Agreement reached on future of Jesus portrait in Jackson schools

Jul 12, 2013 Full story: The Columbus Dispatch 134

The controversy over a portrait of Jesus that hung for decades in a southern Ohio high school apparently didn't end in April when the district took the portrait down.

Full Story
Piss Homo

Cincinnati, OH

#103 Jul 29, 2013
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
No, go read Marbury v. Madison (1803). It's not quite that simple.
The rest of your argument would get your laughed out of any ConLaw I class in any accredited law school, which I am now quite certain you have never attented, nor could if you tried.
Your arguments are ideological, not legal, and are therefore irrelevant.
The rest of your post is simply unworthy of response.
You don't even bother to dispute my main point, which is that the US constitution is the final authority, not case law.

You instead resort to the same appeal to authority (SCOTUS and case law) logical fallacy, because you have no logical basis. SCOTUS has authority only regarding constitutionally delegated powers, not all powers as for which you lust. You deny this fact because you are not intelligent and you are corrupt.

Your ideology is a big lie and totalitarian, which you are too cowardly and dishonest to admit.

My ideology is in accordance with the letter and spirit of the true authority, whereas your ideology is based on feelings, word games, and a lust for power, which your kind has spectacularly achieved in Washington DC, but is too cowardly and dishonest to take responsibility.

In short, you are full of crap as are most ABA-style money grubbers. There is no mystery understanding why ABA lawyers are seen as pathological liars by ordinary people.

The control of public schools is very relevant to the headline topix discussion, because it is fedgov intervention in public schools, formerly controlled by the people, that has caused the issue of religion in public schools to be controversial. Queers and other diversity people are pushing queer education in public because fruitcakes have gained the upper hand using likeminded political appointments in the fedgov judicial system. You deny this corruption because you are full of crap and your diversity ideology (victim cult) is psychotic crap.
Piss Homo

Cincinnati, OH

#104 Jul 29, 2013
Can anyone here quote the constitutional text that grants the fedgov the power to control the curriculum in US public schools?

I already know that Strel the ABA-mouthpiece can't do it, and the mouthpiece will instead quote case law, which is nonsense and irrelevant.

Many public schools are currently teaching queer is normal education because of the lies that Strel the ABA-mouthpiece is posting.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#105 Jul 29, 2013
Marbury v. Madison, 1803.
The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional and what is not. They get to interpret the Constitution and they get the final say.
That is how it is.
I am sorry that you couldn't get into law school and even more sorry that you have decided to react to your failure by making a fool of yourself on the Internet.
As before, the rest of your post does not merit a response.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#106 Jul 29, 2013
Oh, I'm also not a member of a ABA.

Chump.
Piss Homo

Cincinnati, OH

#107 Jul 29, 2013
Strel wrote:
Marbury v. Madison, 1803.
The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is constitutional and what is not. They get to interpret the Constitution and they get the final say.
That is how it is.
I am sorry that you couldn't get into law school and even more sorry that you have decided to react to your failure by making a fool of yourself on the Internet.
As before, the rest of your post does not merit a response.
Wrong again, mouthpiece.

As already explained, the constitution is the real authority, not black robed political appointees.

Your favored black-robed political appointees are restricted by the US constitution to arbitrate only a very few delegated powers, not arbitrate the gamut of all power that low-lfe like you demand.

The US constitution explicitly says the people own all undelegated powers, which logically implies the people arbitrate them too. This fact is enumerated in the 9th and 10 amendments, which low-life like you ignore on a regular basis.

You are so outlandishly cowardly and dishonest that you won't take responsibility for the totalitarian government you've created in Washington DC. Black robed DC vermin have determined that queer porn is federally protected speech, sodomy is federally protected activity, elective abortion is federally protected activity, political speech in a church is federally taxable speech, queer curriciulum in public schools is protected speech, and so-called hate speech is not protected speech. Obviously queers are having a libertine holiday with the base lies you express here.

The federal court system is loaded with overpaid ABA-approved liars.

As for your ABA-mouthpiece status, you walk like a ABA duck and quack like a ABA duck, so it is likely you are an ABA quack or a quacking sychophant.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#108 Jul 29, 2013
Piss Homo wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again, mouthpiece.
As already explained, the constitution is the real authority, not black robed political appointees.
Your favored black-robed political appointees are restricted by the US constitution to arbitrate only a very few delegated powers, not arbitrate the gamut of all power that low-lfe like you demand.
The US constitution explicitly says the people own all undelegated powers, which logically implies the people arbitrate them too. This fact is enumerated in the 9th and 10 amendments, which low-life like you ignore on a regular basis.
You are so outlandishly cowardly and dishonest that you won't take responsibility for the totalitarian government you've created in Washington DC. Black robed DC vermin have determined that queer porn is federally protected speech, sodomy is federally protected activity, elective abortion is federally protected activity, political speech in a church is federally taxable speech, queer curriciulum in public schools is protected speech, and so-called hate speech is not protected speech. Obviously queers are having a libertine holiday with the base lies you express here.
The federal court system is loaded with overpaid ABA-approved liars.
As for your ABA-mouthpiece status, you walk like a ABA duck and quack like a ABA duck, so it is likely you are an ABA quack or a quacking sychophant.
Has anyone pointed out to you that repeating the same wrong statement over and over and over and over does not make it magically come true?
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#109 Jul 29, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Has anyone pointed out to you that repeating the same wrong statement over and over and over and over does not make it magically come true?
You can't fix stupid.
Piss Homo

