guide (http://www.repentamarillo.com/map.php) to area strip clubs (red pushpins), so they can't be all bad.

[AvalonXQ]

forced pregnancy advocacy associations
Kind of hard to take an article seriously when they describe things like this...

[Ladewig]

Kind of hard to take an article seriously when they describe things like this...

I wondered if the article was exaggerating, so I went to the group's website to get their side of it. I am not impressed with this group.

[AvalonXQ]

I wondered if the article was exaggerating, so I went to the group's website to get their side of it. I am not impressed with this group.

Me neither. But I'm also not impressed with the article.

[AvalonXQ]

The Christian soldier has three weapons in his arsenal, prayer, praise and worship, and the Word of God.

"... Four! Four weapons! Amongst our weaponry!
"Let me come out and come in again..."

[Aepervius]

They have a handy guide (http://www.repentamarillo.com/map.php) to area strip clubs (red pushpins), so they can't be all bad.

"Wat Lao Buddharam
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
False god"

"First Church of Practical Christianity
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Not Christian and not practical. This "church" teaches blatant heresy."

"Islamic Center of Amarillo
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Allah is a false god and Muhammad is a false prophet."
Maybe we should just fatwa them...


Hihi. That's too funny.

Click on the blue and green pins for a laugh :).

[ponderingturtle]

Thanks, I was being lazy. Should have Googled it. I assumed it was camping, marsh mallows and stuff.
More raunchy it appears. :eye-poppi

Well that all depends on were you put the marshmallow. But it is more beach, bikini's, beer and wet teeshirt contests in the popular view anyway.

[Roadtoad]

Looks like this crowd is going to try and hit Mardi Gras. Someone let the NOPD know in advance.

This could get ugly. Fun, but ugly.

[AvalonXQ]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

So... you find it reasonable that someone gets to randomly decide what behaviour is not acceptable and then hold you accountable to it?
Ie if a group of dedicated communists would start harassing you and those you know for not equally sharing all your money you would find this acceptable?
Or if a group of neo-nazies starts telling you you should boycott all things jewish because they are the cause of all things evil in the world you would have no problems with this?

Now if they were to limit their accountability to only those sharing their particular faith who have sworn to live by those rules, maybe you'd have a point, but they seem to feel that because they feel like that, so should everyone else.

[drkitten]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

Really? What's reasonable about it?

Why should I have to "account" for my behavior, especially to a private organization that is acting in violation of the law?

[Roadtoad]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

Let's review, shall we?

What they do is take down the license plate numbers of people who visit a private establishment. They then go to the employers of these people, pass on information that is really none of the employers' business, and get them fired. They harass people, badger them, belittle them. (Watch the video cited above.) They threaten and berate them.

While most of us would not participate in this business, while we would not go there on our own, to the best of my knowledge what goes on inside that business remains legal. Objectionable to many, but still legal. Lots of businesses like that around the country, such as bars, smoke shops, head shops, and a whole lot more. This is not "holding people accountable for their actions," it's abuse. And that is wrong.

Frankly, I would find the Raven Ministry's actions tolerable, if they were involved in Prison Fellowship, or if they were running a crisis pregnancy center, or for that matter, if they would even open a food closet, none of which they say they do. It's groupthink at its worst, and it's inexcusable. And frankly, it's the kind of thing I was striving to leave behind when I left the Church.

Hell, no. Worst of all, their demands for accountability come without any accompanying accountability on their part. They are doing this while spewing hate for Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christian Scientists, and more. There is no love behind this, and certainly not in the manner described by Charles Spurgeon in the quote they cite. Their militaristic website reminds me more of the Militia Movement than a desire for holiness within their god's church. It's frightening, not because I dread an active, serving church, but rather because I fear a militant, unthinking one.

Yes, they scare the crap out of me. I'm reminded of Steinbeck's East of Eden, and reading about the Polish immigrant who was strung up because "he talked funny" by people who insisted the man was a "Hun," even though the evidence showed the opposite. It's the same damned thing.

I say, Hell, no.

[bookitty]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

Not quite. This "Army of God" does not have the moral or legal standing to judge appropriate behavior. In fact, their opposition to constitutionally protected rights proves that they have no understanding of our laws and therefore no authority.

[Accidental Martyr]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

To call anything this group does "reasonable" is reprehensible.

[drkitten]

Let's review, shall we?

What they do is take down the license plate numbers of people who visit a private establishment. They then go to the employers of these people, pass on information that is really none of the employers' business, and get them fired.

I would like to point out that this behavior is specifically illegal (unlike visiting, say, a strip club).

It's called "tortuous interference with contract."

[Roadtoad]

I would like to point out that this behavior is specifically illegal (unlike visiting, say, a strip club).

It's called "tortuous interference with contract."

Glad you pointed that out. I didn't know this.

[Foster Zygote]

They have a handy guide (http://www.repentamarillo.com/map.php) to area strip clubs (red pushpins), so they can't be all bad.

That explains the 60,000 - 75,000 hits each month.

[Foster Zygote]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

How can they be held accountable for behavior which is not illegal? And held accountable to whom?

[Ladewig]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

Reasonable is not a word I would use to describe an organization who concludes that Masonic Lodges are evil because they are "full of secrecy. Only evil hides in the dark."

[sadhatter]

This is the scary part... maybe they should fire him for dangerous terrorist beliefs.

WHAT? PANTEX

okay, total derail, but first time i saw a pantex sign i almost crapped myself. Long story short in the white wolf rpg universe there is a large company that runs all sorts of sketchy things named pentax. Now at first glance a big sign with a corporate logo (the sign in my city was kind of a spook white on black color scheme.) and slogan, is a bit of a creep out.

I actually thought it might have been viral marketing for a white wolf movie, but no such luck.

[sadhatter]

Their main MO, at least from the video I saw, seems to be holding people accountable for their behavior. This seems a reasonable tactic.

Who are they to hold me accountable for anything? By christian theology, god is the judge, and if he exists, he is the one that will hold me accountable in the afterlife, not these ignorant fools who think that they are helping an omnipotent being. Which in my opinion is the height of narcissism.

[Rogue1stclass]

Looks like this crowd is going to try and hit Mardi Gras. Someone let the NOPD know in advance.

This could get ugly. Fun, but ugly.

Mardi Gras is long over. It traditionally ends on Fat Tuesday, the day before the start of Lent.

Unless you are Universal Orlando, which is apparently doing a Mardi Gras event until April...

[sadhatter]

Reasonable is not a word I would use to describe an organization who concludes that Masonic Lodges are evil because they are "full of secrecy. Only evil hides in the dark."

Only evil hides in the dark.....

Then what is their issue with a bunch of people watching each other bang? I mean the only other choice is to find a private spot , turn off the lights and do it, which by their logic is also evil as "only evil hides in the dark."

Internal consistency , learn it, live it, love it.

[Roadtoad]

Well, whatever. They aren't hiring for anything I can do.

[Thunder]

how long before they resort to violence? not long...I bet.

[tsig]

"Wat Lao Buddharam
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
False god"

"First Church of Practical Christianity
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Not Christian and not practical. This "church" teaches blatant heresy."

"Islamic Center of Amarillo
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Allah is a false god and Muhammad is a false prophet."
Maybe we should just fatwa them...


Hihi. That's too funny.

Click on the blue and green pins for a laugh :).

I like this one:

"Unitarian Universalist Church
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Pagan and witchcraft headquarters for Amarillo. Pagan and wichcraft celebrations and rites are performed here.
Get directions: To here - From here


Zoom here"

None of the UU churches I visited ever did anything like that.

[Roadtoad]

That's fine. I just keep reporting them as I read through their Pastor's blog.

[tsig]

I just don't understand why God can't deal with all these preverts like he did with Saddam And Gemorah ..

Well He's gettin' on in years and that crucifixion thing took more out of him than he let on.

