Whenever they have these rallies, it always seems like the radical anti-immigration fanatics are grossly outnumbered.

"We did not hurl racist epithets or make bigoted hate-filled comments. We did not hurl objects at our opponents or resort to violence. Yet, we are racist vigilantes!"

Just because you don't do these things, doesn't mean you're not a racist. We're all guilty of it whether we realize it or not, and it would interesting to hear what they say when the cameras are turned off.

That's hilarious--they didn't do anything racist or say anything racist, but we assume they are racists because "We're all guilty of it." That is such liberal claptrap it is ridiculous. You assume the worst in others because you see the worst in yourself.

Your right. Sometimes I make mistakes and see the bad side of myself, which is why I'm free to admit it and strive to change my own iniquities. To not assume people are equally guilty of the same things and attempt to pass it off as "liberal claptrap" is the very moment when it is allowed to flourish. Perhaps you should try thinking sometime and realize it's time to see yourself for who you really are. Then strive to change it.

"Let he who is free from sin cast the first stone."

Welcome to liberalthink...everybody is guilty of everything and we are all victims...

That's a nice over-generalization, but I think you missed the point. For reading, may I suggest the Sermon on the Mount.

I don't know what you think the Bible is all about. I don't even know if you've ever read it. But the truth is there, and if you're unwilling to see it, that's your choice.

I hope you will choose the opposite. Wisdom and growth comes only from one's willingness to self-examine and change what needs to be changed.

Well, my bachelor's degree is in Bible and I am a pastor, so let me put it this way..By their fruits ye shall know them...I know liberals when they spout liberal nuttery, and I know it is wrong to assume everyone is racist just because you find yourself so inclined...I'm sorry you're a racist, (you must be, you say we're all guilty) but I'm not.

"I know liberals when they spout liberal nuttery, and I know it is wrong to assume everyone is racist just because you find yourself so inclined...I'm sorry you're a racist, (you must be, you say we're all guilty) but I'm not."

James 2

Favoritism Forbidden

1 My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism.

2 Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in.

3 If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, "Here's a good seat for you," but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet,"

4 have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

5 Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?

6 But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court?

7 Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?

8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing right.

9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.

10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery,"also said, "Do not murder."If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom,

13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment!

Makrothumeo,

I'm glad to here you're free of sin and iniquity. It must be very relieving for you to know this.

Matthew 21:28-32
The Parable of the Two Sons

28"What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, 'Son, go and work today in the vineyard.'
29" 'I will not,' he answered, but later he changed his mind and went.

30"Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, 'I will, sir,' but he did not go.

31"Which of the two did what his father wanted?"
"The first," they answered.

Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you.

32For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him.

I'm glad we have some of the religious right here who would like a theocracy, like deccles, who would base all of our country's decisions on the Bible.

However, I dont see how a protest against a monument that was attacked by others has anything to do with what he posted above.

That makes two of us...whatever deccles reasoning is, it escapes me how the Scripture quoted justifies his/her calling SOS racist.

Digger,

If George Bush can do it, and have the agreement of every site similar to this one, and a major portion of the country agree as well, aren't we then already living in a theocracy.

I would have assumed that Makrothumeo, have proclaimed his status as a pastor, would understand the point of the verse I posted. Maybe I was wrong.
In any event, The SOS group (who by the way lives in Ventura, about 75 miles from Baldwin Park) went out of their way to inform the locals they don't like them or their monuments. The act itself is one of racism and intolerance. Both of which go completely the opposite direction of the teachings of Christ. Both of you should know this, so why do you refuse to acknowledge it?

Joseph Turner, who claims on his site he is a Christian, has attempted to create a situation which tries to prove he is correct by going to a city he would normally never even stop for gas in, and passively incite outrage, while claiming he is the victim.

I do not condone the reaction of the neighborhood, but did Joseph or his group really think this wouldn't happen? I think he was counting on it.

Having said this, go back and read the verse I posted and then tell me it doesn't apply.

This is supposed to be a nation which represents the best of human relations. Would you call this the best?

I'm not of the religious right. I actually oppose them on virtually every issue. This issue is not about religion it is about an invasion of illegal aliens and open support of overthrow of our government while using our taxes to do it.

As for the monument, it is taxpayer funded and the taxpayers have a right to take a stand against something that they paid for and don't agree with. I don't care if it was hidden in a bunker in the middle of Kansas and those protesting it were from Alaska.

This is similar to the 10 commandments monument fight. It was removed because it was taxpayer funded and in a public place. Why is this any different -- it's taxpayer funded and it's in a public place -- and what does race have to do with it?

Explain to me how it's any different deccles and then I'll agree with you. You can't simply use the religion issue when it's convenient. Seperation of church and state is one thing, active support of an overthrow of our government, as this monument seems to apply to a lot of people, is another.

