Replies

I don't remember saying I was against an RA having a Quran study. I would back a Muslim RA to allow a study of the Quran in his room. Everyone involved in the Quran study would be consenting adults and well within their rights to decide what books they want to study. So your argument falls down with the selective application of privacy rights. This distraction technique was a nice try on your part though.

As far as your research skills, just because you cant find it in 45 minutes on Yahoo means it must not exist? I'm trying to remember when I said it was a well known incident. Ill give you some hints....the event was squashed before it even got to Dobson. Take your head out of the Internet, start to remember how to use a phone, and do some real research.

Seeing as your research skills are obviously limited, Ill give you another hint with the ACLU incident in PA. It involves the ACLU trying to stop prayers that happen in private places that happen to coincide with with commencement exercises.

Seeing as you are the one who requested information many posts ago, it would seem you are the one expecting others to do his work for him. If you are really interested, perhaps you will do more than cursory searches on Yahoo. I'll even give you one more easy one. Palm Beach county had the Muslim crescent displayed at Christmas, Jewish Star, but forbade citizens from putting up a nativity scene. If you choose to research this, use the search words "Thomas Moore Law Center". Here is the conclusion, you don't believe in privacy rights, your research skills need work, and you still don't have anything to say about the PA incident besides your own personal spin.

Forget it, wideminded. This guy apparently doesn't appreciate what it takes to advance a real argument; and he hasn't been on this forum long enough to take his actual word for anything.

Instead, he offers evidence with no substantiation, and then when you disagree, he reads far more into your disagreement than is there, and accuses you of believing in things you don't. In other words, he decides---incorrectly---he knows exactly what kind of person you are and exactly what you are thinking.

Gee, that sounds an awful lot like the author of this silly article.