Post by: gronne on July 02, 2004, 03:34:00 PM
I'm a socialist, or close to a communist. I know very well why I stand for my opinions, eventhough I'm not fully certain what I think about all issues at all times. And when I'm not certain I try to gather as much information as possible (depending on how interesting the question is though).
I agree with most people on the left-wing here if they have a valid point to their statements, and pretty often they do. Unfortunately, I can't say the same about all right-wingers'.
So, instead of all the bashing I would love to hear both side's opinions in why they are left/right-wingers.
Statements some right-wingers made about iraqies being worth dying, simply because they're iraqies seem unacceptable to me. But I suppose you've said it because you want to tease the other side.
Now I would like you to give VALID and THOUGHTFUL reason's why you think your side is the best, and what's so bad about the other side.
Once again, make VALID and THOUGHTFUL points.
Let's have a clean discussion for once, I've been part of way too many unserious discussions, and I've been somewhat unserious myself.
Post by: Ween311 on July 03, 2004, 05:33:00 AM
With that said, I am generally more conservative. I am not a religious freak, in fact I have not been to church since I was a child. I don't agree with everything the republicans do, but I do support smaller government and less taxes.
I am pretty cynical when it comes to politics. I think that for a politician to get where they are, they have to lie, cheat, and steal. Is there such thing as an honest politician? I doubt it. You have to read and listen and form your own opinions. Don't follow blindly and don't believe everything that you read.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 03, 2004, 09:37:00 AM
the few things that piss me off and make me wanna be a die hard liberal at times are when people say the economy is fine right now, iraq was a A+ choice, and bush is aswome, but some points i might take the conservative side (ie, abortion, but thats about it for now).
i also feel gays shouldnt be treated so badly, as there human beings and deserve a free choice
Post by: HeLiuM on July 03, 2004, 08:57:00 PM
It'd be hard to agree with both unions and shrinking government, but those who value social programs usually also side with unions (mainly the lower and middle class).
What about on the issues where the social and economic really mesh (gay marriage for example)?
I say that because thats one of the main arguments against gay marriage (that it would raise their healthcare costs), but maybe thats just an attempt at hiding homophobia?
Any thoughts?
Post by: Ween311 on July 04, 2004, 05:37:00 AM
On social programs such as welfare and rehab, I am kind of iffy. I think that "Welfare to Work" programs would be better than just welfare. If you know that you are going to only get help for a limited period, then realistically that should motivate you to be self sufficient and make a living on your own. I understand that people need help sometimes but I think that a lot of people just see welfare as a way to live and not have to work.
Gay marriage? Hmmmm....I have some gay friends and that is cool. Do I think homosexuality is right or normal? No. Am I going to harass them about it? No. Do I really care what their sexual preference is? No. Should they be allowed to get married? I don't think so. But not because of any political reasons, just because I think its wrong. Don't go flaming me saying that I'm a homophobe or a gay basher or anything like that. People can do what they want to do, but because of thier preference should they be able to change the law? I don't think so.
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 05:49:00 AM
| QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Jul 3 2004, 06:48 PM) |
| The best government is my opinion is a Dem president with a Repub controlled hill. I think we'll see one soon |
Yeah, because when the white house and the congress are at odds, so much gets done.
The last time that happened, the head of the ACLU made it onto the supreme court.
Post by: Colonel32 on July 04, 2004, 03:38:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| colonel, out of curiousity, what do you think of social programs (welfare, rehab, etc)? Any thoughts on unions? |
I think welfare is a necessary thing but it HAS to be reformed, right now its being abused at the tax payers expense. I HATE unions and think they are a plague on the workplace... I DO think workers rights come first and foremost though and unions have done a lot for safety in the workplace. As for rehab, I think addiction should be treated as a medical condition and not a criminal one, the "war on drugs" wastes more money and lives than welfare.
| QUOTE |
| What about on the issues where the social and economic really mesh (gay marriage for example)? |
Gay marriage in Canada hasn't effected anything at all but when social and economic policy contradicts I would always side with the social issue. I made all my money in the States and had it taxed higher in Canada because of where it was going to go.
| QUOTE |
| Yeah, because when the white house and the congress are at odds, so much gets done. |
Sometimes its better for less to get done. Being a conservative I assumed you would agree. With a dem pres and a repub hill... things still get passed, but there's gridlock. A repub hill keeps the bloated costs and useless stuff out of the Dem bills - but a Dem pres still pushes billsand programs for the common folk. Worst thing in the world is an unchecked government like we have now whether it be Dem/Dem or Repub/Repub.
As for the Supreme court, thats always being abused by whoever is in power
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 04:20:00 PM
Post by: nemt on July 04, 2004, 05:52:00 PM
Post by: Banj on July 05, 2004, 01:24:00 AM
If it makes you feel more comfortable to label me a homophobe then please, I want you to be comfortable. Because I am very comfortable with my feelings about homosexuality being a sexual perversion. I understand that people are born who they are and have no control over thier orientation but this is a nihilists argument. Your sensibilities would be revaged if I was draw comparisons with peadophilia and the 'automatic orientation' argument so I'll leave that to someone braver. The bottomline for me is that homosexuality serves no purpose.
......pluss I hate the 'uniform' that ALL homosexuals wear as soon as they are outed. I feel no compultion to organise a 'Straight Pride March' so why are homosexuals so intent on drawing attention to their perversion?
Post by: cainedna on July 05, 2004, 07:41:00 AM
You're totally right about homosexuality serving no "purpose." Of course, let's say your body cannot have kids. Any sex you might have has no "purpose" as far a society is concerned.
I'm not bashing anyone as a homophobe, but I don't see why it's a problem if two consenting adults prefer each other's company to being involved with women, what the fuck business is it of mine to pass judgment on that?
On top of that, you've gotta realize that marriage involves a lot of things you don't approve, for some cultures. It doesn't mean that it's invalid.
As far as the gay pride thing, you've gotta realize how a lot of these people feel. They were raised their whole life hearing how disgusting and offensive homosexuality was, and realized it wasn't a choice they could make. I think it's a natural backlash, although I wouldn't know for sure. You could either wallow in misery and hide your relationships, or make an effort to get over it.
Post by: Ween311 on July 05, 2004, 08:50:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Welcome to reality. People will always be there to abuse the system, but personally I'd much rather see some getting equal pay for less work, then the masses getting wages they can't live on. On a side note, unions don't force promotion by seniority, it would be largely up to the business whether to implement that. |
It's not welcome to reality. I have been there. So you are saying that if you work your hardest every day and your buddy comes in to work sometimes and half asses it everyday then he or she should get paid the same as you and get the same promotions and raises as you?
And yes, promotions and raises go exactly by seniority. If I posted for a new position and someone who had the same qualifications as me, but worse performance appraisals posted also, it would come down to who had been there longer. I was represented by CWA Local 4106 and this was written into the contract with the business. If the businesses do not agree with the contracts that the unions present them with then the unions have the option of striking or not working until they are agreed upon. I don't think that unions should have all the power that they do. They were started for a good reason and have served their purpose but are now larglely unneeded.
Post by: Ween311 on July 05, 2004, 08:57:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Thats mighty easy for you to say, your rights are already protected by law. You say not to flame you saying you're a homophobe or a gay basher, but isn't that what you're doing? You feel they are wrong and abnormal because they don't have the same beliefs as you. I doubt the strength of your relationship with those gay friends, and I only hope they know how you feel about their rights. As far as I'm concerned, the law is there to protect us, not restrict us. Gay marriage is not harmful to you (for any legit reason anyway), and therefore straight males have no right to enforce their beliefs on them. How much freedom would we have if we couldn't do what we believe in simply because you feel it's wrong? |
I don't think that you can judge the strength of the relationships with my friends because you don't know me or them. But we are very close and have been since high school. I am 30 now by the way, so we have been friends for about 15 years. Yes, they know my views and they respect that because I respect their right to their sexual orientation. I never said that gay marriage was harmful to anyone so please try not to put words in my mouth. I also am not trying to enforce my beliefs. I stated my beliefs. If the majority of the country votes to make same sex marriage legal, it will be no skin off my back, but that doesn't mean that I have to agree with it or that I am a homophobe or gay basher for my beliefs. I don't beleive in polygamy should be legal either, but that was a right that was actually taken away from people. It used to be legal for Mormons in Utah, but now it not.