Cincinnati, OH

#110 Jul 29, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Has anyone pointed out to you that repeating the same wrong statement over and over and over and over does not make it magically come true?
Nothing i've stated is wrong, jerko.

You get your way as it is today because you are liars, and many if not most people don't know you are liars.

I'm here to inform normal people of your lying ways.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#111 Jul 29, 2013
Actually, pretty much everything you said is wrong - or has been wrong for over 200 years (in the case you pretending that judicial review doesn't exist) and 145 years (since the enactment of the 14th Amendment) and 65 years in the case of the Establishment clause being applicable to public schools.

That's quite an accomplishment. Perhaps you should get your information from a licensed attorney instead of some nutter's blog.

If you don't trust the ABA, then feel free to consult with an unaffiliated attorney, or if you like your lawyers leaning a bit more Left, call one from the National Lawyers Guild (if they still exist).
every troll here but you

Reynoldsburg, OH

#112 Jul 29, 2013
110 posts about a stupid picture. This forum is crap.
Conservative

Springfield, OH

#113 Jul 29, 2013
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn.
You lost this argument in 1803.
You know the case, or should. Look it up.
Stolen powers is NOT granted power or authority. Their authority is clearly described in the Constitution.

Can you show me where their present authority is or was granted and by who?

If they took it upon themselves they are in violation of the Constitution wouldn't you agree?
Conservative

Springfield, OH

#114 Jul 29, 2013
Strel wrote:
<quoted text>
No, go read Marbury v. Madison (1803). It's not quite that simple.
The rest of your argument would get your laughed out of any ConLaw I class in any accredited law school, which I am now quite certain you have never attented, nor could if you tried.
Your arguments are ideological, not legal, and are therefore irrelevant.
The rest of your post is simply unworthy of response.
In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court claimed the power to review acts of Congress and the president and deem them unconstitutional, creating a precedent for an American process of judicial review.

Where in the Constitution does it say ANY government agency, appointed or elected individuals have the right or authority to assume ANY power or Authority?

The 22nd Amendment clearly defines how long a sitting president can serve. Should it be allowed that one can decide to serve longer than the Constitution allows or just let them claim the right to serve longer if they wish regardless of the Constitution?
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#115 Jul 29, 2013
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
Stolen powers is NOT granted power or authority. Their authority is clearly described in the Constitution.
Can you show me where their present authority is or was granted and by who?
If they took it upon themselves they are in violation of the Constitution wouldn't you agree?
Wishful thinking doesn't change the law.

You, like too many others here, infect your reasoning with too much ideology.

Anyway, Article III. That was the authority for Marbury. Highest court in the land has to actually MEAN something, eh?

So no, I do not agree. Neither did Jefferson, but he lost the argument to Adams (vicariously).
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#116 Jul 29, 2013
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
In Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court claimed the power to review acts of Congress and the president and deem them unconstitutional, creating a precedent for an American process of judicial review.
Where in the Constitution does it say ANY government agency, appointed or elected individuals have the right or authority to assume ANY power or Authority?
The 22nd Amendment clearly defines how long a sitting president can serve. Should it be allowed that one can decide to serve longer than the Constitution allows or just let them claim the right to serve longer if they wish regardless of the Constitution?
Marbury was necessary, despite Jefferson's objections. Without the power (limited to cases and controversies as it should be), the third branch of government would have been toothless and unable to be the check it was intended to be.
I acknowledge, of course, that Marbury was controversial. But it is almost universally accepted as valid in the legal community because they recognize it's necessity.
The argument is that their authority is implicit in Article III. Again, if they are the highest court in the land, should the power to be the final arbiter of a legal dispute of ANY kind - including a constitutional one, be part of their toolbox? If not, would that not invest too much power in the other branches? How can they be a check on the other two and the highest court if Article III doesn't permit them to decide on the constitutionality of a law or action of government?
It can't.
The 22nd amendment is much more explicit.
Jefferson was not infallible.
Noevidence

Point Pleasant, WV

#117 Jul 30, 2013
Piss Homo wrote:
<quoted text>
If Jesus didn't exist, then why did the fedgov give tax monies thru the National Endowment for the Arts to Andres Serrano, a flaming queer, to mock and degrade a non-historical figure?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ
Probably just to piss you off.

