Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigTreesy
I'm not - but when somebody states "abortion isn't progressive" I want to know why. Especially when the same individual also claims to be against social welfare?
The US is the only so-called civilised country which has this issue. In the rest of the Western world, it's a non-issue.
seanchai
That's what the socialist want you to believe. They want you to believe that power and education rests solely in the hands of "the rich". It's what they do. It's how they operate it. In Venezuala the people bought into that and the government went in and stole private property from private citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrironknee
They want you to believe the lie so that you'll give them the power to take property and rights. It's what they do. Steal property and rights and with them, hope and dignity.
I believe that school makes complete fools of our young men, because they see and hear nothing of ordinary life there. -Petronius
Life is the real education. Skills and trade are also important, but what are those skills worth without ethics and values? What are they worth without Hustle or Experience? Skills and trade can be mentored by a parent or mastercraftsmen. It can be learned through books and application. There are ways. All you need is the will!
The mentality of "I can't afford school because I'm poor" is what keeps people poor. It's what makes drug addicts and alcoholics when a young man sees no way out of his entry-level job except for lighting up or boozing. He has no way out, not because he's poor but because he believes he has no way out. It isn't true until you believe it.
"As a man believes in his heart, so is he"- Proverbs.
You have the power.
Not true. One thing is true though. There will always be rich people and poor people. ALWAYS. No matter what laws you right or however you can micro-legislate. It's only an economic manifestion of survival of the fittest.Quote:
I don’t believe republicans in general are racists, they are elitists. I also don’t believe in affirmative action or reparations, because I agree that those, along with a good portion of welfare, do not encourage people to work hard to make something of themselves. That said, the richest people have an interest in keeping the poor down simply because it benefits their bottom line. If everyone was an entrepreneur, who would work for low wages to manufacture, sell, deliver and service what these “entrepreneurs” are getting rich on? It’s a simple matter of class struggle. Every penny more the worker makes is a penny less the owner makes.
There will always be competition for resources, but to say the rich have an interests in keeping "the poor down" is false. The rich have an interest in keeping rich.... and that's exactly why they are rich. They know how and what to do to get it and keep it. While the poor blame "The man" and take no action to improve their own lives, the rich work on their riches.
Abortion is murder, plain and simple. It does have tremendous moral implications but murder trumps whatever psychology you can through at it.Quote:
As far as progressives, how can progress ever be a bad thing? Abortion is a moral choice.
I don't see Christians out in taliban gear wacking women in the head for dressing provacatively. Christians wrote the very laws that allow for the very freedoms you enjoy. From pornography to rock concerts.Quote:
Religion is a choice. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say you are for less government because you don’t want industry regulations and social programs to cut profits and create taxes, but you want to regulate morality and control scientific advancement.
There are no forced conversions to Christianity. We worked that shit out centuries ago. Muslims are still doing it, though.
Christians wrote the constitution and the bill of rights, both of which strictly forbid religious restriction of behavior.
Enterprise has no limits in a moral and just society.Quote:
You are right, progressiveness has its limits. So does free enterprise.
That's why Muslim women in Middle eastern countries have so many rights, right?Quote:
And finally, you are right again to say that this country was founded on Christian ideals that helped to create the greatest country in the world. Keep also in mind that those same founders knew that these Christian ideals could just as well have been Hindu ideals, or Muslim ideals
They did not insist on "separation of church and state". That's a phrase coined in the 20th century by a bigoted and anti-semitic supreme court justice.Quote:
and that’s why they insisted on freedom of religion and a separation of church and state.
"Separation of Church and State" is not mentioned once in the constitution. Not ONCE.
Listen. You're the one who's allowed yourself to believe the liberal lies. That the individual is relatively powerless and at the mercy of the rich. I'm telling you. The minute you believe you are powerless in this country, is the minute you are.... and that's when they come after your rights and property. Just like in Russia, Venezuela and China. They believed the lie.Quote:
Oh, and by the way, don’t quote the Bible as reference material. It may have social and moral applications, but even then you have to sort through the fable telling to get to anything with substance. Teaching the bible, or any religion, to children usually only makes it less likely that they will look at things with an open mind when they get older. You are a perfect example. Unless, of course, you are simply using it like other conservatives to control the weak minded and are not a true believer.