Actually, I think that it would be best if the government and lawmakers were less involved in a lot of aspects of people's everyday lives. Less government, Less laws, Less lawyers.
Post by: Mozart.mp3 on July 05, 2004, 10:08:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Are you trying to prove that you do have the right to enforce your beliefs on others? Your morality is your own. Gay marriage is closer to interracial marriage than it is to polygamy, so why don't you work on getting that banned too? |
I think what he is trying to say is that even tho YOUR morality may be your own, it takes the majority to stick up for that morality. Just because only YOU believe in something doesn't mean that it is wrong by any means, it just means that the odds are that until you make your own country and people respect that belief, you can forget about practicing it. It's my belief that interracial marraige at one time WAS basically banned and shunned upon. Whether people believe it was right or not then didn't make a whole heck of alot of difference. The majority doesn't have the right to enforce thier beliefs on others, but they do anyway, thats the way it goes.
Post by: Ween311 on July 05, 2004, 03:51:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Your union managed to get a good deal then. May I ask what field you work in? |
Yes, I worked in communications. I was a field technician for a phone company. I agree that unions were formed to protect employees, but now they are pretty much a political action group. I think corporations today are a lot different now than when unions were formed. Even in companies where employees are not represented, you don't have the same type issues that plagued industry when unions were formed.
| QUOTE |
| By opposing gay marriage (and don't tell me openly calling it wrong isn't opposing it) and supporting bans on it, you ARE enforcing your beliefs on others. |
I don't call discussing my beliefs in a thread that asks for OPINIONS on this topic "enforcing my beliefs." I don't go out and march, I have never been to a rally, I don't go find homosexual people and tell them they are wrong. I don't think that stating your opinions is enforcing anything on anybody. I'm sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way, but I thought we were supposed to give our opinions.
Post by: BlackAdam on July 05, 2004, 04:53:00 PM
| QUOTE (gronne @ Jul 3 2004, 12:34 AM) |
| I'm a socialist, or close to a communist. |
Damn commies...
Post by: gronne on July 06, 2004, 02:45:00 AM
| QUOTE (BlackAdam @ Jul 6 2004, 01:53 AM) |
| Damn commies... |
Tell me everything you know about the communistic ideaology, so I can see whether your post has any value to it. And I don't think well of Stalinism whatsoever.
Don't come with statements about stuffs if you don't know anything about it. That's only pure logic.
Post by: HSDEMONZ on July 06, 2004, 04:11:00 AM
Post by: gronne on July 06, 2004, 06:43:00 AM
Post by: HSDEMONZ on July 06, 2004, 01:24:00 PM
Post by: self on July 07, 2004, 02:31:00 PM
Military and war: In a perfect world it shouldn't exist. We definitely don't have a perfect world, but generally I think this world spends way to much resources on trying to kill each other. All wars are nothing but results of difference of opinion. Both Hitler and Osama thought they were doing the right thing. Bush thinks he's doing the right thing now. Thats why I think all use of military force needs to be authorized by an international institution like the UN. Because if the international community doesn't agree with it, it is by definition wrong.
Abortion: I'm pro-choice. I know that having an abortion is never an "easy way out", and I don't think anyone thinks of it as an alternative to birth control. There are no 100% effective means of birth-control available, so you're not neccesserily an irresponsible slut just because you get pregnant by mistake.
War in Iraq: Heh, see every other post I've made. Yeah, I'm against it. Very much.
Role of government to Create Jobs: This is an old social-democratic thing. It has definitely been done here in Norway, and it looks like it has worked to. The unemployment rate is at 4,5 percent atm. Also many workplaces are directly funded by the state. For example, newspapers are heavily funded (funding is based on number of copies, not on political view, of course). While they're not neccesserily economicaly productive, they're still incredibly valuable.
Protectionism: I think almost every country protects their own agriculture, and I guess its neccesary because we need those farms to survive. We need the food they make. Any other form of protectionism from us industrialized countries, I strongly oppose. Theres so much poverty and hunger in this world. 24000 die of hunger every day. Industrialized country's protectionism is keeping poor countries down. We need a regulated world economy that will allow under-developed countries to develop and industrialize.
Death-Penalty: I'm against it. I don't think even the most brutal crimes you hear about deserve the death penalty. What purpose does it serve to kill the criminal? Everyone is created equal, and wheter you grow up to be a brutal child rapists or a normal citizen has do to with the environment you grow up in. You are still are worthy human-being with dreams and plans, and even if growing up makes you mentally ill you can still get help and become a perfectly sane human being.
Jail time for Crimes: I belive there needs to be some flex in the system, 'x' crime cant just give 'y' punishment. There are always circumstances around the crime that needs to be considered. Generally I think jail sentences in the US are extremely long. I heard somewhere you'll get 3-5 years if you bring a camera into a movie theater. Thats extreme! I don't belive in the preventive effect hard sentences is supposed to have. Wheter its 10 or 40 years, you dont want there to be chance in hell that you have to spend that time in jail. If you do a crime that might send in jail for several decades, that sentence is not what you're thinking about when you're doing it.
Homosexuality: Don't have a problem with it what so ever. Of course I dont. I have close gay friends, and they're really good people. Of course they are. Should they be allowed the same legal rights as anyone else. Yes. Sure, call it a 'union' just not to hurt anyones feelings, but allow it. What two consenting human beings do to each other when nobodys watching, is nobodys business but theirs. Its not a perversion and dont even think about comparing it with pedophilia. Homosexuality doesn't involve anyone being abused against their will, maybe resulting in psychiatric problems and a ruined adult life. The only reason people have a problem with homosexuality is tradition, but people have been screwing around with people of their own sex for ages.
No-one is asking us straight people join in. (Except maybe your close gay girl friends *wink wink nudge nudge*)
Well there's my view on some of things HSD brought up. Maybe I'll rant about some other things later.
Post by: muerte on July 07, 2004, 03:55:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 08, 2004, 01:33:00 AM
I never had much money and when you see all the people around you working in crappy jobs coming home after work and collapsing with exhaustion it grates. Then the working classes have more health problems which I feel stems from a bad diet. (my helath improved after I qualified and I spend a lot of money on good food). When I go to my friends for foos it is frozen mixed veg with homemade chips and a bit of cheap frozen meat, or it is a £1 tv dinner. I grew up seeing people with little or no money and some of my friends parents working two jobs. Holidays are camping in Wales. Because your dressed scuffily you get followed by security when you go into a department store.
The school you go to is rough and it is full of teachers who dont want to be there. The standard of teaching is crap and you have to learn to fight pretty quickly or you wont survive. You never hear of going to university and expectations are very low, becoming an electrician is seen as a great success. I was lucky, I had a paticurly good aptitude for maths and one of my teachers reccomended to my parents that I change to a school out of the city (took an hour an a half to get there instead of 15 minutes walking). Of all my friends from when i was growing up I am the only one who got a full education.
There is nothing for kids to do in poorer areas. They cant afford to take up sports lessons and all you can do is kick a ball around the streets. There are sometimes youth clubs but usually a gang takes over it and no one else can go unless they want a fight so you hang around on the streets. You get bored so you drink or smoke pot (this applies around the ages of 13-17). Then police say you cant hang around and harrass you so what are you meant to do?
You have no money so you try and think of ways to make money and usually only illegal avenues are open to you which is why there are so many problems with "youths". Governmants try to stop the crimes taking place but dont look at the root of the problem.
When I got older I seen all my mates work shitty jobs and by the time there 25 they look 35 because they have a hard life. Im 26 now and i have done the crappy jobs at weekends and for 3 months in the summer while in education. I knew the jobs were only temporary and i would be leaving. It would be hard knowing you have to spend the next 40 years doing shit for a pittance with none or little chance of bettering yourself. Your wage just covers the rent or motgage in a crappy 2 bedroomed house and pays the bills.
