iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

Teju's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Luxury Brands Return: Chanel, Michael Kors Scoring More 'Aspirational' Shoppers

Luxury Brands Return: Chanel, Michael Kors Scoring More 'Aspirational' Shoppers

Commented Mar 5, 2012 at 21:44:42 in Money

“I hate this term "aspirational shopper", it is disrespectful to their customers in my opinion. These designer economy brands are typically very tacky to say the least, they should be grateful middle class women are willing the shell out money for such logo-ed ugliness.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 20, 2012 at 12:43:14 in Religion

“Big deal, ignore those parts if they offend you. The bulk of it was without any religious reference, I'm not so sure why it makes you so insecure.

There is a difference between being spirited and religious. Religious values change depending on the culture, the Christian spirit always remains the same.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 20, 2012 at 03:52:28 in Religion

“Look, the constitution was written by Judeo-Christians. To pretend like there wasn't any spiritual influence is naive. The topic of religion was something they debated over and the separation of church and state was an amendment. The purpose of that was to prevent extremism and intolerance, no different than what you all are trying to accomplish now.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 20, 2012 at 03:43:02 in Religion

“Yes. No respectable person takes those people seriously anyways. They are consistently mocked in the media, they are on a losing front & that generation is dying off. Even so, they are allowed to voice their opinions. The idea is that we shouldn't really be trying to silence anybody under the guise that it's a constitutional precedence rather than a cultural one. The issue was so entirely petty, it's so obvious this is a cultural battle. There are so many other real constitutional violations plaguing our country I can think of devoting time & energy to.

Also, the banner was meant to express virtues of the human spirit and not really religion. Religious values are often a often a confusing and uncomfortable subject, but it could have easily applied to an Atheist or Muslim, etc. as much as a Christian. This entire thing was overblown by some pedantic liberals with too much time on their hands; in many ways they aren't any better than the Evangelicals. I value the liberal spirit, sorry I'm not a sheep.”

mkendziora on Feb 20, 2012 at 04:38:37

“Did you not read the banner or prayer? It opened with "Heavenly Father" and closed with "Amen". That sounds religious to me.. It also sounds like a typical Christian prayer.

Maybe, you are sleep deprived, but this prayer could not apply to an Atheist! That make no sense. Just to let you know, Atheist not only disbelieve in your Christian god, but they also don't believe in any other god..

I've had better debates with my nine year old!”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 22:33:11 in Religion

“LOL ad hominem attacks are such a respectable way to debate! You sound insecure.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 22:03:22 in Religion

“Also, many of the things people are referencing have not been constitutional precedents, but supreme court & other legal precedents. The Constitution is filled with mentions of God. To say that this is all constitutional is incredibly stupid. This idea that religion is not to be mentioned at all in schools is an entirely new thing of this era. I feel that if we want our children to be well rounded & true scholars, they should learn both points of view.”

jemkee on Feb 20, 2012 at 13:47:04

“So no mention of god, then?

I'd be curious to hear what "spiritual influence" you see in the Constitution or in the Bill of Rights...personally, I see no "spiritual" content whatsoever, and I feel it's pretty naive to assume that because you feel that you can characterize the culture from which these men came as "Judeo-Christian," then religion must be important in their writings. They made it clear in this and other documents that the government they made was secular.

When you say "and the separation of church and state was an amendment," you do realize that all of the rights enumerated in the Constitution are in the amendments, right?

That's what the Bill of Rights is - a bunch of amendments added to respond to criticism that there were no guarantees of civil liberties in the Constitution itself. That doesn't mean that the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses were afterthoughts...and, contrary to your claim, there wasn't much debate over these two clauses, nor indeed over any of the clauses of the First Amendment. The debate was over the content of the body of the Constitution, and over the propriety of including amendments enumerating civil rights with the Constitution.

Your understanding of the Constitution and the process by which it was written and ratified seems somewhat lacking.”

jemkee on Feb 20, 2012 at 03:10:35

“"The Constituti­on is filled with mentions of God."

Really? You are talking about the Constitution of the United States, right? Not some other country's Constitution?

Ooo I'm all agog. Do please cite any five references to god in the Constitution.

