0
   

Arrests made in church fires

 
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 10:39 pm
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
That is not proof. That is coinciendence until you bring other information forward to proof that they did do it because of hate toward baptists.



Pretty good. Especially if they were trying to throw off police after they realized that the first church they burned gained media attention. That first just happened to be baptist so now they targetted Baptists to make it sound like a hate crime. A hate crime would throw off police in their mind since they have no previous history of hating baptists.

In my mind that is just as valid of a reason as any of them right now. You do not know what was going on in their head anymore than I do. I just fail to see a bunch of kids targetting baptists only. Doesn't make sense.



Again no proof to back that up other than they were all Baptists. Only thing you got. The police even ruled out they were targetted for their denomination
Quote:
That is not proof. That is coinciendence until you bring other information forward to proof that they did do it because of hate toward baptists.
What coinciendence? The fact that they chose nothing but baptist churches? I need no other proof other then they were all baptist churches. So what about mosques, hate crime or no? The jews place of worship? Those aren't hate crimes either?
Quote:
Pretty good. Especially if they were trying to throw off police after they realized that the first church they burned gained media attention.

If they were trying to throw off police don't you think they should of picked something other then another baptist church?
Quote:
That first just happened to be baptist so now they targetted Baptists to make it sound like a hate crime.

So now there whole ploy is to evade a hate crime charge? Got proof, or just speculation? According to the definition i think i got the law on my side.
Quote:
I just fail to see a bunch of kids targetting baptists only.

You fail to see but that is exactly what they did. Makes perfect sence to me.
Quote:
Again no proof to back that up other than they were all Baptists. Only thing you got.

Key words in your statement. "other than they were all Baptists". Read the law, that is the only proof i need. "Other then" is your indication i have proof.
0 Replies
 
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 10:42 pm
@Brent cv,
dictionary.com wrote:
hate crime
n. A crime motivated by prejudice against a social group

You still haven't proven (to me) the prejudice involved.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 10:45 pm
@ndjs,
ndjs wrote:
I'm not following you.

Do you believe that it was a hate crime because it was churches that were targeted or because it was primarily Baptist?

The reason churches were burned that were out of the area was because they were trying to throw police off the trail. If they hadn't tried to throw police off, then they would have all been in the same area. The reasons that the later churches were burned were not the same as the reasons the first ones were.

Quote:
Do you believe that it was a hate crime because it was churches that were targeted or because it was primarily Baptist?

Both, no other faith church's was hit. That to me means baptists were the intended target.
Quote:
The reason churches were burned that were out of the area was because they were trying to throw police off the trail.

Again, then why go after another baptist church if your trying to throw them off?
Quote:
If they hadn't tried to throw police off, then they would have all been in the same area.

By the same reasoning then they should of went after another church other then baptist.
Quote:
The reasons that the later churches were burned were not the same as the reasons the first ones were.

The outcome didn't change on the receiving end.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 10:46 pm
@ndjs,
ndjs wrote:
You still haven't proven (to me) the prejudice involved.

All were baptist churches, you see no prejudice in that?
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 10:48 pm
@Brent cv,
The people killed in the twin towers were of all different backgrounds and faiths. Was there prejudice in there deaths? Was that prejudice caused by hate?
0 Replies
 
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 23 Mar, 2006 11:18 pm
@Brent cv,
It depends on what you would consider a 'social group' to involve. Are Americans a social group? Too broad? I think that's a personal differentiation that must be made.

These boys will not be tried on hate crime charges, imo. We'll see, but I don't see it happening. I've explained to you why I think all the churches were Baptist, and if we can't agree, we're going to agree to disagree.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 09:33 pm
@ndjs,
ndjs wrote:
It depends on what you would consider a 'social group' to involve. Are Americans a social group? Too broad? I think that's a personal differentiation that must be made.

These boys will not be tried on hate crime charges, imo. We'll see, but I don't see it happening. I've explained to you why I think all the churches were Baptist, and if we can't agree, we're going to agree to disagree.
I did that same search on that site. When i pulled it up two definitions came up, the second i included on my post with the poll. It included religion.
They won't be tried for hate crimes because most think if it's against critstians it ok. But if it were another social group like mulims or jews i think you would get a different charge?
ohiosweetheart
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Mar, 2006 10:25 pm
@Brent cv,
your ass would be thrown in jail so fast it'd make your head spin
0 Replies
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 01:26 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
They won't be tried for hate crimes because most think if it's against critstians it ok.


:wtf:

Quote:
But if it were another social group like mulims or jews i think you would get a different charge?


