Tech, politics, sports, and the overuse of ellipses...

Oooooo ourage of outrages!

Here’s the Thomas More Center’s press release, which notes that there was trouble at last year’s Dearborn Arab festival too. Evidently the cops were worried that the presence of Christian lit at a mostly Muslim event might produce some “excitement,” so they solved the problem by punishing the party that tried to peacefully exercise its rights. Note to the defendants: Don’t forget to ask for damages. A lot of damages.

The hysteria in the comments is quite funny. Sometimes when you try to IRL troll, you get the IRL banhammer.....

In reality: the cops did it to prevent trouble, any charges will most likely be dropped. From the perspective of the cops---what do you want on your report at the end of the night? "Arrested religious crazy" or "Broke up holy war during street fair".

This is, of course, Pride Weekend here in Chicago. The wife and I take the baby because it's a great family event loaded with the kind of inclusiveness that hardened Christians purport to represent. Attendance these days 'officially' approaches a half a million, but that's counting the parade only, and I don't think anybody argues with the idea that the whole of the pride event having a million attendees.

One of the things that can be counted on year after year, are white panel vans from the suburbs rolling in with their packs of derranged Jesus loons to 'protest'. A great source of pride amongst Chicagoans is our neighborhood system, and the LGBT community is largely recognized as a neighborhood owner. That is to say, much like the Irish or the Italians or the Polish - they have their own area, their own culture, their own resturants, and their own parties. The jeebus types are largely from South of the Mason Dixon (or something---who cares---somewhere that's not here) and don't really have a great understanding of exactly what life is the big city is (they are, after all---just country mice). So in effect, these Fred Phelps wannabes are doing an ever so hilarious reenactment of the first few moments of the famed Harlem sandwich board scene from Die Hard - really only making total fools of themselves. Thankfully, the Chicago Police sit on top of these people to preclude them from getting violent. Really it's quite sad that the event has to be tainted with police presence due to these urban foreigners.


Comments (Page 3)
6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last
on Jun 28, 2010

been years since i spent any time in chicago; is that neighborhood's geographical location centered at the near northside intersection of queerborn and perversion?

Yes.  Right next to Wrigley Field.  FWIW, it's not a bad neighborhood if you can deal with the Cubs fans and the Cubs fans related tourists. 

My take is, even if they didn't have a permit, arresting them is over the top, roughly akin to arresting someone for jaywalking.

I think that was their point. 

 

YOu have to worry about that.

No.  I don't.  Because your analogy is an unrealistic fantasy. 

 

Proving it in court is another matter and none will be.

Like I said:  the charges will be dropped.  It's an excuse to bounce out the trouble makers. 

ahhhhhh so this is the crux of the whole matter eh? You're just anti-Christian. Why not just come out and admit it?

Yes.  As a life long Roman Catholic, I am clearly anti-christian. 

 

 

Well your believing I'm a loon just because I believe in the God of the bible can be turned into a double sided argument.

No.  I believe you're a loon because you publicly admit to believing that there is a 'day of judgement' coming. Those sort of fatalist fantasies indicates that a person is derranged, just like the piss covered drunks who hold up the 'repent now' signs off the expressway. Most of society has moved on from such pap.  As a Roman catholic, I have long put to bed such fables.  The only people who have not, are those that are either too stupid to know any better or those that enjoy too much masturbating to the idea of the world ending. 

 

 

 

on Jun 28, 2010

i lived from age 8 to 15 one suburb away from dearborn and then near downtown detroit from age 18 to nearly 23.  years before i was born and some years after i left the area for good, one orville hubbard presided as mayor of dear ol dearborn. he managed to win a total of 15 consecutive terms--1942 thru 1978--by promising to "keep dearborn clean" (by "clean"  he meant keeping it all white).  

he pretty much succeeded in that endeavor for all those years thanks in no small part to his dearborn police department, members of which made detroit's elite jackbooted  tactical mobile unit look good by comparison (by jackbooted, i mean even exactly that--even though they drove patrol cars, their uniform included knee high boots into which they tucked their trouser legs)  it was dearborn pd who enforced that enlightened municipality's 'don't let the sun set on you here' code that continues to resonate seeing as how a whopping 1.3% of its current residents are black  .

so i find myself really torn here having to argue that yes, dearborn--just like every other city since the birth of our republic--is permitted to enact reasonable and constitutionally compliant local statutes defining and prohibiting disorderly conduct.  as they were prowling my old neighborhood with weapons ready and badge numbers concealed, i never dreamed i'd one day find myself agreeing dearborn's law enforcement personnel are empowered to enforce said statutes.  members of an organization who willfully refuse to comply with such city ordinances stipulating times, locations and acceptable conduct for all similar organizations as a condition of receiving approval to participate in public events put themselves in jeopardy of being cited or taken into custody for (this will apparently come as quite a surprise to some of yall, so please sit down and take a breath before reading on)  conducting themselves in a disorderly manner.

with apologies to my homie, bob seeger, it happens out in vegas and it happens in moline, on the blue blood streets of boston, up in berkeley and out in queens.  it went on yesterday and it's goin on tonite, somewhere someone's actin out and claimin it's their right.

ironically  none of this woulda happened if hubbard had not so badly failed his former constituency in one crucial aspect.  despite his claims to the contrary ("i'm not a racist, i just hate those black bastards') hubbard was, in fact, an equal opportunity segregationist committed to keeping his city free of not only blacks but virtually all middle eastern peoples from jews to arabs and beyond ('syrians are even worse than...').

on Jun 28, 2010

No. I don't. Because your analogy is an unrealistic fantasy.

