Speaking of civil disobedience

Civil disobedience is sometimes, though not always,[1][2] defined as being nonviolent resistance.

I could see them rioting.

Again, a non-answer.

Only one other choice....you'll get it right this time.

YOUR post.....regarding priests and civil disobedience and how they would be breaking the law if SCOTUS changes anything.

Then read MY post where I asked if you thought priests would RIOT in front of the WH if they were 'forced/mandated' to break their religious beliefs, since you believe that 'civil disobedience' includes rioting. Or do you think that gays would RIOT in front of churches instead?

I have only found a small handful of 'peaceful' protests when it comes to the left and the far left agendas.........the vast majority of those protests turn violent, usually with encouragement from this administration and others like Sharpton. Do you disagree?

Do you also agree, since YOU stated that ALL should follow the laws, that BO and his administrative cohorts should be investigated and prosecuted for breaking existing laws by ignoring those they don't like?

since you believe that 'civil disobedience' includes rioting.

And you don't?

AND YOU don't dispute that YOU DO.........

linked the Tea Party with riots......


The Boston Tea Party

rally/protest has been violent in THIS century.......you are beginning to sound like BO trying to compare ISIS to the Crusades. Total nonsense that you can't back up anymore than he can.....but that's again typical of you.

Sometimes I wonder why you keep responding.

sometimes I wonder why you DO since you nearly never have anything of import to say.

However, I have a question....which direction do YOU think SCOTUS should go? Think carefully since a completely new can of worms would crawl out of a possible Pandora's Box.

There was burning at the Boston Tea Party.

Was this the person that was "murdered" and 2 days later was in "critical condition" in the hospital?

One "tea partier" appeared to rise from the dead.
After being knocked unconscious by a falling tea crate in the hold of a ship, John Crane was reportedly thought to be dead and hidden by his compatriots under a pile of wood shavings in a nearby carpenter's shop. He awoke hours later, however, and was the only man harmed in the Boston Tea Party.

His view is bankrupt. That's all he's got. Snipes. Misdirection. Misapplications. Divergence from real issues, etc.

I've seen the link.
Don't know about the violence (against people); I wasn't there. But there was destruction of property, which is a separate violation of law. Anyway, wasn't a religious affair, right?

and they didn't steal the tea, because they weren't crooks. Tossed it overboard. That way no tax could be collected by those who might want to buy it with the tax on it.

The "tea" was their property and they threw their property into the harbour?

I suppose the owner of the tea retrieved it and sold it as "slightly used tea".....never been in a cup of water, It's been in Boston Harbour, BUT not in a cup.

Was this tax that they objected to charged when people purchased the tea? They could have achieved the same end buy NOT purchasing any tea. But a "riot" is much more effective.

because they weren't crooks.

Not doing anything illegal?...Why the disguises?

The demonstrators, some disguised as American Indians, destroyed an entire shipment of tea sent by the East India Company,

Which they had every right to do since it was actually their country, even if it was under the thumb of England at the time. Perhaps if the English had listened better...

It was still a British colony.

That's why they dressed as "Native Americans/Indians" when they threw the tea into the harbour?

Even then they realized it wasn't "their" country.

Said the man that plans to get into Heaven because he "tells the truth".

were you under the impression that's how they dressed all the time?

I think they were in "disguise" ...Just the same as you do with the rioters in Baltimore.....

G. Washington et al. were therefore traitors to their country when they 'rioted' in uniform later. But they won, so they wrote the history-- as patriots.

He's already sent HIV and it's resulting AIDS, aka "The Gay Man's Disease". No matter how much one tries to cover up the truth, it exists. What's next for them in their continuing to push their moral crimes onto America? Rabid HIV, that kills quicker? For which there is no pallative, no extension of time for repentance? Something new instead?

Meanwhile it's our duty to expose the works of sin and darkness.

Ephesians chapter 5
11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.

Psalm 91:7

Of the pestilence that stalks in darkness, Or of the destruction that lays waste at noon. A thousand may fall at your side And ten thousand at your right hand, But it shall not approach you. You will only look on with your eyes, And see the recompense of the wicked....

I don't remember saying that either.