[AvalonXQ]

While most of us would not participate in this business, while we would not go there on our own, to the best of my knowledge what goes on inside that business remains legal. Objectionable to many, but still legal. Lots of businesses like that around the country, such as bars, smoke shops, head shops, and a whole lot more. This is not "holding people accountable for their actions," it's abuse. And that is wrong.

I tend to disagree.
If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.
Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.

[sgtbaker]

The people of that town that disagree with their behavior should start following the leaders around. I find in a lot of cases, people who are the most imposing of their own ideals have a habit of assuming that their ability to think of the rules somehow exempts them from following them.

[Foster Zygote]

I tend to disagree.
If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.
Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.
Where does it end? How far does your advocacy of the invasion of privacy in the name of coercing people to conform to your own personal behavioral standards go?

If someone kept his/her homosexuality a secret due to the legitimate fear of public persecution, would you think that this church was justified if following him/her around in the hope of finding evidence of a homosexual relationship in order that they might present it to an employer whom they expect to fire said person?

The fact is that the private, legal activities of others are none of my business, nor the members of that church, nor yours.

[joobz]

I tend to disagree.
If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.
Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.
I'm curious, when you wipe after defecating, do you insert your finger a bit into the anus? Do you wipe 1 time, or two twice? I would hate to think you do not take personal hygiene seriously or that you linger too much on your anal region. I think it would be perfectly fine if we were to film your cleaning methods and report this data to your employers.

I think they have the right to know what your secret activities are and perhaps help augment any behavior that may be deemed...unseemly.

[AvalonXQ]

Where does it end? How far does your advocacy of the invasion of privacy in the name of coercing people to conform to your own personal behavioral standards go?

How far does the law allow it to go? There are laws protecting people's privacy, and we should be certain to make sure those laws are strictly enforced against these people.
But, again, circumstances where they have the right to bring things into the public sphere -- making people justify behaviors that they have done in secret but know could be made public -- again, the process makes sense.
I don't see how any employer can legally fire someone for this, though.

[AvalonXQ]

I'm curious, when you wipe after defecating,

Bad analogy. This is more like filming the fact that I go into the restroom.
Something that you would have every right to do, if I used a public restroom.

[Ladewig]

From this thread:


If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.

From another thread:

I'm a libertarian, and a strong supporter of individual rights.

You don't see a conflict between these two points of view? Every libertarian I have ever encountered on the internet espoused the position that whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is nobody's business but their own.

Others have asked the question and you never answered so I'll ask the question again: why should anyone have justify their actions to this group?



Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.

The Masons are a private fraternity that engages in charitable actions of all sizes. Some of their charity is public: Shriner's hospitals for children. Some of their charity is outside the public eye.1 It is not your business, it is not the Repent Amarillo group's business.

My second question for you. Do you believe that the Masons in Amarillo are evil in any way? Do they need to be exposed to the public?

The Repent Amarillo website claims that the motivation of all this activity is convert people to Christianity. My third question for you is do you believe that following people, tracing their license plates to learn their identities, and then reporting their private activities to their employers is a useful way of bringing people to Christ.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(1) Of course the Bible which these folks profess to follow directs people to do things in secret Matthew 6 "1 Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

[joobz]

Bad analogy. This is more like filming the fact that I go into the restroom.
What's wrong? Why didn't you answer the question? Are you hiding something?

Something that you would have every right to do, if I used a public restroom.
Are you claiming a privately owned establishment = public property?

[AvalonXQ]

You don't see a conflict between these two points of view? Every libertarian I have ever encountered on the internet espoused the position that whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is nobody's business but their own.

I wasn't aware that Repent Amarillo were going behind any closed doors. The fact that you walk into a building visible from public areas is publically-accessable information.

Others have asked the question and you never answered so I'll ask the question again: why should anyone have justify their actions to this group?

Nobody is asking them to justify their actions to this group. When their activities are public knowledge, however, they can justify their actions to anyone they care to. Or not.
It's been said before -- light is the best disinfectant. As long as they're not doing anything that actual violates my right to privacy (taping what goes on inside my house, for instance, or hacking into my computer), as long as all they're doing is making it public who goes to these places, I fail to see the problem.

[AvalonXQ]

(1) Of course the Bible which these folks profess to follow directs people to do things in secret Matthew 6 "1 Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Yes. Jesus also says this:

"And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God."

[AvalonXQ]

Are you claiming a privately owned establishment = public property?

Nope. Which makes me wonder -- if they were in the parking lot of the swingers' club in that video, why didn't the club owner ask them to leave?

[Ladewig]

Yes. Jesus also says this:

My claim was that it is incorrect to label everything done in secret as evil. Pointing out that some things done in secret are evil does not weaken my claim at all.

[AvalonXQ]

My claim was that it is incorrect to label everything done in secret as evil. Pointing out that some things done in secret are evil does not weaken my claim at all.

I agree. Your point that secret != evil is one I agree with.
However, from the Scripture I quoted, the fact that "light is a good disenfectant" is clearly scriptural as well.

[Ladewig]

I wasn't aware that Repent Amarillo were going behind any closed doors. The fact that you walk into a building visible from public areas is publically-accessable information.

I thought it was understood that I was speaking metaphorically. Allow me to clarify my understanding of orthodox libertarianism. No legal action done between consenting adults is anybody's business but their own. Do you disagree?



Nobody is asking them to justify their actions to this group. When their activities are public knowledge, however, they can justify their actions to anyone they care to. Or not.
It's been said before -- light is the best disinfectant. As long as they're not doing anything that actual violates my right to privacy (taping what goes on inside my house, for instance, or hacking into my computer), as long as all they're doing is making it public who goes to these places, I fail to see the problem.

Drkitten explained in post #29 that interfering with one's employer is illegal.

[AvalonXQ]

I thought it was understood that I was speaking metaphorically. Allow me to clarify my understanding of orthodox libertarianism. No legal action done between consenting adults is anybody's business but their own. Do you disagree?

I do. I think the correct statement would be: "No action done between consenting adults is the government's business."

[Ladewig]

I agree. Your point that secret != evil is one I agree with.
However, from the Scripture I quoted, the fact that "light is a good disinfectant" is clearly scriptural as well.

Do the Masons require disinfecting? Are the Masons evil because some of their charity is performed in private?

[Ladewig]

The Repent Amarillo website claims that the motivation of all this activity is convert people to Christianity. My third question for you is do you believe that following people, tracing their license plates to learn their identities, and then reporting their private activities to their employers is a useful way of bringing people to Christ.

[joobz]

Nope. Which makes me wonder -- if they were in the parking lot of the swingers' club in that video, why didn't the club owner ask them to leave?
Clearly you are hiding something about your bathroom habits as you keep avoiding the simple questions. Can I send this thread to your employer and discuss with them your potential preferences for first knuckle entry into your anus while cleaning? Or perhaps your lack of appropriate wiping which could cause a health hazard to everyone around you?


ETA: Given your tacit support of "However, from the Scripture I quoted, the fact that "light is a good disenfectant" is clearly scriptural as well."
I find your unwillingness to discuss your wiping procedures even more disturbing. What are you hiding, sir?

[Schrodinger's Cat]

AvalonXQ:

"It's been said before -- light is the best disinfectant"

Maybe this is true if you are doing something which you are actually ashamed of and SHOULDN'T be doing...people finding out about it will make you stop and be GOOD for you. But there are plenty of things people do which they are not ashamed of but they do not want known in public.

My husband was raised a conservative Christian in the deep south. he is now a moderate non theist. He is not ashamed of this in any way. However, his family is extremely, extremely Christian from a small town. In the past, when other members of the community have fallen away from the flock, they have been either shunned or harassed incesently. My husband does not want to go through this because he wants to maintain good relationships with his family.

My husband is not keeping his lack of Christian conservativism a secret from his family because he is ashamed, he is doing it because THEY are intolerant. Exposing this truth would in no way change his behavior. It would, however, ruin his relationship with his family, and, were he still to live in that community, would lead to him being harassed or shunned on a daily basis.

