Evangelist Calls On Christians To Assassinate Abortion Providers

[LiberalArkie]

Last edited Mon Nov 30, 2015, 07:00 PM - Edit history (3)

Popular Facebook evangelist Joshua Feuerstein calls on Christians to “punish Planned Parenthood” and make abortion providers fear for their life.

The obnoxious but popular Christian evangelist Joshua Feuerstein published the following video to his Facebook page on July 29:

Planned Parenthood has hunted down millions and millions of little innocent babies, stuck a knife into the uterus, cut them, pulled them out, crushed their skull with forceps, ripped their body apart, sold their tissue, and threw them bleeding into a trash bin.

I say, tonight, we punish Planned Parenthood. I think it’s time that abortion doctors should have to run and hide and be afraid for their life.

There is also this post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027397203

[moondust]

1. Tell it to the FBI.

This guy is an existential terrorist threat.

[Initech]

97. Yeah this asshole needs to be investigated by as many authorities as possible.

If this isn't terrorism I don't know what is.

[hifiguy]

2. This fucker belongs behind bars.

NOW.

[Aerows]

6. I completely agree with you.

What a dangerous thing to say in light of the death of 3 people.

Hell, it's an awful thing to say at any time, but downright recklessly despicable at a time like this.

[passiveporcupine]

74. His video is from July, not sure what year

But still, this is the type of incitement that really should not be legal as "freedom of speech".

[Aerows]

79. Cheering people harming other people

is a despicable act. What in the hell is in the heads of such people? What are they missing in their life that they would commit such horrible acts?

[passiveporcupine]

82. an evangelist of death

What a way to love your fellow man.

[Aerows]

83. It's so damn sad. n/t

[B Calm]

39. Along with congressional republicans who drilled Planned Parenthood and

created the atmosphere for terrorism!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

62. What prosecutable crime? I despise his actions and motives, but all speech is protected

What prosecutable crime? I despise his actions and motives, but all speech is protected otherwise there is always somebody to block your speech.

[cloudbase]

70. Incitement is not protected speech. n/t

[Bernardo de La Paz]

71. Yes it is. There is case law. You can't point to a single law that stands outside of riots and

You can't point to a single law that stands outside of riots and other extremely volatile situations.

Nor convictions that weren't overturned.

Give it a try finding one.

[cloudbase]

78. Brandenburg.

"The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

[Bernardo de La Paz]

81. This was not and is not "imminent lawless action". He was not speaking in a riot.

There was a long delay between the "incitement" (the bogus body parts video and Fiorino and the pastor) and the action (the Colorado shootings on Friday). Therefore no lawyer and no prosecutor could prove "imminent".

[Bernardo de La Paz]

76. Incitement is not protected in New Zealand. But ...

Incitement was an offence under the common law of England and Wales. It was an inchoate offence.[1] It consisted of persuading, encouraging, instigating, pressuring, or threatening so as to cause another to commit a crime.

It was abolished in England and Wales on 1 October 2008[2] when Part 2 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 came into force, replacing it with three new statutory offences of encouraging or assisting crime.[3] The common law is now only relevant to offences committed before that date.[4]

Incitement remains an offence in New Zealand.[5]

-- Wikipedia

In the United States, you have to prove that "imminent danger" is or was operative.

Traditionally, however, if the speech did not fall within one of the above categorical exceptions, it was protected speech. In 1969, the Supreme Court protected a Ku Klux Klan member’s racist and hate-filled speech and created the "imminent danger" test to permit hate speech. The court ruled in Brandenburg v. Ohio that; "The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a state to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force, or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."[80]

-- Wikipedia

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Apparently, he knows absolutely nothing about abortion. I would bet a million dollars that

he couldn't tell an embryo of a pig from one of his 'little innocent babies'





Which one is it?

[LiberalArkie]

5. Good quote on your sig line.

[moondust]

11. I'm sure he's also virulently opposed to spaying and neutering.

At least I think he's probably opposed. I've never actually heard a conservative voice his virulent opposition to human intervention in animal reproduction, but I'm sure they object to it since God makes animals, too, ya know.

