[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]We had that happen a couple of years ago at a kindergarten. They took the crosses off the buns and gave them some stupid name. The whole idea was ludicrous and caused quite an uproar. [/B][/QUOTE]
Jesus, don't tell me that happened over in the States [i]as well[/i]... :eek:
Oh yeah, there was also a call for the Metropolitan Police to remove the Crown from on top of their badge (There for almost 150 years) for fear it's "Royallist imagery" would "offend" ethnic minorities.
Don't these people ever see that by treating ethnic and religious minorities like this they're making them feel even more more marginalized?
I agree that "efforts" like that could (and probably do) make them feel more marginalized. I know that, of my friends who are "minorities," most find this type of thing obnoxious and refuse to play into it. Of course, they aren't leeches who feel they're owed something just because they happen to be of a different ethnicity. This is what I disagree with so much! If we're all equal, why do (at least in the US) certain ethnicities get so many benefits compared to the rest of us? You can't have it both ways, if you want equal rights, then deal with the world like the rest of us do. It reminds me of women who want equal rights, then fight like hell to make sure the US can never draft women into war. You can't have it both ways!
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Matt [Psionic] [/i]
[B]If we're all equal, why do (at least in the US) certain ethnicities get so many benefits compared to the rest of us? You can't have it both ways, if you want equal rights, then deal with the world like the rest of us do. It reminds me of women who want equal rights, then fight like hell to make sure the US can never draft women into war. You can't have it both ways! [/B][/QUOTE]
Indeed, people speak about "equal rights" when they actually advocate bias in favour of one race or ethinicity which they see as "unfortionate" because of their historical background. (Which is simply moronic.)
Double standards are rife in society, especially in issues of sex as you say; femenists gunning for "better treatment" but still being predjudiced against men.
The proportion of our taxes that go to people who don't need or deserve it is unfuriating, and is part of the monster that is Political Correctness; a small minority deciding "what's best" for the rest of us.
Regards,
Morden
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
Morden279: I hurt you now.
The polical correctness situation in NZ is pretty bad, and it's almost entirely based around the Maori. A large number of them are very hung up on what's happened in the past and as a result are taking certain actions that I feel are really holding the country back. Of course, I could be lynched just for saying this.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]A large number of them are very hung up on what's happened in the past and as a result are taking certain actions that I feel are really holding the country back. Of course, I could be lynched just for saying this. [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, accusing a racial or religious minority of racial predjudice these days will often result in you being called every bad name under the sun by the political correctness mob.
In thier eyes, you're just not allowed to do it, even though it may be valid. It's been made taboo.
One thought that appeals to me (I didn't come up with it; read it in an editorial) is the idea of changing the American system of Affirmative Action. Currently, wherever that happens to be in place, it's designed to favor women and minorities, regardless of whether the specific person being targeted actually needs this kind of consideration. Now, I tend to think that, were I a woman or part of an ethnic minority, I would find this downright insulting. The idea that I got into a job or school in part because of skin color or sex instead of merit would be infuriating to me. I honestly don't think that Affirmative Action as it stands is useful.
It might be useful, however, were it based on economic standing.
Think about it... money is a big stumbling block for those that don't have any, particularly with regards to getting an education, a problem most people here have probably experienced firsthand. What's more, with demographics as they are, it would end up helping a lot of the same people.
At the very least, it seems a reasonable compromise between those who refuse to let go of Affirmative Action and those who, like me, think it isn't quite so necessary these days.
UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... America in particular is growing FAAAAAR too conservative in the last few years, it's frightening. It really and truely frightens me sometimes when i see how conservative my country has become. (especially the frightening parallels between george w. bush (et his administration) and that of president clarke). and anyone who doesn't see the parallels is kidding themselves (or worse they've been so brainwashed they actually THINK things are good the way they are).
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by LogicSequence [/i]
[B]UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... America in particular is growing FAAAAAR too conservative in the last few years, it's frightening. It really and truely frightens me sometimes when i see how conservative my country has become. (especially the frightening parallels between george w. bush (et his administration) and that of president clarke). and anyone who doesn't see the parallels is kidding themselves (or worse they've been so brainwashed they actually THINK things are good the way they are). [/B][/QUOTE]
I dont think things are good the way they are your right things are looking scary look at the Patriot Act thats the scariest thing ive seen in years other then Tom Ridge wanting to revive internment camps wtf is that? But I think for most this game would be legit if you were a firefighte rather than a lowly civilian plunging to your death.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
[B]Yeah, but there are some scary parallels. :) [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes there are, but the comparison itself is not entirely accurate at this time. Personally, even as a republican (I guess), I think Bush is being a moron. I supported, and still do, our actions in Iraq, with much regret that we had to go in NOW and finish what we should have finished during the first Gulf War. However, I think his moves both in legislation (i.e. Patriot Act), and currently in the world (i.e. North Korea, Liberia, Iran, etc) are moronic.
Patriot Act: I don't need to describe the horridness of this.
Iran: If we do not bother them, they will not bother us. (To borrow a phrase)
North Korea: Don't provoke them, and fight them only as a last resort. Any war in Korea will be very brutal on us. We will win it eventually, but it'll be just as bad as the last one. US troops are NOT good at fighting in environments like this.
Liberia: Who cares? It's not our problem, we should stay out of it.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by LogicSequence [/i]
[B]UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... America in particular is growing FAAAAAR too conservative in the last few years, it's frightening. It really and truely frightens me sometimes when i see how conservative my country has become. (especially the frightening parallels between george w. bush (et his administration) and that of president clarke). and anyone who doesn't see the parallels is kidding themselves (or worse they've been so brainwashed they actually THINK things are good the way they are). [/B][/QUOTE]
*Shudders*
people like you scare me.
poeple like you are the reason that things like Gay Unions are being alloyed (Its not marraige, I'm sorry, call it what ever you want, it ain't marraige)
Abortion being allowed, right up to taking the baby out and slicing off limbs on its way out. (That is what they do you know)
sriously, Conservatism is RAMPANT?!? what on earth are you on man? Sure, we don't allow nudity on the TV like some other nations, etc etc.
face the historical facts, every nation, EVERY nation that has become very liberal has died off, taken over by another nation, or otherwise disapeared off the face of the earth.
Rome, Soddom and Gamorah, Babylon, list goes on.
Now, I'm not saying that a certain level of liberlism is bad, but from your post I can see you want to turn this nation into a hell hole. (That exactly what it would be IMO to, frankly, if this nation gets much more liberal, I'm leaving it behind).
in the past few years we have become MUCH more liberal, its down right scary how much so. Your comment that we have become more CONSERVATIVE is utterly stupid. Howso? I can't think of a single area in our nation that has become more conservative. Abortion rates are though the roof, God has been compleatly taken out of schools, and evolution being taught. Shit, the school system thoughout the US sucks utterly and compleatly. Take a kid thats never said a four letter cuss word in his life, stick him in school for three months and suddenly hes saying more curse words then I do in a year. They even brainwash the kids into believing that god doesn't exist! Hello, the schools are to teach kids good grammer, math, history, etc, not tell them God does or doesn't exist!
TV shows are getting worse and worse, just turn on USA or TNT if you don't believe me, getting alot worse. (In the sence that there is more sex, violence, etc. This is conservative?!?)
Gays are getting more and more rights. This utterly disgust me. I don't mind the person themselves, I know a number of gays personally, but KEEP IT TO YOUR F**KING SELVES. They don't want bloody equal rights, they want special rights. Anyone that says otherwise is kidding themselves.
If your so scared at how conservative the US is, do us all a favor and move to France.
Gah. Liberals.
I wish the US was more like it was when it was Founded, a REPUBLIC (Hello, we are NOT a democracy, just recite the pledge of alligence if you don't believe me), a nation UNDER GOD, we certainly arn't right now, we are about as far from God as we can possibly be.
Sigh, I need to find a new country, claim it for the US, then leave a revolutionary war with the US, and make another country the way the US used to be 100 years ago. Yea...like thats gunna happen. Guess I'm stuck in this hell hole your intent on creating for us.
Whoa. Slow down there boy. I was hoping this wouldn't degrade into a religious debate, and FOR SURE not an abortion debate, but since it has...
Abortion: Your description of what is done is at best, overstated. These types of abortions ARE done, they are late term and/or partial birth abortions, and I don't agree with them unless it's based on medical reasons. (i.e. mother will die if it's not done.)
Where I stand on Abortions in general is midway on both sides. I think it's disgusting and disgraceful that abortions are being used as birth control. Get a damn brain, and learn how not to get pregnant. People who use abortions as birth control and have multiple abortions FOR THIS REASON should be taken out back and shot, or sterilized. (How's that for an opinion?)
However... I see nothing wrong with a rape or incest/abuse victim who gets pregnant from it having an abortion. In fact, I think this is a good idea. I see a little less wrong with teenagers who get knocked up at 13 years old having abortions. They are not ready for a child, nor should they have. In doing so, they are not only destroying their lives, but the future life of their child. The problem is here that if you take away the ability to have an abortion for one reason, all other reasons become endangered. Imagine if a rape victim could only have an abortion if it was proven in court that she was raped? With a disgustingly small percentage of rapes actually being solved, this would defeat the entire purpose.
