[Vision2020] A Kirk Cathdral l as a gateway to Moscow'

[g. crabtree]

Scott, you're absolutely right. I'm sure Doug and Co. would, will, and have 
gotten by just fine. (they certainly have up to now at any rate) I was 
merely commenting on the disparity between the folks on this list who are 
quick to quack about rights for one group and then just as rapidly deny them 
to another. And with a perfectly straight face and wounded demeanor tell you 
they don't.

g

P.S. I just got back from looking in on Mr. London and friends protest 
march. I thought that the anti-Bush/stop the war/show the duck marches they 
sponsored were pathetic until I saw this latest embarrassment. When you get 
less than a dozen participants it ain't so much a march as an after dinner 
stroll with yer zany chums. Needless to say the "powerful impact" was 
greatly diminished. It did seem to provide a great deal of amusement to the 
onlookers if that's any consolation.

g
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Dredge" <sdredge at yahoo.com>
To: "viz" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A Kirk Cathdral l as a gateway to Moscow'


> g.,
>
> Based on Doug Wilson's previous writings, he doesn't object to being 
> discriminated against for his religion on things like being denied rent 
> and I would guess this would extend to real estate purchases as well.
>
> These are Doug's words:
>
> "...if I applied for rental, and the fellow told me he didn't rent to 
> Jesus freaks, I would move on down the street, and that right gladly. No 
> lawsuits from me, nothing. I would think to myself as I walked away, isn't 
> it great to live in a free country?"
>
> http://vision2020.moscow.com/Archives/2002/0206/msg00234.html
>
> If anyone discriminates against Doug and he chooses not to go down legal 
> avenues in an attempt to remedy the situation, I have no issue with that. 
> Why do you?  Living in a free country, It's Doug choice.  He shouldn't be 
> forced to fight for his legal rights.
>
> -Scott
>
> ===============
>
>
> Ms. Mix postulates:
>
> "It seems at some point that the seller would be made aware of the real 
> purchaser and still be within his or her legal right to interrupt the 
> sale."
>
> g. responded:
>
> What if the erstwile seller were to have become aware that the real 
> purchaser was Jewish, or gay, or an uppity woman? Would he still have been 
> within his legal right to interrupt the sale? Or does this discriminatory 
> policy for land transactions only come into play when dealing with "the 
> earnest and sweater vest clad." Could you please provide me with a list of 
> the groups you feel are deserving of this kind of "special" attention? I 
> mean heck, if you don't have to sell land to them why should you have to 
> sell them food or clothes, rent them lodging or allow them to interact 
> with righteous folk such as yourself in any manner?
>
> g
>
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>