Stop knocking on peoples' doors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NO ONE DISPUTES IT IS LEGAL! Case citations do not address the question and show you are gish galloping.

Is it right for them to do?

I don’t like being panhandled but I don’t think there’s any reason to have a conversation about it’s propriety or whatever

That's odd. But OK, I believe you don't think there's a reason to have a conversation about it.

What's baffling to me is then why did you enter and participate in a forum doing exactly that?

To let you know you should stop trying to control people who are merely an annoyance to you. We aspire to be a free country. Get used to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

More for annoyance. Sometimes I feel bad for them actually. They actually believe they might/will go to Hell if they don't do this. Their lives are so controlled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This. With so many solicitors of all stripes (and why isn't OP complaining about them),

What makes you think they aren't? And in many towns (like mine) solicitors are illegal, but the preachers are constitutionally exempt. (no one disputes this is their right, just that it is extremely rude).

who answers the door these days unless you're expecting someone?

Pretty much every normal human being I know.

You can’t be serious. Nobody answers the door to complete strangers, at least around here. The solicitors, the JW, the people wanting money for their orgs, and the violent crazies—you should know better than to open your door to complete strangers, if you’re doing that.

So don’t answer the door. Problem solved. Stop whining about religious rights on DCUM and go back to your life.

I am fortunate to not live in a world of "violent crazies who let people who don't answer the door go", and I am certainly not paranoid about it. But even if I did, your "whataboutism" and avoidance of the question is very transparent.

It's rude and you know it. And I can't imagine it is very fruitful either. IMHO It's more about controlling the missionaries than the results of the mission.

Your "just ignore the problem" approach is very shortsighted and I don't know many people who are satisfied with that type of solution for any problem.

Pp here. If you live in the DMV you absolutely live in an area where you don’t open the door to everybody who knocks. I live in a “desirable” area too so your shade just looks lame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This. With so many solicitors of all stripes (and why isn't OP complaining about them),

What makes you think they aren't? And in many towns (like mine) solicitors are illegal, but the preachers are constitutionally exempt. (no one disputes this is their right, just that it is extremely rude).

who answers the door these days unless you're expecting someone?

Pretty much every normal human being I know.

You can’t be serious. Nobody answers the door to complete strangers, at least around here. The solicitors, the JW, the people wanting money for their orgs, and the violent crazies—you should know better than to open your door to complete strangers, if you’re doing that.

So don’t answer the door. Problem solved. Stop whining about religious rights on DCUM and go back to your life.

I am fortunate to not live in a world of "violent crazies who let people who don't answer the door go", and I am certainly not paranoid about it. But even if I did, your "whataboutism" and avoidance of the question is very transparent.

It's rude and you know it. And I can't imagine it is very fruitful either. IMHO It's more about controlling the missionaries than the results of the mission.

Your "just ignore the problem" approach is very shortsighted and I don't know many people who are satisfied with that type of solution for any problem.

Huh? What’s your “type of solution” then? The Supreme Court says you can’t stop them.

Do you have a practical idea? Your attempt to shame them on DCUM isn’t going very well. Probably because, frankly, your insults and day of raging about this make you seem a little unhinged. That and the whole Supreme Court disagreeing with you thing. I’d suggest ignoring them and going about your business instead of raging here, but you don’t seem to have the maturity for that.

As for your little derailment into whether it’s “morally right” for them to show up on your door, you’re OT but I’ll play. They apparently think it’s morally right, even morally imperative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This. With so many solicitors of all stripes (and why isn't OP complaining about them),

What makes you think they aren't? And in many towns (like mine) solicitors are illegal, but the preachers are constitutionally exempt. (no one disputes this is their right, just that it is extremely rude).

who answers the door these days unless you're expecting someone?

Pretty much every normal human being I know.

You can’t be serious. Nobody answers the door to complete strangers, at least around here. The solicitors, the JW, the people wanting money for their orgs, and the violent crazies—you should know better than to open your door to complete strangers, if you’re doing that.

So don’t answer the door. Problem solved. Stop whining about religious rights on DCUM and go back to your life.

I am fortunate to not live in a world of "violent crazies who let people who don't answer the door go", and I am certainly not paranoid about it. But even if I did, your "whataboutism" and avoidance of the question is very transparent.

It's rude and you know it. And I can't imagine it is very fruitful either. IMHO It's more about controlling the missionaries than the results of the mission.

Your "just ignore the problem" approach is very shortsighted and I don't know many people who are satisfied with that type of solution for any problem.

Huh? What’s your “type of solution” then? The Supreme Court says you can’t stop them.

Do you have a practical idea? Your attempt to shame them on DCUM isn’t going very well. Probably because, frankly, your insults and day of raging about this make you seem a little unhinged. That and the whole Supreme Court disagreeing with you thing. I’d suggest ignoring them and going about your business instead of raging here, but you don’t seem to have the maturity for that.

As for your little derailment into whether it’s “morally right” for them to show up on your door, you’re OT but I’ll play. They apparently think it’s morally right, even morally imperative.

Here's my type of solution:

Communicate to people that it is discourteous, unwanted, and distasteful, and hope that they stop.

Up to them of course. Just as you can choose the be a courteous driver of not, or someone who does not cut in line and returns his shopping cart... help people make better choices and be more considerate of others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

And the OP had nothing to do with morality, just rudeness.

You are stuck on morality. Is it because it’s religious? Because it’s intrusive? Because it’s trespassing? What’s your actual issue? Are you ok with political door to door? Magazine subscription sellers? Girl Scouts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

You don’t like living in a free country under the rule of law with religious freedom and freedom of speech.

