I know this is old...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ciaran said:
It was completely within their rights to do so.
which is kind of interesting, since i would assume the land-owners would have the right to kick them out/make them at least leave the premise. standing at the gate or wherever the land ends would still totally be legal.

i guess. meh. haters gonna hate.
 
Ciaran said:
It was completely within their rights to do so.
which is kind of interesting, since i would assume the land-owners would have the right to kick them out/make them at least leave the premise. standing at the gate or wherever the land ends would still totally be legal.

i guess. meh. haters gonna hate.
 
Wow, I was reading about their church, and in the late 1990's they wanted to build a statue of Matthew Shepard (the young man that was killed because he was gay), with an engraving on it that said "Burning in hell"
 
Wow, I was reading about their church, and in the late 1990's they wanted to build a statue of Matthew Shepard (the young man that was killed because he was gay), with an engraving on it that said "Burning in hell"
 
TroxBlox said:
Wow, I was reading about their church, and in the late 1990's they wanted to build a statue of Matthew Shepard (the young man that was killed because he was gay), with an engraving on it that said "Burning in hell"
Classy *censored.2.0*.

Fred Phelps was actually a somewhat-prominent lawyer in the civil rights movement. Crazy, right? I have this theory that they do this to provoke people to attack, and then intend to make money off of suing their attackers.
 
TroxBlox said:
Wow, I was reading about their church, and in the late 1990's they wanted to build a statue of Matthew Shepard (the young man that was killed because he was gay), with an engraving on it that said "Burning in hell"
Classy *censored.2.0*.

Fred Phelps was actually a somewhat-prominent lawyer in the civil rights movement. Crazy, right? I have this theory that they do this to provoke people to attack, and then intend to make money off of suing their attackers.
 
The irony is that the soldier died for their right to protest their ignorant ideas at his funeral.
 
The irony is that the soldier died for their right to protest their ignorant ideas at his funeral.
 
Pear said:
The irony is that the soldier died for their right to protest their ignorant ideas at his funeral.
No. he is a useless turkey that was to lazy to get a real job ~WBC <small><small><small><small>(not me dur)</small></small></small></small>
 
Pear said:
The irony is that the soldier died for their right to protest their ignorant ideas at his funeral.
No. he is a useless turkey that was to lazy to get a real job ~WBC <small><small><small><small>(not me dur)</small></small></small></small>
 
Bacon Boy said:
Mochacho said:
For some reason this topic reminds me of the Civil War. Whites didn't want African-Americans to do anything at all, yet they sure as hell will put them in war. :L
I don't think you have your facts straight there. The North was anti-slavery and wanted the African-Americans to be free and the South was for slavery. The South forced the Africans into war, whilst the North let them enlist on their own if they wanted to.
Well yeah, I just think of it as something terrible in any case. They didn't let Blacks do anything but work.
 
Bacon Boy said:
Mochacho said:
For some reason this topic reminds me of the Civil War. Whites didn't want African-Americans to do anything at all, yet they sure as hell will put them in war. :L
I don't think you have your facts straight there. The North was anti-slavery and wanted the African-Americans to be free and the South was for slavery. The South forced the Africans into war, whilst the North let them enlist on their own if they wanted to.
Well yeah, I just think of it as something terrible in any case. They didn't let Blacks do anything but work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top