Famous last words.  I am sure the Jews thought that as well in 1933.

on Jun 28, 2010

both groups are known world wide for their bloodlust

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHEk_kaXmTk

on Jun 28, 2010

Dan_1 posts:

As a life long Roman Catholic, I am clearly anti-christian.

Saying you are both shows confusion on your part. One can't be Catholic and anti-Christian at the same time. There is no such thing....It's impossible.  It would be correct had you said, As an apostasized Catholic, I am clearly anti-Christian.  

that there is a 'day of judgement' coming. Those sort of fatalist fantasies indicates that a person is derranged, ....Most of society has moved on from such pap. As a Roman catholic, I have long put to bed such fables.

That Almighty God will judge each one of us is Scriptural truth and taught by the Catholic Church. Read the Apostles' Creed.

Again, you are speaking here not as Catholic but rather as an apostasized Catholic who denies the Faith.    

"Man's love of truth is such that when he loves something which is not truth, he pretends to himself that what he loves is the truth, and becasue he hates to be proved wrong, he will not allow himself to be convinced that he is deceiving himself."  Saint Augustine, Confessions.

on Jun 28, 2010

Leauki


both groups are known world wide for their bloodlust



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHEk_kaXmTk

That movie had some great lines.  I loved that part where Malone was squirming to distance himself from O'Connel.

 

on Jun 28, 2010

As a life long Roman Catholic, I am clearly anti-christian.

Saying you are both shows confusion on your part.

can't think of a better example of how and why literal interpretation of the written word is so fraught with potential for failure. 

zeal blinded you to his irony.   

 

on Jun 28, 2010

his irony.

Oh that it were only irony!

 

on Jun 28, 2010

The fact that you are incapable of understanding written sarcasm concerns me lula

on Jun 28, 2010

Come on people this is just another Dan_l "Crazies, wackos, and idiots did this and got that....but I'm impartial so whatever" blog. I found it quite amazing and hardly serious.

on Jun 28, 2010

Famous last words. I am sure the Jews thought that as well in 1933.

Yes.  Because troublemakers getting arrested for..well...making trouble will clearly lead to me getting arrested because my daughter cries in a park followed by us all being rounded up and gold starred Obama who is the modern incarnation of hitler. 

 

Saying you are both shows confusion on your part. One can't be Catholic and anti-Christian at the same time.

You fail at the detection of sarcasm.  And at life.   It is a miracle that you have not yet ingested fatal quantities of used kitty litter. 

 

The fact that you are incapable of understanding written sarcasm concerns me lula

Ain't it the truth?

 

King: Whereabouts are you now?  I'm not going to like stalk you or anything, it's just a point of curiosity. 

 

 

 

 

 

on Jun 29, 2010

Whereabouts are you now? I'm not going to like stalk you or anything, it's just a point of curiosity.

pleasantly shrouded with fog in the least los angeles part of la. 

on Jun 29, 2010

Yes. Because troublemakers getting arrested for..well...making trouble will clearly lead to me getting arrested because my daughter cries in a park followed by us all being rounded up and gold starred Obama who is the modern incarnation of hitler.

You are being especially obtuse.  They were practicing their rights.  One which you happen at this point in time to disagree with, which your disagreement is your right.  Your disagreement turned into action is a violation of their rights.

So for expediency, you have abrogated rights for safety, the same thing that Germans did in 1933.  In 1933, Hitler did not say he was coming after the Jews.  That came later.  One brick at a time.  You just sold your freedom for safety.  Trouble is, the man in power might like you now, but the next guy may not.  After all, look at Russia.  one thing was certain, when a leader died, if you were his friend, you either grabbed power or got out.  So it is with your rights.  You lost them when you decided it was better to stop a bunch of christians from passing out literature because some hot heads might take it the wrong way.

That is why I like reading you.  It is an educational experience in how America will lose its freedoms, one right at a time.  And all for the sake of "safety".

on Jun 29, 2010

lulapilgrim


"Man's love of truth is such that when he loves something which is not truth, he pretends to himself that what he loves is the truth, and becasue he hates to be proved wrong, he will not allow himself to be convinced that he is deceiving himself."  Saint Augustine, Confessions.

Time blow the dust of my copy.

 

Peace,

Eric.

on Jun 29, 2010

DG: 

These guys aren't the jews.  The Dearborn police aren't the gestapo.  Obama is not Hitler. 

 

America will lose its freedoms, one right at a time.

Be honest:  do you really believe that? Or is this a bit?

6 Pages1 2 3 4 5  Last