Monday, August 25, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

Imagine No Religion' signs to go up around town

by AZ Central

Thanks to Dan Koerner for the link.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/08/24/20080824billboard0824-ON.html

'Imagine No Religion' signs to go up around town

Courtesy of The Freedom From Religion Foundation

The Freedom From Religion Foundation sponsored this billboard currently up in Denver. The billboard will remain there throughout the Democractic National Convention.

A national organization that promotes freedom from religion and separation of church and state is hoping to get Phoenix commuters talking with five controversial billboard ads that will go up this week.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, based in Madison, Wis., paid advertising company CBS Outdoor to put up five signs that read "Imagine No Religion."

The message on the billboards will start to go up Monday and will remain there for a month, said Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

t will take CBS Outdoor a few days for all signs to be up, which will be located at:

� 19th Avenue and Fillmore Street, west of the State Capitol

� Van Buren Street and 15th Avenue, northeast of the State Capitol

� Indian School Road and 23rd Street

� McDowell Road and 14th Street

� McDowell Road and Third Street

Phoenix will be the first city to have as many as five signs.

But getting the billboards up did not come without hurdles.

The five sites chosen by the organization were changed after CBS Outdoor said they had to be 1,000 feet from any schools or churches, Gaylor said.

The site locations were finalized late last week, and CBS Outdoor was not available for comment over the weekend.

The organization, comprised of 12,000 atheist or agnostic members, aims to promote free thought and separation of church and state.

The billboards debuted last year in Madison and have made their way to cities like Columbus, Ohio, and Seattle.

A billboard reading "Keep Religion OUT of Politics" is currently displayed in Denver and will remain there throughout the Democratic National Convention.

So far, Gaylor said, there has been little opposition to the billboards, and she doesn't anticipate any issues in Phoenix.

"The free thought movement has never been stronger in this country," she said.

Bob Mitchell, senior pastor at Central United Methodist Church, on Central Avenue near McDowell Road, said he's also noticed an increase in atheist activism.

"I don't have a problem with people expressing their points of view in public," Mitchell, whose congregation has around 420 members, said.

Mitchell said he hoped there would be no backlash against the billboards but wouldn't be surprised if there was.

"I would prefer that there was serious tolerant dialogue that might emerge from this publicity campaign because it is much needed," he said.

But state Sen. Linda Gray, who represents the Northwest Valley, was more critical of the organization and its billboard ads.

Gray, a Republican, thinks the signs will be offensive to those who believe in God.

"The FFRF fails to acknowledge history which recognized the strong Christian commitment of those who attended the Constitutional Convention," she wrote in an e-mail.

For Harold Saferstein, of Scottsdale, the billboards are a step forward in making the idea of freedom from religion more public.

Saferstein, who is part of the Humanist Society of Greater Phoenix, an organization that promotes humanism, donated money for the billboards.

He said several members of his organization also donated.

"I think (the billboards) are going to alert people to the fact that there are organizations that support lack of believe in a supernatural being," Saferstein said.

Posted: Monday, August 25, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 174 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #236753 by practicing atheis on August 25, 2008 at 9:31 am

i would love to see some of those billboards out here in the inland empire of southern california. and what is it about restricting the billboards from being within 1000 ft of a school or church? do they restrict churches from being within 1000 ft of schools? somehow, i doubt it.

Other Comments by practicing atheis

2. Comment #236754 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 9:33 am

practicing atheis,

What part of the Inland Empire are you from?

I grew up in Redlands.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

3. Comment #236756 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 9:38 am

The Freedom From Religion Foundation sponsored this billboard currently up in Denver. The billboard will remain there throughout the Democractic National Convention.

I was pleasantly surprised and happy to see this when I came in.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

4. Comment #236758 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 9:39 am

Al,

Lol. You grew up in Redlands?! I grew up in Rialto and then Riverside. . .incredibly small wworld.

Other Comments by CocoCantare

5. Comment #236759 by practicing atheis on August 25, 2008 at 9:40 am

I'm in Claremont. i guess it's not technically the inland empire, but it's not really los angeles either.

Other Comments by practicing atheis

6. Comment #236760 by Vaal on August 25, 2008 at 9:42 am

The five sites chosen by the organization were changed after CBS Outdoor said they had to be 1,000 feet from any schools or churches

Schools? Churches, I can understand, but schools?

Still, a heartening step in the right direction. It will be interesting to see if/when they are defaced.

EDIT: How about some T-shirts being made up?

Other Comments by Vaal

7. Comment #236761 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 9:42 am

I think some parts of the IE would be less open to the signs than others. For example, they would never pass at the surrounding mountain towns like Arrowhead and Big Bear. They are VERY christian towns!

Other Comments by CocoCantare

8. Comment #236763 by Roger Stanyard on August 25, 2008 at 9:46 am

My understnding is that about half of Americans believe that religion and politics basically don't mix. There are an aweful lot of religious people who think so. The opposite is clearly a threat to many religions.

One of the very basic concepts of a liberal democracy is that we re all free to hold any religious opinions that we feel comfortably with.

One of the huge problems we now have is that is not acceptable to many American evangelicals/fundamentalists and, for the most part, the creationist/ID movement.

The fundamentalists basically want a theocracy (with only them in charge) because it "saves souls.

Here is an article I have just written up on the latest developments where they call for concentration camps for those that accept evolution:

I think it is important to keep up to date with the latest "developments" coming out of American creationists. Our creationists are closely connected to them and usually ape their nonsense.

As most here are well aware the creationists/fundamentalists have been pushing history revisionism for some years, arguing that science leads to concentration camps, Stalinism, Hitler, Maoism, Pol Pot and whatever.

My argument has long been the reverse. The religious fundamentalism of creationism is what leads to the concentration camps. The creationists and fundamentalists are ideologues in the same mould as Trotskyites, Maoists, Nazis, Marxists and whatever. Everything has to fit their world-view and that which doesn't has to be eliminated.

We've already addressed the evidence in the form of Intelligent Design, the Discovery Institute and Truth in Science. As most are well aware, the prime financial backer of the Discovery Institute is Howie Ahmanson who was also the financial backer of Rousas Rushdoony (Rushdoony was also his and Pat Robertson's personal mentor). Rushdoony proposed that some 98.5% or more of the population be murdered because they do not accept or follow his personal religious opinions.

Well, the creationists in the USA are now spelling out exactly what they would like to do with anyone (religious or otherwise) who accepts evolution. Lock them up in concentration camps. The debate being put forward is whether the concentration camps (which are described as labour camp) should be in Antarctica.

Amongst the other ideas being proposed is to torture those who accept evolution until they recant and accept God ("Since evolutionists are liars and most do not really believe evolution we could employ truth serum or water-boarding to obtain confessions of evolution rejection."), forcing people who accept evolution to wear placards that says they are dangerous and mentally incompetent (I am not making this up) and denial of the vote to them.

All this is being put forward by a long-established creationist organisation, the Creation Science Association for mid America, based in Kansas City in Missouri/ Its head is one Tom Willis. (This was Ku Klux Klan country �quot; it seems to have now mogrified into another form with Willis and the CSA.)

Willis is also suggesting that "evolutionists" locked up in these camps should be left to fend for themselves and not be given sustenance (food, water, etc..)

Willis, who has put these views froward in two of his organisation's newsletters, is well known amongst creationists and anti-creationists in the USA. He also had a high profile in the UK around 1999-2000. He was at the forefront in the late 1990s in trying to get creationism into the school classroom in Kansas (a hot spot for creationism in the USA). The Creation Science Association of Mid-America has been around for 25 years. Given that Willis apparently runs it, I take his position to be the same as that of he association.

The most recent of the newsletters which deals with the establishment of concentration camps can be found at

http://www.csama.org/csanews/nws200809.pdf. You can also see from this that Willis is what Americans would call a paranoid rightwing wingnut who fantasises that "evolutionists" are all "socialists" with their snouts in the public trough, failing, of course, to point out that the fundamentalists receive huge tax breaks and are equally as likely (or not) to work in the public sector.

Willis, incidentally, can't make up his mind whether "evilutionists" are Nazis or communists.

Basically Willis's position is the "evolutionists" should not be allowed "to roam free in the land". Just as Pol Pot thought about the educated in Cambodia or Hitler and his pals thought about the Jews and "socialists".

The stuff that calls for the withdrawal of the vote from people who accept evolution can be found in a CSA newsletter published some 2 months back.

It is at http://www.csama.org/csanews/nws200807.pdf

There he also openly advocates "the violent expulsion of all evolutionist from civilised society/ As I say, another Pol Pot/Hitler.

When I first came across Willis's position a few days ago I thought it to be a parody of creationist viewpoints. Well Poe's law serves us well here. It isn't. (Incidentally, at least part of what he has said has been posted on "Fundies Say the Darndest Things".)

What Willis is proposing is that over half the population of the USA be sent to concentration camps and denied all freedoms. Even Hitler didn't go that far.

Willis is also a geocentrist.

Willis seems to display the paranoia and fantasising of many a creationist and fundamentalist I have come across, believing that "evolutionists" are incompetent, unproductive, dangerous, at war with Christianity, and have demanded the elimination of Christians. (You can see the bog-standard diddums martyrdom complex here.)

Other claims by Willis include evolutionists being "largely unproductive leaches on the productive members of society, else they are totally destructive."

"True Christians are not evolutionists…."

"Evolution tends to attract people whose intellects are sub-par."

The state is a form of organised crime.

Evilutionists "gravitate to employment positions where knowledge, truth, character, logic, etc. are not needed, typically education and the media…."

"Most evolutionists are also socialists."

"Evolutionists are mostly incompetent."

Evolution will not be eradicated until the antichrist eradicates all evolutionists to make way for worship of himself.

"Evolutionists are manifestly the most dangerous and destructive people on this planet." Muslim creationists cannot get much succour from this as he suggests Muslims are near equally as dangerous.

"The only slavers that evolutionists will admit that ever existed are Southern U. S.
whites, though some will admit Nazis…" (Where did he get this rubbish from?)

"People who accept evolution are not competent to vote."

"I am quite serious that their [evolutionists] danger to society is so great that, in any sane society they would, at a minimum, be denied a vote…as well as any job where they might influence immature people." The latter includes teaching, academia, youth leadership or helping run the boy scouts.

There you have it �quot; creationists want absolute and total control over education and total control over the political system. Willis is just another totalitarian indistinguishable from Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Robert Mugabe (who, incidentally, also claims to be a Christian.)

Dismiss Willis as unrepresentative if you like, but many of these claims seem to have been made in some form (mostly against the BCSE or its individual members) by one prominent British creationist who we have long suspected is a front for the mainstream of British creationism.

One minor point is that many who have commented on the two CSA newsletters seem to have assumed that Willis is talking about evolutionary biologists. He is not. He is talking about people who accept evolution which even in the USA is the majority of the population and most of its well-educated (which Willis, clearly, is not to be counted amongst.)

Willis is dead useful to us, As soon as one of the creationists/IDers starts foaming at the mouth that evolution led to Fascism, communism and the concentration cam http://www.csama.org/csanews/nws200807.pdfps, just point out that one of the leading and best established creationist organisations wants to send over half the population to concentration camps.

As we have long argued, the outcome of creationism is theocracy with them in charge. Now we have it straight from the horses mouth just what that theocracy will be like.

Willis is, in fact a double whammy for us as he has been in the forefront in the USA of getting creationism into the school science lesson. Just point out as soon as Mackay, McIntosh or others pop their heads about the parapet what the revealed ambitions of the creationist movement is. If they shout "no, not us guv", bring up the connection with Rushdoony (in Truth in Science's case) or the excommunication/necrophilia background of Mackay.

If anyone should be so foolish as to claim Willis is not what creationism is about, I beg to differ. He is central to it. I've been looking at the Rapture Ready web site recently �quot; the End Timers/Dominionists/Dispensationalists and whatever involved are all, it appears, creationists. The whole shooting match consists of a murderous death wish cult �quot; they actually want most people to be killed because "they deserve it". Willis himself looks to be an End Timer.

I must say that far from being a Christian, Willis is a nasty, arrogant, piece of work who wants to make live hell for the majority of the population that he doesn't like. I would also include Rousas Rushdoony apologists and anyone who gets involved in Ahmanson funded activities (such as distribution of DI CDs to schools) in that same category.

The game they are playing is very simple. They are ideologues and everything and every fact has to fit to their world view, If the can't, they have to be rubbished; likewise anyone who disagrees with them. To get everything to stack up, they have no option but to lie, repeatedly and habitually �quot; just like Hitler and Stalin. Habitual liars cannot be trusted. Their justification is that they are morally superior because they are saving souls. Well, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and they are on that road and want everyone else on it. Willis, like Hitler, has worked out a final solution.

The "revolution" will also devour its own, that you can bet.

Here is one of the Creation Science Association's stated objectives: "To show that Biblical Creation, because it is true, is the only "scientific" explanation of origins, and therefore is the only account of origins that can possibly be useful to science."

Willis also claims that "evolution is a belief system imposed by the government." (Back to wingnut paranoid conspiracy theories again.)

Willis also believes that evolutionists have established "atheism" as the Kansas state religion. There you have it, again straight from the horse's mouth (or, more likely, his backside during a severe dose of diarrhoea), if you accept evolution you are an atheist. One shudders at the utter fantasy of it all.

I suspect that Willis has self-outed his real opinions because he and his pals have lost every battle they have fought to get creationism into the science classroom in Kansas. They have spent nearly decade at it and got nowhere. More likely, though, it is just a change of strategy �quot; drumming up the crowd with hate for a demonised enemy.

It is exactly what I would now do if I where Willis. With America looking likely to be in a deep, long recession, there are going to be a lot of likely recruits to extreme causes. See American Fascists by Chris Hedges. No doubt in the next few years we will see the growth of armed militia (paramilitaries) again in the USA (they are usually self-proclaimed God fearing, Bible Believing creationists and fundamentalists as well.) Willis's political views are way to the right of he political spectrum.

Conclusion: Willis vividly demonstrates that creationism is not an issue between science and religion but a political battle between the concept of liberal democracy where we can all hold whatever religious opinions we feel comfortable with and those that cannot abide the idea.

Roger Stanyard, British Centre for Science Education (www.bcseweb.org.uk)

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

9. Comment #236764 by catskill on August 25, 2008 at 9:50 am

Yeah 1000 feet from churches or schools? Ask yourself, what else has to be 1000 feet from churches or schools? Liquor stores? Adult businesses? And... anything accepting of atheism?? WTF??

Other Comments by catskill

10. Comment #236766 by MRA on August 25, 2008 at 9:50 am

Excellent! More consciousness raising!

Other Comments by MRA

11. Comment #236769 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 9:54 am

Well put, Staynard. As a Californian, I see a lot of progress and more people are demanding a secular society with no religion in politics. However, I tend to lose a bit of hope when I travel in the midwest and the south. When you have whole communities who think this way, they constantly reinforce each other. Though, being a recovered Southern Baptist, I know people can change.

Other Comments by CocoCantare

12. Comment #236773 by BillySands on August 25, 2008 at 9:58 am

Roger,

That is worrying. Were Is DR when we need to point this out to him?

The first link does not work.

Other Comments by BillySands

13. Comment #236789 by eellerto on August 25, 2008 at 10:21 am

Great read, Roger. But, I strongly suggest you run s spell checker through it!

Other Comments by eellerto

14. Comment #236790 by Stafford Gordon on August 25, 2008 at 10:21 am

It is very touching that Senator Linda Gray is standing up for God and believers, but I would have thought that she can look after herself.

Indeed, I think she'll welcome the debate; at least we're using our "grey matter".

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

15. Comment #236791 by Roger Stanyard on August 25, 2008 at 10:24 am

The two main references are at:

http://www.csama.org/csanews/nws200809.pdf
http://www.csama.org/csanews/nws200807.pdf

I checked both repeatedly today and they worked. However, there may be an overload as I have, in the last hour, posted my article on a couple of sites.

Roger

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

16. Comment #236793 by Ishruul on August 25, 2008 at 10:25 am

8. Comment #236763 by Roger Stanyard

The fundamentalists basically want a theocracy (with only them in charge) because it "saves souls.

Ha ! HA ! HA ! Almost pee myself with this one!
Saving souls? Still charging indulgence ticket, are they?

I live in Saguenay (that's like 4 hours north of Montreal) the mayor of our town is in some kinda media frenzy debate about HIS RIGHT to do -IMPOSE- a 5 minutes prayer with all the rest of the city council...christian or not.

Keeping religion out of politic, hmmm...should keeping religion out of politicians be a better anwser?

Other Comments by Ishruul

17. Comment #236797 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 10:36 am

Coco, Practising,

The IE is a remarkable hold out. It is also the sub prime foreclosure capital of the world.

I was just in Redlands 3 weeks ago. It was warm. Claremont is a nice town, always like it a lot.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

18. Comment #236801 by Lucas on August 25, 2008 at 10:40 am

Looking at that picture just keeps making me smile. I hope Barack sees it. I recently received an invitation to meet our new lobbyist, hired by the Secular Coalition of America, next month I think. I can't wait.

Other Comments by Lucas

19. Comment #236803 by Layla Nasreddin on August 25, 2008 at 10:48 am

Phoenix, eh? I'll have to check that out if I manage to get up there in the near future. Although Phoenix tends to be solidly Republican, with hundreds of churches (along with quite a few synagogues and mosques) in the vicinity, we're so laid back here we might as well be comatose! So I don't really expect any problems, either.

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

20. Comment #236811 by squinky on August 25, 2008 at 11:22 am

Al-rawandi, Practicing atheis

Small world; fancy meeting you here. I went to Pitzer College for a year before transferring to another school. Claremont I liked OK (view of Mt. Baldy) but the smog is a KILLER! It's probably like Beijing right about...now! I knew a classmate that lived his whole life in Redlands and he was 7th Day Aventist. I had no idea there were such religious wingnuts at the time and his goal in life was to attend Loma Linda Medical School. The IE needs more than a few billboards!

Other Comments by squinky

21. Comment #236812 by Edamus on August 25, 2008 at 11:22 am

More Bible-Belt locations! Like here in good ol' North Carolina!

Other Comments by Edamus

22. Comment #236816 by Ed-words on August 25, 2008 at 11:31 am

State Sen. Gray needs a history lesson.

The Constitutional Convention did not even open

with a prayer, and chose to OMIT the word God

from the Const.!

Other Comments by Ed-words

23. Comment #236818 by Crono454 on August 25, 2008 at 11:38 am

I'm going to be happy to see these around the valley. :-)

Other Comments by Crono454

24. Comment #236820 by Cartomancer on August 25, 2008 at 11:45 am

What's with this 1000 feet from schools or churches nonsense? Is there really a law or policy in Phoenix Arizona that means you can't put up a billboard poster within 1000 feet of someone who might be influenced by it?

I doubt it. This is the most blatant discrimination possible, unless they also state that no religious posters can go up within 1000 feet of schools or science labs...

Other Comments by Cartomancer

25. Comment #236822 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 11:50 am

I'm going to be happy to see these around the valley

Ha well when you put it that way;

Al you're a valley boy? hahaha makes sense.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

26. Comment #236823 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 11:59 am

Al,

I went to a southern baptist church in Highland. It's true, the IE is full of christians. . . I'm sure if the billboards went up, I'd be hearing about it from my baptist sister who currently lives in Yucaipa. Her (very large and influential) church has already called for a boycott of McDonald's because apparently they support gay rights.

Other Comments by CocoCantare

27. Comment #236824 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 12:04 pm

TWP,

I am not from the "Valley". And it doesn't make sense...

I am so totally, like, not from, like, the valley.... mkay? Now I have to go shopping, for like, new pants.

squinky,

Loma Linda is a 7th Day Adv. hold out. The mail is not delivered on Saturdays there. The Medical school is extremely crazy religious, and is inbred, only hiring its own graduates. But it is still a good place to go if you have been shot, good doctors either way.

Smog is very bad there. Don't trust the air if you cannot see it.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

28. Comment #236829 by DamnDirtyApe on August 25, 2008 at 12:13 pm

You guys in the states must always protect your historical documents, because if theists get their mits on that evidence... I fear the worst.

Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe

29. Comment #236831 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 12:16 pm

Al,

Noted.

Have fun with that, pick up a like a new hat while you're at it.

Have you returned to the work force yet?

Loma Linda is a 7th Day Adv.

A friend of mine growing up had an aunt that was 7DA, she scared me. They're on a whole different level.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

30. Comment #236833 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 12:19 pm

Coco,

I went to Yucaipa HS, it was a bastion of Christian whackjobbery.

I became an ordained minister through that online church, and I went to class with a glass of water and made "Holy Water" and started blessing people in class... there were two other irreverent students who thought it was funny.... others were pissed. I got a lecture for that. But that was my general attitude.

TWP,

I am back at work and it has been a little crazy. Really cutting into my RD.net time.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

31. Comment #236837 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 12:27 pm

I became an ordained minister through that online church, and I went to class with a glass of water and made "Holy Water" and started blessing people in class... there were two other irreverent students who thought it was funny.... others were pissed. I got a lecture for that. But that was my general attitude.

That's classic, that's a great story.

No doubt you are playing catch up. Nice attitude towards work; it's cutting into your time dilly dallying on the internet.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

32. Comment #236838 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 12:29 pm

Al,

So now you live in the Bay area. . .right? Much better air quality and people quality (not so many religionuts)IMO. But me, I'm stuck in the Central Valley while my husband is stationed at NAS Lemoore aka "Cowtown California" for the next 2 years. Oh well.

Other Comments by CocoCantare

33. Comment #236839 by Layla Nasreddin on August 25, 2008 at 12:30 pm

"Around the valley" in this context means the "Valley of the Sun," the touristy (I guess) name for the Phoenix metro area.

24 Cartomancer

I don't believe there's a law, it's that the billboard company insisted it be that way. I'm just happy they agreed to take their money and put them up at all! Baby steps...

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

34. Comment #236842 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 12:48 pm

TWP,

I am shockingly productive at work, that excel based life is helpful.

Coco,

I am in the Bay now. Lemoore? Ewwwwww

Other Comments by al-rawandi

35. Comment #236843 by Faith Minus on August 25, 2008 at 12:51 pm

Quick! Someone notify Ray Comfort! Maybe that will get him to move away

Other Comments by Faith Minus

36. Comment #236847 by Scot Rafkin on August 25, 2008 at 12:56 pm

TWP, Al-Rawandi:

I'm a valley-boy; Sherman Oaks/Van Nuys in the 80's (**hangs head in shame**). I even dated a few Madonna look-alikes. And, yes, OMG, the stereotypes were, like, so accurate. Occasionally used to hang out at Perry's Pizza in the Galleria (that's the place in Fast Times at Ridgemont).

Other Comments by Scot Rafkin

37. Comment #236853 by decius on August 25, 2008 at 1:15 pm

Comment #236847 by Scot Rafkin

I even dated a few Madonna look-alikes.

No blame, mate. It's called "riding the wave".

Other Comments by decius

38. Comment #236859 by robotaholic on August 25, 2008 at 1:27 pm

omgoodness, that picture makes feelings of happieness erupt in my heart srsly!

TWP your picture is insane lollllllllllllllll

Other Comments by robotaholic

39. Comment #236860 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 1:27 pm

I grew up in the late 90's.... early 2000's.

I dated a few Monica Lewinsky look-a-likes.

Can't blame me can you :-/

Other Comments by al-rawandi

40. Comment #236864 by 8teist on August 25, 2008 at 1:33 pm

Whoooooa,they had to be 1,000 feet from any schools,

thats cos` atheism is a drug duudes, it opens your mind and sends you on a wicked trip , yeah far out right on...........

Other Comments by 8teist

41. Comment #236865 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 1:34 pm

Scot,

Madonna look-a-likes in the 80's? [ahem] lovely.

Occasionally used to hang out at Perry's Pizza in the Galleria (that's the place in Fast Times at Ridgemont).

[chuckles] You weren't by chance the resident based Spinelli were you?

I dated a few Monica Lewinsky look-a-likes.

Can't blame me can you :-/

Must.Not. Take. Bait.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

42. Comment #236867 by Scot Rafkin on August 25, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Comment #236860 by al-rawandi

I dated a few Monica Lewinsky look-a-likes.

I feel better now. Thanks.

Other Comments by Scot Rafkin

43. Comment #236870 by al-rawandi on August 25, 2008 at 1:37 pm

TWP,

It's "Spicolli" not "Spinelli".

Would you like a DVD player for Christmas?

Must.Take.Bait.Al.Is.Bored.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

44. Comment #236872 by CocoCantare on August 25, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Al,

Hey man, don't hate. My husband's next tour might be East coast or Japan. . .so. . .it's alright. We drive to the coast and Sequoia often. The signs I see around here are "Get the US out of the UN" and "US Sovereignty" type stuff. :o/

Other Comments by CocoCantare

45. Comment #236873 by InfuriatedSciTeacher on August 25, 2008 at 1:41 pm

Edamus> I live in Raleigh, and would gladly contribute to something of the sort going up around here.. perhaps near the state capitol complex? Although the reactions in smaller towns would be worth filming...

Other Comments by InfuriatedSciTeacher

46. Comment #236874 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 1:44 pm

Al,

Ha ha that it is. I had a hankering Spinelli wasn't right.

Idk depends, is the movie included?

Nah the moment is lost, next time you make a remark that could have a possible sexual inuendo retort I'll be sure to throw it out there.

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

47. Comment #236875 by Scot Rafkin on August 25, 2008 at 1:45 pm

Comment #236865 by thewhitepearl

You weren't by chance the resident based Spinelli were you?

I'm assuming you mean Spicolli, as Al pointed out. No, I wasn't. The surfer-stoner dudes had their own clique, which also required the wearing of Vans shoes. I was more in the "new-wave" crowd. I had spikey hair with a bleached stripe going down the middle.

Other Comments by Scot Rafkin

48. Comment #236876 by RigoJancsi on August 25, 2008 at 1:45 pm

"The FFRF fails to acknowledge history which recognized the strong Christian commitment of those who attended the Constitutional Convention," she wrote in an e-mail.

Well, history also had witches burning on the stake. Is that something she would relate to as well? Then I would like to mention the even older history of christians eaten by lions. Yummi!

Other Comments by RigoJancsi

49. Comment #236881 by kkelly on August 25, 2008 at 1:51 pm

I always wanted to be a teenager in the 80s so that I could go to the mall and see Tiffany.

Other Comments by kkelly

50. Comment #236882 by thewhitepearl on August 25, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Scot,

Oh. I would have hung out with the surfer-stoner dudes. The pepe le pew look just doesn't do it for me.

:)

Other Comments by thewhitepearl

Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 3 4 | Next | Last