That should pretty much outline where I stand on this. Abortion is NOT a black and white issue, despite what many pro-life advocates would like you to believe. There are many, many mitigating shades of gray in there.
Now, moving right onto religion.
Let me first state, as I've stated before, that I'm Agnostic. For the not so intelligent people out there, this does NOT mean atheist. It means that I'm pretty much on the fence. I don't, per se, believe in God because there is little hard proof of one. I also do not disbelieve, because there is little proof that there ISN'T one. I don't think any mortal has the right to dictate to another, or say to another with certainty that God exists. You are mortal, you do not know. You may personally believe whatever you want. I myself feel that to say there is no God requires as much of a leap of blind, ignorant faith as does saying there is a God. To me, the organized religious people, and the atheists are one in the same. They both have beliefs based solely on blind, ignorant faith.
Now, I do believe that there is some higher power, or powers, in the universe. I do not claim knowledge of who or what they are, to do so I feel is arrogant beyond belief. I further do not claim knowledge of what will happen to me after I die. Again, to claim knowledge of this is arrogant. I will find out when I die, as will you. This is not to say that I do not believe in many of the morals that religion teaches. Morality is not religion. Religion serves its purpose in providing a METHOD of teaching morals. The truths, or untruths, behind the religion do not matter so long as these goals are met. I know people that are deeply religious, and who have been helped in life by their belief. That is great! I would encourage this. If it helps YOU as a person, then you made the right choice. This does not make your beliefs true (or untrue), it simply makes them beneficial to you.
This country should not, by any means, encourage or endorse a specific religion. Like it are not, there are millions of non-christians in this country. For the country to endorse one religion over another is pure bigotry. I find it distasteful that the pledge of allegiance says 'One Nation Under God' -- simply because children are FORCED, with NO RESPECT TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL BELIEFS to recite it. When I was in elementary school, if you didn't recite the pledge, you were given detention or suspension. That should not be allowed to go on. It is one group, albeit possibly a "majority" force feeding the rest who believe differently to do something that goes against their beliefs. There should be zero sponsorship of ANY religion by the government. In government insitutions, on goverment property (MONEY! What the hell is up with that?), or in any other state or federal sanctioned activity.
Leave religion up to the INDIVIDUAL. It should not be state enforced or endorsed. I find it very distasteful that all our money says 'In God We Trust' -- however, I have to continue using the money. There isn't much choice, now is there? This is what bothers me. Forcing people into your beliefs.
The role of the U.S. Government is not to convert people and endorse religions. I bet if the U.S. Government had some pledge that said 'In Allah We Trust' -- people would be shooting people over it. Even though there is ZERO, ZERO, difference between that and what the mostly Christian government is doing.
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
Oh, I just realized I forgot to talk about Gay Marriages.
In short: I don't care if people don't like them. There is no legal basis for disallowing them. The only people who want gay marriages banned are the hyper-religious people who think gays go against God. If you think RELIGIOUS marriages (i.e. in a church) should not be allowed to gays, fine! However, leave LEGAL marriages (i.e. in a courtroom) alone. You have no right to force your religious beliefs on another person. It doesn't affect you, let them do what they want. There is zero reason to not allow this for ANY reason that's not religious. Get ready man, like it or not, same-sex unions are coming. There's nothing the religious right can do to stop it.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Matt [Psionic] [/i]
[B]I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.[/B][/QUOTE]
Not odd at all mate.
Looking at what you've said, I feel exactly the same way as you on these issues.
I have the same views on violent crime as you; criminals like these are in my opinion scum, and should feel the full force of the law upon them. Victims rights should be paramount as you said, and people should have more rights in defending their homes from intruders. (I'm sure you heard the addage; "An Englishman's home is his castle.")
Like you, I'm not racist, and I have no cause to be. I have Jewish blood in me, (although I don't follow the faith, and nor do my parents) and I have a black uncle by marriage.
I am a patriot, but unlike a lot of English people, consider myself "British" first. From a historical standpoint, the United Kingdom of Great Britain could not have reached its place in the world today without it being a union of the Scottish, the Welsh, and the English.
I believe in the one-nation state, and that history, culture, and heritage, especially one as significant as ours; should be protected.
As for immigration, the UK has a huge problem with it too at the moment, and I can't help but think Enoch Powell was right about the dangers of letting in too many asylum seekers.
If these people are committed to work, learn English, become a productive member of society and respect our laws, I welcome them with open arms. It's a sad fact that the vast majority of immigrants don't fell the same way.
When it comes down to religion, I used to be agnotic like you, but had a fondness for the Christian faith. (Which has endured, the religion being an integral part of our history.)
However, I've become a lot more cynical as my world view expanded, and Imy views towards Christianity, especially Catholicism have grown really quite negative.
I consider myself conservative with a small c, but some of my ideas, especially about homosexuality are quite liberal. (Although I agree with A2597 that just because you are a minority, it doesn't entitle you to "special" treatment.)
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Morden279 [/i]
Not odd at all mate.
Looking at what you've said, I feel exactly the same way as you on these issues.
I have the same views on violent crime as you; criminals like these are in my opinion scum, and should feel the full force of the law upon them. Victims rights should be paramount as you said, and people should have more rights in defending their homes from intruders. (I'm sure you heard the addage; "An Englishman's home is his castle.")
[/QUOTE]
This is actually exactly what I'm talking about. Especially in Maryland this is bad. Your rights to self defense are... questionable at best. Outside of your own home, you're going to jail. No question about it. You have a big duty to retreat. i.e. someone pulls a gun on you on the street, you have to try to run away before shooting them. You do not have a duty to retreat in your own home, but the act of them breaking into your house is NOT justifyable cause for self defense. It is in a lot of states, but not mine.
As someone who had two people (both under 18 and drunk!) break into my house while I was home... well, to make a long story short, they met the business end of a Glock .40 and did not resist. They sat against the wall, on their hands, until the police arrived and arrested them. I then got a lecture about gun safety, one cop said "I doubt you even know how to use it." -- Well gee, my Dad is ex-military and ex-police, I've been shooting guns since I was about 7 years old, I go to the range to keep up on accuracy at least once or twice a month... No, I think I know how to use it.
Victim's rights? Well... I couldn't even get their names. In the end, the Juvenile Justice Department, against my wishes and arguements, decided not to press charges. Their punishment was... 90 days [b]informal, voluntary[/b] supervision. I digress.
[QUOTE]
Like you, I'm not racist, and I have no cause to be. I have Jewish blood in me, (although I don't follow the faith, and nor do my parents) and I have a black uncle by marriage.
[/QUOTE]
Nor am I. I judge people on their actions, not their race. I try to avoid sterotyping groups, though I'll admit I do from time to time... Mostly in terms of like 'DC is full of crackheads' -- etc. My family background is both German and French, with some Scot/Irish and even a bit of Italian in there. My spouse is Phillipino, etc.
[QUOTE]
I am a patriot, but unlike a lot of English people, consider myself "British" first. From a historical standpoint, the United Kingdom of Great Britain could not have reached its place in the world today without it being a union of the Scottish, the Welsh, and the English.
I believe in the one-nation state, and that history, culture, and heritage, especially one as significant as ours; should be protected.
[/QUOTE]
Well said. You have a pretty nice country, I went to school in England :)
[QUOTE]
As for immigration, the UK has a huge problem with it too at the moment, and I can't help but think Enoch Powell was right about the dangers of letting in too many asylum seekers.
If these people are committed to work, learn English, become a productive member of society and respect our laws, I welcome them with open arms. It's a sad fact that the vast majority of immigrants don't fell the same way.
[/QUOTE]
That is my single biggest problem. I'm all for educated, productive people immigrating here, regardless of where they are from. However... Look at Mexican immigration to the US; many are uneducated, do no productive work here, and manage to collect welfare. (Which, in and of itself, is an evil system that I think should be abolished.) This has got to stop. Another problem of mine is H1B (Work) Visa's. Microsoft is lobbying to extend them, even while America's unemployment rate is obnoxiously high. Why? Not because Asians/Indians are better trained (though some of them are), but because they work for less money. What I would like to see is a law stating that no H1B visa holder could be employed for a job where an EQUALLY EXPERIENCED American is available. This means that IF the H1B visa holder is MORE qualified, they SHOULD get the job. However, I know that this would be abused as a way for underqualified American's to get jobs that should go to better qualified people. I.E. Affirmative Action and Hiring Preference in Civil Service jobs.
