Students Take Field Trip to Mosque, R...
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#817 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, douche...I truly despise attempted brainwashing. It's nobody's business how I feel about individuals or groups as long as my actions don't sully the reputation of my employer. 23 years...so far, so good.
How are my attitudes different from those of a defense attorney who represents a client they know is guilty? They aren't.
1) It is exactly because people harbor the bigoted hatred that you cling to that your employer must take steps to curb it, and limiting its potential liability, lest it be implicated in a discrimination suit.

2) Yes Paco, they are. Defense attorneys are ethically obligated to defend their clients' rights EVEN WHEN they strongly suspect or know their clients are guilty. They CANNOT ethically permit a client to testify falsely. You clearly have a limited understanding of the 5th Amendment, and its global effects upon the rights of all citizens, not just guilty ones. Your bigoted hatred has nothing to do with Constitutional rights against self incrimination. Nothing.

You really aren't very bright.

woof

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#818 Sep 27, 2013
Black Rhino wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope...Projection on thd hillbilly's part.
Try again, chuckles.
No, Rastus...i proved it and buried you as always. You never fail to amaze when you pose as someone who thinks he knows Central Ohio.
Do you know how Einstein defined insanity? You're who he was talking about.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#819 Sep 27, 2013
Black Rhino wrote:
<quoted text>
The war on poverty and racial equality. That's what he gave speeches and built a rapport with all races during his presidency, hillbilly.
Quite a rapport he was building when he said, "I'll have those n#####s voting Democratic for the next 200 years."
Black Rhino wrote:
Nice try to deflect away from your drug dealing friends.
Two morons in Columbus, several miles from my home are my friends? I gues that makes n#####s from Queens who kill whitey your friends.
Black Rhino wrote:
I don't live in 1964. The work has been put in for the advancement of all in this country.
If you think black Americans are better off today, you really are on drugs. You must be proud of that murder rate and that 75% illegitimacy rate.
Black Rhino wrote:
We just have brainless hillbillies like you to deal with, which is alright because most of you cowards only exist in your basement and on topix...
Am I in the ballpark? Sure I am, chuckles.
Take a look at what's going on in the House and Senate today, booner. Those aren't "brainless hillbillies in basements" firing the opening shots of change.

When you get an education and grow up, get back to us.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#820 Sep 27, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
1) It is exactly because people harbor the bigoted hatred that you cling to that your employer must take steps to curb it, and limiting its potential liability, lest it be implicated in a discrimination suit.
2) Yes Paco, they are. Defense attorneys are ethically obligated to defend their clients' rights EVEN WHEN they strongly suspect or know their clients are guilty. They CANNOT ethically permit a client to testify falsely. You clearly have a limited understanding of the 5th Amendment, and its global effects upon the rights of all citizens, not just guilty ones. Your bigoted hatred has nothing to do with Constitutional rights against self incrimination. Nothing.
You really aren't very bright.
woof
1. The presumption that any employee with no history of any offensive behavior is a danger to the employer is wrong and these thought crime sessions are only in place thanks to leftist legislation opening up employers to suits. Odd...American business operated quite well without all this nonsense before 1990.

2. Nobody argued against how attorneys operate, you blithering fool. I'm pointing out that my situation is no different from those who know the client is guilty as sin but still do their best to defend him.

Are you hung over this morning?
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#821 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Being a vile bigot with mindless hate directed at Christianity.
You like to assign feelings and thoughts to people that they don't have. I don't hate Christianity. Further, my thoughts to organized religion and the zealots who pervert it for their own twisted agendas are quite well thought out.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#822 Sep 27, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You like to assign feelings and thoughts to people that they don't have. I don't hate Christianity. Further, my thoughts to organized religion and the zealots who pervert it for their own twisted agendas are quite well thought out.
Keep lying to yourself, little girl. The rest of us have seen you in action.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#823 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Keep lying to yourself, little girl. The rest of us have seen you in action.
You want to provide some evidence to support your assertion? Oh that's right. You don't do that.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#824 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The presumption that any employee with no history of any offensive behavior is a danger to the employer is wrong and these thought crime sessions are only in place thanks to leftist legislation opening up employers to suits. Odd...American business operated quite well without all this nonsense before 1990.
2. Nobody argued against how attorneys operate, you blithering fool. I'm pointing out that my situation is no different from those who know the client is guilty as sin but still do their best to defend him.
Are you hung over this morning?
1) Based upon what you author here your employer has good reason to be concerned.

