Posted on 10/10/2010 2:52:53 PM PDT by NYer
For the same reason that they fired weapons at Lexington and Concord over taxation.
They considered it a gross violation of what they were.
Was it wrong to shoot British troops over taxation disagreements? Was Jefferson wrong to say it was just?
By the time the Battle of Lexington began, the Boston Massacre had already occurred and the Intolerable Acts had been passed (among which resulted in the Port of Boston being shut down and arbitrarily altering the colonial government of Massachusetts to bring it more under British control, among other things), and the British regulars, on the morning of the battle, attempted to destroy reported military supplies belonging to the colonial militia.
They considered it a gross violation of what they were. Was it wrong to shoot British troops over taxation disagreements?
Taxation was far from the only grievance by the time the Battle of Lexington began.
What you just wrote makes no sense at all. There is a huge difference - a gulf - an abyss - between people who promote the homosexual agenda and those who fight it. And what is they mythical little guy for? Or against? ????
Many, many of us have wondered.
Makes no sense why some who consistently spew leftist crap talking points and opinions are allowed to keep doing so.
As the old saw goes, “Two wrongs don’t make a right”.
The nazi-esque forcing of the homosexual agenda is much more reprehensible that a bunch of hoodlums getting a bit rowdy.
Sure, those guys were over the line, they should have behaved themselves better. But calling them “clero-facsists” (I think that was the term, I realize you didn’t use it) paints every opponent of the homosexual agenda with the “thug” brush, which is loaded and a lie.
The homosexual agenda is meant to destroy the natural family, marriage, children’s innocence, the freedoms of speech, religion and association, the military, and requires a huge Nanny State to enforce on the generally very unwilling population. So, it is much more dangerous - exponentially so - than a handful of hooligans. And it would be interesting to read a non-MSM report of what went down at that protest.
There were a few mass graves. But there were mass graves on both sides, going back centuries. The fact is, the Serbs were facing a Muslim onslaught, an onslaught supported by Clinton’s USA.
I wasn't supporting mainsail's use of that term either. What I am saying is that the protesters were in the wrong to firebomb the police.
I can't be responsible for your confusion. Regardless of what the hell it's about.
Adams wrote about his part: "The Part I took in Defence of Cptn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country. Judgment of Death against those Soldiers would have been as foul a Stain upon this Country as the Executions of the Quakers or Witches, anciently. As the Evidence was, the Verdict of the Jury was exactly right.
The Intolerable Acts were passed due to, among other things, the Boston Tea Party....tax policy.
So, the comparison stands. Lexington & Concord was about taxation, and that reason is preserved in the Declaration of Independence. In the list of grievances, he writes: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
Now, the issue is that these all were seen by the colonials as "usurpations", and these usurpations they considered worthy cause to take up arms.
Who are you to say that forcing "homosexuality" down the throat of the Serbian Orthodox people is not a "usurpation"?
The proof it is seen in such a way is the number of police assigned. We're never told the size of the crowd in opposition, were we?
What was the size of the police contingent?
There must have been a huge outpouring into the streets for them to need that large a police force. They were reacting to a usurpation.
Uh, hyperbole much? Are we next going to hear you spout on about non-existent "mass graves"?
Amen to that. Go back to DailyKos, "mainsail that", you LGBT troll.
*sigh*
Late for yet another ZOT.
Muslims propaganda that Clinton and Weaseley Clark used as a pretext to go to war against Belgrade and massacre 2,500+ Serbian civilians. Disgraceful chapter in our history, as was Kosovo, for which G.W. Bush is nauseatingly a "hero" to the KLA terrorists.
No gay rights means no eligibility for EU membership.
For some this is a backdoor way to fight for national sovereignty.
Does this make more sense now?
Excellent comments. And it would certainly be interesting - and maybe enlightening - to read some eyewitness or on the spot reporters without a pro-homosexual agenda bias. All we read about are the hooligans. But we saw a photo of a priest, and people with religion-based signs. How many other people were protesting?
Umm, that is just factual incorrect; no matter how you define liberalism it is much older then 100 years; Marxism is older then 100 years as well. it is probably the easiest to date it to Leviathan by Hobbes, which would make liberalism about 360 years old.
I’m not even going to bother touching the rest.
IATZ
:(
I’m not even going to bother touching the rest.
I wouldn't either if I just signed up today to make my first post on this thread of all threads.
Say, you wouldn't happen to know mainsail, now would you?
Welcome to FR. Have some popcorn.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.