To Be an American

[bwaites]

Starting a thread about veteran's rights in (North) America, punctuated by a video sponsored by commercial enterprise is a recipe for opinion. Related to veterans rights is government and to some on the forum government is linked to religion. A recipe for contentious opinion.

I'd prefer to talk about the 6.5mm Grendel on a site called '6.5 Grendel Forum'.

Then I invite you to do so. There is no obligation to venture into the 2A section of the Forum. Its not a necessity in any way. This section was requested by a multitude of members and was opened by the owner to discuss 2A issues in the United States. As the 2A doesn't apply in other countries, there is no reason to visit it.

In this case a moderator decided to post something interesting to him, and it happened to most closely fit in this section. Members are free to come and see what is here, but don't need to tarry if they are offended, as some appear to be.

The simple truth is that the United States was founded by a group who deeply believed in God, Liberty, and the individual right to self determination. However, they also believed in the individual right to NOT believe in those things, and constructed a government that protected the rights of all, regardless of belief.

No other country was willng to allow those at the time, and few do today. Many of us believe that those rights are only protected with and by the right to keep and bear arms, and the loss of that right has been found. time and again, to rapidly lead to the loss of the most basic of human rights.

Believe in God, or don't, but the greatest nation in human history was founded by those who did, and continues to be protected by those who do. Without those men, much of Europe would be speaking German or Russian, and much of the rest of the world would be speaking Japanese.

[Heywood]

I'm not sure if this should be taken in jest or not. :?

Yes. I forgot to push the sarc. button.
I was trying to point out that most agnostics, atheist or anti-theists conveniently forget, or at the least take for granted, that many of the the greatest institutions in western civilization have Christianaity as their founding and guiding principal. And act shocked offended or put upon when people still practice those beliefes as Christians do, or on my case, celebrate them and defend them in my own way.
I am really an agnostic, though, I wish I wasn't.

[Klem]

Then I invite you to do so. There is no obligation to venture into the 2A section of the Forum. Its not a necessity in any way. This section was requested by a multitude of members and was opened by the owner to discuss 2A issues in the United States. As the 2A doesn't apply in other countries, there is no reason to visit it.

In this case a moderator decided to post something interesting to him, and it happened to most closely fit in this section. Members are free to come and see what is here, but don't need to tarry if they are offended, as some appear to be.

The simple truth is that the United States was founded by a group who deeply believed in God, Liberty, and the individual right to self determination. However, they also believed in the individual right to NOT believe in those things, and constructed a government that protected the rights of all, regardless of belief.

No other country was willng to allow those at the time, and few do today. Many of us believe that those rights are only protected with and by the right to keep and bear arms, and the loss of that right has been found. time and again, to rapidly lead to the loss of the most basic of human rights.

Believe in God, or don't, but the greatest nation in human history was founded by those who did, and continues to be protected by those who do. Without those men, much of Europe would be speaking German or Russian, and much of the rest of the world would be speaking Japanese.

"The greatest nation in human history..." I'd like to drop this discussion but the sheer arrogance of implying an opinion is axiomatic begs a response. Religion and politics. Throw in a hefty spoonful of ethnocentricity and you get a critical mass of disquiet.

My understanding of the role of Moderator is akin to an umpire - to remain neutral. To calm and control the waters, not provoke disquiet.

For the record this discussion did not start in 2A.

[bwaites]

It may not have started 2A, but it is there now. As for my being a moderator, I was a member long before I was a moderator. I still retain my rights to express my opinion and and to express truth. IF I or any moderator were required to waive those rights, there would be no moderators, for in and of itself that implies censorship.

There was no religion expressed in my post, only a simple explanation of the Founding Fathers beliefs in Christianity, or, if you wish, Judeo-Christianity. Religion in this context is not a simple belief in God, but a value set and customs associated with that belief. It is man made, and the Founding Fathers had multiple different religious backgrounds, including Methodism, Lutheranism, Catholic, Huguenot, Congregationalist, Episcopalian/Anglican, Presbyterian, Calvinist, Unitarian, and Quakers, as well as Dutch/German Reformed. I find it interesting that someone with no belief in God is so offended by others belief in a Supreme Being. No one is implying or requiring that you should so believe.