But seriously if jesus is such a historical figure and did indeed exist then why didn't a single prominent historian that was around when he was alive make a record of him? It's likely because he is just a symbol and as real as Harry Potter.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#118 Jul 30, 2013
Noevidence wrote:
<quoted text>
Probably just to piss you off.
But seriously if jesus is such a historical figure and did indeed exist then why didn't a single prominent historian that was around when he was alive make a record of him? It's likely because he is just a symbol and as real as Harry Potter.
Aside from the four GOSPEL accounts of Christ's life, written by His colleagues, we have secular historical record, as follows:

CORNELIUS TACITUS

Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustusí death in A.D.14 to Neroís death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Neroís death and finish with Domitianís death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Neroís decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesusí surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christusí or Christís death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.

LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA

Lucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesusí name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.

SUETONIUS

Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrianís government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ].

PLINY THE YOUNGER

Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.

THALLUS and PHLEGON

Both were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died.

MARA BAR-SERAPION

Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.

JOSEPHUS

Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead!
Noevidence

Point Pleasant, WV

#119 Jul 31, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Aside from the four GOSPEL accounts of Christ's life, written by His colleagues, we have secular historical record, as follows:
CORNELIUS TACITUS
Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustusí death in A.D.14 to Neroís death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Neroís death and finish with Domitianís death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Neroís decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesusí surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christusí or Christís death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.
LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA
Lucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesusí name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.
SUETONIUS
Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrianís government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ].
PLINY THE YOUNGER
Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.
THALLUS and PHLEGON
Both were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died.
MARA BAR-SERAPION
Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.
JOSEPHUS
Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead!
Considering jesus died at the latest 36 AD none of these people would be considered witnesses or even second or third hand accounts of jesus. The gospels are laughable as reliable sources as well since the earliest one we know of was written sometime in 125 AD.
None of these texts or historians provide any more evidence of the existence of the man than somebody telling you I can throw a 120 mph fastball because they heard it from a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend. Here's a tip. I can't throw a 150 mph fastball.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#120 Jul 31, 2013
Noevidence wrote:
<quoted text>
Considering jesus died at the latest 36 AD none of these people would be considered witnesses or even second or third hand accounts of jesus. The gospels are laughable as reliable sources as well since the earliest one we know of was written sometime in 125 AD.
None of these texts or historians provide any more evidence of the existence of the man than somebody telling you I can throw a 120 mph fastball because they heard it from a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend. Here's a tip. I can't throw a 150 mph fastball.
Jesus lived in the First Century, as did some of those historians.
By the way, your implication would render void all modern accounts of historical fact.
Noevidence

United States

#121 Aug 1, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Jesus lived in the First Century, as did some of those historians.
By the way, your implication would render void all modern accounts of historical fact.
Not really considering a lot of it has at least a few firsthand accounts, graves, remains of a person, descendants, and whatnot.
We live in the 21st century. If I'm going to write about the Wright brothers I can because we have a physical gravesite to visit, surviving family to ask questions of, newspaper articles while they were alive, pictures of them, and the plane itself.

We only have stories (and very contradictory ones at that) of a man named jesus that were written after his supposed death. Not enough evidence to support his existance. I suppose Hercules could be real though if you only go by that standard.
Noevidence

United States

#122 Aug 1, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Aside from the four GOSPEL accounts of Christ's life, written by His colleagues, we have secular historical record, as follows:
CORNELIUS TACITUS
Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustusí death in A.D.14 to Neroís death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Neroís death and finish with Domitianís death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Neroís decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesusí surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christusí or Christís death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.
LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA
Lucian was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesusí name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.
SUETONIUS
Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrianís government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ].
PLINY THE YOUNGER
Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.
THALLUS and PHLEGON
Both were ancient historians and both confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified. This parallels what the Bible said happened when Jesus died.
MARA BAR-SERAPION
Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.
JOSEPHUS
Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead!
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/...
This story actually shows why this is a ridiculous argument to support the existance of jesus.

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
Merry Christmas! What's your favorite memory? 8 min Big Papa Tea 186
Deron and Jovawn Leeper (Dec '12) 9 min just say NO 8
CIA Torture Report Comes Out Tomorrow 23 min M I C 249
Should Witchcraft or Pagan Shops be 18+ ? 30 min Which Church 4
Police beat White Woman 1 hr Huey 24
Another Epic Obama Accomplishment 2 hr BizzyBee 3
Two People Shot Within 30 Minutes In East Columbus 2 hr know what I mean ... 6
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 8 hr Xenosteen 1,023
Columbus Dating
Find my Match

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:45 pm PST

Bleacher Report 8:45PM
Manziel's Indecisiveness Behind Early Struggles
NFL 5:21 AM
Tim Couch: Kosar was right, Browns can't develop a QB
NBC Sports 6:21 AM
Tim Couch: There's no commitment, no loyalty in Cleveland
NFL 6:58 AM
Dez Bryant's big night headlines Week 15's awards
ESPN10:58 AM
Pettine: Browns, front office making strides