Another big problem of mine is illegal immigrants. People have flamed the hell out of me for my blanket statement of 'All Illegal immigrants are criminals.' -- well, it's true. The moron that is our president even granted citizenship to a large group of illegal immigrants. What does THIS say? Break the law long enough and you can stay legally? Hell no. They should be tracked down and deported. If they can't immigrate by the book, then yes, they ARE criminals, and should be booted out of this country fast enough to make their collective heads spin. An illegal immigrant cannot be a productive member of society. Cannot work legally, does not pay taxes, drains the medical system by being unable to pay for emergency medical care... I could go on and on. These people are criminals and should be treated as such. Do it by the book or not at all. What do you have to hide that makes you so afraid of the LEGAL immigration process?
[QUOTE]
When it comes down to religion, I used to be agnotic like you, but had a fondness for the Christian faith. (Which has endured, the religion being an integral part of our history.)
However, I've become a lot more cynical as my world view expanded, and Imy views towards Christianity, especially Catholicism have grown really quite negative.
[/QUOTE]
I like to have an open mind on these things. I also like to KNOW about other religions. I've read the bible, more than once. Several versions of it... I like to be informed, and as I said in my above post, I do think a lot of the morals that religion teaches are good and DO benefit society. I may very well end up as you did and embrace a religion eventually. I will do it with eyes wide open though. I am not ready to do that now, nor do I feel any presure to do so now.
[QUOTE]
I consider myself conservative with a small c, but some of my ideas, especially about homosexuality are quite liberal. (Although I agree with A2597 that just because you are a minority, it doesn't entitle you to "special" treatment.)
Regards,
Morden [/QUOTE]
Absolutely! Equal rights does NOT mean you get special treatment. I don't believe in this BS of giving special treatment to 'make up for past wrongs.' -- GET OVER IT! MOVE ON! You deserve equal rights, just like any human being, but it ends there.
I further agree that, were I a minority as such, I'd be offended by special treatment like that. It IS demeaning and insulting.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Matt [Psionic] [/i]
[B]
Abortion: Your description of what is done is at best, overstated. These types of abortions ARE done, they are late term and/or partial birth abortions, and I don't agree with them unless it's based on medical reasons. (i.e. mother will die if it's not done.)
Where I stand on Abortions in general is midway on both sides. I think it's disgusting and disgraceful that abortions are being used as birth control. Get a damn brain, and learn how not to get pregnant. People who use abortions as birth control and have multiple abortions FOR THIS REASON should be taken out back and shot, or sterilized. (How's that for an opinion?)
However... I see nothing wrong with a rape or incest/abuse victim who gets pregnant from it having an abortion. In fact, I think this is a good idea. I see a little less wrong with teenagers who get knocked up at 13 years old having abortions. They are not ready for a child, nor should they have. In doing so, they are not only destroying their lives, but the future life of their child. The problem is here that if you take away the ability to have an abortion for one reason, all other reasons become endangered. Imagine if a rape victim could only have an abortion if it was proven in court that she was raped? With a disgustingly small percentage of rapes actually being solved, this would defeat the entire purpose.
That should pretty much outline where I stand on this. Abortion is NOT a black and white issue, despite what many pro-life advocates would like you to believe. There are many, many mitigating shades of gray in there.
Now, moving right onto religion.
Let me first state, as I've stated before, that I'm Agnostic. For the not so intelligent people out there, this does NOT mean atheist. It means that I'm pretty much on the fence. I don't, per se, believe in God because there is little hard proof of one. I also do not disbelieve, because there is little proof that there ISN'T one. I don't think any mortal has the right to dictate to another, or say to another with certainty that God exists. You are mortal, you do not know. You may personally believe whatever you want. I myself feel that to say there is no God requires as much of a leap of blind, ignorant faith as does saying there is a God. To me, the organized religious people, and the atheists are one in the same. They both have beliefs based solely on blind, ignorant faith.
Now, I do believe that there is some higher power, or powers, in the universe. I do not claim knowledge of who or what they are, to do so I feel is arrogant beyond belief. I further do not claim knowledge of what will happen to me after I die. Again, to claim knowledge of this is arrogant. I will find out when I die, as will you. This is not to say that I do not believe in many of the morals that religion teaches. Morality is not religion. Religion serves its purpose in providing a METHOD of teaching morals. The truths, or untruths, behind the religion do not matter so long as these goals are met. I know people that are deeply religious, and who have been helped in life by their belief. That is great! I would encourage this. If it helps YOU as a person, then you made the right choice. This does not make your beliefs true (or untrue), it simply makes them beneficial to you.
This country should not, by any means, encourage or endorse a specific religion. Like it are not, there are millions of non-christians in this country. For the country to endorse one religion over another is pure bigotry. I find it distasteful that the pledge of allegiance says 'One Nation Under God' -- simply because children are FORCED, with NO RESPECT TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL BELIEFS to recite it. When I was in elementary school, if you didn't recite the pledge, you were given detention or suspension. That should not be allowed to go on. It is one group, albeit possibly a "majority" force feeding the rest who believe differently to do something that goes against their beliefs. There should be zero sponsorship of ANY religion by the government. In government insitutions, on goverment property (MONEY! What the hell is up with that?), or in any other state or federal sanctioned activity.
Leave religion up to the INDIVIDUAL. It should not be state enforced or endorsed. I find it very distasteful that all our money says 'In God We Trust' -- however, I have to continue using the money. There isn't much choice, now is there? This is what bothers me. Forcing people into your beliefs.
The role of the U.S. Government is not to convert people and endorse religions. I bet if the U.S. Government had some pledge that said 'In Allah We Trust' -- people would be shooting people over it. Even though there is ZERO, ZERO, difference between that and what the mostly Christian government is doing.
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
*Deep breath*
Regards,
Matt [/B][/QUOTE]
Very well spoken sir.
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...
I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...
You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea.
However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidance that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion. I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools. Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another.
Cool, guess I'm hyper religious. :rolleyes:
Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife
Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc. Marraige is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marraiges are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offencive, revulting, etc.
[quote]
Originally posted by Matt [Psionic]
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
[/quote]
[QUOTE]
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
[/QUOTE]
Understandable, I have a few triggers that do that to me as well.
[QUOTE]
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...
[/QUOTE]
No argument here on partial birth or late terms. It's disgusting. The woman has plenty of time to make up her mind long before that. There are medical reasons that could require it, but they are the exception to the rule and are rare. Many states have banned (or at least attempted to!) partial-birth abortions and late term abortions. However the supreme court tends to step in and say no. They see the same problem I do... if you ban one type or reason for abortion, what's next?
[QUOTE]
I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...
You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea.
However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidance that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion. I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools. Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another.
[/QUOTE]
Regarding the above, I agree on finding their voice, totally. As for the school system, I couldn't agree more. I don't, per se, believe in creationism... however, I have the brains to see the gaping wide holes in evolution. I did study a lot of biology, I know the statistical unlikeless of all those amino acids forming long chains in a very unstable atmosphere, which would usually break the chains before they'd have any chance to become big enough to form even the most trivial for of life. Evolution is perhaps part of the truth... it explains how things have changed between billions of years ago and now. It does NOT explain the catalyst that started it all. Personally, I believe some event (or even intervention) created life here, and evolution stepped in from there. Species do evolve, but we do not have a large enough time period of recorded history to really see it on that scale. Yes, species adapt or die, but it doesn't explain how the first forms of life came to be. I'm not prepared to accept God as the answer, but it's SOMETHING other than what evolution theory says it is.
I wish schools would teach NONE of this as FACT, and teach it as what it is -- THEORY.
[QUOTE]
Cool, guess I'm hyper religious. :rolleyes:
Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife
Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc. Marraige is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marraiges are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offencive, revulting, etc.
[/QUOTE]
Well, as for the hyper-religious... very poor choice of words, I apologize. That's one of my triggers :P Yes, the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman, but words do evolve as times change. However, you'll also note that it says the LEGAL union, not the HOLY union. I acknowledge that the opinion of it being legal or holy is up to the individual, however... As for gays having many other options available to them... No, in the U.S. they do not. There is no common-law system to speak of as there is in Canada and England. A gay couple has no legal rights, and this DOES become important; just look at things like taxes, emergencies, death... would a hospital refuse a gay man from seeing his dying partner because they aren't married or family? No, there needs to be some legal acknowledge of the union.
You are, of course, free to feel as you do. I will not fault you for that, they're your beliefs. There are lots of things I find offensive that society does not, so I can understand that. However, as I said above, like it or not, it's coming.
Regards,
Matt
P.S. I was wrong about this thread degrading, this has been very well spoken by all parties. Thank you.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by A2597 [/i]
[B]Very well spoken sir.
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
[/quote][/b]
How dare you speak about being angry. I can’t even respond to this. Suffice it to say, I am not a violent man, but had you said half the things in that post to my face, I would’ve made sure you regretted it. Remember, there is a person on the other side of that keyboard, and in the case of a rant like that, there are many people there.
Now, I wrote that after the rest of this post, as I missed to bit about A# being angry until proofreading. Now, onto out civilized discussion.