Sorry if you don't share my beliefs about the greatest nation in history, but no other nation in history has spent so much blood for the lives and freedoms of people in other countries, and asked so little in return. Indeed, all America has asked for the lives of our fallen is a place to bury them in the countries where they have fallen.

Once again, you are not required to visit the 2A forum to be a good member of the Grendel Forum, it was established at the request of many members to allow a place for discussion of 2A issues, and since they don't pertain in your situation, there really isn't any need for you to visit here. You are welcome to do so, but with the understanding that this section will be, obviously, "ethnocentric" though the word does not mean what you think it means. There is no such thing as applied to United States citizens as a group, simply because we are so multi-ethnic! We have a dominant language, English, and even that is changing, but when it comes to any other divider; race, religion, culture, or custom we are widely divergent. Calling US citizens ethnocentric is laughable. If you are referring to our patriotic bent, regardless of ethnic background, it is that patriotic bent that has allowed the US to defend freedom from "halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli" as one of our military hymns so proudly claims! Please do not interpret that as a belief that the US has always been right in its interventions, for we are a nation led by men with various egos and rationales, not all of which have been pure at times. The US has made mistakes, but has tried to correct those mistakes where possible, eventually.

So, once again, I invite you to remain in the "technical" areas of the forum, avoiding those areas that might offend your sensibilities.

[cory]

Well said Bwaites!

[Nukes]

So, if I understand both moderators, there is no rule against promoting charities that have nothing to do with the 2A and no rule against discussing politics and religion in the 2A section. It is OK to discuss "interesting" items, including the Deism (not Christianity) of many of the Founders (for example, Jefferson who crossed out Jesus' miracles from his copy of the Bible) as well as the contradiction in terms such as "Judeo-Christianity."

“The thesis of this book is that Judaism and Christianity do not form a common tradition, ‘the Judeo-Christian tradition.’ They are not compatible ... only now, for reasons of politics and sociology, have some representatives of Judaism maintained otherwise....”
Jews and Christians: the myth of a common tradition, Rabbi Jacob Neusner, ISBN 1-586841-08-4, Binghamton NY: Classics in Judaic Studies

http://books.google.no/books?id=qDdoHV9sPsAC&lpg=PP1&dq=Jews%20and%20Christians%3A%20the%20myth%20of%20a%20common%20tradition&hl=no&pg=PR11#v=onepage&q&f=false

See also: Don Curzio Nitoglia, The "Judeo-Christian" Lie

http://www.doncurzionitoglia.com/menzogna_del_giudeocristianesimo.htm

a Google translation: http://translate.google.com/translat...stianesimo.htm

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2011/11/don-curzio-nitoglia-judeo-christian-lie.html

As for "beliefs about the greatest nation in history," the souls lost, the innocent civilian men, women, and children lost, in Wounded Knee, Sherman's March, Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Eisenhower's post-war death camps, My Lai, and the Middle East are likely to have a dissenting opinion on what makes a nation great. Even some veterans have a dissenting opinion about what makes a nation great.

Please, no double standards here. Moderators brought these things up, so we should be free to discuss the matters.

[bwaites]

So, if I understand both moderators, there is no rule against promoting charities that have nothing to do with the 2A and no rule against discussing politics and religion in the 2A section. It is OK to discuss "interesting" items, including the Deism (not Christianity) of many of the Founders (for example, Jefferson who crossed out Jesus' miracles from his copy of the Bible) as well as the contradiction in terms such as "Judeo-Christianity."

“The thesis of this book is that Judaism and Christianity do not form a common tradition, ‘the Judeo-Christian tradition.’ They are not compatible ... only now, for reasons of politics and sociology, have some representatives of Judaism maintained otherwise....”
Jews and Christians: the myth of a common tradition, Rabbi Jacob Neusner, ISBN 1-586841-08-4, Binghamton NY: Classics in Judaic Studies

http://books.google.no/books?id=qDdoHV9sPsAC&lpg=PP1&dq=Jews%20and%20Christians%3A%20the%20myth%20of%20a%20common%20tradition&hl=no&pg=PR11#v=onepage&q&f=false

See also: Don Curzio Nitoglia: The "Judeo-Christian" Lie

http://www.doncurzionitoglia.com/menzogna_del_giudeocristianesimo.htm

a Google translation: http://translate.google.com/translat...stianesimo.htm

http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2011/11/don-curzio-nitoglia-judeo-christian-lie.html

Please, no double standards here. Moderators brought these things up, so we should be free to discuss the matters.

