My post was very much material and relevant to law and religion. I believe our ListMeister fears any criticism of Judaism or world Jewry or global endeavors of its adherents. No matter how often or who opposes freedom of religion, which includes criticism of Judaism, the knowledge of truth (of the HoloHoax) is expanding across the Earth.
For a USA-First government! Larry -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 11:33 AM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: From the list custodian RE: Pink Triangles and Religious Liberty Folks: Let me say it again -- please keep posts on-topic, which is to say pretty closely focused on the law of government and religion. The original thread had to do with whether Title VII's religious accommodation provision, or perhaps the Free Exercise Clause or the Free Speech Clause, authorized religious objections to certain in-class posters; that's on-topic. This post is not on-topic. Please abide by the list discussion rules. The list custodian > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Larry Darby > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:24 AM > To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics' > Subject: RE: Pink Triangles and Religious Liberty > > > Applying such isolated events (specific) to an entire class > (general) is just the sort of logical fallacy that has led to > all sorts of distortions in law and public policy during > recent decades of "political correctness." The same sort of > manipulation of the masses has been wildly successful in > regard to the Holocaust Industry. The Religion of the > Holocaust is made law under the guise of hate crimes. Here's a good > summary: > > Holocaust Fundamentalism promotes loss of individual liberties > > CounterThink, Taiwan > > Jan. 24, 2006 > > Articles central to The Faith include unwavering commitment > to Jewish casualty numbers with a full and complete > understanding of the manner in which innocent Jews were > gassed, murdered and executed in Nazi Germany. > > The typical rhetoric goes: "these bigots deny the facts and > lessons garnered from humankind's experience during WWII. > > In Europe and North America, Holocaust skeptics are being > apprehended, arrested and are now facing lengthy prison terms. > > These Holocaust-denying apostates include British author and > historian David Irving, Holocaust revisionist Ernst Zundel, > German chemist Gemar Rudolf, and others. > > In an era where nearly anything goes, why does the truth need > special laws to protect it? > > Laws regulating 'historical interpretation' are themselves a crime. > It's known that after the second world war, the Red Cross put > the number of Jewish deaths at considerably less than one million. > > It is, after all, indisputable that some earlier "facts" > regarding the Holocaust have been streamlined and smoothed > out for popular consumption. > > As for the "un-revisable" six million figure, Jews have > superstitious reasons pertaining to the number "six" for > claiming that six million died. > > In fact, similar charges about six million Jews were made, > incredibly, in 1919, concerning the fantastic number of Jews > facing death during WWI. > > Another reason Jews want to hype the number of victims is > that they wanted to have the greatest causality count so they > could claim supreme victimhood and reap the political rewards. > > Holocaust lore is essential to the precarious legitimacy of > the Jewish State. > > Rightly or wrongly, the Nazis blamed the Jews for America's > entry into WWI as well as the unjust and punitive Treaty of > Versailles which followed. > > This deliberate mischaracterization of Holocaust revisionism > has been spread widely and purposefully by keepers of the > Holocaust faith. > > One reader suggested that we call the search for truth in > this matter "Holocaust factualism". > > http://www.counterthink.org/016944.html > > http://www.rense.com/general69/hol.htm > > Larry Darby, Democratic candidate for > Attorney General of Alabama. > http://www.larrydarby.com/ > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul > Finkelman > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 5:00 PM > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > Subject: Re: Pink Triangles and Religious Liberty > > Rick: > > Maybe the test ought to be which "whiny" group has suffered > persecution, > > gets murdered, beaten up, and threatned (or beaten up and > left tied to a > > fence overnight in Wyoming); which group lives in fear day-to-day of > being attacked for the essence of who they are? which needs the > protection of the school and which needs to have the majority > group be > educated about the fundamental wrongness of harming people because of > who they are. Or, to put it anther way, in a majority Christian > country, with a born-again president, do Chrisian students feel some > threat that they are about to be beaten up or even killed > because of who > > they are. If there is a real threat to Christian student and > they need > to be protected and that they need a place of refuge to > avoiding being > harmed by fellow students, then by-all means, have a pink > triangle and a > > little cross in a triangle as well, and let the two persecuted groups > meet together in a place of refuge. > > > Paul Finkelman > > > > > > > > Quoting Rick Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> Steve: I agree with your point about whiny victims and the > culture of > > >> complaint. But here is the problem. One group of whiny complainers > >> asks for a Pink Triangle to make them feel more welcome. > This causes > >> another group of whiny complainers to complain about > having the Pink > >> Triangles shoved down their throats. Which group of whiny > complainers > > >> should be appeased? What would be the more neutral way of resolving > >> this dispute between the dueling whiners? > >> > >> Rick Duncan > >> > >> Steve Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Quoting Rick Duncan : > >> > >>> What if a teacher walks into class, sees the display, and states > >>> that he does not agree with its posting in his classroom. May the > >>> school discipline him for merely making it clear that the > display is > >>> the message of the school board as opposed to that of the teacher > >>> himself? > >> > >> > >> It be interesting to speculate, too, whether gay students > would then > >> have some sort of disparate-impact and/or harassment claim (against > the > >> teachers individually? the school board?) under the state or local > >> non-discrimination ordinances (there is no federal gay > rights law, of > >> course). > >> > >>> I also think there is a non-constitutional religious > liberty policy > >>> issue when teachers are required to teach under a banner that > >>> violates their sincerely held religious beliefs? > >> > >> > >> Rick, the problem with this, is seems to me (and like yours, this > isn't > >> a legal argument, but a practical one), is that the vast > majority of > >> religious believers (of all types) probably encounter, in > their daily > >> work lives, any number of policies, things they are > expected to do, > >> colleagues they are expected to put up with, etc., that they could > >> claim violate some sincerely held religious belief of > theirs, if they > >> insisted on being strict and literal about it. But most people do > what > >> they need to do to get by each day, if for no other reason than > they've > >> absorbed the American ethos of live-and-let-live pluralism. > >> > >> Not long ago, civic-republican oriented conservatives wrote books > with > >> titles like "The Culture of Complaint," about how too many > Americans > >> had become whiny, oversensitive rights-claimers to the > exclusion of > >> larger notions of duty and citizenship. I confess, the idea of > >> teachers taking offense and asserting "rights" against > policies that > >> are intended to help their own students learn in safer and more > >> effective environments strikes me as being just as regrettable. > >> > >> Steve Sanders _______________________________________________ > >> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > >> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > >> > >> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot > be viewed as > > >> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read > messages that are > >> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can > >> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Rick Duncan > >> Welpton Professor of Law > >> University of Nebraska College of Law > >> Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > >> > >> > >> "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow > either Galahad > >> or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle > >> > >> "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, > >> or numbered." --The Prisoner > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------- > >> Do you Yahoo!? > >> With a free 1 GB, there's more in store with Yahoo! Mail. > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________ > > > > Steve Sanders > > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be > viewed as > > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read > messages that are > > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can > > (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > -- > Paul Finkelman > Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law > University of Tulsa College of Law > 3120 East 4th Place > Tulsa, OK 74104-3189 > > 918-631-3706 (office) > 918-631-2194 (fax) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members > can (rightly > or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, > see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be > viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read > messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; > and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the > messages to others. > _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