As I said I was lucky I have a good job and many chances of promotion in front of me but I remember my roots and I watch and listen to politicians from the Conservative party and am confused. They are all posh privatly educated people who have benefiited from high expectations and money to put them in the position they are now. The schools they went to had the best teachers and facilities and university was excpected. After school they had the money to go do anything they wanted. They have all come from rich families and there is no way they can relate to the working classes. They dont know what it is like to have jam butties for dinner for a week because your parents didnt have any money till pay day. They have no idea what the majority of the population has to go through. They do not represent working classes or even the lower middle class. The same applies for a lot of Labour Mp's.
This is not a working class rant because financially I am not working class.
But my views come from this background.
Right wing politics generally benefits the rich and I have a problem with that.
I belive in helping those less fortunate, be it through a minimum wage or a good state benefit system, cancelling 3rd world debt, stopping sweat shops or protecting innocent civillians caught up in war. It includes helping women who are stuck in a situation they dont want to be in, a fair tax system which taxes thoses that can afford it and helps those that cant. It includes giving pensioners a fair pension or increased taxes to improve health and education. What I dont agree with is helping corporations be it through tax relief or through subsidies. I dont agree with chairmen of bancrupt companies walking away with millions while the lowly workers dont get paid.
I didnt mean to go on for so long but I am trying to explain why I feel the way I do and where my views come from. Also why I have a problem with people who have right wing views and have grown up as little rich kids. They have never experianced what it is like to be poor and therefore do not understand where people like myself are coming from. I have seen both sides, was poor no have a comfortable life and am expected to be quite well off in a few years (once my carraer has progressed a bit). Again sorry for the rant
Post by: BatWick on July 08, 2004, 03:41:00 AM
I'm from the UK, and studying Economics at University, as such I am very against protectionism, it is one of the most stupid things in existence, I am also very pro-capitalism, the benefits it has brought are astounding, and now is it's most fragile time when the free market needs to be protected from meddling from governments who persist in trying to do the impossible and end up breaking things.
Previously I was a semi-socialist, kind of like the US Democrats - trying to smooth the rough edges of Capitalism, but I have lately (in the last year) realised that socialism is a very bad thing, and as Hayek point out in his book 'The Road to Surfdom' the more control government has, the less individual freedom we all have, and individual freedom leads to prosperity, when everyone is acting in their own self interest the outcome reached is the best for everyone.
As I have said very against protectionism, companies like Asda (Walmart to you in the US) I believe are great things, I believe in less government intervention in almost every area. But agriculture subsidies are one thing that greatly annoy me, they really screw over the economies of the third world, but that's something for another time.
Abortion I am pro, I feel it's a woman's body and her choice what to do with it.
Death Penalty sort of on the fence, I can see both sides.
Gay people? well i don't think it's genetic, i think its something peopel choose, or experience leans you towards - many gay people have similar backgroudns from relationships with parents, and so on. so for gay peopel to get married? I would support them absolutely, it's their life, I read John Stuart Mill's 'On Liberty' not too far back, and his harm principle works well, it basically says people can do what the hell the want so long as it doesn't harm other people. If peopel choose to be gay that's their choice, and it's their life to lead and i will let them lead it how they want, it's not a matter of my concern. Similarly I want other peopel to stay the hell out of my life, and let me do what I want, be that drink, promiscous sex, or anythign else you can think of.
I'm an Athiest, and don't liek any sort of religious intervention in government.
I must stress how much my views have changed from around a year age, from advocating a scandinavian style socialist state, with high tax and high standards of living etc. I have realised thta economic growth is the most important thing - then everyone can have more. Even getting the rich and holding upside down and shaking them till everything falls out of their pockets will not make everyone prosperous, 'The inherent vice of capitalism is the uneven division of blessings, while the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal division of misery.' as said Winston Churchill.
War I am against, and would liek to minimise defence spending to defence only, Irag i was always in the middle, it was reasonable to assume Sadam had chemical weapons - he has used them before and refused inspections, i don't think he posed a threat (to us - the west), and the idea of him being in line with terrorists was absurd. At the same time i am apalled that we went to war on an assumption. The intelligence should have been better.
President Bush I hate with a passion, many reasons such as his bringing of his religious beliefs into government actions (funding for abortions?), the worst thing is the federal defecit, it is the largest ever in nominal terms, and it is going to keep on going. Edwards and Kerry may bring in some protectionism, but nothing compared to Bush, Steel Tariffs, now shrimp anti-dumping (a rediculous idea) and other protectionist measures. The best recent US President was Regan without a doubt, the best UK one Thatcher (weird for me to say sicne I come from a former mining village, my family for over 120 year have all been miners, i'm the first male not to be involved in it). Bush though really causes me hate, as the economist said 'The man never saw a spending plan he didn't like'. Abandoning Missile Treaties doesn't help wither, the illogical missile shield, ICBM attacks from russia are unlikely, what are more likely are terrorist devices and dirty bombs. Bush has also exacerbated that situation with his wars and unilateral action, Clinton to his credit was contasntly trying to bring peace to Palestine and facilitate some kind of deal, he cam,e close too. Bush is a poor shadow, funding israel blindly and so on. I could go on but I really hate the guy.
I think that's about it, I will chime in with other things when I see them.
Post by: Colonel32 on July 17, 2004, 12:17:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Death penalty - needs to be abolished. now wait, hear me out. Death penalty costs on average 5 mil to the tax payers due to the appeals process. Keeping them in prison costs an average of 1 million to the taxpayer. its much cheaper to keep them in jail. and there are much worse punishments than death. like torture. we need to teach people to fear our justice systems. we need to stop using taxpayer money to make jails so nice they are almost better then some people's homes. this is supposed to be a punishment, and free internet access, free medical care, no taxes, no costs, free food, tv does not qualify as a punishment. |
I agree, I also don't think it's a deterrent. I have no moral qualms about capital punishment I just don't think it works. Until the state does away with these fancy drug cocktails and parties I wouldn't even consider it as effective.
Post by: nemt on July 17, 2004, 07:59:00 AM
| QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Jul 17 2004, 05:17 AM) |
| I agree, I also don't think it's a deterrent. I have no moral qualms about capital punishment I just don't think it works. Until the state does away with these fancy drug cocktails and parties I wouldn't even consider it as effective. |
The death penalty isn't supposed to deter anyone, it's supposed to protect people who are able to get by day to day without going on a murder spree. By removing the criminal from society, you nullify to risk of him or her hurting anyone else, including other prisoners.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 19, 2004, 01:48:00 AM
If a criminal has the choice between public humiliation, poverty, and social shunning, hey, prison sounds like a good alternative. "Now, how to get there?"
Post by: melon on July 19, 2004, 03:19:00 AM
I agree with coneol, we should introduce schemes in which prisoners clean up waste land, or pick litter off the street, something usefull to society whilst degrading to the prisoner you could make them wear bright pink outfits, which you may laugh at, but it would degrade them.
On cushy jails we have a couple of high profile prisoners who were doing life sentances (as in the rest of their life, not the normal 20yrs), and they had tv's and ps2's in their private cell! Its crazy that people working hard cant afford luxeries that are given to some inmates.
Post by: melon on July 20, 2004, 05:17:00 AM
I understand your point. Im not proud of this, but my cousin has recently done a short stretch (6 months), and he was bragging about it at a family party as if it was cool, but he said he would never want to do it again.
Thats just him, it may be different in the USA or for other people in my country.
So actually i was basing my assumption on one person which isnt the best.
Post by: beaumac on July 21, 2004, 01:38:00 PM
To answer your original post. It is because if you ever try to step through a right-wing position on a particular issue, you will find with greater than 90% certainty that there is no logic or factual evidence to support it. It is almost always based on emotion and/or ideology. That is why conservatives are so quick to change the subject, make personal attacks or other fallacious arguments Once you realize this you will stop wasting your time trying to convince them they are wrong because you cant argue against ideology.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 21, 2004, 03:43:00 PM
I can't stand it when people say an entire political party is incapable of having a straight, logical opinion. There are two types of people who say that...