I'm not calling you weak-minded. But at least consider the possibility that you are very powerful in determining your destiny. The constitution guarantees it.
JUST IN!
Here is a picture of TFan anf his homosexual lover relaxing in their pool after they re-enacted the 'squeeeeeeeeeeal like a pig' from Deliverence on some poor tourist in the woods.
They are taking a break before a big night out of beer drinking and cow tipping.
Now that you have been outed TFan- I hope that you will indeed support gay marrige.
PS. Loooooooooooove the lawn chairs! So chic!
Minds are like bars at weddings. They are best when they are open.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFan
While its true the actual phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution, the concept of it was frequently used by its authors. Thomas Jefferson quoting the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, wrote: "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
James Madison, the principal drafter of the Bill of Rights, wrote of "total separation of the church from the state". He also wrote "Strongly guarded . . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States," Madison also wrote, and he declared, "practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government as essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States" That the purpose of the establishment clauses was to keep religion and government separate is very well set forth in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which was originally authored by Thomas Jefferson, ansd served as one of Madison's inspirations for the Bill of Rights. It declares that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination as follows:
"no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities."
so, while that particular phrase is not in the Constitution, the original intention of the words actually used to separate Church and State can easily be gleaned. Keep this in mind too. Neither the word Jesus nor the word God is found in Constitution itself. Christianity is not mentioned anywhere in it, and proposals to do so were defeated at the Constitutional Conventions.
Since you are so big on the Christian Bible, you really should heed the words of your savior. Thats right, Jesus Christ is sometimes considered the inventor of the separation of church and state. His advice to his followers was "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." (Matthew 22:21)
FK
The following are actual exerpts from the most recent Republican Party Platforms:Quote:
Originally Posted by TFan
Republicans favor aggressive, proactive measures to ensure that no individual is discriminated against on the basis of race, national origin, gender, or other characteristics covered by our civil rights laws
(notice that sexual orientation is omitted)
We strongly support a Constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage, and we [oppose] forcing states to recognize other living arrangements as equivalent to marriage. The well-being of children is best accomplished [when] nurtured by their mother & father anchored by the bonds of marriage. We believe that legal recognition and the accompanying benefits afforded couples should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman which has historically been called marriage.
President Bush will also vigorously defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which was supported by both parties and passed by 85 votes in the Senate. This common sense law reaffirms the right of states not to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states
(This invalidates just for homosexuals the long established, well founded principal expressly set forth in the Constitution at Article IV Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.)
We affirm traditional military culture, and we affirm that homosexuality is incompatible with military service.
We support the traditional definition of “marriage” as the legal union of one man and one woman, and we believe that federal judges and bureaucrats should not force states to recognize other living arrangements as marriages. We do not believe sexual preference should be given special legal protection or standing in law.
Bush is a Texas Republican so the Texas Republican Party Platform can be read as a blueprint for his administration's policies. The following are actual excerpts from it.
“The Party supports the traditional definition of marriage as a God-ordained, legal and moral commitment only between a natural man and a natural woman, which is the foundational unit of a healthy society, and the Party opposes the assault on marriage by judicial activists. We call on the President, Congress, and the Texas Legislature to take immediate action to defend the sanctity of traditional marriage. We urge Congress to exercise authority under the United States Constitution, and pass legislation withholding jurisdiction from the Federal Courts in cases involving family law, especially any changes in the traditional definition of marriage. We further call on Congress to pass and the state legislatures to ratify a marriage amendment declaring that marriage in the United States shall consist and be recognized only as the union of a natural man and a natural woman. Neither the United States nor any state shall recognize or grant to any unmarried person the legal rights or status of a spouse. We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married. Texas families will be stronger because of the passage by Governor Perry and the 78th Texas Legislature of the ‘Defense of Marriage Act’, which denies recognition by Texas of homosexual ‘unions’ legitimized by other states or nations. ”
“The Party believes that the practice of sodomy tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases. Homosexual behavior is contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God, recognized by our country’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable ‘alternative’ lifestyle in our public education and policy, nor should ‘family’ be redefined to include homosexual ‘couples.’ We are opposed to any granting of special legal entitlements, recognition, or privileges including, but not limited to, marriage between persons of the same sex, custody of children by homosexuals, homosexual partner insurance or retirement benefits. We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values.”