Go on...take your time. We'll wait.”

mkendziora on Feb 19, 2012 at 23:57:26

“If Christians would close their mouths to begin with, Atheists and Agnostics would never have a complaint. We are not forcing our beliefs on others! It's called the Separation of Church and State and if you don't like it take you kids out of public schools and head on over to the nearest church school. I'm so sorry, is that where you poor misunderstood Christians never get the freedom to speak about what you believe, due to us loud mouth non-believers! Honestly, the Christian religion should not have a voice in my kids school, I don't want them to learn about it! It is not my families belief.”

Funkstronaut on Feb 19, 2012 at 22:09:17

“"The Constituti­on is filled with mentions of God."

Haha! Is that a joke, or are you just lying?
Oh, I know... You don't even know what is in the Constitution, and you are talking from false authority.
Very shady. Untrustworthy.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 21:24:03 in Religion

“In my opinion, that is naivete. Government is filled with people with ideas and philosophies that dictate our lives and culture, not computing machines.”

Teju on Feb 19, 2012 at 22:03:22

“Also, many of the things people are referencing have not been constitutional precedents, but supreme court & other legal precedents. The Constitution is filled with mentions of God. To say that this is all constitutional is incredibly stupid. This idea that religion is not to be mentioned at all in schools is an entirely new thing of this era. I feel that if we want our children to be well rounded & true scholars, they should learn both points of view.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 21:06:10 in Religion

“Shred away, I haven't seen anyone do it yet LOL.”

ptahian on Feb 20, 2012 at 01:11:45

“This case wasn't about free speech so what can I shred?

Ah you think the government should be allowed to display whatever it wants even if it violates of the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution. Why would you want that kind of power to be held by the government?”

buggeroffyou666 on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:57:52

“I'm sure you dont fcktard. And Humans can see it.”

Funkstronaut on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:32:13

“Look again.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 21:05:16 in Religion

“Your point...?”

rafaelrobyns on Feb 19, 2012 at 22:19:06

“...should be obvious.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 21:04:37 in Religion

“You're the one who needs the enlightening. I wasn't aware we were still living in the 18th century. Cultures are always changing & evolving in accordance with the times. What do you think drives our culture? It doesn't stagnate, it changes according to trends in art, politics, propaganda, etc.”

Earthling1125 on Feb 20, 2012 at 10:44:15

“Sorry my comment went over your head. I was referring to the Constitution - particularly regarding the separation of church and state. Our Founding Fathers guaranteed that - THOSE are the values this country was founded upon, not some ancient book written by men.”

UnderTheHedgeWeGo on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:14:54

“And it sure isn't going backwards as you hope it will.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 21:00:51 in Religion

“That's just paranoia.”

CardinalFang on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:29:03

“How so?”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 20:51:46 in Religion

“LOL, donate to mine too!!”

Zilo on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:44:17

“Your posts here show you don't deserve to have yours paid for. It would be a waste of money.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 20:24:00 in Religion

“The caveat is that America was founded on Judeo-Christian values, not Budhist or Muslim or Hindu values. Many of the things that have made America fruitful and the place where so many people want to be have come from ideas rooted in Judeo-Christian morals and values. Sure, Muslims have the right to publicly display prayer banners as well, just don't expect it to be politically correct because many Americans won't like it.”

sean6886 on Feb 20, 2012 at 15:20:27

“No, the country was not founded on Judeo-Christian values. Yes, it's true that our founding Fathers believed in the Catholic or Christian religions, but the Constitution has nothing about religion in it. The Bill Of Rights is not religious in any way, the branches of government were not set up in any relogious way and until we got to the first ammendment-where the first line is freedom FROM religion before it mentions the freedom to practice religion.
But because we have a seperation of church and state, no religion should be able to "advertise" on state grounds.
America was fruitful not because of Judeo-Christian morals and values-it was because of innovation, industry, freedom, education, opportunity, jobs, and more.”

ptahian on Feb 20, 2012 at 01:47:44

“You should inform the ACLU on these displays of religious prayer banners by the government. As we've seen, they are effective in getting them removed.