The ultra-left
and
The ultra-right
Both are useless.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 21, 2004, 03:45:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 21, 2004, 05:49:00 PM
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 21, 2004, 06:27:00 PM
and i love how you provide a liberal editorial site as "proof" to back up what you say. really helps out your credibility (rolls eyes)
"Rape cannot be used as an EXCUSE? If a woman is forcibly impregnated, why should she be continually forced through pregnancy and then into life as a single parent with a child she very likely cannot financially (or mentally) support?"
as was said before, this is a place to post your opinions, NOT attack people....but anywho, thats what i said. now some of the times its not the womans fault, but sometimes you have to ask what the woman was doing in a dark alley at 12:00am. okay, thats a little extreme, but you get the jist. and besides, i believe life begins at conception. and before you say anything on that, id like to see you prove otherwise, WITHOUT FLAMING. and i also cant prove it does. thats just what i believe. there is no possible way to prove either belief. you people seem to think that flaming is a great way to back up an arguement...
"A war may have been necessary, but not THIS war. This war was not formed with humanitarian goals in mind, and it shows."
hmmm, can you prove this? didn't think so.
and anywho, you repeated exactly what i said, minus the first sentence.
and to correct my original post - there is no way to prove that he did or didn't have womd. so all you liberals stop claiming that 100% he did NOT have them, and all you conservatives stop claiming 100% he DID have them. there is no proof beyond circumstantial evidence that he did or didn't have them. and most of the circumstantial evidence points towards him having them, but they are easily worked around to mean something else. im inclined to belive that if he did have nukes (ones recently produced, not leftovers) then we would have found more than we have.
"It's easy to believe this, and yes, affirmative action is essentially discriminatory. However, the idea was formed in response to public racism (yes, it does exist). For society to advance in tolerance it will have to be faded out."
you would be stupid to belive that public racism doesn't exist. but it is still discriminatory against whites, and since congress is not supposed to make any law discriminating against race, this is unconstitutional.
"Such a program would truly change life in many ways for many people. Rural families often rely on labor from their children. Many people believe being an only child has a psychological effect, whether or not thats true I can't say. Halting immigration would have to occur as well, and population will in all likeliness still increase."
i can really see both sides of this issue. this is not something i really believe in strongly either way.
"You pay for your email.. through your ISP (or advertising, if you use a web service like hotmail)."
you pay $10-$15 a month for bandwidth, all your email accounts, and web space? i think not. spam is paying for some of this, although not all of it. sorry, i realize now i made it seem like i thought spam payed for all the email, but they dont. just some of it.
"It's an interesting idea, but unfortunately theres just too much room for abuse (on all sides). If a prisoner refuses to work, what then? If a prisoner continues to harm other inmates, what should happen to him? If he kills a prison guard?"
yeah...thats a situation i didn't think of. i suppose we should keep the death penalty in reserve as a last resort. when they refuse to work, or kill/injure in prison, then you kill them. though i suppose lack of work/killing/injuring would drop if security wasnt so lax, and prisons wernt so comfortable.
"Jail isn't just punishment, it's also rehabilitation."
yes, playstation 2's, television, and internet access (all free) really help you to rehabilitate.
"You've offered no support, and shown your religious bias. That paragraph is easily discarded."
so is any other paragraph saying otherwise. its all opinion, and religous/political biasness.
"It's our environment too..."
like i said, its an opinion. what i really hate is the radicals. who want to save some stupid owl and let people go homeless.
"You appreciate a willingness to break international law and betray international authority, but praise zero tolerance for those who break national law? (see below)"
i really have a hard time seeing the UN as any kind of authority figure.
"Democracy works? When a president is elected without majority consent, democracy fails.
What leads you to believe the US is the most successful nation ever? We aren't the biggest, our economy isn't leading the world, our social programs are lacking. Is this a horrible country? Of course not. However, you also have to recognize that some of our "success" comes at the expense of others."
proof please? all you say is its horrible, its bad, but no proof. not even examples.
ill post links for why gay marriage is bad tomorrow....storming really bad here, dont want to fry my modem like i did b4...
Post by: gcskate27 on July 21, 2004, 07:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (Dark_Link2135 @ Jul 21 2004, 06:30 PM) |
| and i love how you provide a liberal editorial site as "proof" to back up what you say. really helps out your credibility (rolls eyes) |
dark in another thread after colonel called him on doing the same thing...
| QUOTE |
| id like to see you find an article that is NOT an editorial. any political artical is going to be a biased editorial slant on the issue. |
| QUOTE |
| i have seen very few liberals on this forum alone that have been able to provide tangible facts, unless you call flaming and attacking tangible facts, to back up their arguements. |
you go on and on about people flaming you, when they are often not... are you just really so insecure as to think everytime someone questions your beliefs that it is a personal attack? all you do is go on about how liberals put forth no proof and only flame, yet all you do is put forth no proof and complain about flaming (which is often imaginary)...
| QUOTE |
| but anywho, thats what i said. now some of the times its not the womans fault, but sometimes you have to ask what the woman was doing in a dark alley at 12:00am. okay, thats a little extreme, but you get the jist. |
there is no excuse for rape, it is a violation of another person... it doesnt matter what the girl was wearing or doing, it is still wrong and it would be extremely unjust on the victim to make her carry the child of her attacker...
| QUOTE |
| yes, playstation 2's, television, and internet access (all free) really help you to rehabilitate. |
while i agree that the line should be drawn more clearly, a lot of these can be used in the rehabilitation process... the internet can be used to educate and inform the convict of the outside world... as can the televsion... the ps2 has no real value but having prisons being complete labor camps with nothing to better the individual would be a waste of time... sure youd get free labor, but in the end youd have the same individual on the street...
| QUOTE |
| who want to save some stupid owl and let people go homeless. |
so people come before land and animals always? is your view a complete man vs nature?
| QUOTE |
| ill post links for why gay marriage is bad tomorrow |
yet again, anything youd post would be an editorial chock full of bias and religious rhetoric... so therefore, according to yourself (at least some of the time), not proof of anything...
Post by: melon on July 22, 2004, 02:23:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| now some of the times its not the womans fault, but sometimes you have to ask what the woman was doing in a dark alley at 12:00am |
Your language shows your true feelings on this subject. You say only "some of the time" its not the womans fault. This incuates that in the majority of rapes it is the womans fault. When you question what she was doing in a dark alley at midnight are you honestly saying that on occasion women go out to be raped? Is it meant to be fun to them?
How would you like it if you had been to one of your friends house having a few beers and watching a vid or something. Then on the way home a big bloke pulls a knife on you and drags you down an alleyway. He throws you on the floor beats you around a bit then tears your clothes off. Think about what would be going through your mind! After he is finished buggering you up your ass he leaves you laying there, a bloody mess.
Im sorry for being graphic but im trying to show rape is NEVER enjoyable.
My girlfriend has told me she would rather die than be raped.
And your saying well what was she doing walking down the street?
You might as well say she was acting like a slapper and deserved it!
Then imagine if a woman got pregnant through rape and was forced to have the baby. A lot of women would commit suicide rather than go through with it.
Imagine if she is single and has to bring up the baby by herself. Every day she is going to be reminded of the one day she wants to forget.
Imagine if she is married or has a partner, when the baby comes do you think her husband/partner could love that child? All the hate they feel towards the rapist would be foccused towards the baby.
Rapists deserve life, in this country they have to keep them in seperate sections in prison because every other prisoner wants to kill them.
How would you feel if your mum got raped? She probably deserved it for walking down a road late at night (your logic).
By your logic when it is dark women should stay indoors because if anything happens to them its there fault. That sounds like the Taliban.
What happened to land of the free?
Does that not count for women when it goes dark?