2) Your situation has bears absolutely no resemblance to a defense attorney who acts to protect his or her clients' fundamental rights.

You're a flake.

woof

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#825 Sep 27, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You want to provide some evidence to support your assertion? Oh that's right. You don't do that.
http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T3TVKVDQA...

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/TSU6J5JUL...

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/TRD1HJ4D5...

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/TPLCRAJ6L...
Oliver Canterberry

Columbus, OH

#826 Sep 27, 2013
-tip- wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/n32n2ap
by Todd Starnes
A Tennessee high school has decided to revise its field trip policy after a group of freshmen were taken to an Islamic mosque where they were given copies of the Koran and while a student who opted out of the trip was given a worksheet that alleged Muslims treated their conquered people better than the United States treated minorities.
The students were in an honors world studies class at Hendersonville High School and the field trips to the mosque as well as a Hindu temple were part of a three-week course on world religions.
But some parents objected to the trips and wondered why the school would tour a mosque but not a Christian church or a Jewish synagogue.
“If you can’t go to all five, why are you going to any?” asked parent Mike Conner.“We sent the principal an email and voiced our concerns. She sent back a reply and told us they could not afford to go to all five.”
Daily Roll Call reported the students were taken to the Islamic Center of Nashville.
Children were given punch and cookies at the mosque where they listened to readings from the Koran, Conner said. They were also given copies of the Islamic holy book -- which some students took and others declined.
During their visit to the Hindu temple, students engaged in meditation.
“Our kids are being indoctrinated and this is being shoved in their face,” Conner told Fox News.“It tells me they are pushing other religions and they want Christianity to take a back seat. They want our children to be tolerant of everything except Christianity.”
A Sumner County Schools spokesman declined to answer questions about specific religious activities the children may have engaged in, but he did send a statement acknowledging there was concern about the trip.
“Our district has reviewed the practice and decided to eliminate field trips to religious venues from this class, as it does not provide equal representation to all the religions studied in the course unit,” the statement read.“This decision was made due to the fact that equal representation in regards to field trips for all religions studied in the course is not feasible.”
What do Liberals and Moo Slums have in common? A common enemy, classical Bible based Christianity. That is why you see the alliance of liberals, many of them homosexuals, in an alliance with the very Moo Slums that would execute them given half a chance.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#827 Sep 27, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
1) Based upon what you author here your employer has good reason to be concerned.
2) Your situation has bears absolutely no resemblance to a defense attorney who acts to protect his or her clients' fundamental rights.
You're a flake.
woof
1. Why? My employer knows nothing of my personal views toward certain groups. I suspect that's the way it is with most rational people and their relationships with their bosses.
FAIL.

2. Bullsh!t. I do my best for the client, regardless of my personal beliefs. Not only is that ethical, it's good for my career.

You really live in some sort of bizarre alternate universe.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#828 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
Disagreeing with the Catholic Church's position is not hate. It's disagreement.
Diamond Eugene wrote:
A joke about the Topix censors not liking the word "Catholic" is not hate. It's funny.
Diamond Eugene wrote:
I respond to a poster who referred to the Church as filthy deviants and repeated that person's assertion in my reply. Note that I defended the Church in that one, 3.1.
Diamond Eugene wrote:
I said that defining Catholic as "open minded" was funny. An opinion. Hardly hate.

Now I know why you never try to back up anything you say. You are horrible at it.

