RNWForum.com > RomeNewswire.com Forums > Politics > TRAITORS: Public officials/"Americans" who do not put our land & people FIRST |
RNWForum.com > RomeNewswire.com Forums > Politics > TRAITORS: Public officials/"Americans" who do not put our land & people FIRST |
| Hello and Welcome to the RomeNewswire.com Forum! You are currently logged in as a guest. We welcome you to register and join the conversation! |
| Moderated by: RomeNewswire | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
serpentfoot
|
Among the worst of traitors must be: Public officials and V.A. Hospital and V.A. Clinic personel who do not treat, or do not treat well--do not help-- America's defenders, but put our veterans down like dogs left to die or to be put down at animal control centers.  For several years now I have been troubled by solicitation letters from "PARALIZED VETERANS OF AMERICA" (?) and other such veterans organizations. Why do these people who put their lives on the line to save and protect our nation, why do they have to beg for help???????????????????   I wondered if those solicitations were a scam. (I am on limited income myself, just social security. I want to help the needy when I can, but I can't afford to be scammed by persons as well off or better off than I am.) Surely, I thought, the American government must support those veterans so ready to sacrifice their all for us! And all these public officials, so quick to be seen praying, giving thanks, and pledging their allegiance to our flag (even if that "one nation..." under the God they are praying to is the God of ISRAEL-- surely they are just not thinking but really mean the flag they are looking at) or are they totally mindless or just liars that care only for themselves and to put on a good show for all those Judeo-Christian voters--not caring what the consequences are for our nation, or for the veterans who laid their lives on the lines for us? SURELY DISABLED VETERANS GET SUPPORT FROM THE GOVERNMENT THEY SUPPORTED WITH ALL THEIR LIVES AND STRENGTH? SURELY DISABLED VETS DO NOT HAVE TO BEG FOR CHARITY? But this year I found out: IT IS TRUE. Our vets are betrayed: A Viet Nam Era veteran I know, had turned to drink and had Hepatitus C; he had lost his spleen too in an accident; he has anger and depression problems from too many blows on the head; he had a hernia and too much fluid in his pot belly. He had trouble urinating too and he was in such bad shape that he found it easier not to drink. (and has been quit nearly a year now.) He applied for VA. benefits but when they told him it would probably take several months, he went ahead and applied for SSI. He got that and the VA approval about the same time. But the VA said he was in no condition to have his hernia operated on. FORTUNATELY HE HAD THE MEDICARE and a private doctor using his Medicare got rid of the fluid and did a fine operation on his hernia. Then the private practice doctor using Medicare started treating the Vet's Hepatitus C. Then his Medicare was cancelled because he was entitled to get treated at the V.A. (But Medicare said he could get back onto Medicare next year???) But now the V.A. refuses to continue his Hepatitus C treatments--they say it is too dangerous and that he is not up to the treatments--SO THEY ARE JUST GOING TO LET HIM DIE??? The Vet went back to the nice private practice doctor who had been doing his treatments on the Medicare (before it was cut out due to V.A. "coverage"?) The private doctor agreed to treat the Vet again and to get the Interferon drugs he needed from a private firm--BUT THEY NEEDED A LETTER FROM THE V.A. stating that the V. A. will not treat the Vet. SURELY THE V.A. MUST BE ASHAMED TO PUT IT IN WRITING BUT OTHERS WILL NOT TREAT HIM UNTIL THE V.A. SIGNS OFF. LET THEM AT LEAST BE HONEST. If necessary I will see if I can help the fellow take them to court to get an answer. Unfortunately he could die for lack of treatment before that is resolved, and I bet he would be afraid to be treated by them if they changed their minds and agreed to treat him to avoid admitting the truth in writing: That they are ready to let him die?!! To date the V.A. will not even give him a letter showing they refuse to treat him. (And he has only a 2 week supply of the medication left.) His treatment will be disrupted and we are not sure how much damage that disruption or interruption or total stopping of the treatment will do--if the V.A. continues to delay or refuse to give him the letter that the private doctor needs to start back with his treatments. It seems the V. A. will just let the Vet die of neglect. In the meantime, he--like some other Vets who have committed suicide out of depression and hopelessness, is suffering unnecessary emotional stress that makes the physical conditions worse. THAT VET WOULD BE MUCH BETTER OFF IF HE DID NOT EVEN QUALIFY FOR V.A. BENEFITS, but had SSI with Medicare or Medicaid only. If the V.A. Hospital, and V.A. Clinic, and public officials who allow the V. A. to be so incompetent, uncaring, and harmful to our vets, donned enemy uniforms and took guns for a firing squad to execute these American veterans who have done their service and are "no more use", they would not be more traitor than they are now, letting our veterans die from neglect, incompetence, abuse, and from suicide due to depression over their hopelessness. Some of our vets would surely also be among the traffic fatalities just trying to get to a V.A. Clinic or Hospital, like in Atlanta and that awful traffic. Veterans ought to be allowed to get treatment where ever they are and from any physician they like or any ready to treat them. Please see if you can't persuade every public official you can, to be the patriot our vets were and are; to support those who supported our nation, not be the traitor who would put down those veterans who defended America. Last edited on Mon Dec 7th, 2009 08:02 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