Actually, we did not, you did. There is huge difference in pointing out the Founding Fathers belief in God and a Judeo-Christian belief system, which is widely accepted as the founding basis for our Declaration of Independence and Counstitution, and proposing radical viewpoints on that belief system. We will NOT be having another issue with you on this. You have been warned multiple times about trolling this very issue. You have been suspended for trolling this issue. Further discussion on your part will result in banning.

[Nukes]

Parse carefully.

A moderator, LRRPF52, posted a video promoting a charity that had nothing to do with the Second Amendment. He admitted that.

Not until page 3 did I say anything. I noted the political and religious character of the discussion. I mentioned our food truck "freedom." There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

When the moderator, LRRPF52, admitted that his post really didn't fit in any allowable category, he justified it by claiming the privilege of "veteran's [sic] opinion."

I then pointed out that, even though I personally work for veterans, there are other opinions and that posting one opinion invites other opinions. I mentioned the rule a second time. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

Then you, BWaites, moderator, went on about "Christianity" and "Judeo-Christianity" and the "greatest nation in history"—naked politics and religion. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

You and LRRPF52 opened the door. I "trolled" nothing. You and LRRPF52 ignored and violated the rule.

So, be honest with yourself, Bill. You ignored the rule as long as you agreed with the politics and religion. You intervened only when you disagreed with the politics and religion. "Some animals are more equal than others."

[bwaites]

Parse carefully.

A moderator, LRRPF52, posted a video promoting a charity that had nothing to do with the Second Amendment. He admitted that.

Not until page 3 did I say anything. I noted the political and religious character of the discussion. I mentioned our food truck "freedom." There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

When the moderator, LRRPF52, admitted that his post really didn't fit in any allowable category, he justified it by claiming the privilege of "veteran's [sic] opinion."

I then pointed out that, even though I personally work for veterans, there are other opinions and that posting one opinion invites other opinions. I mentioned the rule a second time. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

Then you, BWaites, moderator, went on about "Christianity" and "Judeo-Christianity" and the "greatest nation in history"—naked politics and religion. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

You and LRRPF52 opened the door. I "trolled" nothing. You and LRRPF52 ignored and violated the rule.

So, be honest with yourself, Bill. You ignored the rule as long as you agreed with the politics and religion. You intervened only when you disagreed with the politics and religion. "Some animals are more equal than others."

Be honest with yourself, what part of "further discussion on your part will result in banning" do you not understand?

[bwaites]

Parse carefully.

A moderator, LRRPF52, posted a video promoting a charity that had nothing to do with the Second Amendment. He admitted that.

Like members, moderators have wide disgression in what they post. When members do so, moderators will often move it to a more appropriate forum. LRRPF52 chose to do so. Does it fit the strict rules, no, but we have thousands of post that don't.

Not until page 3 did I say anything. I noted the political and religious character of the discussion. I mentioned our food truck "freedom." There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

Once again, we give members wide latitude, otherwise the board would be nothing more than recipes of what worked for what gun.

When the moderator, LRRPF52, admitted that his post really didn't fit in any allowable category, he justified it by claiming the privilege of "veteran's [sic] opinion."

I then pointed out that, even though I personally work for veterans, there are other opinions and that posting one opinion invites other opinions. I mentioned the rule a second time. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

And once again, I and the other mods left it alone. The thread had wandered a bit off topic, but that "wide latitude" still was in effect.

Then you, BWaites, moderator, went on about "Christianity" and "Judeo-Christianity" and the "greatest nation in history"—naked politics and religion. There was no intervention to halt the rule violation.

My first post was on the 4th page, I had neither read the posts or watched the video prior to that.(I still haven't found the time to watch it.) But I was receiving multiple PM's and emails about the thread so I came to read it at that point.