[quote][b]First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...[/quote][/b]
Personally, I disagree with abortion myself, but the problem on this issue is that no one is on the same page with anyone else. The Supreme Court stepped out of their job of interpreting the law into creating the law with RvW, which started the whole mess. Now, the Pro-life people are saying that life begins at (or near) conception, while the Pro-choice (notice that no one is anti-anything. All this spin can make a man dizzy...) say that it doesn't matter whether the fetus is alive or not, it depends on the mother's body, and is therefore her property, to do with as she pleases. Thus, if she decides to have an abortion, it is no more an issue than if she were to take some medicine to kill a tapeworm in her. The tapeworm may have a problem with it, but the tapeworm lobby isn't very powerful in the government. Now, while I find it distasteful at best to compare a baby, independent or not, to a mole, a tapeworm, a chair, or anything else a woman can have removed from her life, I am not a woman, and thus feel I have no real say in the matter, beyond my prior observation of the legality of it. I would like to have RvW repealed, and to kick the issue over to Congress so the people('s representatives) can decide the law as the founding fathers intended lo those many years ago.
[quote][b]I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...[/quote][/b]
Well, I was worried that everyone might think that American christians were all a bunch of close-minded bigots like Jerry Falwell, but, ironically, the Catholic child molestation thing has proven me wrong.
You see, if people really believed Christians were all like that, they wouldn't have been surprised about the clergy abusing kids and lying about it. I consider it a left-handed complement.
[quote][b]You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea. [/quote][/b]
Good to know we agree. It's sobering to realize that the Greek myths, for example, were believed with as much faith as Christianity is now, but that they have turned from religion to myth. The sad thing is that a theocracy could not survive that sort of religious switch-over.
[quote][b]However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidence that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion.[/quote][/b]
I rather disagree. I tend to think, in fact, that the creation story is a metaphor for an evolutionary development to the world. Hell, at least everything happened in the same order. ;)
[quote][b]I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools.[/quote][/b]
Another thread than. However, I disagree about evolution (again). At one time, the idea that earth was not the center of the universe was once treated the way you treat evolution now. But, different strokes for different folks.
[quote][b]Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another. [/quote][/b]
I wouldn't. I believe that all religions are divinely inspired as long as they tell people to be cool and groovy to one another. Love your neighbor as yourself. If a religion has this, that more often than not, it's golden.
[quote][b]Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife [/quote]
[quote]Marriage:
1.
a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
b. The state of being married; wedlock.
c. A common-law marriage.
d. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
2. A wedding.
3. A close union: “the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” (Lloyd Rose).
[/quote]
1 out of 4 definitions state that you must be a man and a woman. 1 other goes against it.
[quote][b]Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc.[/quote][/b]
But that's not the same, legally, as a marriage. While it is the law that a company has to extend a worker's medical insurance, for example, to his wife, they don't have to give a rats ass about his partner. Marriage offers very unique legal benefits, and no existing 'partnership' can match them. I mean, why would people march for homosexual marriage on capital hill if they weren't interested in recognition in the eyes of government? I'm sure that many would want their love sanctified by God, but if religion was their priority, why try to advance it through political means?
[quote][b] Marriage is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marriages are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offensive, revolting, etc. [/quote]
I'm sorry, but I can't agree. I don't think that people should be limited by how and who they can love based on which of them has dangly bits between their legs. It strikes me as being akin to saying that a man and a woman can't enjoy a platonic relationship because God intended for man and woman to be together in Holy Matrimony and only holy matrimony.
A2597... methinks you need to learn the meaning of the phrase "impulse control." Your above rant is incredibly insulting, and I can think of at least one prominent board member who may well have been very hurt by the vitriol you spewed.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others.
With that business out of the way, let me get to the topics at hand.
First, marriage:
I feel it important to keep in mind the reasons marriage exists in its current form. I speak here not of religious elements, but what I believe to be the reasons behind even those. A marriage is not simply a union between two people. There wouldn't be much reason for legal recognition if that were the case. Instead, we have legal (and religious) recognition because married couples have this tendancy to have children, and parents need to exercise responsibility towards them. Tax rules are different for married couples not so much for their sake, but out of an acknowledgment that two people may have to care for many others.
Homosexual couples, on the other hand, don't have much chance of having children, save through adoption. For this reason, I don't believe that homosexual unions should be treated quite the same way as heterosexual unions.
That said, I have absolutely no problem with the idea of some form of recognition for them. I would prefer that it not be called marriage, but I don't see that what it's called is really that important.
Abortion:
I can't understand how anyone could deny the humanity of a sufficiently developed fetus. Once independent brain function can be detected, it's a separate being from the mother, and the fact of that life must be considered.
That said, if it's a choice between the mother's life and the baby's, I'd choose the mother every time. The mother already has a full life, and people who care for her, whereas the child would be forced into growing up without a mother, which is a pretty serious detriment.
Rape and incest are less clear-cut for me. In the case of incest, I'd have to say that if the act of conception was consensual, then the parents need to take responsibility for the life they've created. For rape... that's a tough one. For the sake of compromise with those who disagree with me, I suppose I'd allow abortions in that case.
I certainly agree with DoM that the court was irresponsible with RvW; abortion laws, whether pro- or anti-, should be created through the legislative process, not by decree.
Church and state:
Speaking as a Christian myself, I rather like the references to God found in various documents, including (but not limited to) the Pledge of Allegiance.
Speaking as an ordinary citizen, I can also see why others don't like them, and in keeping with that, I feel that the state shouldn't approach things from a religious point of view, be it Christian or otherwise... or even Atheist. I read "freedom of religion" as espousing the right to believe, or not believe, as an individual sees fit. To that end, I feel that the most appropriate point of view for the state is one of agnosticism, neither promoting any particular religion nor seeking to remove religion from any public forum.
With regards to money and the Pledge, I view references to God as more a part of our historical heritage than a hard and fast acceptance of religion. For that reason, I vote they stay.
Regarding schools: I don't want them espousing any religion in particular (not even my own), but neither do I like the downright anti-theistic attitudes that I've seen recently. I'd like to see schools encourage students to explore their own spirituality without foisting any particular belief system (or lack thereof) on them.
Gun control:
License guns as we do cars. Make sure those who own them are certified to use them responsibly. Aside from that, knock yourself out.
Ok. Since Im going to be on the road in a few hours, I cant be here to defend anything Ive said. Therefore, I wont say put anything into the debate apart from this:
Abortion: Im for it, up to the second month.
Immigration: Noone choose where to be born. You can only choose what to believe in.
Guns: Im against them.
Marriage: If you dont want homosexuals to be married in your church, fine. Since marriage is simply a way for people to show how much they love each other, and that they want to be together for the rest of their lives, why should it be denied? Now, on the other hand I believe you shouldnt get married unless youre certain youre going to spend the rest of your life with that person, but that belongs in a different debate.
Again, I cant stay and chat. Hope you can finish this debate nice and easy, I myself was shaking with rage when I read A# post. Provocative? Yes. Is that a reason to start a flame war? no.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Bekenn [/i]
[B]A2597... methinks you need to learn the meaning of the phrase "impulse control." Your above rant is incredibly insulting, and I can think of at least one prominent board member who may well have been very hurt by the vitriol you spewed.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others. [/B][/QUOTE]
hey, already stated he just set me off, that post has been something I've been needing to let out for years. No, it wasn't well written, wasn't thought out at all. I won't delete it though, because that wouldn't serve any purpose at all.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Bekenn [/i]
[B]A2597... methinks you need to learn the meaning of the phrase "impulse control." Your above rant is incredibly insulting, and I can think of at least one prominent board member who may well have been very hurt by the vitriol you spewed.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others. [/B][/QUOTE]
Tis why I won't become a barber. ;)
Hey, sorry to seriously offend, but I was seriously offended myself. What goes around comes around. Just as Croxis shoulden't have to face what I just spewed out, I shouldn't have to face what LogicSequence said. (BTW, my post was directed at Logic Sequence)
Comments
[B]We had that happen a couple of years ago at a kindergarten. They took the crosses off the buns and gave them some stupid name. The whole idea was ludicrous and caused quite an uproar. [/B][/QUOTE]
Jesus, don't tell me that happened over in the States [i]as well[/i]... :eek:
Oh yeah, there was also a call for the Metropolitan Police to remove the Crown from on top of their badge (There for almost 150 years) for fear it's "Royallist imagery" would "offend" ethnic minorities.
Don't these people ever see that by treating ethnic and religious minorities like this they're making them feel even more more marginalized?
Regards,
Morden
[B]Biggles ain't American :D [/B][/QUOTE]
Buggery, the phrase "Kindergarten" influenced me.
Sorry Biggles, where do you hail from? Not our own "fair isle"? ;)
Regards,
Morden
I agree that "efforts" like that could (and probably do) make them feel more marginalized. I know that, of my friends who are "minorities," most find this type of thing obnoxious and refuse to play into it. Of course, they aren't leeches who feel they're owed something just because they happen to be of a different ethnicity. This is what I disagree with so much! If we're all equal, why do (at least in the US) certain ethnicities get so many benefits compared to the rest of us? You can't have it both ways, if you want equal rights, then deal with the world like the rest of us do. It reminds me of women who want equal rights, then fight like hell to make sure the US can never draft women into war. You can't have it both ways!