Post by: gcskate27 on July 22, 2004, 12:00:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| i think YOU are the one insecure in your beliefs that you cant have anyone saying otherwise. why else would you come to a thread to challenge my beliefs |
i have no problem with people questioning my beliefs, but i will argue with said person afterwards... in a thread designed to have people state their opinions, people are going to argue about their stances...
as for the flaming, you come out and the first thing you say is about how noone answers with fact, they just flame... you state this before anyone has even commented on your post as a sort of precaution and i find that unnec... just because they argue, that is not flaming... its all in how its handled...
the "childish and ignorant" comment i feel was just... one of your points against gay marraige was that its "gross"... pretty damn childish if you ask me... another was that straight people wont want to get married because its not special anymore... pretty damn ignorant if you as me... i didnt have time to properly respond because i had to go to work but a slew of others came and did so for me...
| QUOTE |
| if you would actually read the thread, you would see i wasnt talking about colonel32 |
my point was that he called you on using editorials as "proof"... i doubt his reply was to the 'gay penguin' article...
im assuming he meant this, your proof as to how straight people are being discriminated against in the gay marraige issue...| QUOTE |
| and its not unjust to kill the kid? no, not at all! kill the suckers, let em die! |
well this is where people stances on abortion come into it... a lot of people would say that it is alright to have an abortion in that instance as well as several others... you yourself said abortion is ok if the mother is in danger of losing her life... well its more figurative and flowery but would she not be "losing her life" being forced to deal with her attack every day?
| QUOTE |
| yes. people come before land and animals. end of story. duh. which do you think is more important? i think ill keep some owl alive, and screw the people who are dying on the street that need homes. they dont matter. |
i think nature is quite important and your example is a bit farfetched... when did anyone ever throw people out of their homes for another species... more often than not its stopping further development, which i find is generally a good thing... there needs to be a slowdown in population growth and who the fuck needs another stripmall?
| QUOTE |
| find something on gay marriage that is NOT an "editorial chock full of bias and religious rhetoric" |
you wont be able to find anything on gay marraige because the bible thumpers will just be stating that its against gods way and the like... there is not one good reason why gay couples shouldnt be allowed to get married... and most people have no problems with civil unions, so why the term marraige? its arbitrary...
| QUOTE |
| so what you are saying is "kill the kid" |
| QUOTE |
| no...i did not say that. |
these were put here to show that you dont like people putting words into your mouth, yet you do the same back to them...
| QUOTE |
| "How would you feel if your mum got raped? She probably deserved it for walking down a road late at night (your logic)." if she was stupid enough to put herself in a situation like i described, id disown her. but she isnt stupid. and where did you get the idea that i thought the woman deserved it? once again, you are assuming far too much. they dont deserve it, but there is a problem with them when they are in a dark ally at midnight. no, they dont deserve it, but i feel very little pity for them all the same. |
this is both laughable and sad... if you question what a woman is doing in an alley before she got raped, that is akin to saying she shares the blame, to whatever degree, with the attacker... hense "she deserved it"... now this may not be what you meant, but it is what you implied... as for disowning you mother because she was raped... thats just pathetic...
| QUOTE |
| where did you get the idea that i thought rape was enjoyable for the victim? |
perhaps it was from you statement that it was sometimes "deserved"...
*side note: learn how to quote properly, makes the posts much easier to read...
Post by: melon on July 22, 2004, 02:22:00 PM
Post by: gcskate27 on July 23, 2004, 11:23:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 24, 2004, 02:50:00 AM
You dont have a clue what rape does to a woman!
Post by: gcskate27 on July 24, 2004, 04:44:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| hmmm...perhaps because what i said is truth? there have only been a few people who replied to my posts with honest opinion, facts, and backbone. i dont believe you were one of them. |
you are trying to discredit people before they start their argument, which is very immature and quite transparant...
you quite often respond to someone by asking them to point out where you definately, 100% said something... in these situations, ie online forums, the person is left to infer what you meant through your statements if they are not 100% expressed... yet you use that "100% proof" as a way to "discredit" their argument... i would hope that you know what you are implying in your posts: i at least give you that much credit... if you do, and you continue these childish responses, than you are a sad individual... if you dont, why the fuck does anyone waste time talking to you, internet or otherwise?
| QUOTE |
ah, so you dont wouldnt be disgusted if some fag would be "buggering you up your ass?" hmm, you wouldnt happen to be a little....crooked, shall we say? |
everyone raise thier hand if they think this is a mature way to respond to my argument... no one? well thats what id expect... im not gay, bi or whatever... but feel free to call me what you will, i dont mind... hmmm why did i call you childish again?
I do not participate in homosexual acts, but I also do not discriinate against those that do I have absolutely, 100% no problem with gay people call me any name youd like, my beliefs wont change J
| QUOTE |
| yes, thats because its happened already in denmark. i do believe i mentioned this, or did you have your head shoved too far up your ass to read? |
so straight couples in denmark refuse to get married because gay people now have the right? link please? perhaps another editorial? yet again-
| QUOTE |
| ah yes, i seem to remember you saying something similar to this before. and we all know that every time a mother looks at her kid she had from a rapist, the first thing that enters her mind is "i got raped" because there is just sooooo many studies out there saying this... |
and where are the studies saying that women forced to have and raise children concieved through rape are perfectly well adjusted, as well as their kids?
| QUOTE |
| even figuratively, the way you mean, that would be a lot more important then killing an unborn baby. oh yes, screw the kids, kill 'em all i say, can't have people feeling bad... |
youre religious right? so whats your problem with this? the unborn child would go back to heaven and the murderous bastards would be sent to hell... judge not that ye be not judged...
in specific instance i have abs no problem with abortion... in fact, the only instance where i do have a problem with it is when it is used anywhere near regularly as birth control...
| QUOTE |
| when they want to save some stupid animal when people would clearly benefit from ignoring it. and where exactly did i mention this "stripmall?" |
i never said you said anything about a stripmall, and that does not discredit anything i have said*(see above arguemnt)... and why exactly should people come before another species?
| QUOTE |
| look, im sorry to make you look stupid like this |
i would love to see you make me look stupid... hasnt happened yet... but youre doing a great job with yourself... keep it up...
| QUOTE |
| women need to take preventative measures against the creeps who would rape her. |
and whos to say they dont? women do not want to be raped... ever... although i do think people should be a little more careful in everyday life, rape is not something that blame can be shifted from... in a case of rape you cannot say "she had it coming"... this really shows you failing logic...
i assume you are but a child and cannot see the errors in your thought process... your pride makes you blind to facts, rationale or whatever that should persuade a rational person... i feel sorry for you, i genuinely do...
i do eagerly await your response though... i enjoy the "logic" you use to make me "look stupid"... its quite entertainining... nothing quite like having a "battle of the wits" with a person such as yourself...
Post by: gronne on July 24, 2004, 06:04:00 AM
| QUOTE (Dark_Link2135 @ Jul 24 2004, 03:58 AM) |
| when they want to save some stupid animal when people would clearly benefit from ignoring it. |
What's your stance on all multi billionairs? Wouldn't it be better if their money were spread around to the homeless people? But oh I see, you consider them to be animals, so I guess they don't fit.
When I read what people like you write I honestly sit for about five minutes and TRULY try to understand how this person can think so much different from me. Sometimes I understand, but dissagree. But in your case I just CAN'T make it out.
When people makes statements against homosexuals I honestly think it's another form of racism. It's not like black people can help they're black(and they shouldn't), and it's not like homosexuals can help being homosexuals(and they shouldn't either). People like you make their hard situation harder. Try to think how you'd feel if you were gay and someone calls you disgusting.
The most egoistic people I meet are often christian(NOT all), and I can't see how they claim to be so moral when that's what they lack the most.
I CANNOT understand how people can be so cruel to one another.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 25, 2004, 02:27:00 PM
im through arguing with you...
but i will leave with my first and only flame: you are a moron, perhaps the largest ive 'met' on these boards...