You and LRRPF52 opened the door. I "trolled" nothing. You and LRRPF52 ignored and violated the rule.

We "opened the door to more of your anti-jewish pap? Really? By simply mentioning that the Founding Fathers relied on a belief in Christian principles, or perhaps Judeo-Christian principles? REALLY? And I opened the door to politics by stating that the United States was the greatest nation in history? REALLY?

So, be honest with yourself, Bill. You ignored the rule as long as you agreed with the politics and religion. You intervened only when you disagreed with the politics and religion. "Some animals are more equal than others."

I'll be honest with you, I had great hopes that you would avoid the 2A part of the forum, because you obviously have deep feelings and beliefs that are both contradictory to many here, and needless on this forum.

You have great value as a member when you stick to the technical forums, and your experience there has been helpful. But you cannot seem to follow any direction, and you seem to believe that this is some debate. Its not, this is a privately owned forum, where the owner, and by extension, the moderators, do as they see fit to maintain decorum. You have repeatedly violated that decorum, even while being asked not to do so. You leave me no options.

[LRRPF52]

Guys, I just wanted to share something near and dear to me, shedding some light on perspective from some guys who spent their lives serving their Country. I never thought it would turn into a point of contention.

[Klem]

Whoa!

Sorry guys, I've been away. We went down to the foreshore to watch the fireworks. It's Australia Day (26th Jan), where we celebrate our nationalism, being of course the 'greatest nation in human history.' On this day we also celebrate our multiculturalism where they always show citizenship ceremonies with people of other ethnicities on telly. Seems this has heated up in the meantime with threats of censorship by someone who was emphasizing earlier in the thread how we are all entitled to our differences of opinion.

My point earlier about the role of Moderator is one of neutrality, that in my view transcends the indulgence of taking sides. Like a Judge in a courtroom or an umpire in a sporting match. You feel differently Bill as you obviously hold very dear your views on the current subject. It would be very difficult for Nukes, myself or any other forum member to believe that any action you take now is unbiased. In your shoes if I missed the enjoyment of participating I would have two avatars; one as a member and one as an impartial Moderator. I accept there is now temptation for you to admonish me for suggesting the subterfuge but the current situation is also less than perfect. You espouse your deep seated beliefs and then threaten to censor the next poster who disagrees...at least it seems that way to me.

As for the micro aspect of the latest discussion, the US shedding more lives on behalf of other countries with no expectation of anything in return except the gravesites managed by the ABMC.Surely an obviously educated person such as yourself can see the brain washed jingoism in that statement? "No WMD's here." "Ooop's, quick, lets change it to Operation Iraqi Freedom." Come on Bill. Surely you know such grandiose statements stir debate and that there is no quiet dignity in loud proclamations.

Here are some pictures I took in 2011 of Colleville Sur-Mer. It is a beautiful place and a sobering reminder of sacrifice. I recommend everyone makes the pilgrimage to be there at least once in their lives.

[Heywood]

^^^

Did your eyes glaze over when walking amongst so much religious symbolism? Or did you RESPECTFULLY acknowledge that many people sacrificed and continue to sacrifice. Not in spite of, but because their beliefs?

[Klem]

Actually they did, but more so from the military symbolism and my own memories. Just as poignant is the German cemetery at LaCambe, a simple place where more than twice the number at Colleville Sur Mer are buried.

How about you, did your eyes glaze over?

[Drift]

Getting back to the point of the clip. For me, it brought back memories of one of the hardest things I have ever done. Getting out. For four long years I had served. Told what to say and when and who to say it to; what to do what to read, wear, eat drink stand and when to sleep. I had not driven a car, payed rent or changed a TV channel in 3 1/2 years. I had talked on the phone to my family for maybe 30 min total. I was only allowed to take my 30 days annual leave "while at sea". I was 'instutionalised". So getting out was being "free" again. Freedom is scary. Free means"free to starve". Free to fail on my own. Or free to do well and excel. I did well enough for myself. Got a good and liberal education, married and a family to be proud of. I own guns, vote and go to church. I am proud to have served, and now proud contribute to my family town state and country in other ways. That's what being an American is about.