Replies

I will admit my language got excessive and I apologize.

There is a mentality afoot that Believers are obligated to roll over, play dead, behave as wimps to the extreme etc.

And when the attitude on the other side gets excessive, it often seems that some sort of strong assertion in response is the only thing that will faze their antennae. I don't know that that is any excuse. I prefer to be Christ-like and loving even to my enemies.

And this whole issue of obvious hostility to any hint of relgiosity or God involved in public life or the discussions of the public square is part and parcel of playing victim to the same Constitution destroying forces that have been sliding us downt he yellow brick slide for decades. And I increasingly have a short fuse about kowtowing to such Commie idiocy.

If you think WackyKat does not fit that description as hostile to issues related to God being involved in discussions in the public square, then I'm at a loss for words.

I completely understand your frustration with the attempt to push Christianity under the rug. I am typically outraged by the most ridiculous exampes we see daily. I've argued that the extreme Atheists are a serious threat to society and their zealouness in attempting to eradicate any evidence of Christianity is evidence that they themselves are practicing an extreme religion themselves - one that is simply more dangerous because it is so heavily focused on destroying those things that do no harm, even to non-believers or thos of a different faith. The elimination of a manger scene on government property at Christmastime is the classic example.

I think in this case though, people were taken aback because they found that the "Terror Threat News" was from a questionable source - an email from a guy they know nothing about. You had mentioned various pieces of more credible sources that were cited in the email. It is typically suggested that those sources should then be posted, not the interpretation found in the email.

The reason for this is that I can write my own email and cite stories or facts from credible sources in that email. I could also twist the information obtained and provide a ridiculous conclusion. That isn't news.

Had this email been referenced in the discussion of a real news release, it may not have been questioned. I think the headline put people on edge, then the source caused them to be somewhat relieved, followed by anger because they felt a bit conned.