|
TheShadow "Born Free… Taxed to De 
|
This is from their web site. About Paralyzed Veterans of America Paralyzed Veterans of America works to maximize the quality of life for its members and all people with SCI/D as a leading advocate for health care, SCI/D research and education, veterans’ benefits and rights, accessibility and the removal of architectural barriers, sports programs, and disability rights. We are the only Congressionally chartered veterans organization dedicated solely to serving the needs of SCI/SCD veterans. Our Mission The Paralyzed Veterans of America, a congressionally chartered veterans service organization founded in 1946, has developed a unique expertise on a wide variety of issues involving the special needs of our members—veterans of the armed forces who have experienced spinal cord injury or dysfunction. Paralyzed Veterans will use that expertise to be the leading advocate for:
edited to add URL Last edited on Mon Dec 7th, 2009 06:02 pm by TheShadow |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
ABOUT TRAITORS: The following web site shows a definition of "traitor" tracing back to "Trader", one who would sell out. That definition is so evident now where too many in congress are ready to bail out big companies on wall street (those most ready to contribute to their political campaigns or finances generally) but care nothing for the health of our nations poor--even those veterans wh laid their lives on the line for our nation. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/traitor Main Entry: trea·son Pronunciation: \ˈtrē-zən\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English tresoun, from Anglo-French traisun, from Latin tradition-, traditio act of handing over, from tradere to hand over, betray — more at traitor Date: 13th century 1 : the betrayal of a trust : treachery 2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family Main Entry: trai·tor Pronunciation: \ˈtrā-tər\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English traytour, from Anglo-French traitre, from Latin traditor, from tradere to hand over, deliver, betray, from trans-, tra- trans- + dare to give — more at date Date: 13th century 1 : one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty 2 : one who commits treason |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
More on Defining TRAITORS: And now here is a link showing where in the U. S. Constitution treason is defined (and other info): (Note: Click on the link only, not the other blue parts--after you click on the link, then you can click on the other blue parts--from the link's web page.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason United States To avoid the abuses of the English law (including executions by Henry VIII of those who criticized his repeated marriages), treason was specifically defined in the United States Constitution, the only crime so defined. Article III Section 3 delineates treason as follows: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted. However, Congress has, at times, passed statutes creating related offenses which undermine the government or the national security, such as sedition in the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts, or espionage and sedition in the 1917 Espionage Act, which do not require the testimony of two witnesses and have a much broader definition than Article Three treason. For example, some well-known spies have been convicted of espionage rather than treason. The Constitution does not itself create the offense; it only restricts the definition (the first paragraph), permits Congress to create the offense, and restricts any punishment for treason to only the convicted (the second paragraph). The crime is prohibited by legislation passed by Congress. Therefore the United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States." The requirement of testimony of two witnesses was inherited from the British Treason Act 1695 (Since 1945, however, this has been abolished in British law and treason cases are now subject to the same rules of evidence and procedure as a murder trial, but the US requirement still stands barring an amendment). In the history of the United States there have been fewer than 40 federal prosecutions for treason and even fewer convictions. Several men were convicted of treason in connection with the 1794 Whiskey Rebellion but were pardoned by President George Washington. One of American history's most notorious traitors, in which his name is considered synonymous with the definition of traitor, is Benedict Arnold. The most famous treason trial, that of Aaron Burr in 1807 (See Burr conspiracy), resulted in acquittal. Politically motivated attempts to convict opponents of the Jeffersonian Embargo Acts and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 all failed. Most states have provisions in their constitutions or statutes similar to those in the U.S. Constitution. There have