This one doesn't confuse beating ...

Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote Stop pestering your betters
Greg wrote Putting on aires, Kane?
K Oh, I don't consider myself your better, Greg.
K Just a member of the human race.
G Is that what "Stop pestering your betters" says about you?
K And didn't say "stop pestering me," now did I, Greg?
K I see you can't debate the subject of the thread, but then what's
new, eh.

Greg wrote
What WERE those cops thinking when they arrested
a minister for SPANKING some kids with permission?
How big should the settlement be?

Dan Sullivan wrote
The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?

Dan, Didn't you READ the news story?

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."




http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...c-ct--minister...

Minister suing police December 11, 2006, 7:05 AM EST

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP)_ A former New Haven minister who said he was
upholding God's law when he beat two children with a belt because they
disobeyed their mother is suing the police officers who arrested him.

The Rev. Walter Oliver had been charged with assault and risk-of-injury

charges in 2001, but a Superior Court jury acquitted him of the charges

three years ago.

The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion.

Oliver's attorney, Norm Pattis, argues in the lawsuit that the police
warrant failed to acknowledge that Oliver's administration of corporal
punishment to disobedient children, in the eyes of many people, is
proper and an accepted religious practice.

"A bunch of politically correct goons have decided that you can't spank

a child without going to jail," Pattis said Friday.

Police got involved when a pair of boys from West Haven, then 11 and
12, reported the spankings to the Department of Children and Families.
The corporal punishment happened in New Haven, so the case was
transferred here.

The lawsuit names New Haven Detective Benjamin Alma and West Haven
Detective Marvin Kasowitz as defendants.

It took a six-member jury about 1 1/2 hours on Nov. 10, 2003 to find
Oliver not guilty of two counts of risk of injury to a minor and two
counts of third-degree assault for hitting the boys.

Oliver acknowledged he administered what he calls "holy spankings,"
with the permission of the boys' mother, acting under biblical advice.

He beat his own sons, he said, and they grew up to be productive
members of society.

"If you beat him, he will not die, but you will save his soul from
hell," Oliver said, quoting from the book of Proverbs.

Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."

That doesn't answer my question, does it, turdbrain????

You wrote, "How big should the settlement be?"

And I asked "The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."

That doesn't answer my question, does it, turdbrain????

You wrote, "How big should the settlement be?"

And I asked "The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

How much more specific can I get than the actual legal issues as
stated?

Are you showing off your "finesse" again Dan?

Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."

That doesn't answer my question, does it, turdbrain????

You wrote, "How big should the settlement be?"

And I asked "The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

How much more specific can I get than the actual legal issues as
stated?

Again, for the third time, turdbrain, you wrote "How big should the
settlement be?"

And I asked " The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you incapable of understanding my question, turdbrain?

Try it again...

Are you showing off your "finesse" again Dan?

The only

Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."

That doesn't answer my question, does it, turdbrain????

You wrote, "How big should the settlement be?"

And I asked "The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

How much more specific can I get than the actual legal issues as
stated?

Again, for the third time, turdbrain, you wrote "How big should the
settlement be?"

And I asked " The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you incapable of understanding my question, turdbrain?

Try it again...

Are you showing off your "finesse" again Dan?

The only showing off is being done by you, turdbrain.

You're showing off that you can't comprehend a five word question.

Dan:

Are you posting DRUNK again?


Dan Sullivan wrote:
Greegor wrote:
Dan Sullivan wrote:
Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

The third small paragraph in the news story I DID attach last time:

"The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion."

That doesn't answer my question, does it, turdbrain????

You wrote, "How big should the settlement be?"

And I asked "The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you not capable of answering my question, turdbrain?

How much more specific can I get than the actual legal issues as
stated?

Again, for the third time, turdbrain, you wrote "How big should the
settlement be?"

And I asked " The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

Are you incapable of understanding my question, turdbrain?

Try it again...

Are you showing off your "finesse" again Dan?

The only showing off is being done by you, turdbrain.

You're showing off that you can't comprehend a five word question.

Greegor wrote:
Dan:

Are you posting DRUNK again?

Greg, your turdbrained pervert, I haven't had an alcoholic beverage in
well over a decade.

And you've deleted the issue.

So I will explain it in full when you repost what was being discussed.

Dan wrote
Greg, your turdbrained pervert, I haven't had an
alcoholic beverage in well over a decade.

Then what is impairing you, Dan? Pain killers?

And you've deleted the issue.

I attached the news article yet again. It's no trouble!

So I will explain it in full when you repost what was being discussed.

You might want to wait until your head clears.


http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...c-ct--minister...


Minister suing police December 11, 2006, 7:05 AM EST

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP)_ A former New Haven minister who said he was
upholding God's law when he beat two children with a belt because they
disobeyed their mother is suing the police officers who arrested him.

The Rev. Walter Oliver had been charged with assault and risk-of-injury

charges in 2001, but a Superior Court jury acquitted him of the charges

three years ago.

The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion.

Oliver's attorney, Norm Pattis, argues in the lawsuit that the police
warrant failed to acknowledge that Oliver's administration of corporal
punishment to disobedient children, in the eyes of many people, is
proper and an accepted religious practice.

"A bunch of politically correct goons have decided that you can't spank

a child without going to jail," Pattis said Friday.

Police got involved when a pair of boys from West Haven, then 11 and
12, reported the spankings to the Department of Children and Families.
The corporal punishment happened in New Haven, so the case was
transferred here.

The lawsuit names New Haven Detective Benjamin Alma and West Haven
Detective Marvin Kasowitz as defendants.

It took a six-member jury about 1 1/2 hours on Nov. 10, 2003 to find
Oliver not guilty of two counts of risk of injury to a minor and two
counts of third-degree assault for hitting the boys.

Oliver acknowledged he administered what he calls "holy spankings,"
with the permission of the boys' mother, acting under biblical advice.

He beat his own sons, he said, and they grew up to be productive
members of society.

"If you beat him, he will not die, but you will save his soul from
hell," Oliver said, quoting from the book of Proverbs.

Greegor wrote:
Dan wrote
Greg, your turdbrained pervert, I haven't had an
alcoholic beverage in well over a decade.

Then what is impairing you, Dan? Pain killers?

And you've deleted the issue.

I attached the news article yet again. It's no trouble!

So I will explain it in full when you repost what was being discussed.

You might want to wait until your head clears.

My head is fine.

You, OTOH, are more stupid that most of the CPS personnel I've ever
met.

You asked "How big should the settlement be?

And I asked ""The settlement for what specifically, turdbrain?"

And you responded with,

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wi...c-ct--minister...

The lawsuit filed last month in U.S. District Court claims false
arrest, malicious prosecution and the violation of his constitutional
right to exercise religion.

Now try and keep up.

Telling me what issues were listed in the lawsuit doesn't tell me what
you believe the settlement would be for, right, turdbrain?

Would the settlement be for "false arrest?"

Or "malicious prosecution?"

Or "the violation of his constitutional right to excersise religion?"

Or some combination of the three.

Obviously you're assuming the minister would prevail in his lawsuit.

I'm simply asking you what specifically the settlement would be for?

Got it NOW, turdbrain?

You can also tell me why he the minister would win,,, specifically.