Ooo! Ooo! Can I be a degenerate too?
No offense bud but I find this VERY hard to believe. I went to Great Lakes Naval Training Center in the 70’s and Ft. Jackson, SC. in the 80’s and if that behaviour had ever been exhibited in either place, the offending noncom or officer woulf have been court martialed.
On a side note, when I was in Germany, we got a new post commander that disliked swearing and the next mornings formation had the 1st sgt stating that “all you cocksuckers better knock off the fucking swearing cuz the new post CO don’t like that fuckin’ shit.”
Gotta love the Army.
But why? Explain what makes us mentally ill degenerates.
If you can show where it’s a misrepresentation as well, sure. If I show you (and I can) where he’s simply changed the word “war” to the word “attack”, and continued his original whine, will *you * apologize to me? :dubious:
Obviously because you disagree with his statement. That is all he needs to diagnose you. :dubious:
Obvious isn’t it.
cthiax, you really should update your sig to include a hyperlink to his post #80.
Jim
I am well aware that, many pages ago in the thread, he changed from the word “war” to the word “attack.” He appears since then to have been persuaded that this position too is incorrect. I believe what I quoted is his most recent summation of his position, although he has repeatedly clarified that he believes it is only one source of such a chilling effect.
Daniel
link, and a clarification that he agreed later on that this chilling effect was unintended.
Daniel
You’re free to believe whatever you like about what you think he’s saying, since he is so reticent about stating it clearly. But not, unfortunately, to accuse others of misrepresenting it when by simply quoting his actual, unretracted words. What you’ve quoted above he said before the “attack” stuff, too.
Now where’s that apology?
One more clarification: Elvis’s disingenuous statement was that “as for a new position he’s simply changed “war” to “attack”.” Bricker’s original position was:
All quotes taken from the first and second posts in this thread.
Read this original position, and then the position I quote above:
Elvis’s characterization of the change in position is disingenuous.
Daniel
:rolleyes: I would wonder the same thing, except that I know you’re a contemptible lying weasel, and I no more expect an apology from you, even when it’s owed, than I expect my cat to quote Shakespeare.
Daniel
Is your cat more of a Marlowe scholar then?
I always miss the beginnings of these threads. 
As a semiregular poster and an avowed agnostic/atheist let me just say I don’t personally have any problem with the military chaplain service provided the chaplains are able and willing to provide services/sacraments in any and all religions and provide nonreligious counselling service to those who prefer it, regardless of their own personal denomination. I feel that qualifies under the 1st amendment since it at least hypothetically gives equal footing to all belief systems. As long as those requirements are met I’m okay with it. Otherwise, no way. If the military brass are in the habit of proselytizing for their own brand of religion among the troops, and especially if they use belief systems as litmus tests for promotions, then the system is fucked up. I’ve never served so I don’t know that those things happen, but I have heard stories.
Also, I may be mentally ill and my girlfriend could tell you if I’m a degenerate, but I wash every day thank you very much.
A “provoker” (your words, not mine!) is a troll.
A troll is a tool.
Any clearer now?
Isn’t that already done?
Dude, have you ever been on or near a military base?
I didn’t know this either until I spent a lot of time in boot camp.
I’ve never participated in a blanket party or been part of a flight that had one, but I’ve been down the hall from a couple of blanket parties and heard about them (seen the wounds one time when they didn’t cover the face, etc.) the next day. One particularly nasty one I heard about involved those name- and unit-badges with the sharp pins that you wear on your dress uniform.
BTW, I’d also like to add that part of the blanket’s purported functionality is that it helps minimize the scarring, so that the “you better not tell anyone” thing can work.
Well, I can’t be arsed to link to the post for you (or write the post again), but these questions have been answered several times between this thread and the thread it concerns.
I showed you where you were wrong. I even explained what was wrong with the cites you gave later before you even gave them.
A grownup accepts responsibility for what he says. Maybe you’ll learn someday. But I’m not waiting and you’re not worth it.
My apologies for missing some of the posts and links. As I said, as long as those certain conditions are met I have no personal problem with military chaplains. I’m sure instances that would violate them are few and far between.
I do, however, have a huge problem with Martin Hyde.
A “provoker” is a catalyst. A catalyst can be a tool used to start a discussion. Ah, yes, a tool for use instigating discussion. I see now.
How this?
I would say awesome, I just did this a short time ago.
Well, I guess that’s what I get for wondering what “knee-jerk caveman trainwreck ahead” actually means. I’ll have to write that down.
I’m just curious, do you reckon the establishment clause (that’s in the First Amendment) also originated from the same kind of religious bigotry? But then, I suppose somebody like you is probably hatching a plan to rectify that little oversight.
This is just like someone who says they hate bad analogies but then they go rob a liquor store.