been only two successful prosecutions for treason on the state level, that of Thomas Dorr in Rhode Island and that of John Brown in Virginia. After the American Civil War, no person involved with the Confederate States of America was tried for treason, though a number of leading Confederates (including Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee) were indicted. Those who had been indicted received a blanket amnesty issued by President Andrew Johnson as he left office in 1869. The Cold War saw frequent associations between treason and support for (or insufficient hostility toward) Communist-backed causes. The most memorable of these came from Senator Joseph McCarthy, who characterized the Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman administrations as "twenty years of treason." McCarthy also investigated various government agencies for Soviet spy rings; however, he acted as a political fact-finder rather than criminal prosecutor. The Cold War period saw few prosecutions for treason. On October 11, 2006, a federal grand jury issued the first indictment for treason against the United States since 1952, charging Adam Yahiye Gadahn for videos in which he spoke supportively of al-Qaeda.[6] |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
The following U. S. Code section is a good and simplified explanation and conclusion of all the above information on treason: United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States." Last edited on Thu Dec 10th, 2009 05:08 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Patriots of this nation must support the U. S. Constitution not violate it as the defendants in my law suit have done. They also violate their oaths of office and pledges of allegiance to our flag when they violate the 1st Amendment to put us under the God of Israel and put Israel first--NOT AMERICA--as our "Holy Land". It's not Palestian homes only they would tear down, but they put America too as secondary--under Israel as their "Holy Land". Treason or giving aid and comfort to our enemies is also done by putting any other nation or people before our own. Last edited on Thu Dec 10th, 2009 05:27 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
At our Rome and Floyd County Commississions meetings (and even the Boards of "Education"--which should know better) they have established Judeo-Christianity as "our" religion, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. Then they end their prayers with a pledge to "one nation under God" (their God of Israel) and they look to Israel --NOT AMERICA--as "our Holy Land". That is in violation of not only the 1st Amendment, and Amendment 14 giving all citizens (of whatever religion or of no religion) the right to equal treatment and not to have some other religion or nation placed over us; and violates their oaths of office to support the U. S. Constitution, this nation, and not insult our flag by holding it secondary to some other nation even as they salute it. Last edited on Fri Dec 11th, 2009 01:36 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
The Veteran's Hospital, in Atlanta, and the Veteran's clinic, in Rome, have still not given the disabled Vet. a letter stating that they refuse to treat him (so that he can get help elsewhere) nor have they supplied him with the medication he needs for the Hepatitus C. They do indeed treat vets as stray dogs and of no concern to them--as if they can take government money for their support but owe nothing to the veterans who put their lives on the line to support our nation. Certainly V.A. personel who do not care well for our vets, are making our enemies feel fine--giving aid and comfort to our enemies, while betraying those vets who defended us. It is sad and fits the definition for treason. Last edited on Sat Dec 12th, 2009 05:57 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Here is something forwarded to me in e-mail: Subject: Fw: Guess which one..... GUESS WHICH ONE.......] Even if you aren't a sports fan this is very interesting! Attached Image (viewed 100 times): Last edited on Sat Dec 12th, 2009 07:36 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator 
|
The VA is a poor excuse for treatment for our vets, I know from experience but I don't want to go into that at the moment. It seems to me that those who do not believe in prayer, want to restrict the rights of those who wish to pray, to church or home. Personally, I don't think prayer ever hurt anyone and it many times has been a comfort to those who chose to pray or have prayer said for them. It no longer seems a matter of separating Church and state, but a matter of not wanting any public display of Christian beliefs anywhere except Church and home. |
|||||||||||
coolhead64
|
Im glad spice posted, give the readers a break from Ann's ranting about various things that make no sense |
|||||||||||
mae0618
|
Spice wrote:
The Constitution says NOTHING about "separating Church and state". Unfortunately I do not think anyone in Congress has READ the Constitution! Obviously the President needs a refresher course too! |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