[w0nderer]

4. K & R for visibility of this N/T

[herding cats]

7. Feuerstein's the Christian hatemonger who called on his followers to fight gay marriage with guns

He's the one who said they should stand up for their 1st Amendment right to discriminate against gays by using their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

He's one sick puppy. I'm sure he feels no remorse over the deaths at the PP clinic. If anything he's looking for a way to exploit it and increase is social media following.

[LiberalArkie]

8. He deleted it from his Facebook. But, you know how the internet is.

[herding cats]

14. Exactly. It's still out there and easy to find.

He can't just delete his video after millions of people viewed it and think his actions would go away with it.

[hifiguy]

9. I wonder how long it would take for me to be disappeared

if I said similar things about the kleptocrats on Wall Street.

Not long, I'd wager.

But this is OK, because jebus.

[herding cats]

16. Pretty much.

It's crazy what some people get away with and others don't.

[hifiguy]

22. If you can gibber out "jeeeeeebus" or "gawwwwwd"

anything and everything is excusable and you will be presumed sane/OK no matter what else you say or profess.

This is one seriously fucked-up society.

[MindPilot]

38. I had a very similar thought....

If I put up a page urging the assignation of federal prosecutors, I wonder how long it would take before the fibbies broke down my door.

For those who don't get religious privilege, this is what it looks like.

[Proserpina]

64. {cough}

as·sig·na·tion
ˌasiɡˈnāSH(ə n/

noun: assignation; plural noun: assignations

1.
an appointment to meet someone in secret, typically one made by lovers.
"his assignation with an older woman"
synonyms: rendezvous, date, appointment, meeting; literarytryst
"their secret assignation"
2.
the allocation or attribution of someone or something as belonging to something.

[MindPilot]

114. Nope. My Mac thought that was the word I wanted to use. n/t

[LiberalArkie]

73. Take a gander at this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027397531

[erpowers]

21. Also Behind the Starbucks Dust Up

It was Joshua Feuerstein who started the things, earlier this year, with Starbucks. He claimed to be upset that this year Starbucks put out a simple red cup instead of a cup with snowflakes, snowmen, and reindeer. He then encouraged people to go to Starbucks and say their name was Merry Christmas so their cups would say Merry Christmas.

[KansDem]

31. "...and say their name was Merry Christmas so their cups would say Merry Christmas."

And if I were working at Starbucks, I'd write "Mary Quissmiss."

[jmowreader]

101. And also so the clerks would have to SAY "Merry Christmas"

Trust me on something, Mr. Feuerstein: after a retail worker survives the month-long Christmas season, the last thing he or she wants to happen is to be forced to say "Merry Christmas" to someone.

[KansDem]

116. I might respond with "Christmas that is Merry!"

I mean, who says the adjective must precede the noun?

[Brickbat]

10. ROFLMAO -- he says while lying in bed.

[Warren DeMontague]

12. pointy-headed moron.

No, i mean seriously, he's got a fucking point on top of his head.

[LiberalArkie]

13. Just another one of those chisel-heads.

[jwirr]

15. THIS should be a reason to take tax exempt status away

from his church if he is getting it.

[smirkymonkey]

17. He is one sick mofo.

Isn't he the same guy that started that BS with the Starbucks red cup being "anti-Christian" or some such shit? What a dork. Get a life you idiot.

And what's a Christian fundie doing with a last name like Feuerstein?

[jmowreader]

92. He's the one

He's also the same mofo who called a Florida bakery that makes a lot of cakes for same-sex marriages and asked them to make him a cake with "We Do Not Support Same Sex Marriage" written on it. And of course he recorded the call without telling the distant end he was doing it, and published it online to show how people "discriminate against Christians because of their faith." Unfortunately for Josh...recording phone calls in Florida without the consent of all parties is a felony. But, you know, IOKIYAR.

