PDA

View Full Version : A word of advice and warning.




mavtek
03-23-2008, 11:30 PM
If you do not think this forum is monitored by those who are against us you are mistaken. If you do not think others will use your dialog to defame you or others you are mistaken.

Be wary of your rights and the law. My response to chuck is as follows.

http://blog.chuckcampbellshow.com/archives/32#more-32

Chuck how interesting that you have taken what I put on a forum and somehow taken it to mean that I am somehow "gay". You didn't imply you out and out defamed me by calling me a "gay". I'm not sure how you took what I stated to be in anyway an admittance of homosexuality, but I can assure you I am a happily married man (to a woman) with 2 wonderful daughters, one newborn and one a very rambunctious 2 year old. Now I don't know you, nor do I want to, but what you have stated about me is defamation and according to my Attorney as you posted it on a Blog it is Libel. He told me to send you this link if you'd like more information.

http://www.attorneys-usa.com/intentional/defamation.html

You see your "Blog" is considered a media outlet in court. Where as a forum is considered semi public/private discussion group among peers without a 3rd party present (Hence why I can call you an idiot without libel). You are perfectly welcome to take my statements from that forum or my blog and use them how you like. The problem is you have posted a link to my blog, on a conservative blog portal I might add, this blog is registered and linked back to my personal information. Unfortunately I'm not able to immediately file suit against you on Monday when my county court office opens as you unfortunately have 48 hours to either remove, or recant your defamation according to North Carolina statute. If you were in Texas as I am, I could not only file against you, but the radio station you work for as well. I'm lucky my Family has the services of a firm who is able to give us immediate advice via cell phone. Although I must admit he seemed upset when I called him on Easter Sunday (I blame you for this). Also I, or my attorney must notify you before your time expires so please consider this your notification. Suffice it to say I'm writing this letter with a bit of anger, if my attorney is forced to write this letter I will not only be angry but I will be determined.

Now to stipulate where I believe the church and state should stand on gay marriage. I believe the Church and Conservatives like myself should be strongly against gay marriage or it's derivatives as it is clearly a sin and not natural. In my personal opinion homosexuality is an illness, similar to mental retardation. I for one can not possibly believe that one would want to lie with another of the same sex unless there is indeed something mentally, physically, or chemically wrong with them. Do you consider yourself having the ability to consider doing that without your judgment being seriously altered? This is what I implied. Now are we to assume Jesus advocated Christians use the power of the state to persecute those with a sickness or even those that have sinned? We all sin Chuck, if it is eating too much that is gluttony, calling in sick when you are not is sloth. Sins against oneself are between you and god, the state need not be concerned unless you commit sin against another. Chuck as a "minister" you should be concerned with those in your church and what you can do to help those that are sinning against themselves. How do you or anyone else for that matter ask the state to limit their size and power if we give them the power to dictate how we act, think, or treat ourselves? In California they have all but outlawed homeschooling, reference to God in our pledge of allegiance is being attacked, the 10 Commandments along with crosses on public property are stricken from sight. Now you want to give the state the power to literally dictate an institution that has been defined by the church for thousands of years.

Can you please tell me how giving the state more power is Conservative? Do you not see the hypocrisy of your mandate that the state should dictate our morals? You say the Muslims and Sharia law are extremists, how do you define yourself?

Ask yourself what would Jesus do? Would he walk, eat, and accept Homosexuals as God's children?

Luke Chapter 15:1-10

Now the tax collectors and "sinners" were all gathering round to hear him. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, "This man welcomes sinners, and eats with them." Then Jesus told them this parable: "Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it? And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbours together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep.' I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent. "Or suppose a woman has ten silver coins and loses one. Does she not light a lamp, sweep the house and search carefully until she finds it? And when she finds it, she calls her friends and neighbours together and says, 'Rejoice with me; I have found my lost coin.' In the same way, I tell you, there is rejoicing in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents."

Interesting how Jesus and the Religious of his time regarded the "Tax Collector" as a sinner for his very occupation. Now you sir want to essentially give this person the right to mandate moral code for some 400 million Americans in 50 very diverse states with thousands of cities that by democracy define moral code and law for themselves. One might ask what Jesus thinks of you and your desire to give the sinner the power to dictate what is law and moral code for our extremely diverse country.

Chuck you clearly lack the knowledge of 2 very important things in which you speak of. The 1st thing is Jesus, the 2nd is Libertarianism. When you speak of Christianity you are proud to tell us what it means to be Christian. Then you are proud to tell us ways in which we can enforce your version of "Christianity". Unfortunately what you misunderstand is enforcement by the state is not Christianity, it is in fact the antithesis of what is Christian. What you call for is tyranny by men, as government is run by men and not God. You see Freedom, Liberty, and Christianity are of the same cloth. True Christians can be nothing but Libertarians. This will be hard for you to accept, but if you truly want to know what it means to have faith in Jesus and you truly believe he is your savior then study his actions and you will come to know this is true.

mavtek
03-24-2008, 12:46 AM
Here I thought it was interesting :(

LibertyEagle
03-24-2008, 01:02 AM
It is. It is. :) It's just late, Mav.

Mickeys
03-24-2008, 01:25 AM
No offeense, but it is obvious that you did not talk to an attorney (unless your attorney is the WORST attorney in history) and you are not scaring this guy.

This EASILY falls under parody. Not to mention, you have to prove actual damages/harm. But again...if doing this was liable for lawsuits, John McCain could sue everyone on this forum. As could Guiliani for the exact same reason you claim to be suing.

When you bluff, like you obviously did, you just give them more ammunition to use against you.

acptulsa
03-24-2008, 06:25 AM
No offeense, but it is obvious that you did not talk to an attorney (unless your attorney is the WORST attorney in history) and you are not scaring this guy.

This EASILY falls under parody. Not to mention, you have to prove actual damages/harm. But again...if doing this was liable for lawsuits, John McCain could sue everyone on this forum. As could Guiliani for the exact same reason you claim to be suing.

When you bluff, like you obviously did, you just give them more ammunition to use against you.

Mickeys, there is a big difference between politicians and private citizens as far as libel and slander. A big difference.

Grow a brain before you tell people off.

mavtek
03-24-2008, 09:10 AM
Actually Mickey's I did, his blog falls under the jurisdiction of public or 3rd party use. This forum is a private discussion group viewed publicly. There is a huge difference. Read the entire thing, don't take pieces and try to put to come to a conclusion. My family does have the services of a law firm, our Ron Paul group in Dallas also has the services of Steve Heath another attorney who I've emailed this morning to get a second opinion.

Rhys
03-24-2008, 10:32 AM
No offeense, but it is obvious that you did not talk to an attorney (unless your attorney is the WORST attorney in history) and you are not scaring this guy.

This EASILY falls under parody. Not to mention, you have to prove actual damages/harm. But again...if doing this was liable for lawsuits, John McCain could sue everyone on this forum. As could Guiliani for the exact same reason you claim to be suing.

When you bluff, like you obviously did, you just give them more ammunition to use against you.

lol people always say no offence before they say something very offensive. Also, you're wrong.

Aratus
03-24-2008, 10:46 AM
NSA is TRES into electronic snooping...

someone being too hot under the collar

could get on an FBI list if G.W Bush has

people once again functioning the way

COINTELPRO did under J.EDGAR HOOVER!

please post like a cyber-space "ms manners"...

Conza88
03-25-2008, 04:13 AM
\\