You say "no one is making them justify their behavior to anyone." But that exactly what happens when your personal business is exposed to intolerant busy bodies. I saw that enough first hand when I was living in a small town in the deep south, or when dealing with my extremely in-everyone's-business Boston Italian family. People harass you ceaseless trying to force you to justify their behavior.

You are assuming that these swingers are ASHAMED of what they are doing, and that is why they keep it private, and so making it public is good for them and shining "light" on their behavior will "disinfect" them. I think it is more likely they are not doing this in private because they are ashamed, but because there are so many intolerant people out there who think that it's any of their business, and they don't want to deal with the harassment.

[AvalonXQ]

You make a very good point, SC. Where people treat others badly for bad reasons, secrecy makes sense and destroying secrecy may be enabling harrassment.

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Avalon,

Yep, it really just depends on the group of people you are dealing with. There are things about myself I keep private from Group A but not Group B, but then I may tell things to Group B that I keep private from Group A. It's not because I am ashamed of these things, I just know the audience wouldn't be very understanding because of their pre held beliefs on whatever the subject matter is.

[Monster Machine]

I was pleased with their Warfare Map. I'm heading down to Amarillo late spring for business. Now I know the best places to go.

Thank you Repent Amarillo - thank you.

Monster

[tsig]

I was pleased with their Warfare Map. I'm heading down to Amarillo late spring for business. Now I know the best places to go.

Thank you Repent Amarillo - thank you.

Monster

Whenever I see Repent Amarillo my mind tends to read it Repent Armadillo and I get the image of them preaching repentance to armored pigs.

[sadhatter]

I tend to disagree.
If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.
Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.

HEy avalon, ever do anything that you wouldn't want shown in public?

I get the vibe your a guy, so if you are and you say no, then i call 900 types of bs on it. If you catch my drift.

[Roadtoad]

You know, there's a hell of a lot I don't discuss with other people. Some of it simply because it's no one else's business. There are even things I don't discuss with my wife because it isn't her's. Are these things necessarily evil? No. But somehow, this notion of total exposure makes about as much sense is about as sensible as sticking a piano in a tree because people should know you play.

Yes, there is evil which should be exposed. The guy down the street who's groping eight year olds forfeits his privacy. He's committing an actual crime, doing harm, and bringing misery to our neighborhood. The couple across the way running a meth lab? Damn right, I want to know what they're up to, and I want them busted, right now. The lab itself is a danger, as is their highly illegal product.

The lesbian couple next door? How is that any of my business in any way? What is the harm? Or the consenting adults and what they're doing with any other consenting adults? The Masonic Lodge downtown, the mosque in the south end, or anything else? I have no problem as long as the laws are obeyed, they aren't advocating anyone's death or destruction, or disrupting the peace. (Christians: Just so you know, I don't enjoy hearing Christopop music blaring from the speakers of your car so loudly that it rattles the glass panes in my house.)

There's something to be said for privacy, and it's role in our lives. I'm not interested in ramrodding my views down people's throats, and I'd be damned proud if my life were sufficiently and example to others that they would choose to emulate my way of life. Frankly, I don't see anything worth emulating in the actions of the Raven Ministry, and I see plenty that I'd want to avoid. What I see is coercion, hate, malice, intrusion, and personal destruction. Not too good.

This is not an appropriate "witness" in any way, shape or form. And, frankly, if it were up to me, and I were one of those who lost their jobs as a result of this "ministry," I'd be calling an attorney and suing this "church" out of existence.

[AvalonXQ]

Yes, there is evil which should be exposed. The guy down the street who's groping eight year olds forfeits his privacy. He's committing an actual crime, doing harm, and bringing misery to our neighborhood. The couple across the way running a meth lab? Damn right, I want to know what they're up to, and I want them busted, right now. The lab itself is a danger, as is their highly illegal product.

Interesting. So is it basically the case that you think something should be exposed to the public whenever you think it's wrong, and allowed to occur in private whenever you don't?
How do you feel about the Yes on 8 campaign contributions -- do you believe the names and addresses of everyone who donated to the campaign should be made public, or not?

[AvalonXQ]

HEy avalon, ever do anything that you wouldn't want shown in public?

Yes. I don't do any of those things in public.
Anything that I do in public (for example, entering an adult store, which I have done before and will do again) I understand not to be a private event because I'm visible by the public when I do it. I wouldn't be happy to have my life hounded, but I'm not going to have any difficulty justifying my behavior on this point.
Again, though, SC made the point very well -- people are looking to avoid harrassment, and that's reasonable.

[sadhatter]

You know, there's a hell of a lot I don't discuss with other people. Some of it simply because it's no one else's business. There are even things I don't discuss with my wife because it isn't her's. Are these things necessarily evil? No. But somehow, this notion of total exposure makes about as much sense is about as sensible as sticking a piano in a tree because people should know you play.

Yes, there is evil which should be exposed. The guy down the street who's groping eight year olds forfeits his privacy. He's committing an actual crime, doing harm, and bringing misery to our neighborhood. The couple across the way running a meth lab? Damn right, I want to know what they're up to, and I want them busted, right now. The lab itself is a danger, as is their highly illegal product.

The lesbian couple next door? How is that any of my business in any way? What is the harm? Or the consenting adults and what they're doing with any other consenting adults? The Masonic Lodge downtown, the mosque in the south end, or anything else? I have no problem as long as the laws are obeyed, they aren't advocating anyone's death or destruction, or disrupting the peace. (Christians: Just so you know, I don't enjoy hearing Christopop music blaring from the speakers of your car so loudly that it rattles the glass panes in my house.)

There's something to be said for privacy, and it's role in our lives. I'm not interested in ramrodding my views down people's throats, and I'd be damned proud if my life were sufficiently and example to others that they would choose to emulate my way of life. Frankly, I don't see anything worth emulating in the actions of the Raven Ministry, and I see plenty that I'd want to avoid. What I see is coercion, hate, malice, intrusion, and personal destruction. Not too good.

This is not an appropriate "witness" in any way, shape or form. And, frankly, if it were up to me, and I were one of those who lost their jobs as a result of this "ministry," I'd be calling an attorney and suing this "church" out of existence.

Bravo roadtoad.

Now as to the issue of public property, well if they didn't go in the club then they couldn't really tell what was going on in the club now could they? So what they are doing is, with no evidence making insinuations that becuase someone is in a certain place, they are doing a certain thing. And if they didn't see this with their own eyes, simply making the insinuation is wrong not to mention very nosey.

It is like how a man when accused of rape is pretty much automatically guilty unless he can prove his innocence. How do they know the people in the club wern't just going in for directions, or seeing a friend who worked there, or hell passing out bible literature?

They are simply spreading rumors for the sake of hassling people they don't like. and in your case avalon i think this is a great example of how the christian religion can completely destroy a persons sense of morals. If this was being done by a muslim group, or a jewish group, or a pagan group, you would be up in arms. Think of pagans harassing you as you come out of your church, pagans posting inflamitory things ( **church avalon goes to** has consistant meetings on how to harm local members of other religions.) about your organization. etc.

And if your saying this is okay for your group, then you have to extend this to other groups. So then we have every knothole religion harassing people left right and center, but that is okay because a magic man in the freaking sky told them they could do so.

Avalon this is not an insult , this is a specific question to you, or others that believe this is okay.

Why is it that fundamentalist Christians love and i mean love using the law to cover up doing crap that goes against common courtesy and common sense?

These people, the phelps, and any number of other busybodies cannot simply say " i wouldn't want to be hassled , i guess i won't hassle others.", really stick in my craw, for a religion that says treat thy neighbour as thyself, you don't really act like it, at least the fundamentalists.