If i'm not mistaken, the monument states that the land once belonged to the native americans and mexicans, and "will" belong them again someday. Is acknowledging the past agressions of the US government who overthrew the native americans and mexicans to get the land in the first place such a bad thing? The truth hurts, doesn't it.

Funny you should say the taxpayers have a right to protest what they paid for. Isn't Baldwin park a seperate city with it's own government and tax base? Or is Ventura tax payers now supporting the city? How many of them actually were from Baldwin Park?

If the march was in fact to protest the monument, then why, as the photos clearly demonstrate, do their signs say "stop the illegal invasion" instead of something like "tear down the monument'? The illegal aliens entering the US are a convenient excuse for citizens fed up with disappearing jobs and benefits. Immigrants have nothing to do with this. It's been happening for decades.

Instead of finding a scapegoat, why not look at the real reason why so many have migrated here. It's our own governments fault. Or have you forgotten about NAFTA?

If overthrowing the government is the message you see, then why don't you cry for radical response when it's our nation overthrowing other governments? Maybe you do. But now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's not very comfortable, is it.

Iraq, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Chile, Panama, Turkey, Hawaii, Mexico, Guam, Puerto Rico, Haiti, and Venezuela (twice attempted, but failed in the last 5 years). Next will be Syria and Iran. The list goes on and on. And why? Either because the country had some intrinsic value such as mineral resources, or because they refused to play by our rules economically. Thus, they didn't deserve to be autonomous.

Incidentally, overthrowing of government is how the US came into being in the first place.

Besides, Joseph Turner is the one who inserted the religious tone into this story, I'm simply pointing out how misguided his reasoning really is.

I do not associate myself with the religious right. These people use the bible when it's convenient to their politics. I use it everyday. They ignore the message of the new testament, especially the teachings of Christ in the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They ignore the peaceful intentions of God and Christ and instead insite hatred and violence by using only what suits their agenda.

I seek the truth. The religious right, the neocons, the Pat Robertsons and the Zionists do not. They seek only destruction and greed. This is why I voted for neither Bush or Kerry, I voted for the only person telling the truth.

The monument should not stand, and if the illegal immigrants don't like the fact that it might be taken down, then load 'em up and take their asses back to Mexico. No one wanted them here in the first place.

These Aztlanists are racist spics, plain and simple.

"Racist spics"
Classic!

Illegal means illegal. If someone is illegally in the USA, then they need to leave. I dont think that illegal immigrants even have the right to protest under the constitution. That privelege is reserved for American citizens alone. I think that the next time a large number of illegal immigrants rally and cause trouble in our streets, we should fly Apache helicopters over them with loud speakers and tell them that they are breaking the law, they have no legal right to protest, and to disperse and go home immediately. If they dont leave, and they are breaking the law, then its time to use gas bombs on them and incredibly loud noise weapons. And if it is necessary shoot some of them.A couple of rounds from the Apache's guns would scare the hell out of anyone. Besides, they are trying to create an economic downturn by clogging up city streets. i would rather a few illegals be shot and killed, than let invaders from another country run our streets.

Seriously
Will

and what about the thousands of soldiers who entered ILLEGALLY (by all international agreements) in Iraq to start an unjustified war?

asshole

So, drg, you are saying that illegal immigrants are at war with us just as we are at war in Iraq?

I say let's go to war with them.

"If i'm not mistaken, the monument states that the land once belonged to the native americans and mexicans, and "will" belong them again someday. Is acknowledging the past agressions of the US government who overthrew the native americans and mexicans to get the land in the first place such a bad thing? The truth hurts, doesn't it."

In your piss-pour attempt to justify the monument, you addressed only the message about the past...now what about the message about the future?

If there is anything in this world that is anti-American, it's requesting territorial revisionism, a compromising of the Union itself. Let me remind you that the United States WENT TO WAR with the South over secession, and millions died as a result. To defend a monument which encourages the destruction of the United States (by those who are taking advantage of the United States' existence by working/living here) is sheer lunacy. You are in idiot.

"If i'm not mistaken, the monument states that the land once belonged to the native americans and mexicans, and "will" belong them again someday. Is acknowledging the past agressions of the US government who overthrew the native americans and mexicans to get the land in the first place such a bad thing? The truth hurts, doesn't it."

In your piss-pour attempt to justify the monument, you addressed only the message about the past...now what about the message about the future?

If there is anything in this world that is anti-American, it's requesting territorial revisionism, a compromising of the Union itself. Let me remind you that the United States WENT TO WAR with the South over secession, and millions died as a result. To defend a monument which encourages the destruction of the United States (by those who are taking advantage of the United States' existence by working/living here) is sheer lunacy. You are an idiot.

IS THIS SITE FOR REAL? I CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT I'M READING & SEEING....

I don't believe this story. Is there some reporting somewhere confirming the spitting, the water-bottle toss, the bleeding in the brain?

whEN i REAd ThiS i Th0ugHt iT iS REAllY BIASED!!!

the land of a free men don't have borders