If you mean displaying on private property that can be seen, then you can also be sure they can never be made to be removed.”
Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Jessica Ahlquist, Atheist Student In Prayer Banner Fight, Gets $40,000 Scholarship Fund

Commented Feb 19, 2012 at 20:14:47 in Religion

“The problem here is that Atheists confuse their right to free speech as the freedom to suppress the speech of others. Nobody should be forced silent, that is the opposite of free speech. In our American democracy, we are all have the right to contribute to the fabric of our culture as we see fit for ourselves and our lives; that means whoever wants to display should be able to display. I consider myself fairly liberal, but liberals sometimes think that they should be the only ones calling the shots. There is most definitely a culture war going on here in America and unfortunately Christianity is taking a huge beating. Good & bad people exist in all religions. Believe it or not, there are good & well intended Christians out there.”

mkendziora on Feb 20, 2012 at 01:14:47

“Also, are you for real? When you say Liberals think they are the only ones that should be calling the shots... Can I introduce you to the right wing overly zealot evangelical Christian conservative. Let's count the topic - abortion, rape, gay marriage, and the environment.”

mkendziora on Feb 20, 2012 at 01:03:59

“Honestly, Christianity needs a good beating for all the innocent people (throughout history) they have killed in the name of their Christian god. I can't wait for all of you (un)like Christ believers to disappear. Take your fear of life and judgmental mentality with you! If Hell is real (lol) it will be overflowing with Christians!”

mountainmama on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:46:25

“Let the constitution call the shots. Boom, there go religious banners in public buildings.”

Macaroo388 on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:38:49

“"Believe it or not, there are good & well intended Christians out there."

No doubt. However, that has nothing to do with the fact that the school disobeyed the law, was called to account for it and now has to comply.”

WhereIsTheTruth on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:37:29

“Religion belongs in church, not in public schools.

As an aside, I have noticed I that those who object to the prayer banner being removed aren't offering a solution that allows all faiths to be represented. Why is that? Culture war, indeed.”

AZLibDem on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:32:19

“A public school, as an agent of the government, has no right to free speech.”

Graverobert on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:19:33

“If the banner said "worship Allah" on it, I am sure the religious people yelling "Free Speech!" right now would be demanding it be removed. Only when it is what they want up is it ever a problem.”

livintheadventure on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:04:19

“Best comment I've read to date. Thanks for saying what I feel.”

VivaldiPickpocket on Feb 19, 2012 at 21:01:48

“I appreciate your sentiments, but being good and well-intentioned doesn't bestow special rights on any religious group or individual to express their beliefs in a public domain supported by taxpayer dollars, especially in public schools where young minds are no match for countering exclusive religious messaging or indoctrination. There are tax-exempt places of worship for that purpose.”

Boinko on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:58:24

“So, basically you are saying that in public schools all displays should be allowed? Those of Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Wiccans, Satanist, Scientologists, Atheists, Hedonists, etc, etc...

Perhaps you are OK with this, although I doubt you actually are. But if you are, how many of your fellow Christians do you think will agree with you? You are asking for tolerance, but do you really think that, quoting you " whoever wants to display should be able to display", will jive with the Christian majority at most schools.

Please, feel free to try and pitch this to some of these "good and well intended Christians" you speak of and let me know how they feel about equal rights for all to display. Good luck...you're going to need it.”

BurtonDesque on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:57:59

“What part of Separation of Church and State do you not understand?

Try reading the judge's decision.”

Captimprobable on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:55:27

“It isn't suppression. I know you think you should be able to plaster an entire length of a school hallway with religious versus and quotes...and guess what...you can...at private religious schools, but you can't do that in a secular school. Who is under obligation NOT to show or appear to show ANY religious preference. If YOU want to wear a cross, a jesus t-shirt, have your book covers and notebooks overlaid with biblical versus and quotes...knock yourself out. But the SCHOOL cannot appear to show RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE. It's really not that difficult.”

Beccs on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:50:58

“No one forced religion to be silent. The school violated the US constitution and were called out on it. They were even given the option to remove the religious element from the banner. Other tthan that part, the message was very good. Thtey refused. The Law then required them to take it down.

In fact I've seen more of the religious who seem to think that freedom of speech and religion applies to only their particular brand of christianity and no other group whatsoever. We see this whenever there is an atheist billboard vandalised. Occasionally these people need the law to slap them with a friendly reminder that they're not the only people in the country.”

Chris K on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:50:17

“Actually, the problem here is that you don't understand why a public school is not allowed to promote one religion over others.”

pene on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:49:23

“you couldn't be more wrong. this young woman knew that for her school to post a banner that was about being a xtian and believing in gawd was WRONG and unconstitutional.

nobody is being forced into silence. the xtians just don't want to admit that they are not the center of the world. they need to keep their religion to themselves and out of our government.

xtinaity needs to take a beating. it has no business setting itself us as the basis for our democracy. it was xtian intolerance that drove our country into being.”