Morals are pretty black and white when it comes to normal social situations. Don't do something you don't want done to you, let others do what they will as long as it isn't hurting someone, And keep your nose out of places it dosn't belong. But christianity says its okay to ignore these as long as the people are doing something you don't like. That is not only narcissistic, but shows a disregard for anyone who dosn't share you particular beliefs.

[Roadtoad]

Interesting. So is it basically the case that you think something should be exposed to the public whenever you think it's wrong, and allowed to occur in private whenever you don't?
How do you feel about the Yes on 8 campaign contributions -- do you believe the names and addresses of everyone who donated to the campaign should be made public, or not?

No, not when I am the one who thinks it's wrong. When it's wrong, period. That has been decided ages ago.

As to the Yes on 8 contributions: Yes, it should be made public. If you contributed to a political campaign, regardless of the side you contributed to, you have entered into the public debate. You should be willing to have your name made public. That's something I accept when I send in my pittance to support a public initiative. Ditto that when I sign a petition to have it put on the ballot. If you're not willing to have your name made public, resign your citizenship.

This is not about what I think. This is about what's right. And what Raven Ministries is doing is wrong.

[AvalonXQ]

No, not when I am the one who thinks it's wrong. When it's wrong, period.

Ah, so you believe in absolute morality, too? We can all agree on what's right and what's wrong?
Has something that is wrong ever been legal?

[Philosaur]

If there's a legal and legitimate way of making these secret activities public, so that people have to either justify these activities or stop them, it seems quite reasonable to do so.

What is the legal, religious, pholosophical, or moral reasoning behind forcing someone to justify secret activities or stop them? Remember, you have no proof yet that what someone is doing secretly is wrong.

You are essentially saying that the mere possibility that someone *might* be doing something wrong is enough to "out" them and have them justify their actions.

Their assertion is that bad things happen in secret that would not happen if they could not be done in secret. This is an attitude that makes sense to me as well.

That's all well and good, but they still have no *proof* that bad things are happening, merely supposition.

Let's assume that you suffered from a particularly violent case of irritable bowel syndrome. Said syndrome regularly forces you to visit the bathroom quite often to relieve yourself. Now suppose a co-worker had been keeping records of when you went to the bathroom and how long you were in there. Furthermore, this co-worker then goes to your boss with the hypothesis that you were going to the bathroom to do cocaine.

Is it right for your co-worker to keep notes of your bathroom breaks as evidence that you *might* have a cocaine habit? Is it right that the co-worker is making you justify your secret actions?

[sadhatter]

Yes. I don't do any of those things in public.
Anything that I do in public (for example, entering an adult store, which I have done before and will do again) I understand not to be a private event because I'm visible by the public when I do it. I wouldn't be happy to have my life hounded, but I'm not going to have any difficulty justifying my behavior on this point.
Again, though, SC made the point very well -- people are looking to avoid harrassment, and that's reasonable.

So your cool with me following you, and posting pictures of you going into the adult store? Don't think that would cause some conflict?

The only reason your so brazen is because you know that i am not going to do it.

And on top of that do you not think these people would hound you? Do you think they would take your excuse of " its a birthday gag present" seriously, regardless of how true it was?

And going into an adult shop is not public, until you are in the shop, your are not doing anything but standing on the street, and when your in there you are in a private establishment. Same thing with the swingers club.

But lets use this argument for something else. I see you go into your house, maybe you looked a bit strange, now i can make the assumption that you were 'crankin it' take pictures of you entering your house, then harass you as you leave as to the nature of what you may or may not have been pulling, cranking or jacking. Your denial would be proof that your embarrassed, and your admission would be posted online for all to see. You can easily say now that these things wouldn't bug you, but when its your personal life that is being flaunted, you would feel differently.

Spreading rumors , is all it is doing. They have no proof of what these people were or were not doing, but that dosn't matter, they know that if they fling enough crap against a wall some of it will stick.

This is pathetic, plain and simple. If christians are supposed to be petty manipulative and plain mean, that is another reason i am glad i quit the club.

[Sabrina]

I like this one:

"Unitarian Universalist Church
Last Updated by Raven on Sep 1, 2009
Pagan and witchcraft headquarters for Amarillo. Pagan and wichcraft celebrations and rites are performed here.
Get directions: To here - From here


Zoom here"

None of the UU churches I visited ever did anything like that.

My old church in El Paso did. Many UU churches have Pagan or Wicca (note: NOT witch) groups affiliated with them, because UU churches are some of the few places that welcome their views on religion. Not necessarily to the point of preaching it (if what we do can really be called preaching) mind you, but it's done. I attended a Solstice celebration once; it was very calming and peaceful.

[Roadtoad]

Ah, so you believe in absolute morality, too? We can all agree on what's right and what's wrong?
Has something that is wrong ever been legal?

I tend to get pretty well pissed off when someone twists my words. You know you're doing it, too, which pisses me off even more. If you're going to be dishonest, you're going to be ignored.

Yes, there have been things which have been legal which have been wrong. You know this. I know this. But you draw lines where they are appropriate. What Raven Ministries is doing is inappropriate. It is wrong.

You know this. Or at least you should.

[sadhatter]

Ah, so you believe in absolute morality, too? We can all agree on what's right and what's wrong?
Has something that is wrong ever been legal?

Let's ask a more pertinent question.

Why should i have to justify myself to a group of slackjawed yocals that have no more authority than myself?

If police ask me to justify my actions, by all means i will tell them. Itnis their job, and they have governmental jurisdiction to make me to so.

But these people have no right other than their own terminal boredom and obsession with things their magic book tells them they cannot do.

And lets not play coy, this is not about justification, this is about manipulation. If they just wanted justification they could privately ask the person " hey quick question, why were you in the gang bang club?" but they don't. They know they can spread fear through the hassle they bring, and they know they need no real proof. And these are people you support?

[Roadtoad]

Let's ask a more pertinent question.

Why should i have to justify myself to a group of slackjawed yocals that have no more authority than myself?

If police ask me to justify my actions, by all means i will tell them. Itnis their job, and they have governmental jurisdiction to make me to so.

But these people have no right other than their own terminal boredom and obsession with things their magic book tells them they cannot do.

And lets not play coy, this is not about justification, this is about manipulation. If they just wanted justification they could privately ask the person " hey quick question, why were you in the gang bang club?" but they don't. They know they can spread fear through the hassle they bring, and they know they need no real proof. And these are people you support?

Well said. That's what it comes down to in the end.

[sadhatter]

And you know, now that i think of it, avalon, it was mentioned you play d and d, correct?

Well i don't know this groups feelings on role playing games, but there are still a few fundies who hate it ( i was held up at knifepoint by one myself), so would it then be okay for them to stake out a comic book shop, maybe with the caption on thier website " participates in devil worship through the role playing game dungeons and dragons. " and then get hassled about why you were in there trying to work pagan magic, and doing god knows what with demonic spirits?

This is not about finding people doing things, it is about slinging crap, and sooner or later the crap cannon is going to fire at you. Just hope it rolls a 1 brother.

[AvalonXQ]

So your cool with me following you, and posting pictures of you going into the adult store? Don't think that would cause some conflict?

None at all. My social and cultural circles, including my religious circles, consider the use of sex toys, etc. between me and my significant other to be appropriate, and my significant other always knows when I go to these places and what I'm getting (barring a surprise or two for later ;)).
In fact, you'd cause me more problems showing me going in and out of a comics store that sells RPGs, especially since I actually am going in the store to purchase role-playing material. Like has been pointed out by others with regard to their religious families, I don't make an issue out of playing Dungeons and Dragons to my more conservative circles, and I would rather not have to deal with these groups on this issue -- not because I'm ashamed of it, but because it would cause unnecessary tension.
And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.
I still don't think what Repent is doing is wrong, but I certainly understand more now how it's a jerk move.

[sadhatter]

Well said. That's what it comes down to in the end.