mae0618 wrote: Spice wrote: The BIG THING the Constitution does is SEPARATE POWERS: I separates the Executive branch of government from the legislative branch, and from the judicial branch--the separation of powers to prevent any part of government from becoming too powerful. I also separates the federal from state and lower division of the states, and in the 9th Amendment states that the people also retain some individual powers and privacy rights not ceded to any branch of government. In our past we were subjected to Popes and other religious leaders who robbed the people and even robbed kings of their rights to govern or be self governed. We owe a lot to that over-sexed King Henry VIII who told the Pope to go to hell that the Pope no longer controlled England. That getting away from religious persecution is surely one of the main reasons out founders took great pains to separate all powers in the several main parts of the U. S. Constitution and why the very first Amendment prohibits Congress from making religion a part of our government, as stated in the "establishment clause" (No establishment of religion): The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion ... You will find that and more on this link: http://www.bing.com/search?q=1st+Amendment&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC Last edited on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 02:54 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice wrote: The VA is a poor excuse for treatment for our vets, I know from experience but I don't want to go into that at the moment. Spice, prayer is talking to--and listening to God--Jesus said "Hide in the closet to pray." (Matthew 6: 5,6) He often went off to himself to pray--in the desert, in the Garden of Gethseminee--who is it that cannot be alone with God? Why does anyone have to find a captive audience to pray in front of? Is the contact not supposed to be between one's self and God? Not praying when you see a crowd or camera. Is their "prayer" not really to communicate with God (? ) but to to evangelize or put on a show for others?? Our Native American ancestors were treated as dogs, wolves, not even human, by our Judeo-Christian ancestors--who also corrupted them with alcohol and other harmful ways, stole their land , and killed many of those who welcomed us here. We cannot undo what is done but we must not continue treating others as less than human because they have different beliefs or different color skins or different ideas or tastes. Thanks for all consideration of others. Last edited on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 03:38 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
Serpentfoot, My statement was intended to point out that many of those who do not practice the Christian faith, want anything pertaining to it, removed from public view. For instance, wishing someone a Merry Christmas is now frowned upon, along with displaying a Christmas tree in a public place. I do not claim to be a Christian, I believe there is a God no matter what name you choose to call him/her, and I believe in the power of prayer. I also believe that if a Christian wishes to celibrate Christmas with a tree and a wish of Merry Christmas, they should not be chastised for it. The point is, those who are not Christian are trying to take away all rights of those who are Christian, just as those who don't smoke are trying to take away all the rights of those who do. |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
Incidentally, if you have read the Bible, Jesus did pray in crowds. He prayed at his Baptism, on the Cross, taught his disciples to pray. He said pray continuously and no one can stay in a closet continuously. There are many contradictions in the Bible, it was written by many different men and just as we don't always agree on everything, they were not infallible and they also disagreed on many points. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice, I have been arrested and sentenced to jail for 5 years (with the option of a suspended sentence if I would leave my home and family) merely because I was not Christian and spoke against Christian Prayers ONLY at government meetings in Rome and Floyd County, and for two occasions when I performed my Honesty Ritual (naked before the God who allegedly made us naked--not hid in sheep's wool). If that had been a Christian ritual I would not have been arrested at these government meetings devoted only to Jesus--in violation of the establishmwent clause of the 1st Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, and the right to equal treatment of law in the 14th Amendment. One and 1/2 months after I was jailed my mother starved to death in a nursing home where I had been visiting her and helping her eat. That would not have happened if our government meetings were not devoted to Jesus or the Judeo-Christian God only in violation of our rights to religious freedom and equal treatment of law--regardless of our religion or other differences. I feel that Judge Larry Salmon, Prosecutor Leigh Patterson, and all those commissioners and others who discriminated against me on the basis of religion are guilty of murdering my mother--but I was their intended victim. Judge Salmon wanted to silence me to cover up the Forum Splost fraud. His attenpt to banish me or else jail me, showed two of the ways he tried to get rid of me. Banishment, from ancient times was seen as the equivalent of the death sentence, to exclude any animal from the herd is to leave it to the wolves (there is some safety in numbers but not much chance alone without help.) Socrates took hemlock rather than leave when he was banished. I resisted the banishment but was ALMOST LYNCHED in the Floyd County