UnderTheHedgeWeGo on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:49:05

“You are confusing being able to say something and being supplied with the platform to say it. You have the right to say what you like. You do not have the right to any platform you choose. If I own a television station (e.g. Fox News) I can say what I please. You can also say what you please but you don't have a right to say it on Fox News unless they want to give it to you. Nobody has a right to use the power and prestige of the government to advance their personal beliefs. You don't and neither do I. That platform is unavailable for those purposes.”

joemondo on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:49:04

“This isn't about atheism.

This is about the First Amendment and government remaining neutral on religion.”

Rick Goodner on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:48:30

“Liberals were calling the shots all those hundreds of year ago when they penned the Bill Of Rights. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion... a public school is a governmental institution and therefore it cannot cater to or establish a religion. Goverment is not taking away any freedom of speech you can say any crazy thing you want to but not in a governmental institution. Why is that so hard for your lot to understand?”

Foucek on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:44:32

“Religion has NO place in a publicly funded building.You have the choice to attend private school.
You can plaster your walls with slogans. I just have the right not to be forced to look at it in a building I am supporting with my tax dollars.”

EmmaDarian on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:43:59

“"The problem here is that Atheists confuse their right to free speech as the freedom to suppress the speech of others. "

That's false. And it sure wasn't what happened in this case. No one lost any right. And, no, the school did not have the right to hang that banner. If you don't know that, read the judge's decision. Students can wear the prayer, write it on their notebooks, or hang it on their lockers, but the school can't have a "School Prayer" banner telling kids to be better students by praying to "Our Heavenly Father," or any deity.

The only problem here is that you don't understand the basics of this case or of our Constitution. It didn't have to be an atheist or liberal who objected to the banner. It should have been anyone who respects our Constitution. Few at that school do, however.”

CabinAgue on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:43:50

“No free speech was suppressed.  Any student who wants to pray, wear a cross to school, carry a bible, and post the prayer in their locker is free to do so.  And the very same ACLU would help any student whose rights to do these things were challenged.

But the SCHOOL cannot endorse religion.  And it is not only atheists that understand this.  Plenty of Christians (and those with other beliefs) understand the importance of the protection of the 1st Amendment.”

JShankel on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:41:46

“It's simple: no public funds may be spent expressing religion.  You're free to put up all the banners you want, on your OWN property and with your OWN money.”

Earthling1125 on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:38:23

“We "liberals" aren't calling the shots. Our Founding Fathers took care of that long ago. Please read the Constitution - you may be enlightened.”

CardinalFang on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:38:05

“No, the problem here is when the "free speech of others" is a thinly disguised attempt to use the government to promote their religious views.”

rafaelrobyns on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:37:36

“Considering yourself liberal and being liberal are two different things.”

Funkstronaut on Feb 19, 2012 at 20:36:27

“Ridiculous argument shredded in 3, 2, 1...”
Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Commented May 29, 2011 at 23:25:44 in World

“Well, the false equivalencies are meant to be absurd and are there to emphasize the original point that some things are not a matter of choice.

It is a fact of nature and thousands of years of evolution that females tend toward some behaviors, while males tend toward others. I might argue that in such a socially complex and modern culture that we live in now, gender roles are less important, but gender is not a social construct, it just isn't. Let's not pretend that we can magically wipe out tens of thousands of years of evolution. Psychologists have tried it and failed.”

volumexxvii on Jun 1, 2011 at 14:23:51

“I would count psychologists as of the 'experts' who seem to be most resistant to the idea that gender is socially constructed (not all of them... but many of the most historically influential and the ones who are in dominant positions in the field today and still cling to the idea). Anthropologists, (some) historians, and critical social theorists have shown long ago that gender is socially constructed and a fluid performance. As I've said before, no one is trying to wipe out tens of thousands of years of evolution. Gender performance is tied to social relations rather than biology.”
Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Commented May 28, 2011 at 17:58:03 in World

“Don't be silly, we are having a philosophical debate here. Of course they can live their lives as they please (which is exactly what they are doing), but that doesn't mean we can't have an opinion about it, especially since they are being so vocal about their decisions.”