And you know, if i got a private visit on a day off by one of these guys and they simply asked me why i was in said club. No harm no foul if they are not just trying to use the information to post on the web. ( why is it if this is done on 4chan it is a bunch of hacker jerks, real life, it is okay? To some anyway)

I would go into great detail about the things i like to do , who i like to do them with, etc. I don't think they would stay past the first hour. :D

I mean i may get annoyed if every time i went they came back and asked me the same question. But if they stick to one visit per thing that pisses them off, go nuts. Kind of stupid, and i would just mess with them, but heck, if it makes them happy go nuts.

[AvalonXQ]

Yes, there have been things which have been legal which have been wrong. You know this. I know this. But you draw lines where they are appropriate. What Raven Ministries is doing is inappropriate. It is wrong.

See, that's your opinion, and they disagree.
You've made it clear that you think when something is wrong, wrongdoers should be in the public eye. Repent Amarillo believes that what these people are doing is wrong, so it wants their activities in the public eye.
The real question is why you don't support them out of consistency.

[Roadtoad]

None at all. My social and cultural circles, including my religious circles, consider the use of sex toys, etc. between me and my significant other to be appropriate, and my significant other always knows when I go to these places and what I'm getting (barring a surprise or two for later ;)).
In fact, you'd cause me more problems showing me going in and out of a comics store that sells RPGs, especially since I actually am going in the store to purchase role-playing material. Like has been pointed out by others with regard to their religious families, I don't make an issue out of playing Dungeons and Dragons to my more conservative circles, and I would rather not have to deal with these groups on this issue -- not because I'm ashamed of it, but because it would cause unnecessary tension.
And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.
I still don't think what Repent is doing is wrong, but I certainly understand more now how it's a jerk move.

Well, that's certainly generous of you.

But the real issue here: Who the hell appointed these people to become Amarillo's moral guardians, particularly when they demonstrate NO compassion for anyone, and when their own lives aren't up to the same degree of scrutiny? Frankly, I don't WANT to know what they do in their private lives until they cross the line and do harm.

Right now, they are doing just that.

[joobz]

None at all. My social and cultural circles, including my religious circles, consider the use of sex toys, etc. between me and my significant other to be appropriate, and my significant other always knows when I go to these places and what I'm getting (barring a surprise or two for later ;)).
In fact, you'd cause me more problems showing me going in and out of a comics store that sells RPGs, especially since I actually am going in the store to purchase role-playing material. Like has been pointed out by others with regard to their religious families, I don't make an issue out of playing Dungeons and Dragons to my more conservative circles, and I would rather not have to deal with these groups on this issue -- not because I'm ashamed of it, but because it would cause unnecessary tension.
And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.
This is very good of you.


I still don't think what Repent is doing is wrong, but I certainly understand more now how it's a jerk move.

Might I suggest your own words as an explanation why you think so?
So is it basically the case that you think something should be exposed to the public whenever you think it's wrong, and allowed to occur in private whenever you don't?

[AvalonXQ]

The interesting thing here is that what they are doing has zero effect unless society agrees with them.
You're not going to get any flack from being in a swingers' club unless people have problems with swingers' clubs. It wouldn't mean a thing if a bunch of Amarillo liberals set up a similar operation in front of a gun club, because people in Amarillo don't have a problem with people using guns.
Repent Amarillo is, by itself, doing nothing. What they're doing is setting society up to do something.
Which, as has been pointed out, if people are harrassing each other irrationally, that may be what they're enabling.

[sadhatter]

None at all. My social and cultural circles, including my religious circles, consider the use of sex toys, etc. between me and my significant other to be appropriate, and my significant other always knows when I go to these places and what I'm getting (barring a surprise or two for later ;)).
In fact, you'd cause me more problems showing me going in and out of a comics store that sells RPGs, especially since I actually am going in the store to purchase role-playing material. Like has been pointed out by others with regard to their religious families, I don't make an issue out of playing Dungeons and Dragons to my more conservative circles, and I would rather not have to deal with these groups on this issue -- not because I'm ashamed of it, but because it would cause unnecessary tension
And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.
I still don't think what Repent is doing is wrong, but I certainly understand more now how it's a jerk move.

First read my other post that is about that same thing, the crap cannon reference specifically.

From a scriptural standpoint, its the whole casting the first stone thing, the christian religion hates so many things, for no good reason, that sooner or later your going to be in the crosshairs.

And really man, despite your recent somewhat backstep, it is very hypocritical to support these people ( short of saying , well yeah it is kind of a jerk move.) when you know darn well, that if they were in your city, your picture would be on the net walking out with the book of erotic fantasy, or the complete villian ( i honestly for the life of me cannot remember off the top of my head the real title of the book with all the evil hero stuff. ) and branded as a devil worshiper, regardless of validity.

Your a good guy, but like so many good guys that happen to be christian, you have to be a hypocrite to hold both stances. And when being a good person conflicts with your religion, that should tell you something.

[AvalonXQ]

Might I suggest your own words as an explanation why you think so?

Nope. I think there are a lot of things that are wrong but should be allowed to occur in private. Heck, I think you should be able to get away with breaking the law, flat-out, if nobody can prove it -- I feel that strongly about Fourth Amendment protections.
So, no -- legal rights and morality are not the same to me, and I don't draw the line in the same place.

[Philosaur]

None at all. My social and cultural circles, including my religious circles, consider the use of sex toys, etc. between me and my significant other to be appropriate, and my significant other always knows when I go to these places and what I'm getting (barring a surprise or two for later ;)).

But that's not the point. What if you were part of a circle that wasn't so accepting? What if you were the host of a children's TV show? You don't think your boss or the network would have a problem? Your particular situation is irrelevant to the fact that it's wrong for busybodies to reveal others' secrets for purposes of harassment.

And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.
I still don't think what Repent is doing is wrong, but I certainly understand more now how it's a jerk move.

Why the equivocation? Why is it only a "jerk move" but not wrong? do you mean it's socially wrong but not morally wrong? Morally wrong but not illegal?

If it's not wrong, is it right? Is it a Christian way to behave? What happened to "judge not, lest ye be judged"? Or are they just willing to take one for the team, because the wrong they commit is "less wrong" than the one they curtail through harrassment?

[AvalonXQ]

First read my other post that is about that same thing, the crap cannon reference specifically.

From a scriptural standpoint, its the whole casting the first stone thing, the christian religion hates so many things, for no good reason, that sooner or later your going to be in the crosshairs.

And really man, despite your recent somewhat backstep, it is very hypocritical to support these people ( short of saying , well yeah it is kind of a jerk move.) when you know darn well, that if they were in your city, your picture would be on the net walking out with the book of erotic fantasy, or the complete villian ( i honestly for the life of me cannot remember off the top of my head the real title of the book with all the evil hero stuff.)

You're thinking of the Book of Vile Darkness.
Ironically it was never intended to be used by PCs, which is why so much of what's in it is actually overpowered. I don't own or use BoED or BoVD in my games.
... but, since the BoVD came up, here's an interesting story. I encountered it in a used book store about a year ago along with other RP books -- no wrapper or warning on it. I took it up to the cashier and told her that the book usually carries a "mature content" warning because of some of the more gruesome sections on torture, etc.

[sadhatter]

The interesting thing here is that what they are doing has zero effect unless christianitysociety agrees with them.
.

What is the percentage of Christians in America, at least, what 70 per cent being conservative?

Let's be nice and say only half have a problem with that, so now you are dealing with 35 per cent of a city that is going to look down their noses at you. That is a pretty high number man.

And you said it yourself, its not shame, it is the needless conflict. But i guess that only applies if it is something you like that is being crapped on.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in that? You say yourself your only worried about the adverse reactions of your social circle, what does that make up in your city, maybe, maybe 5 per cent? ( being very very generous.) Imagine about 7 times that many people at least giving you a crappy look as you walk down the street.

But , heck as long as the crap cannon isn't aimed at you, who gives a rip right?