[B]If we're all equal, why do (at least in the US) certain ethnicities get so many benefits compared to the rest of us? You can't have it both ways, if you want equal rights, then deal with the world like the rest of us do. It reminds me of women who want equal rights, then fight like hell to make sure the US can never draft women into war. You can't have it both ways! [/B][/QUOTE]
Indeed, people speak about "equal rights" when they actually advocate bias in favour of one race or ethinicity which they see as "unfortionate" because of their historical background. (Which is simply moronic.)
Double standards are rife in society, especially in issues of sex as you say; femenists gunning for "better treatment" but still being predjudiced against men.
The proportion of our taxes that go to people who don't need or deserve it is unfuriating, and is part of the monster that is Political Correctness; a small minority deciding "what's best" for the rest of us.
Regards,
Morden
The polical correctness situation in NZ is pretty bad, and it's almost entirely based around the Maori. A large number of them are very hung up on what's happened in the past and as a result are taking certain actions that I feel are really holding the country back. Of course, I could be lynched just for saying this.
[B]A large number of them are very hung up on what's happened in the past and as a result are taking certain actions that I feel are really holding the country back. Of course, I could be lynched just for saying this. [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, accusing a racial or religious minority of racial predjudice these days will often result in you being called every bad name under the sun by the political correctness mob.
In thier eyes, you're just not allowed to do it, even though it may be valid. It's been made taboo.
Oh yeah, please don't hurt me. ;)
Regards,
Morden
It might be useful, however, were it based on economic standing.
Think about it... money is a big stumbling block for those that don't have any, particularly with regards to getting an education, a problem most people here have probably experienced firsthand. What's more, with demographics as they are, it would end up helping a lot of the same people.
At the very least, it seems a reasonable compromise between those who refuse to let go of Affirmative Action and those who, like me, think it isn't quite so necessary these days.
[B]UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... America in particular is growing FAAAAAR too conservative in the last few years, it's frightening. It really and truely frightens me sometimes when i see how conservative my country has become. (especially the frightening parallels between george w. bush (et his administration) and that of president clarke). and anyone who doesn't see the parallels is kidding themselves (or worse they've been so brainwashed they actually THINK things are good the way they are). [/B][/QUOTE]
I dont think things are good the way they are your right things are looking scary look at the Patriot Act thats the scariest thing ive seen in years other then Tom Ridge wanting to revive internment camps wtf is that? But I think for most this game would be legit if you were a firefighte rather than a lowly civilian plunging to your death.
[B]UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, quite frankly, a lot of Leftism and Liberalism makes me sick in the way it tries to ignore or destroy our heritage and national identity.
In my eyes, there's nothing wrong with conservatism, or at least my brand of it.
And on the Bush administration being compared to the Clarke regime, a tad melodramatic, don't you think?
Regards,
Morden
[B]
And on the Bush administration being compared to the Clarke regime, a tad melodramatic, don't you think?
Regards,
Morden [/B][/QUOTE]
lol, how long has that comparison been going around here? I agree, its pretty damn melodramatic.
[B]Yeah, but there are some scary parallels. :) [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes there are, but the comparison itself is not entirely accurate at this time. Personally, even as a republican (I guess), I think Bush is being a moron. I supported, and still do, our actions in Iraq, with much regret that we had to go in NOW and finish what we should have finished during the first Gulf War. However, I think his moves both in legislation (i.e. Patriot Act), and currently in the world (i.e. North Korea, Liberia, Iran, etc) are moronic.
Patriot Act: I don't need to describe the horridness of this.
Iran: If we do not bother them, they will not bother us. (To borrow a phrase)
North Korea: Don't provoke them, and fight them only as a last resort. Any war in Korea will be very brutal on us. We will win it eventually, but it'll be just as bad as the last one. US troops are NOT good at fighting in environments like this.
Liberia: Who cares? It's not our problem, we should stay out of it.
[B]UGGGH u people exude conservativism! EEEEK! makes me sick... America in particular is growing FAAAAAR too conservative in the last few years, it's frightening. It really and truely frightens me sometimes when i see how conservative my country has become. (especially the frightening parallels between george w. bush (et his administration) and that of president clarke). and anyone who doesn't see the parallels is kidding themselves (or worse they've been so brainwashed they actually THINK things are good the way they are). [/B][/QUOTE]
*Shudders*
people like you scare me.
poeple like you are the reason that things like Gay Unions are being alloyed (Its not marraige, I'm sorry, call it what ever you want, it ain't marraige)
Abortion being allowed, right up to taking the baby out and slicing off limbs on its way out. (That is what they do you know)
sriously, Conservatism is RAMPANT?!? what on earth are you on man? Sure, we don't allow nudity on the TV like some other nations, etc etc.
face the historical facts, every nation, EVERY nation that has become very liberal has died off, taken over by another nation, or otherwise disapeared off the face of the earth.
Rome, Soddom and Gamorah, Babylon, list goes on.
Now, I'm not saying that a certain level of liberlism is bad, but from your post I can see you want to turn this nation into a hell hole. (That exactly what it would be IMO to, frankly, if this nation gets much more liberal, I'm leaving it behind).
in the past few years we have become MUCH more liberal, its down right scary how much so. Your comment that we have become more CONSERVATIVE is utterly stupid. Howso? I can't think of a single area in our nation that has become more conservative. Abortion rates are though the roof, God has been compleatly taken out of schools, and evolution being taught. Shit, the school system thoughout the US sucks utterly and compleatly. Take a kid thats never said a four letter cuss word in his life, stick him in school for three months and suddenly hes saying more curse words then I do in a year. They even brainwash the kids into believing that god doesn't exist! Hello, the schools are to teach kids good grammer, math, history, etc, not tell them God does or doesn't exist!
TV shows are getting worse and worse, just turn on USA or TNT if you don't believe me, getting alot worse. (In the sence that there is more sex, violence, etc. This is conservative?!?)
Gays are getting more and more rights. This utterly disgust me. I don't mind the person themselves, I know a number of gays personally, but KEEP IT TO YOUR F**KING SELVES. They don't want bloody equal rights, they want special rights. Anyone that says otherwise is kidding themselves.
If your so scared at how conservative the US is, do us all a favor and move to France.
Gah. Liberals.
I wish the US was more like it was when it was Founded, a REPUBLIC (Hello, we are NOT a democracy, just recite the pledge of alligence if you don't believe me), a nation UNDER GOD, we certainly arn't right now, we are about as far from God as we can possibly be.
Sigh, I need to find a new country, claim it for the US, then leave a revolutionary war with the US, and make another country the way the US used to be 100 years ago. Yea...like thats gunna happen. Guess I'm stuck in this hell hole your intent on creating for us.
Abortion: Your description of what is done is at best, overstated. These types of abortions ARE done, they are late term and/or partial birth abortions, and I don't agree with them unless it's based on medical reasons. (i.e. mother will die if it's not done.)
Where I stand on Abortions in general is midway on both sides. I think it's disgusting and disgraceful that abortions are being used as birth control. Get a damn brain, and learn how not to get pregnant. People who use abortions as birth control and have multiple abortions FOR THIS REASON should be taken out back and shot, or sterilized. (How's that for an opinion?)
However... I see nothing wrong with a rape or incest/abuse victim who gets pregnant from it having an abortion. In fact, I think this is a good idea. I see a little less wrong with teenagers who get knocked up at 13 years old having abortions. They are not ready for a child, nor should they have. In doing so, they are not only destroying their lives, but the future life of their child. The problem is here that if you take away the ability to have an abortion for one reason, all other reasons become endangered. Imagine if a rape victim could only have an abortion if it was proven in court that she was raped? With a disgustingly small percentage of rapes actually being solved, this would defeat the entire purpose.
That should pretty much outline where I stand on this. Abortion is NOT a black and white issue, despite what many pro-life advocates would like you to believe. There are many, many mitigating shades of gray in there.
Now, moving right onto religion.
Let me first state, as I've stated before, that I'm Agnostic. For the not so intelligent people out there, this does NOT mean atheist. It means that I'm pretty much on the fence. I don't, per se, believe in God because there is little hard proof of one. I also do not disbelieve, because there is little proof that there ISN'T one. I don't think any mortal has the right to dictate to another, or say to another with certainty that God exists. You are mortal, you do not know. You may personally believe whatever you want. I myself feel that to say there is no God requires as much of a leap of blind, ignorant faith as does saying there is a God. To me, the organized religious people, and the atheists are one in the same. They both have beliefs based solely on blind, ignorant faith.