Sistagirl Young on May 28, 2011 at 18:56:07

“It appears to me that for all intents and purposes the couple in question isn't fazed in the least by what I am sure has been an overwhelming "sharing" of other points of view. In all honesty I cannot see anything they are doing is injurious to their children. So far so good. Should things change I imagine they will keep us apprised.”
Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Commented May 28, 2011 at 02:43:34 in World

“You're asking people to forget about tens of thousands of years of evolution lol.”

volumexxvii on May 28, 2011 at 07:35:38

“Not really, lol. X/Y chromosomal combinations can vary (some argue there are at least five biological sexes), and I'm really talking about our culture's obsession with 'having to know' an infant's biological sex so that we can 'properly' gender it.”
Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Commented May 28, 2011 at 02:18:04 in World

“It makes sense to me. A child needs role models and direction in order to be an able human being. I think that is what is being emphasized here.”

volumexxvii on May 28, 2011 at 07:52:20

“"Make sleep, eating, and, obviously, loving your parents, optional."

Those are your (false) equivalencies to 'parents intervening on having their child pigeonholed into one of two (constructed) genders and subsequently rewarded and policed based on that categorization'? C'mon. You can't be serious.

And no one is talking about a child 'lacking role models' or 'direction'... this is about an issue -- that should be a non-issue -- but instead is evidencing a culture's obsession with binary sex and gender, and with 'knowing' someone's 'true' sex or gender.”
Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Storm Gender Debate Rages In Canada As Parents Defend Right To Keep Baby's Sex A Secret

Commented May 28, 2011 at 02:11:08 in World

“These parents need to put down the pipe. I think people forget that gender roles do serve an important social function, that is why they are so naturally and instinctively ingrained, it isn't just for kicks and giggles. Also, It is an overly new age and unrealistic concept to think that living in the world is simply about exploring your own consciousness. Children do need some direction.”
A Change of Heart: <i>The Real Housewives</i> Can Do Real Damage

A Change of Heart: The Real Housewives Can Do Real Damage

Commented Jul 19, 2011 at 12:40:36 in Women

“I can't imagine a 12 year old being interested in this type of television. Mid to late 20s and beyond seems to be more of the target demographic.”
C-Section Rates Reach All Time High, Says New Study

C-Section Rates Reach All Time High, Says New Study

Commented Jul 19, 2011 at 12:36:18 in Healthy Living

“Our heads/brains are also getting bigger”

wsdave on Jul 19, 2011 at 14:20:44

“Our heads may be getting FATTER, but not bigger.”

AppleBaby on Jul 19, 2011 at 14:16:41

“perhaps egos, not the heads.”

Oregonian76 on Jul 19, 2011 at 14:16:08

“Cite a source, please...”

marianproletarian on Jul 19, 2011 at 14:13:45

“No.”
huffingtonpost entry

Duchess Of Cambridge Goes Casual For Stop In Slave Lake, Alberta (PHOTOS)

Commented Jul 8, 2011 at 14:23:57 in Style

“She looks modern and sophisticated. She's 29 not 89. You all are being a bit over the top.”
Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Commented Jul 7, 2011 at 14:26:11 in Crime

“You think you're so clever as to try and defy common sense logic with the rules of logic, that is the problem with smug people like you. Save your insults for yourself.”
Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Commented Jul 7, 2011 at 13:55:05 in Crime

“They couldn't prove it because the body decomposed for so long while Casey partied and sent the state of Florida on a wild goose chase.”
Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Casey Anthony Juror: 'Sick To Our Stomachs' Over Verdict

Commented Jul 7, 2011 at 13:49:27 in Crime

“I feel the burden of proof was in demonstrating that the child did not die by accident, not in proving how exactly she died because Casey will only know that. I think they proved overwhelmingly with circumstantial evidence that it could not have been an accident. These were not critical thinkers, sorry.”

Carol Harvey on Jul 7, 2011 at 14:13:50

“I agree, Sadly, the point of a trial is not to bring justice and punish the guilty, but to see how well the defense can argue their cases and to see how many loopholes can be found. It is not about justice for the victim or consequences for the guilty. I don't want to hear these people argue that the justice system works. It didn't work in this case.”

ReligionTaints on Jul 7, 2011 at 14:09:13

“Logic doesn't work like that. If you accuse someone of something, you have to prove that that happened. You can't accuse someone of something and then say, "prove that, that didn't happen."

This is Logic 101. Please research what I am saying. Your logical processing skills are damaged.

Blue unicorns exist. Prove they don't. Now do you understand?”
next
1 - 25