Post by: gcskate27 on July 25, 2004, 02:52:00 PM
Post by: ZeroDown on July 26, 2004, 12:54:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| homosexuality is a CHOICE. take it from an evolutionary standpoint: if evolution were true, that means you would have a natural selection to go along with it, evolution uses that as part of an explanation. and since there is no benefit to being gay (you cannot reproduce) then the gene carrying the gay tendency would have died out. LOL - and i cant imagine how id feel if i were gay, probably dead since i would kill myself before i turned gay. |
What evidence do you have to prove that homosexuality is indeed a choice? Have you asked any if they had a choice in the choosing of their sexual preference? Did you have a choice in your sexual preference? Let's not look at it from an evolutionary standpoint considering you believe humans are superior to animals. Animals have sex primarily to reproduce, humans however, do not. Do you honestly say to yourself when see a very attractive female, "Boy I sure would like to mate with her and raise a child"? I sincerely hope not. See we need to look at it at a social point of view because we truely are NOT having sex for just reproduction reasons. Because of this homosexuality is fine in my opinion. It is not hurting our population, it is doing just fine. I'm going to say with no doubt in my mind the human race is not ending because some how we aren't producing enough children.
And can you see our problem with speaking our opinions to you with that last sentence stated by you in the quote? You'd kill yourself before you would turn gay is a pretty bad reflection on your opinion on homosexuality and very extreme.
| QUOTE |
| so now homosexuality is moral? is this really what people are beginning to think...sad. |
Is it more moral to be straight? If so, why? The only difference between a homosexual couple and a straight one is that the straight one can have a child through birth. The homosexual couple can aquire a child through legal terms in some states and raise a child good or bad in reflection of their own parenting skills just like any straight couple would. Now if you believe that the child is going to have problems growing up with two fathers or two mothers, then you would be correct depending on where the couple lives because some areas are more open than others and accept it as a social norm. That is the problem we are trying to fix (opinion). If we make it a social norm to be homosexual and homosexual and have children, then there wouldn't be a problem here at all. Now if you believe that would pose a problem please tell me how (I'm not being sarcastic). But before you state anything on marriage in Denmark and Europe then let me state I read something on the same topic in Newsweek (Some issue in May or June I believe). But they indicated that homosexual marriages rarely affected the decline. Couples living together but unmarried were interviewed and they did not mind the gay marriages at all, it was DEVORCE that was unsettling to the straight couples. Devorce is so costly and such a hassle that more and more people are disliking the idea of marriage and therfore not getting married. The study showed that gay marriages were HELPING the marriage statistics rather than hurting them. Seeing this, I know your stance on gay marriage. But don't you think devorce is more of a threat to marriage than gay marriage? One destroys it, the other promotes it. And why has marriage become more about between 'a man and a women' rather than love? Do you think love is more importance to a marriage or it being just between a man and a women?
| QUOTE |
| now ill try to reason with gcskate....but it will be hard, like i said, he is hard to reason with... |
Do you believe you are less difficult to reason with considering you would kill yourself before you would turn gay?
| QUOTE |
| so quick to assume arnt you? well i for one raise my hand. its very interesting the way you accuse me of being "childish" for calling you names, yet at almost every single post you have made, you call me either "childish" "ignorant" and "stupid" i notice you made no mention of gays being gross.....does that mean you think they are? if so, you are quite "childish" according you your logic. the reason i said that, was because you seemed to think you were just so much more mature than everyone else, and that gay sex was not gross. so i assumed, as the only other option...that you thought it was not gross, and you would not be disgusted if you had gay sex....and if you were not disgusted, what other feeling could you have for it but enjoyment? |
Though he has insulted you, most were in response to you calling homosexual activity 'gross'. Now that is your opinion but do you believe that is the most mature way to express it? And I apologize if I didn't read this correctly, but I fail to understand the part stating that skate made no mention of gays being gross and then questioning that he thinks they are thus he is too childish. How would he think it was 'gross' considering he's arguement against it being 'gross' from before. And aside from that you then indicate that he may in fact enjoy it since he stated he did not find it 'gross'. Again I'm sorry if I misread anything, just clear it up for me if I have please.
Now you said that skate believed he was more mature 'than everyone else' which is not true. At most he believes to be more mature than you from what he has stated so far in his responses.
Another question is that you assumed that as the only other option from him not finding gay sex 'gross' is that he would enjoy it. How is that possible? If you are straight and you would find it unpleasant or 'gross' he would not enjoy the act upon him just the same. We are not discussing the feelings you get FROM gay sex, it's our feelings TOWARDS it. And if we are discussing matters on only two options, it wouldn't be that he would find it enjoyable for two men to have sex, it would be he would find it to be 'not gross' or 'acceptance'.
| QUOTE |
but of course, a womans comfort is far more important then an infants life. |
An infant is a born child. A fetus is much different.
| QUOTE |
do you actually think Christians want people to be sent to hell? |
I actually do believe this for some of the Christians. I've met some who since they spent their lives devoted to thier faith and have been taught of heaven and hell, they want the none believers to go to hell proving them that their religion is right. The hypothetical girl that got raped because she walked too late at night you had less pity for correct? The same could be said for people ignoring religious text. If you have been told what was going to happen isn't it part of your fault? So some christians would see it as part of the nonebelievers fault and as they see it as part of their fault, their punishment was acceptable.
| QUOTE |
| well, thats your opinion, and as you have already said, you are not under any circumstances going to change your opnioin. and yet you bash bush because he will not change his. hmmm..... |
It's not all the way bashing at times, it's failure to see the other sides stance on the subject. We all are guilty of that link even you.
| QUOTE |
| wow...you really do have your head shoved up your ass, dont you? warning, extra large ego onboard...... ive said stupid things yes, but you insist on making yourself look like a moron by claiming you havnt..... so now, if someone doesn't agree with you, that makes them stupid? so you are the all knowing genie with all the answers. all the secrets of the world are open to you. you are always right. give me a break. |
I'm sorry but I haven't read any part that reflects skate of having a large ego. Him not saying that he's said stupid things does not qualify anyone for aroggance. I also haven't read anywhere that skate thinks anyone is stupid for not sharing his opinions. If he is, however, a genie I wish for some lesbian action in my bedroom. Which hopefully you don't own any lesbian porn or even accept porn of that nature link because you would find that hypercritical correct?
| QUOTE |
| i said i would have very little pity for her, if she had done nothing to prevent it. end of story. you really love to put words in my mouth, dont you? no matter, its easily discredited. |
As with my religious comparison, if you gave very little pity towards her for knowing this would have happened, there is a reason your pity for her went down. Now we don't know your reason, we can only ASSUME that you meant because she had knowledge on how to prevent this, she could have prevented it. Thus she had it coming. If this is not the reason please correct us, I don't like assuming things.
And you have been putting words in skates mouth just as he has with you in these posts.
| QUOTE |
| you on the other hand, think you are god and can make no mistakes and are 100% right. easy to see from how you post. |
Again I have not read where skate states he believes he is always right and to the more extreme, that he is in fact, the Creator. But skate if you read this and you are God...I would really....really....really like those lesbians. And if I can push it, a new video camera....and some whips, I like it kinky.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 26, 2004, 02:18:00 AM
Post by: melon on July 26, 2004, 02:24:00 AM
Post by: Ween311 on July 26, 2004, 06:32:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I don't think this thread will last very long. Cainedna tried this before and hardly anybody responded. I think it is because most people don't really know the reasons that they believe or stand for something. They just like to argue. |
Hate to say, "I told you so", but.....