Now, I do believe that there is some higher power, or powers, in the universe. I do not claim knowledge of who or what they are, to do so I feel is arrogant beyond belief. I further do not claim knowledge of what will happen to me after I die. Again, to claim knowledge of this is arrogant. I will find out when I die, as will you. This is not to say that I do not believe in many of the morals that religion teaches. Morality is not religion. Religion serves its purpose in providing a METHOD of teaching morals. The truths, or untruths, behind the religion do not matter so long as these goals are met. I know people that are deeply religious, and who have been helped in life by their belief. That is great! I would encourage this. If it helps YOU as a person, then you made the right choice. This does not make your beliefs true (or untrue), it simply makes them beneficial to you.
This country should not, by any means, encourage or endorse a specific religion. Like it are not, there are millions of non-christians in this country. For the country to endorse one religion over another is pure bigotry. I find it distasteful that the pledge of allegiance says 'One Nation Under God' -- simply because children are FORCED, with NO RESPECT TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL BELIEFS to recite it. When I was in elementary school, if you didn't recite the pledge, you were given detention or suspension. That should not be allowed to go on. It is one group, albeit possibly a "majority" force feeding the rest who believe differently to do something that goes against their beliefs. There should be zero sponsorship of ANY religion by the government. In government insitutions, on goverment property (MONEY! What the hell is up with that?), or in any other state or federal sanctioned activity.
Leave religion up to the INDIVIDUAL. It should not be state enforced or endorsed. I find it very distasteful that all our money says 'In God We Trust' -- however, I have to continue using the money. There isn't much choice, now is there? This is what bothers me. Forcing people into your beliefs.
The role of the U.S. Government is not to convert people and endorse religions. I bet if the U.S. Government had some pledge that said 'In Allah We Trust' -- people would be shooting people over it. Even though there is ZERO, ZERO, difference between that and what the mostly Christian government is doing.
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
*Deep breath*
Regards,
Matt
In short: I don't care if people don't like them. There is no legal basis for disallowing them. The only people who want gay marriages banned are the hyper-religious people who think gays go against God. If you think RELIGIOUS marriages (i.e. in a church) should not be allowed to gays, fine! However, leave LEGAL marriages (i.e. in a courtroom) alone. You have no right to force your religious beliefs on another person. It doesn't affect you, let them do what they want. There is zero reason to not allow this for ANY reason that's not religious. Get ready man, like it or not, same-sex unions are coming. There's nothing the religious right can do to stop it.
Regards,
Matt
(Hey Morden, signing like that is catchy :P)
[B]I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.[/B][/QUOTE]
Not odd at all mate.
Looking at what you've said, I feel exactly the same way as you on these issues.
I have the same views on violent crime as you; criminals like these are in my opinion scum, and should feel the full force of the law upon them. Victims rights should be paramount as you said, and people should have more rights in defending their homes from intruders. (I'm sure you heard the addage; "An Englishman's home is his castle.")
Like you, I'm not racist, and I have no cause to be. I have Jewish blood in me, (although I don't follow the faith, and nor do my parents) and I have a black uncle by marriage.
I am a patriot, but unlike a lot of English people, consider myself "British" first. From a historical standpoint, the United Kingdom of Great Britain could not have reached its place in the world today without it being a union of the Scottish, the Welsh, and the English.
I believe in the one-nation state, and that history, culture, and heritage, especially one as significant as ours; should be protected.
As for immigration, the UK has a huge problem with it too at the moment, and I can't help but think Enoch Powell was right about the dangers of letting in too many asylum seekers.
If these people are committed to work, learn English, become a productive member of society and respect our laws, I welcome them with open arms. It's a sad fact that the vast majority of immigrants don't fell the same way.
When it comes down to religion, I used to be agnotic like you, but had a fondness for the Christian faith. (Which has endured, the religion being an integral part of our history.)
However, I've become a lot more cynical as my world view expanded, and Imy views towards Christianity, especially Catholicism have grown really quite negative.
I consider myself conservative with a small c, but some of my ideas, especially about homosexuality are quite liberal. (Although I agree with A2597 that just because you are a minority, it doesn't entitle you to "special" treatment.)
Regards,
Morden
Not odd at all mate.
Looking at what you've said, I feel exactly the same way as you on these issues.
I have the same views on violent crime as you; criminals like these are in my opinion scum, and should feel the full force of the law upon them. Victims rights should be paramount as you said, and people should have more rights in defending their homes from intruders. (I'm sure you heard the addage; "An Englishman's home is his castle.")
[/QUOTE]
This is actually exactly what I'm talking about. Especially in Maryland this is bad. Your rights to self defense are... questionable at best. Outside of your own home, you're going to jail. No question about it. You have a big duty to retreat. i.e. someone pulls a gun on you on the street, you have to try to run away before shooting them. You do not have a duty to retreat in your own home, but the act of them breaking into your house is NOT justifyable cause for self defense. It is in a lot of states, but not mine.
As someone who had two people (both under 18 and drunk!) break into my house while I was home... well, to make a long story short, they met the business end of a Glock .40 and did not resist. They sat against the wall, on their hands, until the police arrived and arrested them. I then got a lecture about gun safety, one cop said "I doubt you even know how to use it." -- Well gee, my Dad is ex-military and ex-police, I've been shooting guns since I was about 7 years old, I go to the range to keep up on accuracy at least once or twice a month... No, I think I know how to use it.
Victim's rights? Well... I couldn't even get their names. In the end, the Juvenile Justice Department, against my wishes and arguements, decided not to press charges. Their punishment was... 90 days [b]informal, voluntary[/b] supervision. I digress.
[QUOTE]
Like you, I'm not racist, and I have no cause to be. I have Jewish blood in me, (although I don't follow the faith, and nor do my parents) and I have a black uncle by marriage.
[/QUOTE]
Nor am I. I judge people on their actions, not their race. I try to avoid sterotyping groups, though I'll admit I do from time to time... Mostly in terms of like 'DC is full of crackheads' -- etc. My family background is both German and French, with some Scot/Irish and even a bit of Italian in there. My spouse is Phillipino, etc.
[QUOTE]
I am a patriot, but unlike a lot of English people, consider myself "British" first. From a historical standpoint, the United Kingdom of Great Britain could not have reached its place in the world today without it being a union of the Scottish, the Welsh, and the English.
I believe in the one-nation state, and that history, culture, and heritage, especially one as significant as ours; should be protected.
[/QUOTE]
Well said. You have a pretty nice country, I went to school in England :)
[QUOTE]
As for immigration, the UK has a huge problem with it too at the moment, and I can't help but think Enoch Powell was right about the dangers of letting in too many asylum seekers.
If these people are committed to work, learn English, become a productive member of society and respect our laws, I welcome them with open arms. It's a sad fact that the vast majority of immigrants don't fell the same way.
[/QUOTE]
That is my single biggest problem. I'm all for educated, productive people immigrating here, regardless of where they are from. However... Look at Mexican immigration to the US; many are uneducated, do no productive work here, and manage to collect welfare. (Which, in and of itself, is an evil system that I think should be abolished.) This has got to stop. Another problem of mine is H1B (Work) Visa's. Microsoft is lobbying to extend them, even while America's unemployment rate is obnoxiously high. Why? Not because Asians/Indians are better trained (though some of them are), but because they work for less money. What I would like to see is a law stating that no H1B visa holder could be employed for a job where an EQUALLY EXPERIENCED American is available. This means that IF the H1B visa holder is MORE qualified, they SHOULD get the job. However, I know that this would be abused as a way for underqualified American's to get jobs that should go to better qualified people. I.E. Affirmative Action and Hiring Preference in Civil Service jobs.
Another big problem of mine is illegal immigrants. People have flamed the hell out of me for my blanket statement of 'All Illegal immigrants are criminals.' -- well, it's true. The moron that is our president even granted citizenship to a large group of illegal immigrants. What does THIS say? Break the law long enough and you can stay legally? Hell no. They should be tracked down and deported. If they can't immigrate by the book, then yes, they ARE criminals, and should be booted out of this country fast enough to make their collective heads spin. An illegal immigrant cannot be a productive member of society. Cannot work legally, does not pay taxes, drains the medical system by being unable to pay for emergency medical care... I could go on and on. These people are criminals and should be treated as such. Do it by the book or not at all. What do you have to hide that makes you so afraid of the LEGAL immigration process?
[QUOTE]
When it comes down to religion, I used to be agnotic like you, but had a fondness for the Christian faith. (Which has endured, the religion being an integral part of our history.)
However, I've become a lot more cynical as my world view expanded, and Imy views towards Christianity, especially Catholicism have grown really quite negative.
[/QUOTE]
I like to have an open mind on these things. I also like to KNOW about other religions. I've read the bible, more than once. Several versions of it... I like to be informed, and as I said in my above post, I do think a lot of the morals that religion teaches are good and DO benefit society. I may very well end up as you did and embrace a religion eventually. I will do it with eyes wide open though. I am not ready to do that now, nor do I feel any presure to do so now.
[QUOTE]
I consider myself conservative with a small c, but some of my ideas, especially about homosexuality are quite liberal. (Although I agree with A2597 that just because you are a minority, it doesn't entitle you to "special" treatment.)