If you think freedom of speech and religion are immoral, I can’t help you. No one can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

You don’t like living in a free country under the rule of law with religious freedom and freedom of speech.

If you think freedom of speech and religion are immoral, I can’t help you. No one can.

Strawman. And a repulsive, nasty and disgusting one at that.

If you don't see the difference between the legality of "freedom of speech and religion" and "being a rude d-bag even though it is 100% legal" then I can’t help you. Because you don't want help.

[Anonymous]

It’s pretty hilarious that angry atheist doesn’t want people showing up at her door, but she has no reservations about showing up on Christian threads to mock their heaven or whatever.

Some people have zero self-awareness, or they’re massively hypocritical, or both….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

You don’t like living in a free country under the rule of law with religious freedom and freedom of speech.

If you think freedom of speech and religion are immoral, I can’t help you. No one can.

Strawman. And a repulsive, nasty and disgusting one at that.

If you don't see the difference between the legality of "freedom of speech and religion" and "being a rude d-bag even though it is 100% legal" then I can’t help you. Because you don't want help.

You hate religious freedom and freedom of speech. You are absolutely seething that Americans have both of those freedoms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

You don’t like living in a free country under the rule of law with religious freedom and freedom of speech.

If you think freedom of speech and religion are immoral, I can’t help you. No one can.

Strawman. And a repulsive, nasty and disgusting one at that.

If you don't see the difference between the legality of "freedom of speech and religion" and "being a rude d-bag even though it is 100% legal" then I can’t help you. Because you don't want help.

You hate religious freedom and freedom of speech. You are absolutely seething that Americans have both of those freedoms.

No no no no no no no. No matter how many times you type it, it remains untrue. You are a very dishonest person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This. With so many solicitors of all stripes (and why isn't OP complaining about them),

What makes you think they aren't? And in many towns (like mine) solicitors are illegal, but the preachers are constitutionally exempt. (no one disputes this is their right, just that it is extremely rude).

who answers the door these days unless you're expecting someone?

Pretty much every normal human being I know.

You can’t be serious. Nobody answers the door to complete strangers, at least around here. The solicitors, the JW, the people wanting money for their orgs, and the violent crazies—you should know better than to open your door to complete strangers, if you’re doing that.

So don’t answer the door. Problem solved. Stop whining about religious rights on DCUM and go back to your life.

I am fortunate to not live in a world of "violent crazies who let people who don't answer the door go", and I am certainly not paranoid about it. But even if I did, your "whataboutism" and avoidance of the question is very transparent.

It's rude and you know it. And I can't imagine it is very fruitful either. IMHO It's more about controlling the missionaries than the results of the mission.

Your "just ignore the problem" approach is very shortsighted and I don't know many people who are satisfied with that type of solution for any problem.

Huh? What’s your “type of solution” then? The Supreme Court says you can’t stop them.

Do you have a practical idea? Your attempt to shame them on DCUM isn’t going very well. Probably because, frankly, your insults and day of raging about this make you seem a little unhinged. That and the whole Supreme Court disagreeing with you thing. I’d suggest ignoring them and going about your business instead of raging here, but you don’t seem to have the maturity for that.

As for your little derailment into whether it’s “morally right” for them to show up on your door, you’re OT but I’ll play. They apparently think it’s morally right, even morally imperative.

Here's my type of solution:

Communicate to people that it is discourteous to you, unwanted by you and distasteful to you, and hope that they stop.

Up to them of course. Just as you can choose the be a courteous driver of not, or someone who does not cut in line and returns his shopping cart... help people make better choices and be more considerate of others.

FIFY because most of us don’t have our panties in a twist about this and/or we’ve developed the adult skills of ignoring and moving on.

Maybe your approach will get them to take you off their list (especially you’re in character with shrill rudeness). But I kinda doubt your “solution” will actually work because, as pointed out above, they see a moral component in this too and you telling them they’re rude isn’t going to outweigh that. (Besides which, the JW who come to my door are sweet old ladies and “rude” just doesn’t work.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We check the camera and ignore anyone we don’t know. It’s what normal people do these days. They can knock for and ring and call out and we ignore. The only person I open my door for is someone we know or law enforcement. Even then we ask for id before we open.

That's fine, but it begs to be pointed out yet again that the issue of the thread is about the person at the door and whether they are right to do so, not your choice to ignore them. That's a separate topic. As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

So, please, from now on, no more stories of not answering the door. Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

That has been answered. The Supreme Court voted 8-1 that it was.

Can you not read?

Above it says:

As is the "legal" aspect of the mission, no one disputes that it is a legal right.

Very frustrating. Not sure how I could have been more clear.

Answer the question: is it morally right for missionaries to knock on your door to spread their beliefs?

So you think the SCOTUS voted 8-1 for immorality?

The SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with morality, but if you think they are not capable of making an immoral decision, you have a lot to learn. We could start with Dread Scott and continue to present day... but this is not a thread for that.

You don’t like living in a free country under the rule of law with religious freedom and freedom of speech.

If you think freedom of speech and religion are immoral, I can’t help you. No one can.

Strawman. And a repulsive, nasty and disgusting one at that.

If you don't see the difference between the legality of "freedom of speech and religion" and "being a rude d-bag even though it is 100% legal" then I can’t help you. Because you don't want help.

You hate religious freedom and freedom of speech. You are absolutely seething that Americans have both of those freedoms.

DP and honestly, you not liking these people at your door basically translates as not liking their religious freedom and wanting to take their religious freedom away from them. This isn’t a complicated equivalence.