Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd
I don't see anything more than if this were a Red Sox fan living in Yankee country...  |
I didn't realize you were fricken blind...
Hall wrote in a series of e-mails to Weinstein that he feared for his safety after being "hallchecked" — being shoved against the wall in a hallway — by fellow soldiers who objected to his lawsuit. Bloggers on the Internet have also referred to "fragging" Hall, or killing him by friendly fire.
I guess this sort of behavior is something you wouldn't have a problem with in the military?
And I had no idea that the military was to be considered as "Yankee country"?
I had thought that religious equality was to be enforced there as well.
Or maybe we should segregate our soldiers according to religious beliefs, like black Baptists and white Lutherans.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cnredd
If the threats are real, those should be punished...But a lawsuit wouldn't be needed...Just as if your neighbor was issuing threats...
|
If the police (or in this case the military) refuse to do anything about it, then the lawsuit is needed.
If the military had kept this in line, there wouldn't be any need.
But as the article states:
"Weinstein said Saturday that the issue was not locating Welborne, noting the incidents alleged in the lawsuit occurred in July and August and the major may have left Iraq since then. Instead, he said, the military must find the soldiers who are threatening Hall and prosecute them under military law."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cnredd
But my question is this...
"Was he ESPOUSING anti-religious rhetoric at any time?"...
|
Oh that's just brilliant.
Ignore the harassment this guy IS going through, and make a question that paints him as an agressor without any evidence whatsoever.
Do you work for Fox news per chance?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cnredd
If this lawsuit was about harrassment, he would've never included these in his lawsuit...
|
It is possible to name multiple offenses in one law-suit.
From the other article, it sounds like some people who do focus on such misbehavior from the military are aiding the soldier, and thus the above doesn't surprise me.
There is no logical conclusion that leads to a preclusion of harassment based on other aspects in the lawsuit....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cnredd
Which is making him out to be right up there with people who want "In God We Trust" off of currency...In other words, he's on a mission he instigated knowing he'll be harrassed for speaking out and is now using that as a shield...
And I'm pretty sure we'd all agree that would "interfere with unit cohesion, readiness, standards or discipline"...
|
I am thoroughly amused at how an article regarding HARASSMENT against an ATHEIST is turned into a pretense of atheist aggression.
Positively amazing!
How many logical leaps (based on absolutely NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER) did it take you to conclude the above?
Maybe we should just chalk up your above description to a Red Sox fan living in Yankee country?