Jail--the most CHRISTIAN PLACE I HAVE EVER BEEN! With all those pick pockets, drug addicts and prostitutes dancing up and down, singing, and praying to Jesus! AND IT WAS NOT "JAIL HOUSE RELIGION" --They had grown up on it--didn't need any song or prayer books--it was ingrained in them! Evidently it made them and the rest of our society what it is--with more people jailed than any other large industrial nation. My mother did not survive my being jailed away from her. She would not have died if those fanatics had not convicted me and jailed me due to religious differences. They murdered her while trying to get rid of me. Tortured her to death. She starved only after I was prevented from visiting her for 1 1/2 months. Last edited on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 05:19 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
Serpentfoot, I do not believe you were arrested for speaking out, but for taking your clothes off in a public place. There are laws against that and they have nothing to do with religion. It could have been anyone of any religion and they would have been arrested because there are laws against public nudity. If you want to run around naked, there are nudist camps that allow that. Think about this, your mother may not have died, had you kept your clothes on. Why not accept your responsibility in the situation rather than placing the blame on those who were following the law? There are those who would claim that child molestation is part of their religion but if they are caught, they will still go to jail because there are laws against it. Some of these laws may be based on Biblical law but they are still the laws of man. Just like wearing your seat belt. I believe that your perceived persecution is caused by your own unwillingness to follow those laws. The laws are not just for you, they are for everyone. Even though I may dissagree with a law, I am required to obey it until or unless the law is changed. Frankly, I don't care if they pray at a council meeting or not, it is not going to effect me personally. I do agree with you about prison, there are a great many who become ordained ministers in Prison, it looks better on their record when they come up for parole. |
|||||||||||
ROP
|
Great post Spice. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice wrote: Serpentfoot, I do not believe you were arrested for speaking out, but for taking your clothes off in a public place. There are laws against that and they have nothing to do with religion. It could have been anyone of any religion and they would have been arrested because there are laws against public nudity. If you want to run around naked, there are nudist camps that allow that. Think about this, your mother may not have died, had you kept your clothes on. Why not accept your responsibility in the situation rather than placing the blame on those who were following the law?Regardless what you believe, I was indeed arrested for speaking against Christian prayers at government meetings. AFTER I was arrested merely for speaking (and I was on the agenda to speak--not interrupting them but they interrupted me) the the next meeting when they statrted their prayers, I answered their prayers presenting God IN FLESH (as the body is called the "Temple of God". The Bible--if you will read it in Rev. 3:17 also states you are naked. God is alleged to have made us that way. Call him an obscene artist if you l;ike but why would you worship as "God" that one artist creator you feel did the most obscene thing? If you ever stand before God, are you going to hide what he supposedly created? Nudity is ALLWAYS APPROPRIATE WHEN TALKING TO GOD. The only thing indecent is prayers at public meetings. Jesus said "Hide in the closet to pray" Matthew 6: 5,6) He surely had to do it around people when he was teaching the people but he preferred to focus on God when talking or listening to God in Prayer. The Declaration of Independence refers to decency as showing some respect (a decent respect) for the opinions of others, not forcing you religion upon others at public meetings. It is a private matter between you and God. And do remember you were born alone and will die alone (even if others are there dying too.) And don't think God won't be able to see right thru you. You won't hide anything in prayer--at least not in real prayer. At public prayer where you are really going after other people you can certainly put on something attractive that hides and shows only your better parts. But that is not talking or listening to God. You won't hide anything from God. Last edited on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 09:02 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
Tex
|
Spice wrote: Frankly, I don't care if they pray at a council meeting or not, it is not going to effect me personally. I do agree with you about prison, there are a great many who become ordained ministers in Prison, it looks better on their record when they come up for parole. Haha, you're right Spice. I too am an ordained minister, got the certificate and everything. I am ordained through World Christianship Ministries. I did it to see if I could as I was writing about false ministers and such a couple of years back. Yes, I can marry you, preside over your funeral or give you your last rights before God. IMHO, I think Serpenfoot is a false prophet that has been swayed by the Demon. Last edited on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 09:45 pm by Tex |
