[Vision2020] Maybe not an intolerista, but slightly confused.

[Donovan Arnold]

Tim,

"Okay, your first reason is slightly flawed.  There
> are times when people disagree with someones opinion
about laws but regardless of their opinion on the law,
the law should be followed as written."

Tim, you obviously are unaware that most disagreement
about the law is about interpretation. That is why we
have a court system.

I happen to believe that NSA is not in violation of
the law. That is my opinion. I am not the only one
that believes that. Prove to me that my opinion is
wrong? I also hold the opinion that blue and green are
the best colors, prove that wrong too while you are at
it.

"I guess I don't follow this argument because I don't
> perceive any other 
> business downtown that is in violation of said
> zoning complaint."

Well, you are obviously unaware that there are
numerous other complaints of Moscow zoning codes now,
including the alternative high school, and the
University of Idaho.

 
"Aren't laws in general unjust to some certain people,
example: public no-somking laws are unjustly applied
against smokers."

No, they are not generally unjust to certain people.
That is why we make laws, so things are just for
everybody. If it is not, it is a bad law and needs to
be changed. Smokers are infringing on the clean air of
others. They need to smoke in a place that respects
the  rights of others and nobody is forced to inhale
their toxins. 

"Again, provide me with some evidence that Mr. Curley
> and his clients have 
> filed a complaint because of prejudice."

They only filed complains against NSA, they did not
file zoning violations against anyone else. 

The interpretation of the law and the filing of zoning
complaint are unjust procedures and actions taken
against a group of people for their religious beliefs
and practices. That is wrong, and I believe a
violation of the First Amendment rights of NSA to
practice their religion. That does not mean that I
agree with NSA, Christ Church, or Doug Wilson as you
and others would like to believe. It means I agree
with the First Amendment.

Take Care,

Donovan J Arnold

 




 
> Currently the owner of a 
> coffee shop somehwere in Idaho disagrees with me on
> my interpretation of the 
> Idaho Clean Indoor Air Act and how it applies to
> coffee shops.  This person 
> feels as though his business would suffer if smoking
> were not allowed in his 
> establishment.  Is his business a threat to the
> community?  No not really, 
> however his business is in violation of a state law
> and therefore should be 
> penalized justly.  Much like the zoning fiasco, one
> party is in the wrong 
> based upon the code as it is written and another
> party has brought this to 
> the attention of the proper authorities who have
> doen their job to try and 
> remedy the situation.
> 
> "Second, if it is a law, it is an unjust law, in
> that if it were to be 
> followed across the board to every business downtown
> it would eliminate much 
> of the core of our city."
> 
> I guess I don't follow this argument because I don't
> perceive any other 
> business downtown that is in violation of said
> zoning complaint.  It seems 
> to me that the vast majority of the businesses
> downtown are in accordance 
> with the zoning code for which they preside.  Maybe
> you could provide 
> evidence that would support your claim that a large
> core of our city would 
> suffer.  Aren't laws in general unjust to some
> certain people, example: 
> public no-somking laws are unjustly applied against
> smokers.
> 
> "And finally, it is being prejudicially  enforced.
> The only reason people 
> are wanting to enforce this interpretation of the
> zoning law is because they 
> do not like a group of people in our community and
> want to make their lives 
> as miserable as possible."
> 
> Again, provide me with some evidence that Mr. Curley
> and his clients have 
> filed a complaint because of prejudice.  Yes, a lot
> of people in this town 
> do not like Wilson et al. however, I do not feel as
> though the complaints 
> are motivated by a dislike of Wilson et al.
> 
> "I believe that prejudice is wrong, even when it is
> applied to people who 
> have values and religious beliefs I strongly
> disagree with, and even people 
> I dislike. Intoleristas only hate prejudices when it
> applies to them and 
> their friends. They are fine with prejudicial
> treatment if it is against a 
> group they disapprove of."
> 
> Well I guess I can agree with part of this statement
> in the sense that 
> prejudice is wrong.  The rest, however, I have to
> disagree till another day.
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> Revolution is not a word but an application; it is
> not war but peace; it 
> does not weaken, but strengthens. Revolution does
> not cause separation; it 
> generates togetherness.
> -John Africa, Strategic Revolution
> 
> 
> >From: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
> >To: TIM RIGSBY <tim.rigsby at hotmail.com>,
> vision2020 at moscow.com
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Is Donovan an Intolerista
> now?
> >Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 15:03:19 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >No Tim,
> >
> >Your example is a poor one for three major reasons.
> >First, I do not agree with your premise that NSA is
> in
> >violation of the law. Second, if it is a law, it is
> an
> >  unjust law, in that if it were to be followed
> across
> >the board to every business downtown it would
> >eliminate much of the core of our city. And
> finally,
> >it is being prejudicially  enforced. The only
> reason
> >people are wanting to enforce this interpretation
> of
> >the zoning law is because they do not like a group
> of
> >people in our community and want to make their
> lives
> >as miserable as possible.
> >
> >I believe that prejudice is wrong, even when it is
> >applied to people who have values and religious
> >beliefs I strongly disagree with, and even people I
> >dislike. Intoleristas only hate prejudices when it
> >applies to them and their friends. They are fine
> with
> >prejudicial treatment if it is against a group they
> >disapprove of.
> >
> >Take Care,
> >
> >Donovan J Arnold
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--- TIM RIGSBY <tim.rigsby at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Just because a law is broken in the past, it
> does
> > > not
> > > justify the continuation of the violation in the
> > > present and future."
> > >
> > > So Donovan does this mean that you now support
> the
> > > eviction of NSA as they
> > > have broken laws concerning zoning in the past
> and
> > > continue to break zoning
> > > code now?
> > >
> > > Revolution is not a word but an application; it
> is
> > > not war but peace; it
> > > does not weaken, but strengthens. Revolution
> does
> > > not cause separation; it
> > > generates togetherness.
> > > -John Africa, Strategic Revolution
> > >
> > >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
> > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger!
> > > Download today - it's FREE!
> > >
>
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> > >
> > >
>
>_____________________________________________________
> > >  List services made available by First Step
> > > Internet,
> > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since
> 1994.
> 
=== message truncated ===


	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com