He's ALSO the same mofo who asked his minions for $20,000 for a Red One camera to make YouTube videos (yes, I know: why in HELL do you need a full-fledged professional cinema camera to shoot YT video?), and when they gave him the money he spent it on something else.
http://lifeafter40.net/2015/04/07/josh-feuerstein-wheres-the-camera/

[Katashi_itto]

18. Just reported him to the FBI.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

57. What would be the charge / crime he is alleged to have committed?

Anything prosecutable with a reasonable chance of conviction?

Protecting free speech is to protect free speech you don't like, just like we protect your free speech that your opponents don't like.

[Moostache]

69. I believe that inciting people to violence is still a crime...not a lawyer though.

I would think he could be at risk for:

1) making interstate threats to interfere with interstate commerce (no matter if you like it or not, abortion IS LEGAL)
2) making threats of violence and intimidation (Assault....Battery is only if you HIT them...)
3) a reprisal from Anonymous that posts his home address and phone numbers

Just as you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded public venue, you can't yell "kill" on a public forum....

[saturnsring]

95. it isnt specific enough

[Bernardo de La Paz]

104. Good possibilities of cases, but not free speech cases. Still, good analysis.

This is what is needed, analysis, not the knee jerk anti-free speech reaction of so many.

Thanks.

[NYC Liberal]

112. Small point, but...

it is perfectly legal to shout fire in a public venue.

#1. The case from which that example originates (Schenck) was overturned.
#2. That example was used to justify the arrest and imprisonment of protestors during WWI for handing out anti-war flyers.

[backscatter712]

99. Violation of the FACE Act.

One of President Bill Clinton's accomplishments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Access_to_Clinic_Entrances_Act

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248) is a United States law that was signed by President Bill Clinton in May 1994, which prohibits the following three things: (1) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is obtaining reproductive health services or providing reproductive health services (this portion of the law typically refers to abortion clinics), (2) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is exercising or trying to exercise their First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship, (3) the intentional damage or destruction of a reproductive health care facility or a place of worship.[1][2]

Josh Feuerstein's words were pretty much a direct threat - an attempt to incite immediate violence (he said "tonight&quot against PP clinics.

He could conceivably spend a year in Federal prison for this.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

105. Thanks. nt

[Katashi_itto]

110. Tough, it's a violation of FACE

(Update, Nm, someone already pointed this out.)

[spanone]

19. another big mouthed asshole with a computer....

fuck him

[mike_c]

58. yup-- that seems to be one of the defining pathologies of the internet age....

It's unfortunate that another one appears to be some peoples' willingness to take BS seriously.

[randome]

20. Didn't I read elsewhere that he'd deleted this video? Doesn't excuse him, of course.

What a loser.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[LiberalArkie]

23. It has been saved http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027397203

[Ahpook]

52. Ahh, thanks

He's a fucking con man that won't stand by his convictions.

The coward should leave the video up.

[Mendocino]

24. Starbucks cup guy

Isn't this the same guy who posted his "I tricked Starbucks" coffee cup video?

[LiberalArkie]

25. Oh yea, For high entertainment today, might I recommend his Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=Joshua%20Feuerstein&ref=eyJzaWQiOiIwLjIyMzUxNDE1MjQ1NzkzNzYiLCJxcyI6IkpUVkNKVEl5U205emFIVmhKVEl3Um1WMVpYSnpkR1ZwYmlVeU1pVTFSQSIsImd2IjoiMjlmNGFkYjY2NzJlMzBhMGNjMDZkMDRlNDEzYmEwMWVjODM4ODUyZiJ9

[Mnemosyne]

65. The scary part of his page is seeing almost 1,900,000 "likes". nt

[DawgHouse]

84. I was just there. That video he made will never go away.

[arcane1]

26. 10 bucks says he's masturbating in that second video

[restorefreedom]

87. oh man, i just can't unread that

unfortunately i think you could be right.

sickos.

[Monk06]

113. Lying down in bed doing video selfies wearing satin jammies. Obvious masturbater

[LanternWaste]

27. No doubt, he pretends a "serious anti-christian vibe" is present.

No doubt, he pretends a "serious anti-christian vibe" is present, and is very concerned with it.

[whatthehey]

29. Yep; Wonder if DU Christians will try and find a way atheists are "just as bad"

because after all the only difference between Xian fundies and atheist fundies is the target and the quantity so I'm told.