[joobz]

Nope. I think there are a lot of things that are wrong but should be allowed to occur in private. Heck, I think you should be able to get away with breaking the law, flat-out, if nobody can prove it -- I feel that strongly about Fourth Amendment protections.
So, no -- legal rights and morality are not the same to me, and I don't draw the line in the same place.

Then by what moral distinction allowed you to come to this conclusion?
In fact, you'd cause me more problems showing me going in and out of a comics store that sells RPGs, especially since I actually am going in the store to purchase role-playing material....And, since I myself am in that position, SC's description made sense, and I concede the point.

Why are you hiding your behavior? Perhaps it should be exposed?

Why are you allowed to make the claim that your hiding is acceptable but swingers are unacceptable?

How clean are you when you are done using the bathroom?

[sadhatter]

You're thinking of the Book of Vile Darkness.
Ironically it was never intended to be used by PCs, which is why so much of what's in it is actually overpowered. I don't own or use BoED or BoVD in my games.
... but, since the BoVD came up, here's an interesting story. I encountered it in a used book store about a year ago along with other RP books -- no wrapper or warning on it. I took it up to the cashier and told her that the book usually carries a "mature content" warning because of some of the more gruesome sections on torture, etc.

You know i think i know what your talking about ( i cannot believe that i didn't remember the name, i remember getting the prick the day it came out.) the original copies didn't have the sticker , and obviously that pissed a lot of people off. And i mean with good cause, though i havn't met a player under 19, i could see why someone would want to shelter their kid from some of the stuff in there.

And everything in there with the exception of the willing deformity stuff and some of the items are way too powerful, i actually remade my character after taking levels of disciple of dispater, because he was just unplayably good.

[Philosaur]

be allowed to occur in private

If someone's trying to out you to your boss, are these activities being allowed to occur in private?

Fourth Amendment protections.

So the spirit of these protections should only apply when it comes to law enforcement officials?

[bookitty]

Avalon, I'm curious about something. It's a bit easier to take excuse the Army of Gods actions against swingers' clubs. (It's dirty, dirty sex and America can be puritanical.) But would you still defend them if they were focusing on a Buddhist church?

[AvalonXQ]

Avalon, I'm curious about something. It's a bit easier to take excuse the Army of Gods actions against swingers' clubs. (It's dirty, dirty sex and America can be puritanical.) But would you still defend them if they were focusing on a Buddhist church?
To the extent that I'm defending them at all (and I think I've made clear that I'm not, really), I would say the same justification works if they're staking out a Buddhist church, a sex club, a McDonald's, or wherever. I would just expect that Buddhists probably aren't worried about justifying it to people -- it's not as though Buddhism carries a stigma like sex shops do.

[sadhatter]

To the extent that I'm defending them at all (and I think I've made clear that I'm not, really), I would say the same justification works if they're staking out a Buddhist church, a sex club, a McDonald's, or wherever. I would just expect that Buddhists probably aren't worried about justifying it to people -- it's not as though Buddhism carries a stigma like sex shops do.

But what if they do what they are doing and just putting crap like " pagan rituals preformed here." for the buddhists, these people arn't worried about truth. Just how bad they can paint people. And i must reiterate, they have not taken pictures of anyone doing anything, they have cars and people walking in the door of some place. Then they fling crap, and hope it sticks. So what is preventing them from saying " this buddist temple is actually sacrificing children." or something of the like? It is easy to rile up hatred when you know how.

[Elizabeth I]

I do. I think the correct statement would be: "No action done between consenting adults is the government's business."

And who would you suggest as the (non-governmental) morality police? Do you see how allowing this to happen to one group leaves all groups vulnerable to persecution?

[AvalonXQ]

And who would you suggest as the (non-governmental) morality police?

Everyone gets to be the non-governmental morality police. Everyone gets to give their opinion on morality, to spread it publically, and to do what they want within the law to shame institutions and individuals they disagree with.

[drkitten]

The interesting thing here is that what they are doing has zero effect unless society agrees with them.
You're not going to get any flack from being in a swingers' club unless people have problems with swingers' clubs. It wouldn't mean a thing if a bunch of Amarillo liberals set up a similar operation in front of a gun club, because people in Amarillo don't have a problem with people using guns.

Except this isn't true. "Society at large" doesn't need to have a problem with something in order for any one individual to have a problem with it. And if that one individual is in a position of power, we've got issues.

If I decide, for example, that none of my employees should be permitted to handle guns, then it doesn't matter whether my business is in Amarillo or Worcester, MA. It can still cause problems for my employees if some busybody decides to tattle on them to me.

Why is it any of that busybody's business in the first place?

[AvalonXQ]

Except this isn't true. "Society at large" doesn't need to have a problem with something in order for any one individual to have a problem with it. And if that one individual is in a position of power, we've got issues.

Right, and that's where the problem really lies -- with people in positions of power doing things they're not supposed to.
It's not the publicizing of this information that's actually the issue; it's others doing something with the information that we think is harmful.

[sadhatter]

Everyone gets to be the non-governmental morality police. Everyone gets to give their opinion on morality, to spread it publically, and to do what they want within the law to shame institutions and individuals they disagree with.

Okay, done using kid gloves.

What kind of malignant a-hole wants to shame others? If this is something someone wants to do they are pathetic.

I hate child molesters but i don't want to shame them. Punish, yes, that is why we have law, but not shame. The is petty , ugly and low.

[AvalonXQ]

Okay, done using kid gloves.

Is this code for "done being civil in this discussion"?
If so, I'd recommend leaving until you can be civil again.

[sadhatter]

Right, and that's where the problem really lies -- with people in positions of power doing things they're not supposed to.
It's not the publicizing of this information that's actually the issue; it's others doing something with the information that we think is harmful.

Like busybodies who think that a magic man gives them the right to go snooping around people, because they live in a part of the world where this crap in the name of their specific magic man, flies.

Do you think any non christian boss is firing or demoting people because they go to a strip club?

No they are using christian ignorance, to promote other christians to take actions against non christians, or christians they don't agree with.

This is the classic example of a bully bullying people because he can and he has friends to back him.

[sadhatter]

Is this code for "done being civil in this discussion"?
If so, I'd recommend leaving until you can be civil again.

Why not reply to my point instead of getting offended?

If my posts violate civility, report them.

What my statement means is that i am not going to sit here and lob you softballs, instead i am going to, in black and white state the case against these idiots like the statement i made in that post that you ignored.

[ponderingturtle]

You make a very good point, SC. Where people treat others badly for bad reasons, secrecy makes sense and destroying secrecy may be enabling harrassment.

You have been all for the harassment of these people by these Christians up till now though. Why is harassment a bad thing now?

[ponderingturtle]

Yes. I don't do any of those things in public.
Anything that I do in public (for example, entering an adult store, which I have done before and will do again) I understand not to be a private event because I'm visible by the public when I do it.

And if it causes you to lose your job, so what?

[drkitten]

Right, and that's where the problem really lies -- with people in positions of power doing things they're not supposed to.
It's not the publicizing of this information that's actually the issue; it's others doing something with the information that we think is harmful.

No, it's the publicizing of this information that's the issue, precisely because that's the one thing that the person concerned can control.

I can control what appears on my Facebook page. I cannot control how others will react once something appears on the page.

Which is why it's a violation of my privacy for other people to publish information about me without my consent.

[drkitten]

Is this code for "done being civil in this discussion"?
If so, I'd recommend leaving until you can be civil again.

I'd recommend instead responding to his concerns. If you feel he's being uncivil, report him.

But ignoring his pointed questions just makes you look less credible.

[ponderingturtle]

The interesting thing here is that what they are doing has zero effect unless society agrees with them.
You're not going to get any flack from being in a swingers' club unless people have problems with swingers' clubs. It wouldn't mean a thing if a bunch of Amarillo liberals set up a similar operation in front of a gun club, because people in Amarillo don't have a problem with people using guns.
Repent Amarillo is, by itself, doing nothing. What they're doing is setting society up to do something.
Which, as has been pointed out, if people are harrassing each other irrationally, that may be what they're enabling.