|||||||||||
jillsmom
|
Spice...that was a great post. You hit the nail on the head. |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
My husband was a licenced minister, I still have his licence and he did marry my son and his wife. My first husband was Jewish. I didn't try to change their beliefs and they didn't try to change mine. If I were in a room full of snake handlers, who am I to tell them they can't handle snakes? I don't have to handle them just because they do and personally, I don't like snakes. I believe some states have enacted laws against snake handling and if caught, just like with the laws against public nudity, they would be arrested. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice, it is much easier to close your eyes or turn your head and not see, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE "WHAT GOD MADE (NUDE)" than it is to close your ears and not hear, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ISLAM, HINDU, OR JUDEO-CHRISTIAN or other PRAYERS. But if any group does not want to hear the other's evangelizing then they should not expect the others to hear theirs--the "Golden Rule" requires equal treatment for all--just like the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (and it is the reason why the 1st Amendment prohibits government from establishing any religion as part of government.) Snakes usually mind their own business and get out of your way if they can, a lots nicer than most people, few of whom are "Good Samaritans" but all too many people GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO STOMP THE FALLEN--"Put them in jail and throw away the key!; deny them health care!;..." Last edited on Sat Dec 19th, 2009 08:34 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
serpentfoot wrote: Spice, it is much easier to close your eyes or turn your head and not see, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE "WHAT GOD MADE (NUDE)" than it is to close your ears and not hear, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ISLAM, HINDU, OR JUDEO-CHRISTIAN or other PRAYERS. But if any group does not want to hear the other's evangelizing then they should not expect the others to hear theirs--the "Golden Rule" requires equal treatment for all--just like the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (and it is the reason why the 1st Amendment prohibits government from establishing any religion as part of government.) I don't close my eyes and ears, but I do have the common sense to make my own decisions about what I'm willing to believe. I don't care whose prayers it is, I can listen, show respect and then like the snakes go on about my business and tend to my own beliefs without the need to push them on anyone else. Snakes mind their own business and I mind mine unless a snake decides to strike. As for real snakes, I don't stomp them, I avoid them, even though my son will catch them and bring them in to show the children. I do know that they help with the control of other pests. When it comes to political snakes, they are always coiled and ready to strike if it will fill their own pockets or fuel their popularity. I still don't like snakes. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice wrote: serpentfoot wrote:Spice, it is much easier to close your eyes or turn your head and not see, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SEE "WHAT GOD MADE (NUDE)" than it is to close your ears and not hear, IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO HEAR ISLAM, HINDU, OR JUDEO-CHRISTIAN or other PRAYERS. But if any group does not want to hear the other's evangelizing then they should not expect the others to hear theirs--the "Golden Rule" requires equal treatment for all--just like the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (and it is the reason why the 1st Amendment prohibits government from establishing any religion as part of government.) You may be superior enough to resist brainwashing and the power of subliminal suggestings that have been constantly repeated but most people, like parrots unconsciously pick up whatever they hear over and over--even when they try to resist it consciously, still it slips in unconsciously--like music--if you hear it often you may find yourself singing it. It is aklso hard to reason against rythem. |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
I'm a tough old bird but I'm not a parrot. |
|||||||||||
|
ManinBlack Guest
|
Now Spice, You are going to have to stop. I have called Jeff Foxworthy and after reading some of your recent stuff he wants you to come on and replace Larry the Cable Guy. Funny,,,,,,,,!! |
|||||||||||
|
Spice Super Moderator
|