I suppose, on a technicality, that's right though. After all while there are many preachers and doubtless legions of their followers (or they'd stop being followers!) who want to treat abortion as a capital crime, there is indeed a smaller number of atheists calling for the death penalty for Christians.

It would be nice though if the crowd who think "bear no false witness" is not just sensible but divinely commanded would admit that that smaller number is in fact zero, which makes it qualitatively different too.

[LiberalArkie]

33. Nah, we know that fundies are worse and the Atheists do not bother anyone.

[whatthehey]

35. Thanks - wopuld be nice if more of you had said that in the accusing thread though.

any of you?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7390829

[LiberalArkie]

46. I think all my old friends are all atheists or agnostists. I am not a fundy by any means. I won't

even say I am a Christian, I just say I am a follower of Jesus. And they say "you're a Christian" I say nope. I don't want to be lumped in with those fools. They have no idea of what they say or do. They can make no correlation to saying "All abortionists should be killed" over and over and felling any responsibility when it happens.

I try to stay out of the fire fights myself, it is too easy to go overboard.

[LanternWaste]

40. I'm not clever enough to pretend to know who's worse.

'Wonder if DU Christians will try and find a way atheists are "just as bad"'

I'm not clever enough to pretend to know who's worse person for person. Am however, clever enough to pretend to know that many people are just as bad as I am, many others are better than I am, and yet still others worse than I am.

Then again, I just illustrated my own ignorance by pretending to know what good and bad are.

[el_bryanto]

37. That's an interesting comparison

I assume that in your mind DU Christians (or at least that one who posted about anti-Christian sentiment at DU) and this jackass share certain similarities - how similar do you believe them to be?

Bryant

[LanternWaste]

42. I made no comparison, either morphological or syntactic.

I made no comparison, either morphological or syntactic.

I framed one object. Two are necessary for a comparison.

[el_bryanto]

96. Hmmmm

It seemed like you were comparing Joshua Feuerstein and the person who posted this post.

You have to admit that the language is pretty similar right? So I guess I just assumed you were comparing the two.

Good use of morphological and syntactic though - you must be very smart.

Bryant

[Lizzie Poppet]

28. Bring it, fauxhawk-boy.

We're not all pacifists...

[2naSalit]

30. I think that

not only is he a sh*t stirrer/incitement vector, he's also trolling for some deep pocketed someone to fund his BS... if it hasn't already been the case.

[juxtaposed]

32. I guess the coffee cups weren't doing it for him.

[katsy]

34. "The popular but obnoxious"?

Like "the popular but obnoxious" daesh?

Same difference. Terrorists.

[KamaAina]

36. Feuerstein? Evangelist?!

[B Calm]

41. LOL

I know what your saying. .

[KamaAina]

43. I was stonkered when conversing with someone named Steinberg about marriage equality

He said, "Are you happy about it? I'm not. I'm a Christian."

[KamaAina]

44. Joshua, no less!

Oy gevalt!

[NYCButterfinger]

45. I'm not a fan of abortion, but this guy is nuts

This guy is a joker.

[redwitch]

47. Inciting murder. Jail that bastard!

Violent hate speech has a poster boy. This makes me furious!

[Dont call me Shirley]

48. Time to throw these terrorists, Joshua Fuhrerstein and the like, in prison for inciting violence .

[Bernardo de La Paz]

60. Inciting violence is not a crime. Protecting free speech means protecting speech you don't like

Protecting free speech means protecting speech you don't like because there is always somebody else who doesn't like your speech.

[Dont call me Shirley]

63. But shouting fire in a movie theater and bomb in an airport are okay?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

68. Obviously not. But this case is not remotely similar, and there is plenty of case law

It has been settled law from many cases that (outside of riots and other such extreme situations), exhorting people to violence and law-breaking is not breaking the law.

[backscatter712]

106. Actually, yes it is. See Brandenburg v. Ohio.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

It has to be incitement of imminent lawless action for it to lose First Amendment protection under this SCOTUS decision.