It WOULD NOT have been against muslims or jews because there are not 10 muslim or jewish establishments of worship in birmingham alabama! It is a REALLY simple concept to grasp I just believe you want to make it out that Christians are just getting slapped around and abused :dunno:

The FACT is that Baptist churches are a DIME A DOZEN in Birmingham Alabama. It is NOT unusual that the churches they burned were baptists because these churches are the most common in the area.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 08:32 pm
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
:wtf:



It WOULD NOT have been against muslims or jews because there are not 10 muslim or jewish establishments of worship in birmingham alabama! It is a REALLY simple concept to grasp I just believe you want to make it out that Christians are just getting slapped around and abused :dunno:

The FACT is that Baptist churches are a DIME A DOZEN in Birmingham Alabama. It is NOT unusual that the churches they burned were baptists because these churches are the most common in the area.
Quote:
It WOULD NOT have been against muslims or jews because there are not 10 muslim or jewish establishments of worship in birmingham alabama!

OK, If there was one muslim mosque in AL, would it be a hate crime? Now if there were two and it happened to both would it be a hate crime? What about three? Still the same? What about ten? Baptists are the only ones perpitrated. I'm sure there are many demominations in AL, Why did only baptists get hit?
Quote:
It is a REALLY simple concept to grasp I just believe you want to make it out that Christians are just getting slapped around and abused.
Not just Christians in this case, Baptist Christians are the ones being persecuted.
Quote:
The FACT is that Baptist churches are a DIME A DOZEN in Birmingham Alabama. It is NOT unusual that the churches they burned were baptists because these churches are the most common in the area.

Dime a dozen does not explind why it is not a hate crime by definition. Catholic churches in Santa Fe are dime a dozen, but there are still plenty other churches. If i burn only cathcolic churches i intended it that way. MY reason is any ones guess but it can be atributed to hate none the less by most any ones train of thought. As in this case, IMO.
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 08:53 pm
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
OK, If there was one muslim mosque in AL, would it be a hate crime? Now if there were two and it happened to both would it be a hate crime? What about three? Still the same? What about ten? Baptists are the only ones perpitrated. I'm sure there are many demominations in AL, Why did only baptists get hit?


You have NOT proven the hate. You have NOT given me any information on these three guys and their background.

Quote:

Not just Christians in this case, Baptist Christians are the ones being persecuted.


Give me a break. Persecuted? That is laughable.

Quote:

Dime a dozen does not explind why it is not a hate crime by definition.


You have not PROVEN hate in this crime. Your only evidence is the churches that were burned down were Baptist. You have not even begin to dig into who these kids were. You know nothing of them. What you want is to draw attention to Christians and make them out to be targetted victims by a couple of rich kids with nothing better to do.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 09:14 pm
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
You have NOT proven the hate. You have NOT given me any information on these three guys and their background.



Give me a break. Persecuted? That is laughable.



You have not PROVEN hate in this crime. Your only evidence is the churches that were burned down were Baptist. You have not even begin to dig into who these kids were. You know nothing of them. What you want is to draw attention to Christians and make them out to be targetted victims by a couple of rich kids with nothing better to do.
You have not proven they were doing it for fun. For fun means an insidental target. Seems they hit more then one. Trying to throw them off means going after something other then another baptist churches of which they didn't. They picked another and another and another. Not Catholic, Jewish, Prodostant(sic) or any other faith, just Baptists. Why would a person do that, explain how all of that is just for fun?
Quote:
Give me a break. Persecuted? That is laughable.

Not to all the Baptists that had there churches burned.
Quote:
You have not PROVEN hate in this crime. Your only evidence is the churches that were burned down were Baptist.

Well at least i have some evidence, what is yours that is was not? Hearsay or opinion? I have quite a few smoldering churches as my proof, all of them baptist.
Quote:
You have not even begin to dig into who these kids were.

Why would i want to pry into an arsonists mindset, there deeds speak for themselves. I care not what they were, what matters is what they are now. My estimation is they don't like Baptists, probably all they way up to hating them.
Quote:
You know nothing of them.

I know they like to play with fire, and don't mind if a few crosses get burned in the process. God fearing aren't they?
Quote:
What you want is to draw attention to Christians and make them out to be targetted victims by a couple of rich kids with nothing better to do.

I didn't draw attention to them, they did by liting a few fires. I did not target the Baptist churches, they did. They new who the victums were before hand and decide they would all be baptists. Nothing better to do whould have alot to do with not destroying other peoples property, muchless sacred property. Think they new that before hand or are they that stupid and still yet in college?
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 09:43 pm
@Brent cv,
IMO this discussion is going nowhere .
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 10:01 pm
@Brent cv,
Exactly because no one here knows what their motive is. I never said I DID KNOW what the motive is. I am mearly trying to explain that to Drnaline yet he is hell bent on them being out for Baptists. He thinks the media is out to kill christians and I don't.