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 26, 2004, 01:18:00 PM
| QUOTE (ZeroDown @ Jul 26 2004, 08:57 AM) |
| Again I have not read where skate states he believes he is always right and to the more extreme, that he is in fact, the Creator. But skate if you read this and you are God...I would really....really....really like those lesbians. And if I can push it, a new video camera....and some whips, I like it kinky. |
| QUOTE |
| What evidence do you have to prove that homosexuality is indeed a choice? |
What evidence do you have to prove that homosexuality is not a choice?
end of story. it really comes down to you either believe it one way or the other.
and you seem to be totally discrediting any valid point i make. i personally do not believe evolution is true, but a lot of people do, so i figured that was a good way to reason with it.
another thing it really comes down to...and i really hate to say this because i know all of you will definitely bash me for this, but it also comes down to whether you believe in the Bible. Now, thats not my only reason i think it is a choice, but it is a major one. you really cant prove that homosexuality is a choice wihtout knowing that everyone here believes the Bible is correct. you could use reason, and other articles beside the Bible, but it is extremely hard to do so. the only thing i can say, and this is a horribly weak piece of logic, is that no part of the Bible has ever been proven to be wrong, while many parts have been proven to be correct. like i said, very weak.
| QUOTE |
| And can you see our problem with speaking our opinions to you with that last sentence stated by you in the quote? You'd kill yourself before you would turn gay is a pretty bad reflection on your opinion on homosexuality and very extreme. |
id say it is a pretty good reflection on my opinions on gays.
| QUOTE |
| Is it more moral to be straight? If so, why? The only difference between a homosexual couple and a straight one is that the straight one can have a child through birth. The homosexual couple can aquire a child through legal terms in some states and raise a child good or bad in reflection of their own parenting skills just like any straight couple would. Now if you believe that the child is going to have problems growing up with two fathers or two mothers, then you would be correct depending on where the couple lives because some areas are more open than others and accept it as a social norm. That is the problem we are trying to fix (opinion). If we make it a social norm to be homosexual and homosexual and have children, then there wouldn't be a problem here at all. Now if you believe that would pose a problem please tell me how (I'm not being sarcastic). But before you state anything on marriage in Denmark and Europe then let me state I read something on the same topic in Newsweek (Some issue in May or June I believe). But they indicated that homosexual marriages rarely affected the decline. Couples living together but unmarried were interviewed and they did not mind the gay marriages at all, it was DEVORCE that was unsettling to the straight couples. Devorce is so costly and such a hassle that more and more people are disliking the idea of marriage and therfore not getting married. The study showed that gay marriages were HELPING the marriage statistics rather than hurting them. Seeing this, I know your stance on gay marriage. But don't you think devorce is more of a threat to marriage than gay marriage? One destroys it, the other promotes it. And why has marriage become more about between 'a man and a women' rather than love? Do you think love is more importance to a marriage or it being just between a man and a women? |
look, to start off, morality really comes down to opinions. this country was founded on certain morals, and i believe we should keep to them. Thomas Jefferson remarked (im pretty sure it was him) that the Constitution of the United States of America would only work for a country who believed in God as their leader. back in those days, crime was less, morality was higher (by their standards of morality, obviously, because, yes, as you say, peoples view of morality does change), and now, crime has increased, morality decreased. what we have had to do is almost totally rework the constitution in an attempt to keep it as valid for us. that doesnt really fit together (last sentence) but i couldnt think of better wording for it. but does that make something moral? because people no longer view something as immoral, should that make it moral? suppose people start thinking murder is moral? if you dont like someone, should you kill them, and that be moral? okay, yes, thats off-topic now, but you did go into a lot of discussion on morality in that paragraph.
Also, their is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that a child is raised just as well by homosexual parents as heterosexual parents. There is, however, plenty of documentation that one father and one mother is the best way for a child to grow up. Search for them. If you want me to post some links here, just tell me and I'll be glad to. And it is not just because of social norms. That is definitely part of it, but not all of it. the first link i posted was to prove marriage was on the decline, which gcskate indicated he doubted. the second, was to give a side of the issue saying homosexuality was part of the cause. there is really no way to see what is the actual cause, because there are very good points on both sides of the arguement, but obviously im going to believe homosexuality is the cause, just as you are obviously going to believe it is not.
there are a lot of assumptions in your post, but i wont mention them since i do the same thing a lot of the time without realizing it
| QUOTE |
| Do you believe you are less difficult to reason with considering you would kill yourself before you would turn gay? |
why does this make it hard to reason with me? i really cannot see the correlation here. yes, i can be difficult to reason with. but so can you. so can gcskate, but he wont admit this. -
im not even going to reply to him, now all he is doing is repeating the same thing over, with a bit of new flaming mixed in. ive pretty much said all i want to, but if he comes up with something new, ill reply.
| QUOTE |
| Though he has insulted you, most were in response to you calling homosexual activity 'gross'. Now that is your opinion but do you believe that is the most mature way to express it? And I apologize if I didn't read this correctly, but I fail to understand the part stating that skate made no mention of gays being gross and then questioning that he thinks they are thus he is too childish. How would he think it was 'gross' considering he's arguement against it being 'gross' from before. And aside from that you then indicate that he may in fact enjoy it since he stated he did not find it 'gross'. Again I'm sorry if I misread anything, just clear it up for me if I have please. |
if you can find a better word for me then gross, please tell me. disgusting perhaps? or maybe "vile" thats a word that is used a lot less. no matter how i would have phrased it, skate would have thought it "childish"
what happened:
skate said that i was childish because i called homosexuality "gross" he seemed to think he was much more mature then me, and therefore not childish. so logic would follow that he does not think homosexuality is "gross"
i was getting irritated by then so i flamed him. its nothing less then most of you have done. what i meant was, since he didn't find it gross, maybe he found it "interesting" since what else would he think about it if it was not gross? and i believe a lot of people on here in support of homosexuality find homosexuality "gross" and yet gcskate does not think they are "childish" as he puts it. perhaps because they think like he does. this is what i meant when he thinks he is right, and anyone who thinks differently then he does is childish. throughout many of his posts he implied this, and this is what i meant. i really cant point out where he came right out and said this, but if you read through a lot of his posts on this thread you can see this.
| QUOTE |
| An infant is a born child. A fetus is much different. |
they both are living beings. i personally believe life begins at conception.
and even if you dont believe this, do you know when life enters a fetus, and when it would stop being a lifeless hunk of flesh? why take the chance?
| QUOTE |
| I actually do believe this for some of the Christians. I've met some who since they spent their lives devoted to thier faith and have been taught of heaven and hell, they want the none believers to go to hell proving them that their religion is right. The hypothetical girl that got raped because she walked too late at night you had less pity for correct? The same could be said for people ignoring religious text. If you have been told what was going to happen isn't it part of your fault? So some christians would see it as part of the nonebelievers fault and as they see it as part of their fault, their punishment was acceptable. |
i really cant understand what you are trying to say here, its a little unclear, i apologize. the part i didnt get was "you have been told what was going to happen, isnt it part of your fault" what is the thing that is going to happen? i certaintly dont want to see anyone go to hell. i wouldnt even want to see gcskate go to hell, and he certaintly is not my favorite person. so no, i would not like to see anyone go to hell. but please rephrase this so that i might be able to respond to it.
| QUOTE |
| It's not all the way bashing at times, it's failure to see the other sides stance on the subject. We all are guilty of that link even you. |
yes, and i have admitted this. gcskate, however, indicated that he saw the other side, and i was blind to it. i can see the other side, and understand why they think the way they do. but i do not think any less of them because they think this way. i do not think they are idiots or morons.
| QUOTE |
| I'm sorry but I haven't read any part that reflects skate of having a large ego. Him not saying that he's said stupid things does not qualify anyone for aroggance. I also haven't read anywhere that skate thinks anyone is stupid for not sharing his opinions. If he is, however, a genie I wish for some lesbian action in my bedroom. Which hopefully you don't own any lesbian porn or even accept porn of that nature link because you would find that hypercritical correct? |
he never came right out and said this. he implied it, and when i mentioned it, he did not deny it. and you are correct, i aviod pornagraphy whenever possible. however, i do not find his picture "pornography" just disturbing. i really dont think anything besides pictures of naked people, and similar is pornography. but hey, those girls were hot
and i know i have indicated this, but i do not want gay people to go to hell, or for them all to die. just wanted to clear that matter up.