See Feuerstein's exact words:

I say, tonight, we punish Planned Parenthood. I think it’s time that abortion doctors should have to run and hide and be afraid for their life.

There's the three-fold Brandenburg test. To be actionable, a piece of speech must come with intent, imminence, and likelihood of inciting lawless action.

It passes the intent test, because Feuerstein's made it very plain not just here, but elsewhere, what he thinks of Planned Parenthood.

It passes the imminent test, because Feuerstein called for action "tonight" (presumably the night when the video was posted.)

And it passes the likelihood test, because for Planned Parenthood, this is not their first rodeo. In fact, there are countless instances of death threats, vandalism, assaults, and so on, so Feuerstein's speech was definitely likely to incite lawless acts.

As for specific laws, like I said elsewhere in this thread, I think Feuerstein violated the FACE Act. I think there's a strong, Constitutionally defensible case to be made that Feuerstein could be put in Federal prison for a year for what he said.

[Blue_Tires]

49. I was wondering when we'd return to 1996...

[yuiyoshida]

50. Wow...just wow.

So that's what an asshole looks like.

[Hepburn]

51. Holy mother of gawd....

....this person calls himself a Christian???? Ummmmmmm...IF there was a Jesus, he sure as hell would not want this POS using his name to justify his sick beliefs!

JMHO

[valerief]

53. He should be sharing a prison cell with Cruz and Fiorina. nt

[liberalnarb]

54. And rethugs say we don't know the motive behind the planned parenthood shooting.

[randys1]

55. A liberal suggesting others TARGET people would put them in jail, but it never

works the other way around.

Didnt happen to Sarah, wont happen here I betcha

[Bernardo de La Paz]

56. Extra-judicial killings by right-wing (militia, unregulated). nt

[Jack Rabbit]

59. He's obviously mentally ill

So lock him up. He's a danger to himself and others.

[Tarc]

61. Some DU'ers consider this "protected speech", unfortunately

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027396004#post28

[Bernardo de La Paz]

67. And you don't? What law does it violate that passes Constitutional muster?

Point to it.

In The Friends of Voltaire Evelyn Beatrice Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"[4] (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs.[5][6][7] Hall's quotation is often cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.

[Moostache]

75. This is NOT a 1st amendment issue.

The RIGHT to say something does not and never has freed ANYONE from the consequences of saying it in the public arena.

Your job, your home, you reputation...ALL can be lost for "free" speech because the public can choose to ignore your business as a result or your bosses may fire you in "at-will" employment positions because your ignorant "free" speech besmirches their business too.

Freedom of Speech exists to prevent the government from abolishing political speech or free expression.
It does NOT absolve anyone from the consequences of their actions...and it does not make one free from appropriate retort or counterpoint arguments.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

80. You have huge hurdles. Yes it automatically is a free speech issue when you prosecute speech.

Your job, your home, you reputation...ALL can be lost for "free" speech

Those are covered by the laws of libel and slander. If certain hurdles are overcome then free speech is not a defense.

Freedom of Speech exists to prevent the government from abolishing political speech or free expression.
It does NOT absolve anyone from the consequences of their actions...and it does not make one free from appropriate retort or counterpoint arguments.

Yes, and that guy would instantly claim it is political speech, religious speech and free expression.

None of the posters have paused their emotions to raise the one issue you hint at, ... civil liability. They have simply said he belongs in prison because of his speech. That will not happen thanks to the Constitution of the United States of America.

But when people (like you have) get beyond simple knee jerk reactions, then we are getting somewhere.

[Moostache]

85. Not a lawyer...as said before...but I disagree that "free speech" covers implied threats of violence

His right to voice an anti-abortion statement is NOT the part that gets him afoul of the law (in my view), it is the threat or implication of bodily harm being added to the statement. That and causing "fear in them".

I am pro-choice as the day is long, but I will gladly defend the RIGHT of someone to believe otherwise and to say otherwise. But I do NOT advocate for pro-choice people to attack protesters and threaten to kill them or inflict bodily hamr on them.