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#829 Sep 27, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagreeing with the Catholic Church's position is not hate. It's disagreement.
<quoted text>
A joke about the Topix censors not liking the word "Catholic" is not hate. It's funny.
<quoted text>
I respond to a poster who referred to the Church as filthy deviants and repeated that person's assertion in my reply. Note that I defended the Church in that one, 3.1.
<quoted text>
I said that defining Catholic as "open minded" was funny. An opinion. Hardly hate.
Now I know why you never try to back up anything you say. You are horrible at it.
I offer a deal, quit calling us racist, and I'll stop saying you hate Christianity.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#830 Sep 27, 2013
-The-Artist- wrote:
<quoted text>
I offer a deal, quit calling us racist, and I'll stop saying you hate Christianity.
You can say whatever you want to say. I couldn't care less. I simply like watching ol'3.1 wallow in his anger and fail in his attempts to support his silly claims.

I'll stop calling "you" racist when you stop being racist. How's that?

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#831 Sep 27, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You can say whatever you want to say. I couldn't care less. I simply like watching ol'3.1 wallow in his anger and fail in his attempts to support his silly claims.
I'll stop calling "you" racist when you stop being racist. How's that?
The only one wallowing today is you, kid. You're running into walls here today...with nobody to pick you up.
How do you live without an iota of self respect?
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#832 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Why? My employer knows nothing of my personal views toward certain groups. I suspect that's the way it is with most rational people and their relationships with their bosses.
FAIL.
2. Bullsh!t. I do my best for the client, regardless of my personal beliefs. Not only is that ethical, it's good for my career.
You really live in some sort of bizarre alternate universe.
You really are quite batty

http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/...

Read Rule 3.3 closely Paco.

If you can comprehend it correctly, you will learn why no competent criminal defense attorney will ever ask his or her client the ultimate
question: "Tell me Paco. did you really assault the President of the School Board meeting last Monday?"

You will also learn why your original analogy is utter nonsense.

woof

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#833 Sep 27, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
You really are quite batty
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/LegalResources/...
Read Rule 3.3 closely Paco.
If you can comprehend it correctly, you will learn why no competent criminal defense attorney will ever ask his or her client the ultimate
question: "Tell me Paco. did you really assault the President of the School Board meeting last Monday?"
You will also learn why your original analogy is utter nonsense.
woof
Who's talking about asking the client, dummy? When the evidence is there, it's there.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#834 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Who's talking about asking the client, dummy? When the evidence is there, it's there.
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>How are my attitudes different from those of a defense attorney who represents a client they know is guilty? They aren't.
A regular Clarence Darrow, you would make.

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#835 Sep 27, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Who's talking about asking the client, dummy? When the evidence is there, it's there.
Do you even understand that the definition of the "evidence" doesn't include newspaper or television reports?

Are you saying that no ethical criminal defense attorney should ever take a case in which the media is reporting that the defendant is an abhorrent individual who most likely is guilty of the crime he is accused of committing?

Silliness.

woof

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#836 Sep 27, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you even understand that the definition of the "evidence" doesn't include newspaper or television reports?
Are you saying that no ethical criminal defense attorney should ever take a case in which the media is reporting that the defendant is an abhorrent individual who most likely is guilty of the crime he is accused of committing?
Silliness.
woof
Of course not, moron. I'm aware of what the Constitution says. Everyone is entitled to a defense.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Pull your pants up. 1 min Linda 11
Muslims beat woman for wearing bikini French ou... 1 min Tattle Tale 30
Poll Panty hose vs bare skin What is your preference? 1 min Seriouslady 149
For Cat Lovers Only! 1 min Pope Che Reagan C... 178
Trump builds his political machine 1 min Doc 1
CHINATOWN DETECTIVE AGENCY LOOKING FOR Crazylady 1 min Doc 44
News Mosquito boom: Pests, including West Nile carri... 1 hr Duke for Mayor 6
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages