My boyfriend has my geekery figured out »« There is no hope for humanity

No florist in Rhode Island would send Jessica Ahlquist flowers

From the Freedom from Religion Foundation:

Working through a Wisconsin flower shop Tuesday, Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president, placed what she believed to be a routine order: A dozen red roses to be delivered on Wednesday with the message to Jessica: “Congratulations, and hang in there, with admiration from FFRF.”

Late yesterday, the local florist called FFRF’s office to report she had struck out at three Cranston florist’s shops, including at Twins Florist, which responded to the order in writing with this statement: “I will not deliver to this person.” The other two shops mysteriously produced unusual excuses for refusing the order. Gaylor said when she heard this news, “My jaw literally dropped. Everyone is stunned by the bigotry.”

FFRF was told a Warwick floral shop as of Wednesday had agreed to make the delivery today with no additional long distance charge. This morning, FFRF discovered it too was refusing the order, citing the excuse of unwanted media attention.

Thanks to an FFRF member’s referral, FFRF has placed an order out of state with a friendly shop, Glimpse of Gaia, in Putnam, Ct., which has agreed to deliver a dozen roses.

How fucking petty.

Comments

  1. mosesmodel says

    Probably won’t help to have a Christian who believes in Separation of Church and State condemn this. Still, here it goes. This was repugnant. Could they not find an adult to pick on?

  2. Brachial says

    Christ, I heard about the whole fiasco, I just didn’t know that it happened in the city where some of my family resides. This hits a tad to close to home for me. Makes me worry that maybe those members of my family view her in the same way as those flower shops.

  3. abadidea says

    Separation of Church and State benefits the Christians as much as it benefits us – after all there is hardly one kind of Christian!

    Thanks for being cool.

  4. says

    Rhode Island certainly hasn’t strayed too far from their Puritan roots, but then neither has much of the rest of the nation. Maybe it’s time for everyone who cares to get on board with the FaceBook group, Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF)

  5. Len says

    Reading this gave me a headache. I am absolutely floored by the bigotry of the flower shops who refused service. I think I need to go play some more Skyrim and try to forget there is so much hate in this world.

  6. julielada says

    It would be hilarious if we could organize a bunch of people to send flowers to Jessica through this florist and show the others how much business they lost.

  7. Paul From Narragansett says

    These places of business should be immediately shut down by the Rhode Island State Police and the proprietors, after probable cause is established confirming the denial of the requested commercial transaction, arrested for criminal harassment and conspiracy to commit criminal harassment.

    Paul From Narragansett
    - A Hopeful Guy Who Believes There Is A God(because I have no intellectual evidence not to but some intellectual evidence to believe there is)
    - A Graduate Of The University Of Notre Dame
    - A Lifelong Rhode Islander
    - A Fan Of Jessica’s Activism In The Face Of Zealotry and extreme socialogical stigmatism of the sort that historically speaking was responsible for the putting of Jesus Of Nazareth to torture and death.

  8. platyhelminthe says

    How do we make these people see their vile bigotry for what it is? What can we do to impress upon them how immoral and – dare I say it – how unchristian they are being?

    Such nastiness en masse is only possible when the people concerned have no percrption of it.

  9. Carlie says

    I’m fairly sure they could be tromped on for illegally discriminating against a customer on the basis of religion. At least they should be threatened with it.

  10. CeePeeThreeOwe says

    Possibility is that they may be bigots, or they may just be scared small business people who feel they have little option but to support their families by serving a community which includes a substantial percentage of bigots.
    Doesn’t make them right of course, just human. Would I risk my business on a point of principle? – Of course I would but then I’m safely the other side of the Atlantic.

    Bigotry is insidious, it thrives on weakness and pressure (real and imagined) and religion is just one of the cloaks it hides within.

  11. says

    Moderately conservative Christian here and I think those businesses who refused to make the delivery are nasty.

  12. schism says

    How do we make these people see their vile bigotry for what it is?

    You can’t. The unfortunate truth is that the most malicious people tend to be the most self-righteous as well.

  13. Azkyroth says

    refusing the order, citing the excuse of unwanted media attention.

    I sincerely hope they never have a fire – they’d probably pour gasoline on it to put it out. :(

  14. Azkyroth says

    I don’t think “harassment” is the right law to charge someone with for refusing to provide a service.

  15. says

    Is this not actionable under civil rights law? I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but it is illegal in the USA for a business to discriminate against patrons on the basis of race, is it not? Is Religion (or lack thereof) not also a “protected category?”

  16. gworroll says

    I would be one of those CT readers. Glad we had someone who could step up and do the right thing.

  17. says

    A minor point in the face of the flowery discrimination, but did the FFRF really have to call her “petite”? Still the need to make qualifiers based on figure?

  18. Doink says

    I’ll cheerfully point out that Skyrim basically runs on racism. Aside from wholesale dragoncide, the rest of the game is political manoeuvring between fantastically bigotted parties.

  19. says

    Religious identity is, I believe, a “protected class” … and thus, not merely harrassment, but outright Discrimination would IMO be the more appropriate charge to level against those businesses.

  20. ara says

    this is, however, illegal under interstate commerce laws due to the discrimination being religiously based

  21. says

    I just wish that the crazies who think sharia law is going to be imposed would realize that it’s can’t be, and the reason it can’t be is because of the law they are fighting against.

  22. JoeBuddha says

    I have some compassion for the florists. They didn’t ask to be dragged into this, and they’re pretty much screwed whatever they do. Personally, if I was going to have that problem, I’d go down fighting, but considering the firestorm, I totally understand their point.

  23. says

    They could have delivered some flowers, just like they do every day. No dragging whatsoever. Instead, they choose to get actively involved and even possibly broke the law on their way. They went out of their way to do this. No dragging whatsoever.

  24. Cass says

    Yes, it has to be scary as a small business to risk that. However, the only reason anybody found out about the flowers being sent at all is because everybody refused to send them. If the stores had consented, then nobody would have known and there would have been no backlash. Instead, this makes me suspect that at least some of the stores agreed with Ahlquist’s detractors, rather than simply fearing for their businesses.

  25. Erin says

    Religion at its finest. What good little christians attacking a child. You can keep it over there with your failing, corrupt economy. Disgusting. No wonder Americans are despised worldwide.

  26. LaPlace says

    YouTube has a series people speaking for and against the judges ruling.
    I have been leaving the comment that there are three flower shops in Cranston that have refused to deliver to Jennifer.

    I wish I knew their names.
    Maybe I will sent Jennifer some flowers just to find out.

  27. Azkyroth says

    As several commenters, including one right above you, have noted, it is in fact being actioned.

  28. sandraduffy says

    There’s a poll at The Cranston Herald in serious need of attention. http://cranstononline.com/

    “Should Cranston appeal Judge Lagueux’s decision on the prayer banner at Cranston West?”
    Currently Yes = 81%

    I sent an email to Glimpse of Gaia to support their decency. Since I’m many thousands of miles away in Ireland it might not count for much if a ‘christian’ shitstorm descends on them so maybe those closer to ground zero might like to do the same?

  29. says

    having felt the sting of lost friends and acquaintances for my posts from some of my atheists groups, i am sad for the public scorn and abuse this poor girl has endured. the WORST part is that she isnt even standing up for atheism. she is standing up for separation of church and state, which ought not bring scorn upon anyone regardless of their personal belief system. i would LOVE to see a devout christian stand up for and/or beside her.

  30. Don says

    Right. Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation” metaphor derives from the thinking and writing of Roger Williams, who founded the city of Providence in 1636 on the principle that church and state must remain entirely separate, a principle that later found its way into the First Amendment.

  31. J04NN4 says

    ^This.

    I run a small business myself and I have to say, sad as it is, I think I would do the same thing in their situation. I don’t see that they had any choice. I think Jessica is great, so brave and deserves all the support in the world but if I was in their position I would not risk my livelihood for this. They rely on the population of closed minded bigots to support themselves and their families.

    Of course, they may also be bigots and think she’s ‘an evil little thing’ and agree with all the awful things that have been said about her… but it’s just as likely they’re trapped between a rock and a hard place. Even if they were on her side I honestly don’t see what choice they had.

  32. says

    I called bullshit on the blog that “no florist would send jessica flowers” by blag hag. This is the problem with “bloggers” they fire off half truths all the time without verifying information. The main goal of a blogger is to get Hits or views. So, being a reporter of the APNE A truthful news show, I called corporate offices of Ahold/ Stop and Shop in Cranston RI and confirmed that they do delivery from the stores to people homes or offices .
    Suzy Robinson director of consumer affairs for Stop N Shop Cranston RI “It is not our policy to discriminate against anyone. I can assure you, none of our stores were ever contacted. We will send flowers without regard of any persons personal or public affairs.” Stop N Shop Policy on Discrimination is to not discrimate. 800-453-7467
    fucking bloggers, edit the title of the blog to “a few florists will not deliver.”

  33. Carl S. says

    Misleading headline in this blog post…unless FFRF contacted ALL florists in RI and they all refused the order. A prompt correction is in order.

  34. christophburschka says

    On one level, I can understand the florists who said they “don’t want to get involved” or backed out for fear of a backlash – at least more than the one that refused out of personal bigotry with “I will not deliver to this person”. It’s spineless, but they’re business people.

    But their error lies in thinking they had a choice to avert backlash. They had to realize that whether or not they delivered the flowers, someone would yell at them. That being equal, they should have done what they would normally do, ie. their job, which is delivering flowers. If businesses refused service to customers whom other customers disapprove of, they’d have no customers.

  35. Pieter B, FCD says

    Stop N Shop is not a florist, it’s a supermarket chain.

    FFRF was working through a local florist in Wisconsin, which presumably was attempting to make arrangements through a professional network like FTD. One assumes that they tried all the contacts on their network in or near Cranston.

    Don’t fall off that horse, you might hurt yourself; it’s a long way down.

  36. says

    @ Pieter B, you’re wrong. Stop N Shop has florists and a floral delivery service and floral decorative operations. Just about anything FTD will send out the Stop N Shop chains will as well.
    While I don’t think FFRF said “no florist in RI would deliver flowers to Jessica” it is clear that Blag Hag did.
    Not cool man, bloggers should be held to the same level of responsibility any other journalists are. We head over to Freethought blogs so that we can receive good information, not a FOX news tactic that’s a 1/2 truth intended to drum up hits and make a check off a post.
    Just saying, I’m not pissed, but I am wanting a clarification on the post.

  37. Pieter B, FCD says

    Stop N Shop sells flowers and provides florist services, but it’s a supermarket chain. That is a fact. Is a florist in Wisconsin supposed to know that this regional chain provides said service and not go through their normal channels?

    Your slagging of our host with this sort of language

    I called bullshit on the blog that “no florist would send jessica flowers” by blag hag. This is the problem with “bloggers” they fire off half truths all the time without verifying information. The main goal of a blogger is to get Hits or views.

    and

    a FOX news tactic that’s a 1/2 truth intended to drum up hits and make a check off a post

    sure sounds like you’re not only pissed but jealous of Jen’s success and a condescending asshole into the bargain. Scare quotes and strange Capitalization reinforce this impression.

    Yes, Jen’s title overstates the case; no argument there. I would bet that if you had pointed this out politely instead of accusing her of being a greedhead on the moral level of Fox News, she might even have changed it or issued a correction update. Considering your approach, though, I would not be surprised that if she decides to answer your attack that a deceased porcupine figures prominently in the response.

  38. says

    Regardless of your views and thoughts, she has to hold a level of standards that are above the rest here at FreeThought Blog, just Change the title is all people ask. It reflects negatively upon FFRF as well. As the Director and of the Atheists’ Perspective on News and Events, a TV show in 49 cities, I had best make sure my news is accurate and truthful or the stations will pull the plug on the show. I’m held to a standard that she is held to, I would hope. Bloggers must begin to consider themselves the same level as journalists. End point.

  39. Pieter B, FCD says

    What is it about the “Reply” function that confuses you?

    If we’re going to criticize misleading titles, why don’t we start with your YouTube videos, which are labeled “The Atheists’ Perspective on News and Events.” I demand that in the name of accuracy, you change that to “An Atheist’s Perspective on News and Events.” I hope you understand the difference.

    Your most recent video is labeled

    Attack of the Theocrats! The Athiests’ Perspective on News and Events, Atheist TV

    [video]

    Welcomes Sean Faircloth and Jessica Ahlquist. We discuss and talk about the Attack of the Theocrats after Jessica’s landmark lawsuit she won. People are really upset. Both are speakers at the Reason Rally 2012.

    I suggest that you tend to your own writing before criticizing others. At the very least, use spellcheck.

  40. says

    I suppose you don’t understand the difference between one Atheist which would be “The Atheist’s Perspective on News and Events” and several Atheists and their individual views, “The Atheists’ Perspective…”
    No need for me to argue with a neophyte, start your own show and name it what you’d like. :)Sorry to be so blunt with you, but sometimes it is necessary. My show is not a show of a single persons views, but our leaders views on subjects and purposes…

  41. Pieter B, FCD says

    I understand the difference between the two, it’s you that doesn’t. Sorry to be blunt with you, but to anyone with a bit of familiarity with the English language “The Atheists’ Perspective…” says that you are speaking for all atheists, which is pretty fucking presumptuous. However, reading your prose leads me to the inescapable conclusion that you’re not that familiar with the language.

    As the Director and of the Atheists’ Perspective on News and Events
    -
    We discuss and talk about the Attack of the Theocrats after Jessica’s landmark lawsuit she won.
    -
    My show is not a show of a single persons views, but our leaders views on subjects and purposes… [hilarious after a discussion of the meaning of apostrophes]

    Change the title to “An Atheist Perspective…” and you’d be fine, but do not represent your show as an Official Atheist View; there isn’t one. Who are these “leaders” you claim to be speaking for, by the way?

  42. says

    I speak for myself, but people like Al Stefanelli, Dan Barker, James Randi, Sean Faircloth, Neil D’Grass Tyson and countless others speak for themselves. Sometimes we all disagree, sometimes we agree. Many times the host and the guest will have conflicting views. Sometimes we argue and other times we get along perfectly. Each individual person has their own views. It makes perfect sense. There is no one voice in the movement. There is no definition of the movement. While one will stand on a corner with a Jesus flipping the bird sign to challenge police departments, another might be happy drinking coffee and only talking about atheism. Everyone is part of a movement, everyone has a part to play, agressive or passive. It is normaly the agressive who paves the way for the others imho.

  43. Pieter B, FCD says

    Congratulations on figuring out the “reply” function.

    I speak for myself
    -
    Each individual person has their own views.
    -
    There is no one voice in the movement.

    This contradicts your last comment which was

    My show is not a show of a single persons views, but our leaders views on subjects and purposes

    which you used to justify the name “The Atheists’ View…” Again, I ask you to change the title to the much more accurate “An Atheist View…”

    p.s. What is it with you and links? Comment #24 gives a 404 as does #28, and this latest one goes to an expired domain. Two links do go to your YouTube channel, but for someone who barged in here with insults and condescension demanding 100% accuracy of Jen, 40% accuracy in linking to his own sites is mind-boggling.

  44. says

    Not sure why the links are going to a “404″ and an expired domain. I don’t have a website, beyond youtube and the stations that host the TV show. I can’t answer the questions.
    What you fail to realize is that truthfulness is not important to the writer or I’m sure the title would be changed? and I’m going to be done with this back and forth petty ping pong of a blog defender here at the site. Find me elsewhere or don’t to continue.
    Accuracy of a website or a name is not the same as misleading a mass of people on what many consider to be the “prestigious blog site”. It really irked the corporation I interviewed to see this post, “bloggers, ugh.” This is why it is so hard for bloggers to be taken with credibility. We come for people who are credible and established like, PZ, Al Stefanelli, and others. We know that they would not want to mislead even the worst or lowest of all people.

  45. Pieter B, FCD says

    Not sure why the links are going to a “404″ and an expired domain.

    Facepalm

    I know why they’re going to the 404 and the expired domain, Ernie lad, it’s because you typed in bad URLs. For the love of Darwin, please stop representing yourself as speaking for any atheist other than yourself.

  46. unbound says

    And the silence from Christian leaders regarding the immoral behavior of their flocks is absolutely deafening.

    Christian religious leaders who want the world to think that they are the font of morality need to think closely about these situations. And everyone in every community needs to remind those leaders of their hypocrisy by bringing up these examples over and over again.

    For any Christian that still wants to believe that their particular religion / denomination is full of morality, ask yourself where your Christian leader is and why they are not standing up and loudly decrying the immoral behavior.

  47. says

    Three flower shops in Cranston were contacted. One refused to deliver. The second answered the phone (indicating that they were taking orders), then said they were closed upon hearing the order. The third was willing to deliver until the news stories came out that A & B wouldn’t deliver, meaning everyone would know if they delivered, and they’d be boycotted by bigots. So, too, apparently, with the shop in the next town, which agreed to deliver the order but backed out after a barrage of calls from people threatening to boycott them. If I were a small business owner, I doubt I’d be more courageous. Sad, isn’t it?

  48. michaelcrichton says

    If the stores had consented, then nobody would have known and there would have been no backlash.

    You seriously think there _aren’t_ local bigots watching the house constantly? Somebody would have noticed the delivery vehicle, and while there might not be a concerted “Boycott any local businesses who do business with the infidel!” campaign, it’s still a legitimate worry for said businesses. And that’s why they’ll win any lawsuit, because they can claim that the decision wasn’t based on religion per se.

  49. Freeman says

    I run a small business myself and I have to say, sad as it is, I think I would do the same thing in their situation … They rely on the population of closed minded bigots to support themselves and their families.

    How sad. Personally I doubt I could work under such conditions. I sure hope you’re not hopelessly stuck in a similar situation. Is there no way out? I thought is was a free country…

    Even if they were on her side I honestly don’t see what choice they had.

    Pay attention, oh ye of little imagination, it’s all in front of you, plain to see. Earlier comments in this very thread:

    julielada says:
    January 19, 2012 at 1:29 PM

    It would be hilarious if we could organize a bunch of people to send flowers to Jessica through this florist and show the others how much business they lost.
    Reply

    *
    abeille says:
    January 19, 2012 at 1:32 PM

    I think that would be an awesome idea.
    Reply
    *
    ButchKitties says:
    January 20, 2012 at 6:17 AM

    I’d throw down some money on this idea.
    Reply
    *
    Pieter B, FCD says:
    January 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM

    I’m down for a double sawbuck. Where’s the Donate button?

    So, still think you’d have no choice but to engage in bigoted (and illegal) behavior as long as you could justify in your own mind that it’s someone else’s fault?

    The utter senselessness of your comment convinced me jump on the bandwagon and place an order on Jessica’s behalf with a business that has it’s own long-term interests in mind and isn’t run by someone afraid of running a proper business in the face of a bit of small-minded petty bigotry.

  50. Freeman says

    You seriously think there _aren’t_ local bigots watching the house constantly? Somebody would have noticed the delivery vehicle, and while there might not be a concerted “Boycott any local businesses who do business with the infidel!” campaign, it’s still a legitimate worry for said businesses. And that’s why they’ll win any lawsuit, because they can claim that the decision wasn’t based on religion per se.

    Are you seriously trying to justify bigotry by claiming that someone else’s bigotry is to blame? Refuse service to a black individual in a neighborhood of white bigots and try that excuse! An atheist in a neighborhood of theist bigots is no different.

    They will settle the lawsuit, and quickly, once they’ve had the opportunity to seek legal counsel. Mark my words.

    I’ve owned and operated a small business. It’s scary all the time and some people will come up with reasons you would never imagine to hate you and try to convince others not to patronize your establishment. If you let those people control how you operate your business you are working for them, not yourself, and you won’t be in business for long (and deservedly so).

  51. Freeman says

    I’d like to add a re-post of part of a comment I made to someone else on this thread, as I think it applies here:

    I’ve owned and operated a small business. It’s scary all the time and some people will come up with reasons you would never imagine to hate you and try to convince others not to patronize your establishment. If you let those people control how you operate your business you are working for them, not yourself, and you won’t be in business for long (and deservedly so).

  52. Freeman says

    Americans may be (probably are) despised world-wide, but I doubt poor treatment of one of our own has much to do with it.

  53. Freeman says

    I agree with you, except for this part, which puzzles me:

    It’s spineless, but they’re business people.

    Seems contradictory. It takes a fair amount of spine to run a small business. Your conclusion is correct, and anyone with the spine to make the decision to run their own business should intuitively already know this. If not, they’ll soon learn. I’m thinking there are a few florists in Cranston that are about to learn a hard lesson or two.

  54. Freeman says

    If I were a small business owner, I doubt I’d be more courageous.

    Which is why you’ll probably never be one. It takes courage to be a small business owner, and you doubt your own. christophburschka said it best: If businesses refused service to customers whom other customers disapprove of, they’d have no customers.

    Obviously, there are a lot of people who aren’t really thinking this thing out.

  55. says

    Are you seriously trying to justify bigotry by claiming that someone else’s bigotry is to blame?

    I’m not trying to justify anything, I’m just saying that they have a valid legal defense. Do I think they’re cowards, at best, bigots at worst? Yes, but that’s not actually illegal.

  56. says

    Dammit, hit “send” too soon. It’s legal for a bar to refuse to serve, say, Al Sharpton because they personally dislike him as a human being, even if it’s illegal to discriminate against black people as a class. It’s legal for a restaurant to refuse to serve that odious waste of space Scott Walker for his union busting, but not to refuse to serve republicans in general. It would be illegal for any of these flower shops to refuse to serve atheists because they are atheists, but it is NOT illegal for them to refuse to serve specific atheists, as long as there’s some other, vaguely-plausible reason for them to do so. Even if the florists are genuinely discriminating, in this case it would be completely impossible to prove, and that’s why I think the FFRF is gonna lose this one.

  57. says

    It just occured to me: I know that small businesses in general like to refer people to other small businesses if they can’t serve them themselves, but are loathe to send them to chain stores. If they have an actual policy to that effect, would that be considered “discrimination” against the Stop n Shop? Oh won’t someone PLEASE think of the corporations! ;-)

  58. says

    If businesses refused service to customers whom other customers disapprove of, they’d have no customers.

    If you parse that to mean “If businesses refused service to all customers whom any other customers disapprove of”, you’d be correct. But as the Jim Crow era proved, some customers are more valuable to any given business than others. The KKK and other such scum WOULD organize boycotts (backed up with violence) of businesses that tried to voluntarily integrate, which would deprive them of far more revenue than they would get by accepting brown people as equal customers. That’s the reason why we need anti-discrimination laws, because free-market-utopia-rhetoric aside, there are a lot of cases where discrimination actually is the financially sound thing to do.

  59. christophburschka says

    The term might be ambiguous. By “spine” I didn’t mean the strength of character that is of course required to start and operate a business, but to the resolve to stand by what they consider right even at the risk of a disadvantage to themselves.
    In that sense, choosing to pick what they (maybe mistakenly) consider the more profitable course of action over the right one (which is not to discriminate) is somewhat spineless, but understandable since they’re running a business. I wouldn’t condemn them for it, but I wouldn’t exactly look up to them either.

  60. Gunnar Tveiten says

    So. Where does it stop ?

    You refrain from delivering flowers to teenagers, because you are scared of the reaction of hateful christians.

    You refrain from publishing drawings of prophets, because you are scared of the reaction of intolerant muslims.

    You don’t stand up for anyone or anything – if doing so could potentially lead to any uncomfortable effects on yourself.

    Is this the world, the country, the city, you want to live in ? If not, what are you gonna do about it ?

  61. Gunnar Tveiten says

    (perceived) hypocrisy is one of the main reasons, actually.

    On the one hand talk loudly of your constitution, democracy, freedom of religion and so on, while on the other hand, making a huge fuss over something as simple and clear-cut as this case, sure feeds into that perception.

    Government should refrain from endorsing any particular religion. Simple, clear, perfectly stated in the constitution.

    Piling hate on a teenager who dares to stand up for this simple principle, does not reflect well on christian America.

  62. says

    The flower shop could very plausibly have pretended they didn’t know who the recipient was when they took the order (because they’re a business and they promise prompt delivery, not background checks). Then if the haters really did raise a stink, they could have fallen back on the standard pro-business excuses: times are tough, can’t turn away a paying customer, this is America the land of free enterprise, etc. I have little doubt most of the haters would have accepted such excuses and gone quietly back to their own jobs.

  63. says

    That really did used to happen. Back in the ’80s, when Jesse Helms was trying to organize another round of witch-trials, at least one conservative evangelical Christian stood with the Pagans against the attempted pogrom.

  64. says

    So, being a reporter of the APNE A truthful news show, I called corporate offices of Ahold/ Stop and Shop…

    So, being a reporter, you called a business that had nothing to do with the controversy on which you were allegedly reporting? Is that really how a “truthful news show” operates in your bubble-verse? Where did you go to report on 9/11 — Belgium?

    Congratulations, you may have just got yourself a job at WorldNutDaily.

  65. ildi says

    cranstononline ran an article today: Faith leaders urge kindness, compassion toward Ahlquist

    “Reverend Dr. Donald Anderson, executive minister of the Rhode Island State Council of Churches, organized Tuesday’s press conference to attempt to put an end to the heated debates that have occurred in the aftermath of Judge Lagueux’s decision to remove the banner.”

  66. says

    Whats up this is kinda of off topic but I was wanting to know if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML. I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding skills so I wanted to get guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

  67. says

    There are some interesting time limits in this article but I don’t know if I see all of them middle to heart. There may be some validity however I will take hold opinion until I look into it further. Good article , thanks and we would like more! Added to FeedBurner as nicely

Leave a Reply