Douchewaffle Joshua stepped across a pretty clearly defined line in the "what is protected speech?" debate when he stopped voicing an opinion on abortion and started suggesting that people harm those who disagree...


EDIT (ADDING):
Source: ABC News

The suspect in an online threat against the University of Chicago -- a student from a nearby college -- allegedly wanted to kill approximately 16 students or staff and "any number of white policemen that I can in the process" in retaliation for the fatal police shooting of teenager Laquan McDonald, who was shot 16 times, officials said Monday.

Jabari Dean, 21, was charged with transmitting a threat in interstate commerce, according to federal prosecutors, and could face five years in prison if convicted, officials said, though the FBI determined he did not have the means to carry it out.

That appears to be "speech" too? NO?

[backscatter712]

102. He violated the FACE Act.

Feuerstein made what is essentially a direct death threat against Planned Parenthood.

His exact words were:

I say, tonight, we punish Planned Parenthood. I think it’s time that abortion doctors should have to run and hide and be afraid for their life.

By saying "tonight", he made what could have been a vague call to action into an imminent threat. And with the words "abortion doctors should have to run and hide and be afraid for their life" he was essentially calling for either direct harm or a threat of direct harm towards abortion doctors.

That is NOT protected speech under the First Amendment.

As for specific laws he violated, I say he violated the FACE Act, which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and specifically prohibits the use of violence or the threat of violence to disrupt the obtaining or providing of reproductive health services.

Acts intended to intimidate workers or patients at reproductive health clinics are prohibited, so I think this covers what Feuerstein said specifically.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

103. Very good catch and detail. Thanks ! nt

[backscatter712]

109. No problem!

[fasttense]

66. Just another anti-abortion christian crazy, they'll murder you before they

Find out anything. Shot first ask questions later you know. They think they have license to kill with impunity. Crazy mass murderers.

[NurseJackie]

72. Insane. Completely insane. (He's the original "OMG-My-Starbucks-Cup-Is-RED" guy, right?)

[perdita9]

77. The FBI should investigate all parishioners in this church

Their leader endorses violence.

[SHRED]

86. He's a coward

Why isn't he out there?
Instead he tries to invite others.

[SoapBox]

88. A threat to public safety.

He should be picked up.

What the hell is wrong with this country, when shit like this is allowed to continue.

[Omaha Steve]

89. Hate crime prosecution doesn't bring back the dead

[sulphurdunn]

90. Is this clown Jewish?

Don't know. It is virtually impossible to find an in depth bio on him.

[jmowreader]

94. Only at Chanukah

Which, of course, he celebrates in the traditional manner:

[maryellen99]

91. He's one of these so called pro life men who abandon a woman they get pregnant

Then cry when they have to pay child support.

[Initech]

93. His name is spelled wrong. It should be "Fürhërstein".

[struggle4progress]

98. "Hi! Youtube exists so I can post videos of me screaming at my camcorder!

Send me some money!"

... Feuerstein’s .. incendiary views are part of his .. persona. Appearing on CNN Monday, he says America is a Christian nation ... The other guest .. Pete Dominick, a talk radio host, attacked Feuerstein as a “entrepreneurial bigot” ... For .. $10, $20, or $50 monthly, Feuerstein offers partnerships to help him spread his message ... His Web site doesn’t detail what the various tiers get you ...
Who is Josh Feuerstein, the man behind the Starbucks red cup frenzy?
Colby Itkowitz
November 10

[LiberalElite]

100. Kick nt

[lunasun]

107. bloated blob making threats while laying in bed? he looks like he is laying in bed

or is he disabled?
either way hater supreme

[arthritisR_US]

108. They confirm my atheism every day. nt

[Oilwellian]

111. He has deleted all of his YouTube videos from this past year

But he's left a lot of Neanderthal footprints.

Pastor Encourages Christians to Fight Same-Sex Marriage Ruling With Guns


http://www.advocate.com/religion/2015/07/16/pastor-encourages-christians-fight-same-sex-marriage-ruling-guns

[shenmue]

115. Death threats and incitement to riot are not covered by the First Amendment

As I'm sure this asshole's lawyer will explain to him really soon.