| QUOTE |
| As with my religious comparison, if you gave very little pity towards her for knowing this would have happened, there is a reason your pity for her went down. Now we don't know your reason, we can only ASSUME that you meant because she had knowledge on how to prevent this, she could have prevented it. Thus she had it coming. If this is not the reason please correct us, I don't like assuming things. And you have been putting words in skates mouth just as he has with you in these posts. |
nowhere near as much as he has. i can see where i inferred something he did not mean, but half the things he has said i have said, i cant see where he even got them.
i have less pity for her, because she didn't take much precaution. there is no way of knowing it would happen, but any sane woman should avoid places like that at night. just to clear that matter up
| QUOTE |
| Again I have not read where skate states he believes he is always right and to the more extreme, that he is in fact, the Creator. But skate if you read this and you are God...I would really....really....really like those lesbians. And if I can push it, a new video camera....and some whips, I like it kinky. |
again, he implied it. whether or not he meant this, i did mention it to him and he did not deny it.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 27, 2004, 03:20:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| What evidence do you have to prove that homosexuality is not a choice? end of story. it really comes down to you either believe it one way or the other. |
and thats where evidence comes in... homosexuality in animals... logic follows that what is true in other species will be true in others, and while the link does state that it doesnt fully explain human homosexuality, its a much better starting point than "they choose to do it"...
why the hell would anyone choose a life of constant torment?
| QUOTE |
| any valid point i make |
could you point these out? i must have missed these...
| QUOTE |
| i personally do not believe evolution is true, but a lot of people do |
see heres what gets me... intelligent people like to see proof that validate their beliefs... if you dont believe in evolution, what do you believe in? creationism?
| QUOTE |
| the only thing i can say, and this is a horribly weak piece of logic, is that no part of the Bible has ever been proven to be wrong, while many parts have been proven to be correct. |
it is almost inspiring to see someone admit thier logic is faulty...
you cannot 100% prove something to have never occured (except for you bullshit examples of orange shirts and such...)... do you believe that noah crammed 2 of every species on his ark? or do you adopt the more plausable view of it simply being a story of rebirth, not nec meaning to be accurate? if so, then whats to say that any of it is 100% accurate?
| QUOTE |
| id say it is a pretty good reflection on my opinions on gays. |
good lord here comes that childish comment again... would you rather dies than be black? female? what other types of people would you rather die before being?
| QUOTE |
| this country was founded on certain morals, and i believe we should keep to them. Thomas Jefferson remarked (im pretty sure it was him) that the Constitution of the United States of America would only work for a country who believed in God as their leader. |
using thomas jefferson, that gave me a little chuckle... thomas jefferson, a slave owner who cheated on his wife with a slave and had children out of wedlock...
maybe his example contributed to the decline of marraige in denmark...?
| QUOTE |
| suppose people start thinking murder is moral? if you dont like someone, should you kill them, and that be moral? |
1st, that would never happen... and 2nd, in the example you give, yes that would be moral if people thought murder was moral...
if a, then b...
| QUOTE |
| There is, however, plenty of documentation that one father and one mother is the best way for a child to grow up. |
yes please link away... try not to post just chirstian sites as they are not proof and quite blatantly slanted...
| QUOTE |
| the first link i posted was to prove marriage was on the decline, which gcskate indicated he doubted. |
i indicated that i doubted that marraige was on the decline because of the legality of gay marraige...
| QUOTE |
| i can be difficult to reason with. but so can you. so can gcskate, but he wont admit this. |
i will freely admit that i can be difficult to reason with, esp if the person trying to "reason" with me is shoving the bible in my face as proof and spouting off hateful nonsense...
| QUOTE |
| with a bit of new flaming mixed in |
i will state this again, except for the moron quote, i have never flamed you... i have never called you stupid, which you have claimed... the childish and ignorant post i have explained... i can explain them again if you need it to be... i called you childish because you fell that gays should not have equal rights, at least in part, because gay sex is "gross"... and to that you said that i would enjoy gay sex... THAT IS CHILDISH... i wnt go into the ignorant comment because im sure most people who read you posts can tell that for themselves...
*call that flaming and cry to your mom if you wish, its the truth and it certainly doesnt discredit my arguments...
| QUOTE |
| he seemed to think he was much more mature then me, and therefore not childish. |
i do think that i am more mature that you, and with good reason, as has been previously explained...
| QUOTE |
| anyone who thinks differently then he does is childish |
i dont think that anyone who thinks differently to me is childish, just you, as you have proven yourself to be...
| QUOTE |
| but half the things he has said i have said, i cant see where he even got them. |
they follow from the logic you put forth, im trying to show you how you are not seeing the whole picture...
| QUOTE |
| i have less pity for her, because she didn't take much precaution. there is no way of knowing it would happen, but any sane woman should avoid places like that at night. just to clear that matter up |
the majority of raped women are 'date raped'... not your hypothetical dark alley... should they know not to put themselves in that situation? are they even somewhat to blame?
| QUOTE |
| again, he implied it. whether or not he meant this, i did mention it to him and he did not deny it. |
i did not impy this at all... just because i do not agree with the majority of what you say does not indicate that i think that i am always right... its just that, in our arguments, you havent put forth ANYTHING that has shown me "the errors of my ways"... no proof or substatial argument whatsoever...
and ignoring a comment like that hardly qualifies it as proof of agreement...
look, its all well and good that youre a "good christian", but dont dismiss others arguments... listen, question, and then question your beliefs... youll be a much better person than a blind faith sheep...
AND FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME, just because im arguing against you does not mean im flaming you... point out where i have flamed you, specific instances...
good day...
Post by: melon on July 27, 2004, 03:57:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| i personally do not believe evolution is true |
You have to be joking!
It has been proven
There is evidence.
| QUOTE |
| is that no part of the Bible has ever been proven to be wrong |
So you belive in Adam and Eve?
They totally contradict evolution WHICH HAS BEEN PROVEN!!!!
Im sorry but only idiots or totally brainwashed drones dont.
The bible is full of contradictions. I was always in trouble in Religous education in school. I used to argue with the teacher about the contradictions untill she didnt have anymore arguments and then i was sent to stand outside the classroom. The bible is full of shit.
Post by: melon on July 27, 2004, 06:22:00 AM
Do they go to the great zoo in the sky?
Or do they go to hell because it is likely they have murdered fellow animals to feed?
What makes humans special?
Im asking these questions seriously I would like you to answer them.
Post by: melon on July 27, 2004, 06:48:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| correctness in bible - think of how many times King David, or the Israelites, and their entire history has been mentioned in your history textbook. |
They were never mentioned in our textbooks.
You do realise America is the only western country I know of where Evolution is taught as a theory. Everywhere else it is taught as fact.
It does make you wonder how brainwashed with religion you are over there.
For contradictions my RE teacher told us that the only way to go to heaven was to shun financial reward in this life. The same lesson she taught us that god forgives all. Thats a contradiction. I dont know where these ideas came from in the bible and i dont really care because i was 9 years old.
Post by: gronne on July 27, 2004, 07:18:00 PM
).
Post by: thomes08 on July 27, 2004, 08:07:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: thomes08 on July 27, 2004, 08:10:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: gcskate27 on July 28, 2004, 01:25:00 AM
Post by: gronne on July 28, 2004, 05:31:00 AM
Yeah, this religious crazyness that's still killing all the time (eg. Iraq) MUST stop. Unfortunately the religious lunatics will go to the extreme to "prove" they're right. I assure you if someone had the ultimate answer to evolution a religious person would kill him before spread out. Had people know what "On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection" would affect people someone would've killed him for spreading the truth.
Post by: melon on July 28, 2004, 07:48:00 AM
Find a girl and get laid!
Post by: Mick Garvey on August 01, 2004, 12:20:00 AM
Post by: Colonel32 on August 01, 2004, 01:16:00 PM
Do any of you even know what a theory is. It's something that can be tested, and re-produce similiar results. Something that stands the test of time. There is not a single creationist theory, not one. The entire idea is based on whats wrong with evolution.