ManinBlack wrote: Now Spice, You are going to have to stop. Well, MIB, Foxworthy has to get his material from someone.  |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Spice, Thank you for your forthrightness and honesty in admitting your dislike for snakes and “political snakes” –that humans too have not only animal but even the “lowest of the low”, or “low down” or “snake in the grass” qualities or traits—that the snake then is symbolic of some things we see in ourselves or others. Moses and Jesus, and the Greeks and others, saw that too, as when Moses uplifted the serpent in the wilderness and when it showed its changeable qualities and power before Pharaoh; when Jesus said, “The lowest will be highest, and the first last.”; when the Greeks and other civilizations—including our South American and Native American ancestors and predecessors used the serpent around the staff or walking cane as a symbol of hope or healing (the Caduceus, or medical symbol) showing that just because one is “down”, or without feet, does not mean they are beaten—but like the serpent can go over under, around, or through. It has no feet but is all foot—the symbol of ”that hated enemy”, Need or Necessity, which is nevertheless the best guidance and only way to survival—doing what one really needs to do, doing the necessary (remembering too that love is a need, and that a “friend in need is a friend indeed” (and how bad we feel when we feel un-needed or “ so un-necessary”.) The dislikes and even hates and prejudices that many people feel, is not all bad but is born of fear of partially known, the unknown, that which is hidden, possibly powerful and dangerous— That fear is “The beginning of wisdom”, the warning to be cautious, but it is only the beginning—and should not freeze us forever in fear, afraid to explore, discover, advance, learn and move into the sunlight and green pastures. That hiding in fear, or as a predator stalking, is not limited to cats, or “snakes in the grass”, but people too—behind fig leaves, grass skirts, cotton, wood or steel helmets and other gear to disguise or make them appear bigger, more powerful and to be avoided, or in the uniform or flags of a friend, or in sheep’s wool (when they really are wolves). That prejudice or fear of the “snake in the grass” goes back much further than Eden (as the alleged incident there did not involve a hidden or fearsome appearing snake) and is probably a hold-over of ingrained fear from a time when some of our early primate ancestors were much smaller. Though blind fear or partially informed prejudice is “the beginning of wisdom”, it does not advance to the wisdom or “Age of Reason” stage until we have the curiosity and courage to advance as caution allows—and taking all changes and movements into account—recognizing that we have evolved from that rodent sized primate that serpents preyed upon and that they are not after us now but generally get out of our way if , in our dancing or walking, we thump the ground heavy enough. And even if we accidentally step on one , most of them are not poison nor big enough to crush or try to swallow us. Indeed it would be to our advantage now to have a few King snakes to eat not only the rats that now spread disease and famine but also eat the few poison snakes. I had much rather face a snake (except for those large Anacondas) than a lion, bear, pack of wolves, shark or some other large creatures out there. Yet even the jungle, as the few left are now, are a safer retreat than the civilizations of this world: The worst of all predators, and the most pitiful homeless prey, are on our streets. So let’s all have at least some “street Smarts” to recognize our real situation on the way to reason and wisdom and survive, not stagnate, go backwards or trample/stampede each other out of cowardice, blinded fear, hate, or unreasonable prejudice against the unknown or untried—or by merely “following the crowd herd” mentality, conformity or habit. “Fear of the Lord…” may be the “…beginning of wisdom”, but wisdom is not the usual thing, “run of the mill”, or “common”, it is a good bit different, exceptional. Thanks. |
|||||||||||
|
Amarillo Sky Veritas Aequitas 
|
Spice wrote: Serpentfoot, My statement was intended to point out that many of those who do not practice the Christian faith, want anything pertaining to it, removed from public view. For instance, wishing someone a Merry Christmas is now frowned upon, along with displaying a Christmas tree in a public place. just came up on this one..... Spice I have agree with you. I am Christian but I have to say I still say happy chaunaka when it is time (hence my topic on it). I also try to hit any religious thing I can around this time of year..... I also wish everyone a marry christmas.... Nothing wrong with it and the goventment can frown on me all they want Idk. Serpentfoot.... I saw something where you said you protested in the nude? that is why you were arressted.... there is nothing against protesting as long as you do it in a orderly fashion and I think you have to let the atouritys know about it. As for in the nude.... yea that is not going to fly...... If it is in a public place then you were arrested for public indeceny and probly something to deal with children seeing you or something...... |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Reply to Amirillo Sky: Nudity is always appropriate in the presence of God (If indeed as you folks believe he made us aswe naturally are.) It would even be an insult to say "Hey God, I know you made us naked but your artwork is obscene, indecent, so we're going to have to cover it up even while we stand before you in prayer." How preposterous and dishonest can you get? Do you think an "all knowing God" cannot see right thru you--even if you hide in sheep's wool or cotton? IF prayer is talking to God, Nudity is the honest decent thing. If you are just putting on a show for other humans then covering up may fool them into thinking you look better than you do. That's what's wrong with "Public prayer, IT IS NOT TALKING TO GOD BUT PUTTING ON A SHOW TO FOOL OTHERS INTO THINKING HOW GOOD YOU ARE. Jesus said "Hide in the closet to