Regards,
Morden [/QUOTE]
Absolutely! Equal rights does NOT mean you get special treatment. I don't believe in this BS of giving special treatment to 'make up for past wrongs.' -- GET OVER IT! MOVE ON! You deserve equal rights, just like any human being, but it ends there.
I further agree that, were I a minority as such, I'd be offended by special treatment like that. It IS demeaning and insulting.
Regards,
Matt
[B]
Abortion: Your description of what is done is at best, overstated. These types of abortions ARE done, they are late term and/or partial birth abortions, and I don't agree with them unless it's based on medical reasons. (i.e. mother will die if it's not done.)
Where I stand on Abortions in general is midway on both sides. I think it's disgusting and disgraceful that abortions are being used as birth control. Get a damn brain, and learn how not to get pregnant. People who use abortions as birth control and have multiple abortions FOR THIS REASON should be taken out back and shot, or sterilized. (How's that for an opinion?)
However... I see nothing wrong with a rape or incest/abuse victim who gets pregnant from it having an abortion. In fact, I think this is a good idea. I see a little less wrong with teenagers who get knocked up at 13 years old having abortions. They are not ready for a child, nor should they have. In doing so, they are not only destroying their lives, but the future life of their child. The problem is here that if you take away the ability to have an abortion for one reason, all other reasons become endangered. Imagine if a rape victim could only have an abortion if it was proven in court that she was raped? With a disgustingly small percentage of rapes actually being solved, this would defeat the entire purpose.
That should pretty much outline where I stand on this. Abortion is NOT a black and white issue, despite what many pro-life advocates would like you to believe. There are many, many mitigating shades of gray in there.
Now, moving right onto religion.
Let me first state, as I've stated before, that I'm Agnostic. For the not so intelligent people out there, this does NOT mean atheist. It means that I'm pretty much on the fence. I don't, per se, believe in God because there is little hard proof of one. I also do not disbelieve, because there is little proof that there ISN'T one. I don't think any mortal has the right to dictate to another, or say to another with certainty that God exists. You are mortal, you do not know. You may personally believe whatever you want. I myself feel that to say there is no God requires as much of a leap of blind, ignorant faith as does saying there is a God. To me, the organized religious people, and the atheists are one in the same. They both have beliefs based solely on blind, ignorant faith.
Now, I do believe that there is some higher power, or powers, in the universe. I do not claim knowledge of who or what they are, to do so I feel is arrogant beyond belief. I further do not claim knowledge of what will happen to me after I die. Again, to claim knowledge of this is arrogant. I will find out when I die, as will you. This is not to say that I do not believe in many of the morals that religion teaches. Morality is not religion. Religion serves its purpose in providing a METHOD of teaching morals. The truths, or untruths, behind the religion do not matter so long as these goals are met. I know people that are deeply religious, and who have been helped in life by their belief. That is great! I would encourage this. If it helps YOU as a person, then you made the right choice. This does not make your beliefs true (or untrue), it simply makes them beneficial to you.
This country should not, by any means, encourage or endorse a specific religion. Like it are not, there are millions of non-christians in this country. For the country to endorse one religion over another is pure bigotry. I find it distasteful that the pledge of allegiance says 'One Nation Under God' -- simply because children are FORCED, with NO RESPECT TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL BELIEFS to recite it. When I was in elementary school, if you didn't recite the pledge, you were given detention or suspension. That should not be allowed to go on. It is one group, albeit possibly a "majority" force feeding the rest who believe differently to do something that goes against their beliefs. There should be zero sponsorship of ANY religion by the government. In government insitutions, on goverment property (MONEY! What the hell is up with that?), or in any other state or federal sanctioned activity.
Leave religion up to the INDIVIDUAL. It should not be state enforced or endorsed. I find it very distasteful that all our money says 'In God We Trust' -- however, I have to continue using the money. There isn't much choice, now is there? This is what bothers me. Forcing people into your beliefs.
The role of the U.S. Government is not to convert people and endorse religions. I bet if the U.S. Government had some pledge that said 'In Allah We Trust' -- people would be shooting people over it. Even though there is ZERO, ZERO, difference between that and what the mostly Christian government is doing.
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
*Deep breath*
Regards,
Matt [/B][/QUOTE]
Very well spoken sir.
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...
I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...
You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea.
However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidance that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion. I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools. Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another.
Cool, guess I'm hyper religious. :rolleyes:
Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife
Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc. Marraige is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marraiges are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offencive, revulting, etc.
[quote]
Originally posted by Matt [Psionic]
I'm a bit odd with my political beliefs aren't I? I'm also pro-gun (in every way), pro-death penalty, anti-imprison non-violent drug offenders, pro-increase penalties for violent crimes such as rape, pro-victim's rights, anti-giving criminals more rights, and for the big one; I'm anti-most immigration as it has become in the US (if you want to discuss THAT one, we can talk about it in a different place. It really is not racially based at all.) Hell, I could go on for a while. I don't really follow one party too much. I'm more of a centralist.
[/quote]
Bingo, I agree there 100%
[QUOTE]
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
[/QUOTE]
Understandable, I have a few triggers that do that to me as well.
[QUOTE]
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...
[/QUOTE]
No argument here on partial birth or late terms. It's disgusting. The woman has plenty of time to make up her mind long before that. There are medical reasons that could require it, but they are the exception to the rule and are rare. Many states have banned (or at least attempted to!) partial-birth abortions and late term abortions. However the supreme court tends to step in and say no. They see the same problem I do... if you ban one type or reason for abortion, what's next?
[QUOTE]
I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...
You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea.
However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidance that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion. I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools. Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another.
[/QUOTE]
Regarding the above, I agree on finding their voice, totally. As for the school system, I couldn't agree more. I don't, per se, believe in creationism... however, I have the brains to see the gaping wide holes in evolution. I did study a lot of biology, I know the statistical unlikeless of all those amino acids forming long chains in a very unstable atmosphere, which would usually break the chains before they'd have any chance to become big enough to form even the most trivial for of life. Evolution is perhaps part of the truth... it explains how things have changed between billions of years ago and now. It does NOT explain the catalyst that started it all. Personally, I believe some event (or even intervention) created life here, and evolution stepped in from there. Species do evolve, but we do not have a large enough time period of recorded history to really see it on that scale. Yes, species adapt or die, but it doesn't explain how the first forms of life came to be. I'm not prepared to accept God as the answer, but it's SOMETHING other than what evolution theory says it is.
I wish schools would teach NONE of this as FACT, and teach it as what it is -- THEORY.
[QUOTE]
Cool, guess I'm hyper religious. :rolleyes:
Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife
Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc. Marraige is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marraiges are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offencive, revulting, etc.
[/QUOTE]
Well, as for the hyper-religious... very poor choice of words, I apologize. That's one of my triggers :P Yes, the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman, but words do evolve as times change. However, you'll also note that it says the LEGAL union, not the HOLY union. I acknowledge that the opinion of it being legal or holy is up to the individual, however... As for gays having many other options available to them... No, in the U.S. they do not. There is no common-law system to speak of as there is in Canada and England. A gay couple has no legal rights, and this DOES become important; just look at things like taxes, emergencies, death... would a hospital refuse a gay man from seeing his dying partner because they aren't married or family? No, there needs to be some legal acknowledge of the union.
You are, of course, free to feel as you do. I will not fault you for that, they're your beliefs. There are lots of things I find offensive that society does not, so I can understand that. However, as I said above, like it or not, it's coming.
Regards,
Matt
P.S. I was wrong about this thread degrading, this has been very well spoken by all parties. Thank you.
[B]
P.S. I was wrong about this thread degrading, this has been very well spoken by all parties. Thank you. [/B][/QUOTE]
with the exception of my second-to-last post...
I don't know if I even want to re-read it...would be a nightmare to edit, that is one thing I know.... :D
[B]Very well spoken sir.
Sorry about the outburst, but lately there have been alot of letters to the editor that have really gotten the blood flowing, and the "America is getting WAYYYY to conservative" sentance just set me off...
now that I've calmed down, I can begin to argue like a civilized person. :)
[/quote][/b]
How dare you speak about being angry. I can’t even respond to this. Suffice it to say, I am not a violent man, but had you said half the things in that post to my face, I would’ve made sure you regretted it. Remember, there is a person on the other side of that keyboard, and in the case of a rant like that, there are many people there.
Now, I wrote that after the rest of this post, as I missed to bit about A# being angry until proofreading. Now, onto out civilized discussion.
[quote][b]First, let me state that you have a very well written responce, and agree with alot of what you've said.