I am taking what we are given and saying no it is not a crime that targeted just Baptists.

Drnaline is taking the only evidence of them being all Baptists in an area where Baptist churches are a OVERWHELMING MAJORITY and saying it is a hate crime with NOTHING more to back that up. I am mearily disagreeing and trying to make him show us something more to back up his statement if he wants to say it is a hate crime.

It is pretty obvious that the Christian arguing this is going to want it to be a hate crime because it targets his religion. I do not see it that way. These kids have no history of hating just Baptists.

If there was enough evidence to try them for a hate crime which under Alabama law the sole intention of them burning those churches down was to prevent people from congregating and worshipping together the State of Alabama and the media would be bringing this out.

Yet we are not seeing this, unless of course Drnaline wants to jump into the conspiracy boat and join all the radical left wing nutjobs who thrive on conspiracy theories.
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 Mar, 2006 10:10 pm
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
I know they like to play with fire, and don't mind if a few crosses get burned in the process. God fearing aren't they?


Not enough to convict on a hate crime. You love to take the law literally in every arguement on here except ones that target your belief. Then its ok to read into the law and decide that it is something that will side with your belief Smile

Quote:

I didn't draw attention to them, they did by liting a few fires. I did not target the Baptist churches, they did. They new who the victums were before hand and decide they would all be baptists. Nothing better to do whould have alot to do with not destroying other peoples property, muchless sacred property. Think they new that before hand or are they that stupid and still yet in college?


A lot of stupid people are in College. Again you have no proof, just speculation based on coincidence. Nothing that will make a Jury convict them of a hate crime.

Prove to me they knew the first church they were going to burn was going to be a Baptist.

Prove to me that the news reports of them being drunk while hunting and coming across that first church was not what really happened and the media is covering up the real motives! Prove to me any of that as false. You can't.

Prove that the first church they burned was targeted and not a church that just happened to come across while hunting.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 07:16 am
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
Exactly because no one here knows what their motive is. I never said I DID KNOW what the motive is. I am mearly trying to explain that to Drnaline yet he is hell bent on them being out for Baptists. He thinks the media is out to kill christians and I don't.

I am taking what we are given and saying no it is not a crime that targeted just Baptists.

Drnaline is taking the only evidence of them being all Baptists in an area where Baptist churches are a OVERWHELMING MAJORITY and saying it is a hate crime with NOTHING more to back that up. I am mearily disagreeing and trying to make him show us something more to back up his statement if he wants to say it is a hate crime.

It is pretty obvious that the Christian arguing this is going to want it to be a hate crime because it targets his religion. I do not see it that way. These kids have no history of hating just Baptists.

If there was enough evidence to try them for a hate crime which under Alabama law the sole intention of them burning those churches down was to prevent people from congregating and worshipping together the State of Alabama and the media would be bringing this out.

Yet we are not seeing this, unless of course Drnaline wants to jump into the conspiracy boat and join all the radical left wing nutjobs who thrive on conspiracy theories.

Quote:
Exactly because no one here knows what their motive is. I never said I DID KNOW what the motive is. I am mearly trying to explain that to Drnaline yet he is hell bent on them being out for Baptists. He thinks the media is out to kill christians and I don't.

NO one does know yet you say it "isn't" and then I'm not allowed to say it "is". I understand what you are saying but that does not make it so.
Quote:
I am taking what we are given and saying no it is not a crime that targeted just Baptists.

And who would those other targets be?

Quote:
Drnaline is taking the only evidence of them being all Baptists in an area where Baptist churches are a OVERWHELMING MAJORITY and saying it is a hate crime with NOTHING more to back that up. I am mearily disagreeing and trying to make him show us something more to back up his statement if he wants to say it is a hate crime.

Overwhelming don't cut it. What is the ratio? If Baptiast churches were the only religion in town with churches then you have an arguement. I bet there are quite a few different demoninations that were not picked because they were not the target. You say it is not a hate crime, where is your stuff to back up yours?
Quote:
It is pretty obvious that the Christian arguing this is going to want it to be a hate crime because it targets his religion. I do not see it that way. These kids have no history of hating just Baptists.

It is not my religion. I am Catholic. It does fall under Christian though. If it targeted my religion there would be burnt catholic churches. I did not right the definition of a hate crime, but in my interpretation it falls under that very difinition. And an Overwhelming about of people on this site think it does too. "These kids have no history of hating just Baptists." Got proof?