pray." (Matthew 6: 5, 6). That means focus on God, not be distracted with anything else--if you really want to communicate with "God". Public prayer at government meetings is also unconstitutional violating the rights of non-Judeo-Christians by forcing them to hear your evangelizing when you would not want to hear theirs--denies them "equal treatment" and "establishes" your religion over others. It creates prejudice that forms a "religious test" for public office--that no one (or few) can get elected if they are not liars pretending to be Judeo-Christian. The Declaration of Independence defines "decency" as having a "decent respect for the opinions of others"--something Judeo-Christians do not have. That would include the opinions of others as to religion and their right to worship or not as they please not have someone else's religion forced on them at government meetings. Last edited on Sun Dec 27th, 2009 06:45 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
jeffreyballard79
|
" Quote from Serpentfoot- Spice, Thank you for your forthrightness and honesty in admitting your dislike for snakes and “political snakes” Ok but your last name is Serpentfoot? Oh the irony!!! Last edited on Mon Dec 28th, 2009 01:55 am by jeffreyballard79 |
|||||||||||
|
toosavoter Guest 
|
Here we go... |
|||||||||||
jeffreyballard79
|
Where are we going? Back to Vegas? Ok but your driving this time. And I am guarding Lunk Heads poll he dances on ok!!! |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
The VA is still not doing what it should for that good man--and other veterans needing help. We should not send them off to get injured and killed if we will not help the injured. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
The V.A. has still not come to the aid of that Vet in need. |
|||||||||||
stoker
|
serpentfoot wrote: The V.A. has still not come to the aid of that Vet in need.Madame serpentfoot. I don't know what the story is on the Vet in need but I would submit this to you. Any vet that I have met worth his salt will tell you that no one OWES him anything. They do what they do to serve something greater than they are and expect nothing in return. Anything that may be received in payment or compensation in whatever form, other than the agreed upon compensation at the beginning of the contract, is gratefully accepted but not mandatory. If it was a breach of contract, then that is a different story, but unless that is the case, then the point is mute. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
stoker wrote: serpentfoot wrote:The V.A. has still not come to the aid of that Vet in need.Madame serpentfoot. I don't know what the story is on the Vet in need but I would submit this to you. Any vet that I have met worth his salt will tell you that no one OWES him anything. They do what they do to serve something greater than they are and expect nothing in return. Anything that may be received in payment or compensation in whatever form, other than the agreed upon compensation at the beginning of the contract, is gratefully accepted but not mandatory. If it was a breach of contract, then that is a different story, but unless that is the case, then the point is mute. We can bail out Wallstreet with millions in bonuses for CEO's but sacrifice our Vets? So they are good enough to give their all--but should we not show some gratitude to our most deserving? |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
I am sorry that I do not have as much time to help the Veterans on this link as I would like right now, but if I can get justice in my court case as shown on the SPLOST thread, a more honest government will allow us all more time and other resources for the needy. Thanks. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
I feel bad that I have been so busy with my law suit that I am not doing more to help that disable vet who is not getting real help from the V.A. They act like he can just suffer and go on. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
While thinking about "traitors", I can't help but wonder how it was possible that in this country--and in Rome, Ga., back in the 1970's-- I would have been arrested several times, and sentenced to jail, fines, and banishment, for parading an AMERICAN flag and wearing a sign that said: "MAY THIS FLAG NEVER MAY CHRIST'S KINGDOM NEVER COME-- AMERICA- NOT ISRAEL, BUT THIS DUST THAT I AM--MY HOLY LAND!" I do not have the money or time to do that again, but I still can not help wondering: How messed up can citizens be--or our officials at least be--and us continue as a nation? Punished for parading an American flag and putting our own nation first??????????
Last edited on Thu Feb 4th, 2010 07:56 pm by serpentfoot |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Again, America--not Israel--is my Holy Land--this dust that I am. |
|||||||||||
serpentfoot
|
Is this the end for us-- that we can not even parade our own flag on our own streets? Because others here prefer Israel-- and with China too beginning to beat us in trade. It is not the end of the world but is it the end for us? |
|||||||||||
|
romegasir Troglodyte 
|
I've seen several parades recently in which the US Flag was carried..............................I did not see Israeli or Chinese flags...............but I wasn't really looking for them.............. |
|||||||||||
|
toosavoter Guest
|
Dog is cat and cat is dog... And bird is the word... |
|||||||||||