I can see abortions when they will save the life of the mother, but to date, I've never seen something that warrents a partial birth abortion, or late term for that matter. I Abhor all abortions though, I mean, after just a few weeks its proven that the brain is already functional...[/quote][/b]
Personally, I disagree with abortion myself, but the problem on this issue is that no one is on the same page with anyone else. The Supreme Court stepped out of their job of interpreting the law into creating the law with RvW, which started the whole mess. Now, the Pro-life people are saying that life begins at (or near) conception, while the Pro-choice (notice that no one is anti-anything. All this spin can make a man dizzy...) say that it doesn't matter whether the fetus is alive or not, it depends on the mother's body, and is therefore her property, to do with as she pleases. Thus, if she decides to have an abortion, it is no more an issue than if she were to take some medicine to kill a tapeworm in her. The tapeworm may have a problem with it, but the tapeworm lobby isn't very powerful in the government. Now, while I find it distasteful at best to compare a baby, independent or not, to a mole, a tapeworm, a chair, or anything else a woman can have removed from her life, I am not a woman, and thus feel I have no real say in the matter, beyond my prior observation of the legality of it. I would like to have RvW repealed, and to kick the issue over to Congress so the people('s representatives) can decide the law as the founding fathers intended lo those many years ago.
[quote][b]I have no problem with the fact that alot of america isn't Christain/Cathlic/the many other religions that are all basically the same thing, I just REALLY wish that they would find their voice. The fact that so many Christains just have this isolationest mentality really bugs me. Makes the world think we don't exist or something...[/quote][/b]
Well, I was worried that everyone might think that American christians were all a bunch of close-minded bigots like Jerry Falwell, but, ironically, the Catholic child molestation thing has proven me wrong.
You see, if people really believed Christians were all like that, they wouldn't have been surprised about the clergy abusing kids and lying about it. I consider it a left-handed complement.
[quote][b]You are 100% correct, our nation isn't supposed to suport any one religion, and was founded on that idea. [/quote][/b]
Good to know we agree. It's sobering to realize that the Greek myths, for example, were believed with as much faith as Christianity is now, but that they have turned from religion to myth. The sad thing is that a theocracy could not survive that sort of religious switch-over.
[quote][b]However that still means that the school system needs an overhaul. Evolution is still taught as fact, when in truth it uses the same evidence that creationism uses, and draws a very different conclusion.[/quote][/b]
I rather disagree. I tend to think, in fact, that the creation story is a metaphor for an evolutionary development to the world. Hell, at least everything happened in the same order. ;)
[quote][b]I've seen alot of things that have made me think of evolution as a crock, not thats for another thread. the point is, that Evolution, Religion, etc are things that shouldn't be endorced by the schools.[/quote][/b]
Another thread than. However, I disagree about evolution (again). At one time, the idea that earth was not the center of the universe was once treated the way you treat evolution now. But, different strokes for different folks.
[quote][b]Would I love to see Christianity endorced by the schools? Oh yes, but I wouldn't ask for it, because our nation cannot endorse one religion over another. [/quote][/b]
I wouldn't. I believe that all religions are divinely inspired as long as they tell people to be cool and groovy to one another. Love your neighbor as yourself. If a religion has this, that more often than not, it's golden.
[quote][b]Cool, guess I'm hyper religious. :rolleyes:[/quote]
Yes. Yes you are. I hope that isn't a problem.
[quote][b]Seriously, look it up:
marriage.
The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife [/quote]
[quote]Marriage:
1.
a. The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
b. The state of being married; wedlock.
c. A common-law marriage.
d. A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
2. A wedding.
3. A close union: “the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics” (Lloyd Rose).
[/quote]
1 out of 4 definitions state that you must be a man and a woman. 1 other goes against it.
[quote][b]Gays have many other options available to them. Partnerships,etc etc.[/quote][/b]
But that's not the same, legally, as a marriage. While it is the law that a company has to extend a worker's medical insurance, for example, to his wife, they don't have to give a rats ass about his partner. Marriage offers very unique legal benefits, and no existing 'partnership' can match them. I mean, why would people march for homosexual marriage on capital hill if they weren't interested in recognition in the eyes of government? I'm sure that many would want their love sanctified by God, but if religion was their priority, why try to advance it through political means?
[quote][b] Marriage is a holy union between Husband and Wife, to me, Gay marriages are a complete mockery of this union. I find it very offensive, revolting, etc. [/quote]
I'm sorry, but I can't agree. I don't think that people should be limited by how and who they can love based on which of them has dangly bits between their legs. It strikes me as being akin to saying that a man and a woman can't enjoy a platonic relationship because God intended for man and woman to be together in Holy Matrimony and only holy matrimony.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others.
First, marriage:
I feel it important to keep in mind the reasons marriage exists in its current form. I speak here not of religious elements, but what I believe to be the reasons behind even those. A marriage is not simply a union between two people. There wouldn't be much reason for legal recognition if that were the case. Instead, we have legal (and religious) recognition because married couples have this tendancy to have children, and parents need to exercise responsibility towards them. Tax rules are different for married couples not so much for their sake, but out of an acknowledgment that two people may have to care for many others.
Homosexual couples, on the other hand, don't have much chance of having children, save through adoption. For this reason, I don't believe that homosexual unions should be treated quite the same way as heterosexual unions.
That said, I have absolutely no problem with the idea of some form of recognition for them. I would prefer that it not be called marriage, but I don't see that what it's called is really that important.
Abortion:
I can't understand how anyone could deny the humanity of a sufficiently developed fetus. Once independent brain function can be detected, it's a separate being from the mother, and the fact of that life must be considered.
That said, if it's a choice between the mother's life and the baby's, I'd choose the mother every time. The mother already has a full life, and people who care for her, whereas the child would be forced into growing up without a mother, which is a pretty serious detriment.
Rape and incest are less clear-cut for me. In the case of incest, I'd have to say that if the act of conception was consensual, then the parents need to take responsibility for the life they've created. For rape... that's a tough one. For the sake of compromise with those who disagree with me, I suppose I'd allow abortions in that case.
I certainly agree with DoM that the court was irresponsible with RvW; abortion laws, whether pro- or anti-, should be created through the legislative process, not by decree.
Church and state:
Speaking as a Christian myself, I rather like the references to God found in various documents, including (but not limited to) the Pledge of Allegiance.
Speaking as an ordinary citizen, I can also see why others don't like them, and in keeping with that, I feel that the state shouldn't approach things from a religious point of view, be it Christian or otherwise... or even Atheist. I read "freedom of religion" as espousing the right to believe, or not believe, as an individual sees fit. To that end, I feel that the most appropriate point of view for the state is one of agnosticism, neither promoting any particular religion nor seeking to remove religion from any public forum.
With regards to money and the Pledge, I view references to God as more a part of our historical heritage than a hard and fast acceptance of religion. For that reason, I vote they stay.
Regarding schools: I don't want them espousing any religion in particular (not even my own), but neither do I like the downright anti-theistic attitudes that I've seen recently. I'd like to see schools encourage students to explore their own spirituality without foisting any particular belief system (or lack thereof) on them.
Gun control:
License guns as we do cars. Make sure those who own them are certified to use them responsibly. Aside from that, knock yourself out.
There's my two cents' worth; thoughts?
Abortion: Im for it, up to the second month.
Immigration: Noone choose where to be born. You can only choose what to believe in.
Guns: Im against them.
Marriage: If you dont want homosexuals to be married in your church, fine. Since marriage is simply a way for people to show how much they love each other, and that they want to be together for the rest of their lives, why should it be denied? Now, on the other hand I believe you shouldnt get married unless youre certain youre going to spend the rest of your life with that person, but that belongs in a different debate.
Again, I cant stay and chat. Hope you can finish this debate nice and easy, I myself was shaking with rage when I read A# post. Provocative? Yes. Is that a reason to start a flame war? no.
[B]A2597... methinks you need to learn the meaning of the phrase "impulse control." Your above rant is incredibly insulting, and I can think of at least one prominent board member who may well have been very hurt by the vitriol you spewed.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others. [/B][/QUOTE]
hey, already stated he just set me off, that post has been something I've been needing to let out for years. No, it wasn't well written, wasn't thought out at all. I won't delete it though, because that wouldn't serve any purpose at all.
[B]A2597... methinks you need to learn the meaning of the phrase "impulse control." Your above rant is incredibly insulting, and I can think of at least one prominent board member who may well have been very hurt by the vitriol you spewed.
Croxis, I'm sorry you have to face stuff like that, particularly here, of all places.
A2597... that said, I know you didn't intend to be insulting. But when you type with your anger instead of your mind, such things will happen. But if you insist on foaming at the mouth like that, all I can really say is "Get off my side."
Because I do happen to hold some of the same political opinions as you do, and from your previous posts, I'm sure your reasons for holding those opinions can't be as stupid and unreasonable as you just made them seem.
I say this not to flame you, but because I believe in this forum and the good will normally present here. Moreover, I believe you already know that that post was a mistake. But I do ask that you please, [i]please[/i] watch what you type, and, perhaps more importantly, [i]why[/i] you type it. When you let comments like those made by LogicSequence upset you, you only hurt your own position and alienate others. [/B][/QUOTE]
Tis why I won't become a barber. ;)
Hey, sorry to seriously offend, but I was seriously offended myself. What goes around comes around. Just as Croxis shoulden't have to face what I just spewed out, I shouldn't have to face what LogicSequence said. (BTW, my post was directed at Logic Sequence)