Quote:
If there was enough evidence to try them for a hate crime which under Alabama law the sole intention of them burning those churches down was to prevent people from congregating and worshipping together the State of Alabama and the media would be bringing this out.

Sure like they brang out Saddam and his WMD's? That is what i am saying. If it was even one mosque like in Irag. The MSM right away says cival war, hate crime. Burn down over ten in this country and nothing?

Quote:
Yet we are not seeing this, unless of course Drnaline wants to jump into the conspiracy boat and join all the radical left wing nutjobs who thrive on conspiracy theories.

No conspriacy needed. All they needed was one different type of church. Then your arguement would stick, but they did not do that. I will admit that the college educated three leftwind nutjobs did consrire to burn down nothing but Baptist churches and for that they did succeed.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 07:27 am
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
Not enough to convict on a hate crime. You love to take the law literally in every arguement on here except ones that target your belief. Then its ok to read into the law and decide that it is something that will side with your belief Smile



A lot of stupid people are in College. Again you have no proof, just speculation based on coincidence. Nothing that will make a Jury convict them of a hate crime.

Prove to me they knew the first church they were going to burn was going to be a Baptist.

Prove to me that the news reports of them being drunk while hunting and coming across that first church was not what really happened and the media is covering up the real motives! Prove to me any of that as false. You can't.

Prove that the first church they burned was targeted and not a church that just happened to come across while hunting.
Quote:
Not enough to convict on a hate crime. You love to take the law literally in every arguement on here except ones that target your belief. Then its ok to read into the law and decide that it is something that will side with your belief


Please show me where I didn't take it literally? And most laws side with my beliefs, It's called moral majority and is how this country is governed and how it's laws are made.

Quote:
A lot of stupid people are in College. Again you have no proof, just speculation based on coincidence. Nothing that will make a Jury convict them of a hate crime.


No proof, they arrested all three and maybe more from a set of tire tracks. I think the cops had proof of them doing something. Speculation didn't start those fires.

Quote:
Prove to me they knew the first church they were going to burn was going to be a Baptist.

The big sign out front that said "Baptist Church". And probably all the other had them too.

Quote:
Prove to me that the news reports of them being drunk while hunting and coming across that first church was not what really happened and the media is covering up the real motives! Prove to me any of that as false. You can't.

Prove they were really drunk? I'll wait for you proof, if you can?
Quote:
Prove that the first church they burned was targeted and not a church that just happened to come across while hunting.

Proof that is wasn't. And then do the same for all the remaining ones.
ohiosweetheart
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 05:46 pm
@Brent cv,
ok I'm going to jump in here, as this particular part is interesting to me... otherwise, this argument is getting old, lol

Brent wrote:

Prove that the first church they burned was targeted....

To be perfectly honest, I can't prove that the first church was targeted... but then again, you can't prove it wasn't, can you?

Brent wrote:

..... and not a church that just happened to come across while hunting.


did they "just happen" to come across all the other churches that were Baptist as well? hmmm...
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 06:11 pm
@ohiosweetheart,
ohiosweetheart wrote:



To be perfectly honest, I can't prove that the first church was targeted... but then again, you can't prove it wasn't, can you?


Nope but I am not the one swearing up and down it is a hate crime either. Just asking the person swearing up and down it is to prove it. I don't know what their intentions were anymore than Drnaline.

Quote:

did they "just happen" to come across all the other churches that were Baptist as well? hmmm...


Does anyone have a list of all the churches targetted
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Wed 29 Mar, 2006 06:12 pm
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
Please show me where I didn't take it literally? And most laws side with my beliefs, It's called moral majority and is how this country is governed and how it's laws are made.


No proof, they arrested all three and maybe more from a set of tire tracks. I think the cops had proof of them doing something. Speculation didn't start those fires.


The big sign out front that said "Baptist Church". And probably all the other had them too.


Prove they were really drunk? I'll wait for you proof, if you can?

Proof that is wasn't. And then do the same for all the remaining ones.


You ask me to prove all this why? I am not the one swearing up and down it is or isnt a hate crime. I do not know.

You however have the one track mind that it was a hate crime so I ask you to give a little substance to it.
 

Related Topics

What is the most valuable thing you own? - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Has there been a roll call? - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
Here's another Trump thread... - Discussion by tsarstepan
Should I be offended? - Question by the prince
How desperate can a christian get? - Discussion by reasoning logic
Is A2K A Religion? - Question by mark noble
Top o' the Mornin' to Ya! - Question by Transcend
8/31/05 : Gas Prices - Discussion by Ken cv
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 08:43:26