Why would you tell someones employer what they are doing on their free time to get them fired, and that isn't harassment?

[Roadtoad]

I'd recommend instead responding to his concerns. If you feel he's being uncivil, report him.

But ignoring his pointed questions just makes you look less credible.

Avalon lost credibility when he tried to defend what Raven Ministries is doing.

[ponderingturtle]

And who would you suggest as the (non-governmental) morality police? Do you see how allowing this to happen to one group leaves all groups vulnerable to persecution?

It works so well for the Saudi's.

[ponderingturtle]

Right, and that's where the problem really lies -- with people in positions of power doing things they're not supposed to.
It's not the publicizing of this information that's actually the issue; it's others doing something with the information that we think is harmful.

And you don't think that these people don't have the goal and hope that their targets have someone as bigoted as they are in some position to mess up their lives?

[fullflavormenthol]

Why would you tell someones employer what they are doing on their free time to get them fired, and that isn't harassment?
Exactly. I would also imagine it can be harassment of the employer as well if 1.) they don't care if an employee is a swinger or 2.) just really doesn't want to know if their employee is a swinger.

I also think that an element being over looked is an intimidation factor in a group of thugs following a person around and yelling because they are gay, a swinger or a Muslim. That and the Army of God is a group known to support demostic-terrorism, and the people of this country deserve a level of protection from AoG and it's associated groups.

[sadhatter]

Avalon lost credibility when he tried to defend what Raven Ministries is doing.

And i mean i hate to appeal to the crowd, but does it seem likely i am going to offer pointed yet rational discussion for X number of months. Then use this as an opportunity to implement my evil plan of swearing and being uncivil.

and i would have gotten away with it too.........

[sadhatter]

I have to add something here about these tools picking on people who won't pose them a threat.

I have known a good many bikers over my life, and they tend to get rather.....free with the love, now i am sure there is a few biker bars around there that are doing all kinds of things they don't like.

Don't notice them sitting outside " Sid's bikes, beatings and beer" doing this crap.

No, just the people that they can bully.

[joobz]

And i mean i hate to appeal to the crowd, but does it seem likely i am going to offer pointed yet rational discussion for X number of months. Then use this as an opportunity to implement my evil plan of swearing and being uncivil.

and i would have gotten away with it too.........
You are not in the wrong.

Avalon has clearly avoided addressing questions that directly expose the double standard he is promoting.

Why is his hiding his RPG obsession acceptable but hiding swinging not?



I asked my restroom questions as a means of exposing his dishonesty. Clearly he has refused to answer this private question. What does that say about his argument?

[Roadtoad]

I have to add something here about these tools picking on people who won't pose them a threat.

I have known a good many bikers over my life, and they tend to get rather.....free with the love, now i am sure there is a few biker bars around there that are doing all kinds of things they don't like.

Don't notice them sitting outside " Sid's bikes, beatings and beer" doing this crap.

No, just the people that they can bully.

I should have mentioned this. Glad you did. Funny how these guys go after folks that can't really fight back, ain't it?

I picture the dialogue outside Sid's like this:

RM: "Brother, you're going inside there to sin. What's you're name...?"

Biker: "Spider. This is my little friend..."

RM: "Brother, we'd like to pray for you..."

Biker: "SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND...!"

[Ladewig]

AvalonXQ, the Repent Amarillo website claims that the motivation of all this activity is convert people to Christianity. My third question for you is do you believe that following people, tracing their license plates to learn their identities, and then reporting their private activities to their employers is a useful way of bringing people to Christ.
__________________

[sadhatter]

I should have mentioned this. Glad you did. Funny how these guys go after folks that can't really fight back, ain't it?

I picture the dialogue outside Sid's like this:

RM: "Brother, you're going inside there to sin. What's you're name...?"

Biker: "Spider. This is my little friend..."

RM: "Brother, we'd like to pray for you..."

Biker: "SAY HELLO TO MY LITTLE FRIEND...!"

You know if the guys from glen gary glen ross were there....

RM " brother what is your name?"

Al pacino " my name , you want to know my name . **** you , thats my name"

( gotta say, that one was all for the humor, lol......though as i write this i realize they were both al pacino quotes, completely non intention, but hilarious.)

[sadhatter]

You are not in the wrong.

Avalon has clearly avoided addressing questions that directly expose the double standard he is promoting.

Why is his hiding his RPG obsession acceptable but hiding swinging not?



I asked my restroom questions as a means of exposing his dishonesty. Clearly he has refused to answer this private question. What does that say about his argument?

The sad thing, is as a fundamentalist for quite some time i understand it. If there is something you do that the church dosn't like, well they are just being old fashioned or nitpicky. But if you don't like it, then they are in the right.

One of the main things that showed me that christianity, is not the joining force it claims to be.

[Roadtoad]

I see Avalon hasn't replied to this. I'm hoping he will.

[sadhatter]

I see Avalon hasn't replied to this. I'm hoping he will.

Me too, i am fond of this thread for some reason. I think it is because it is a subject that should appall anyone , like the phelps but slightly less evil. But one of the nicer christians is defending it.

It is a mind boggler that's for sure.

[Manopolus]

Here's where I'd find such tattling justified:

If I found the leader of this group in a strip bar, enjoying a lap dance, took his picture and published it.

(added) The point? Those that are "outed" probably didn't condemn anyone else for doing the things that they, themselves do -- at least, we have nothing suggesting that they do. Only hypocrites deserve to be outed in this manner... and highly public hypocrites with authority, at that.

[Roadtoad]

Here's where I'd find such tattling justified:

If I found the leader of this group in a strip bar, enjoying a lap dance, took his picture and published it.

(added) The point? Those that are "outed" probably didn't condemn anyone else for doing the things that they, themselves do -- at least, we have nothing suggesting that they do. Only hypocrites deserve to be outed in this manner... and highly public hypocrites with authority, at that.

Like it really slowed Jimmy Swaggart down.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Sounds like a bunch of dangerous people. Akin to the Aryan Nation maybe.

[fullflavormenthol]

Sounds like a bunch of dangerous people. Akin to the Aryan Nation maybe.
Well on their website they link directly to the Army of God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_God_(USA)), which is a domestic terrorist group.

[tsig]

My old church in El Paso did. Many UU churches have Pagan or Wicca (note: NOT witch) groups affiliated with them, because UU churches are some of the few places that welcome their views on religion. Not necessarily to the point of preaching it (if what we do can really be called preaching) mind you, but it's done. I attended a Solstice celebration once; it was very calming and peaceful.

Thanks for the info.

[tsig]

The interesting thing here is that what they are doing has zero effect unless society agrees with them.
You're not going to get any flack from being in a swingers' club unless people have problems with swingers' clubs. It wouldn't mean a thing if a bunch of Amarillo liberals set up a similar operation in front of a gun club, because people in Amarillo don't have a problem with people using guns.
Repent Amarillo is, by itself, doing nothing. What they're doing is setting society up to do something.
Which, as has been pointed out, if people are harrassing each other irrationally, that may be what they're enabling.

The Jihad Amarillo has it's eyes on you.

[tsig]

I see Avalon hasn't replied to this. I'm hoping he will.

He's all wind and no sail.

[ponderingturtle]

I see Avalon hasn't replied to this. I'm hoping he will.

Maybe his employer found out he played RPG's and he got fired. But they got those satanic things out of their work place.

[Accidental Martyr]

I see Avalon hasn't replied to this. I'm hoping he will.

From what I've seen, (obviously, I haven't been here that long) he shows up and throws a bunch of stuff around and then when the questions and challenges get too tough, he disappears.

[sadhatter]

From what I've seen, (obviously, I haven't been here that long) he shows up and throws a bunch of stuff around and then when the questions and challenges get too tough, he disappears.

Yeah that is one thing about debating a biblical literalist, sure they want to come in here to waste a couple of hours, but really they consider it a bigger win when they can ignore anything we put and just have faith.

Which , obviously is an honest completely valid debating technique.

[Sabrina]

The Jihad Amarillo has it's eyes on you.

The Unitarian Jihad (http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-04-08/entertainment/17367067_1_god-unitarian-jihad-serenity)will beat them. ;)

-Sister Machine Gun of Warm Humanitarianism

[tsig]

From what I've seen, (obviously, I haven't been here that long) he shows up and throws a bunch of stuff around and then when the questions and challenges get too tough, he disappears.

Or puts you on ignore. The forum equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ear.

[tsig]

The Unitarian Jihad (http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-04-08/entertainment/17367067_1_god-unitarian-jihad-serenity)will beat them. ;)

-Sister Machine Gun of Warm Humanitarianism

Those losers! They couldn't vote their way out of a paper bag. .

-Brother Explosive Belt of Happiness.

[Roadtoad]

Anything more on this crowd of mental defectives?

[sadhatter]

Anything more on this crowd of mental defectives?

No i have been stalking the page to see if avalon would come back, but he wisely left the thread alone.

[Dragonrock]

In the next 20 years or so I predict that the USA is gonna go through a psuedo-revolution. Christians are gonna start physically fighting back much more openly and violently than they are now. The question is gonna be, are the regular people gonna fight them or hide their heads under a blanket?

I also think the groups like this are gonna make Texas a home base for the killing.

[Polaris]

You know if the guys from glen gary glen ross were there....

RM " brother what is your name?"

Al pacino " my name , you want to know my name . **** you , thats my name"

( gotta say, that one was all for the humor, lol......though as i write this i realize they were both al pacino quotes, completely non intention, but hilarious.)

Actually "**** you, that's my name" is an Alec Baldwin quote (if you really want to get technical it's a David Mamet quote), so never fear!

[mikeyx]

Who are they to hold me accountable for anything? By christian theology, god is the judge, and if he exists, he is the one that will hold me accountable in the afterlife, not these ignorant fools who think that they are helping an omnipotent being. Which in my opinion is the height of narcissism.

judge not others lest YE be judged, punk...............

[Polaris]

judge not others lest YE be judged, punk...............

Isn't it amazing how vociferously the fundies insist on everybody following the 10 commandmants from the Old goddamn Testament, but the "love thy neighbor" and "judge not" portions of their (supposed) guy's book are suggestions to be kicked ASAP through the uprights?

[Tony]

These types of people reinforce by belief that it is folly for liberals to give right-wingers a monopoly on the issue of gun rights.

[Dragonrock]

These types of people reinforce by belief that it is folly for liberals to give right-wingers a monopoly on the issue of gun rights.

Nice thought, but I suspect that most liberals are actually against the right if individuals to own guns. Not all, mind you, but most. Just like not all conservatives are christians or straight (or at least anti-gay), but most are.

[Darth Rotor]

No, it's the publicizing of this information that's the issue, precisely because that's the one thing that the person concerned can control.

I can control what appears on my Facebook page. I cannot control how others will react once something appears on the page.

Which is why it's a violation of my privacy for other people to publish information about me without my consent.
drkitten, from that last comment, you seem to implay that Newspapers are continually committing violations of privacy.

What do you intend to do about it?

DR

[Darth Rotor]

AvalonXQ, the Repent Amarillo website claims that the motivation of all this activity is convert people to Christianity. My third question for you is do you believe that following people, tracing their license plates to learn their identities, and then reporting their private activities to their employers is a useful way of bringing people to Christ.
__________________
I am a Christian, and I don't. I think what you describe is a form of harassment. I don't know if it is legal or not. I would hope that it is illegal.

The early American settlements had the usual group of busybodies who wanted to get into everyone else's business. In time, people like Roger Williams moved away, in part due to how annoying it is to live in such a community.

The internet has allowed the habit to resurface. Given that the internet is also one of the best ways to spread porn, it seems that a funny sort of karmic balance has been struck, but here is the most amusing part:

Orwell may not have gotten it quite right. It might be that Big Brother isn't anywhere near the threat to our privacy that our fellow citizens are, now that the electronic age has morphed into the information age.

If you want to study up on serious fun and games, research your own local news over the past few years on the usual zoning battles when someone goes after a strip club, or tries to get one shut down that is already open, by a zoning variance/change. What these people in Amarillo are doing appears to be similar to that sort of social conflict.

On a very amusing note, when I lived in Connecticut, over a decade ago, there was a huge kerfluffle in a town near New Haven about a Hooters restaurant (franchise) being opened on US Rte 1. The people objecting to this burger and bear and babes in tight t-shirts joint were behaing as though it were a strip club. I'll see if I can find an old news story on it, it was hilarious at the time, unless you were the guy trying to open the franchise.

ETA: Milford CT. Apparently, despite all of the hand wringing, the Hooters opened.

DR

[Polaris]

I am a Christian, and I don't. I think what you describe is a form of harassment. I don't know if it is legal or not. I would hope that it is illegal.

The early American settlements had the usual group of busybodies who wanted to get into everyone else's business. In time, people like Roger Williams moved away, in part due to how annoying it is to live in such a community.

The internet has allowed the habit to resurface. Given that the internet is also one of the best ways to spread porn, it seems that a funny sort of karmic balance has been struck, but here is the most amusing part:

Orwell may not have gotten it quite right. It might be that Big Brother isn't anywhere near the threat to our privacy that our fellow citizens are, now that the electronic age has morphed into the information age.

If you want to study up on serious fun and games, research your own local news over the past few years on the usual zoning battles when someone goes after a strip club, or tries to get one shut down that is already open, by a zoning variance/change. What these people in Amarillo are doing appears to be similar to that sort of social conflict.

On a very amusing note, when I lived in Connecticut, over a decade ago, there was a huge kerfluffle in a town near New Haven about a Hooters restaurant (franchise) being opened on US Rte 1. The people objecting to this burger and bear and babes in tight t-shirts joint were behaing as though it were a strip club. I'll see if I can find an old news story on it, it was hilarious at the time, unless you were the guy trying to open the franchise.

ETA: Milford CT. Apparently, despite all of the hand wringing, the Hooters opened.

DR

Hope this isn't too off-topic, but a similar thing happened with a Hooters in south Arlington, TX. A group of bible-thumpers had their liquor license held up for 30 months, so the restaurant simply stayed open and gave the beer away (yes, I partook).

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hooters-taps-into-justice-in-south-arlington-texas-58475182.html

[Darth Rotor]

On a further note in re harassment, which I think this little story is an example of: if you all pay attention to the coming Supreme Court case involving Mr Snyder versus Phred P(rule10)ing Phelps, and if the Court rules in favor of Phred P(rule10)ing Phelps, I predict that harassment of this sort will increase, not decrease.

Be careful of what you wish for, as you may get it.

DR

[CORed]

As an English person I dont know much about American spring breaks. I am picturing kids having a good healthy time. Why do these dullards object?

Well, if your definition of "a good healthy time" includes lots of drinking and sex, you're right. However, I seriously doubt that very many college kids spend their spring break in Amarillo (it's in a dry prairie region). However, some may pass through on their way to Corpus Christi and other Gulf coast beach towns.

[Polaris]

On a further note in re harassment, which I think this little story is an example of: if you all pay attention to the coming Supreme Court case involving Mr Snyder versus Phred P(rule10)ing Phelps, and if the Court rules in favor of Phred P(rule10)ing Phelps, I predict that harassment of this sort will increase, not decrease.

Be careful of what you wish for, as you may get it.

DR

I predict some Bull Aldrin-style responses to this sort of harrassment, legal or not. It's a shame it would have to come to that, but perhaps someone really getting their neck broken for pulling this BS is necessary for them to think twice.

[Roadtoad]

IVRtn2Ljcts&NR