“The Party opposes the legalization of sodomy. The Party demands Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.”
“We oppose mandatory open adoption and adoption of children by homosexuals.”
We oppose programs that advocate or legitimize pre-marital sexual activity, advocate condoms and birth control use by unmarried minors, advocate abortions, and condone homosexual, bisexual, and transgender acts and/or lifestyles, and elevate minors’ rights to make sexual and health care decisions equivalent to their parents.”
“The Party supports amendment of the Americans with Disabilities Act to exclude from its definition those persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress, thereby reducing abuse of the Act.”
Nonsense is being spoken, but its by Republicans or those who support them in ignorance of their stated principles.
FK
Quote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
Well speaking from the world's second wealthiest western country (second to Japan that is), trust me, the very mention of abortion here has people frothing at the mouth. We have had three referendums, countless supreme court cases, months and months of debate in the media and the issue is still as clear as mud.
People wil simply have to agree to disagree on this and respect each others positions. Debate on the morals of the subject is unproductive. The challenge of producing a legal remedy acceptable by both sides remains outstanding however.
"The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you've simply abdicated the responsibility to think." -William F BuckleyQuote:
Originally Posted by Felicia Katt
These are intelligent men. I don't put my confidence in what's implied. I put my confidence on what's committed and printed. It is clear the the founders, based on what's committed and printed, wanted NO LAWS with regard to religion. Meaning, if a judge wants to hang the ten commandments in his court room, he should be able to because forcing him to remove it because it's religious is an unconstitutional act.Quote:
While its true the actual phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution, the concept of it was frequently used by its authors. Thomas Jefferson quoting the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, wrote: "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."
Besides, the constitution wasn't drafted by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison alone.
These are intelligent men of respect. I'm positive that they would state, in print in the constitution, what their intent was. The words "intent" or "spirit of the law" are usually used by defense attorneys to weasel out of the law when their client is guilty as hell. They're weasel words in this case.Quote:
so, while that particular phrase is not in the Constitution, the original intention of the words actually used to separate Church and State can easily be gleaned.
These were men who did not manipulate their words. They said what they meant.
Read this closely. Article 1
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Intent committed and printed.
And?Quote:
Keep this in mind too. Neither the word Jesus nor the word God is found in Constitution itself. Christianity is not mentioned anywhere in it, and proposals to do so were defeated at the Constitutional Conventions.
Caeser's not here. Things which belong to our American government are things which belong to the people. We don't do emperors here, we are the government. Our founders have given US the basic human right of religious freedom AND freedom from religion.Quote:
Since you are so big on the Christian Bible, you really should heed the words of your savior. Thats right, Jesus Christ is sometimes considered the inventor of the separation of church and state. His advice to his followers was "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." (Matthew 22:21)
Thanks Felicia. I'm a fan of your work and I hope I didn't come across as rude or abrupt. I appreciate your respectful and intelligent reply.
I agree and wouldn't that be a beautiful thing. You know as well as I do, it doesn't happen. Laws that would stop abortion being accessable are obstacle but even more so are the droves of anti-abortion nuts standing outside clinics, making death threats, etc. (and on their off-days they go to the prison to support the death penalty :roll: ). People don't agree to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigTreesy
Presidents can be made on this ONE issue - and that's terrifying.
seanchai
Again, very effective arguments, but not 100% valid. Let me interject:
It's really not that simple. Generations of families in poverty have created a class of people that do not believe in their own ability to escape their social status without trying "easy" ways out (drugs, sports, entertainment, etc.). Just stating that they can if they believe would be like me telling you that if you really tried you could accept the fact that there is no god and only thousands of years of superstition has convinced people otherwise. It obviously goes against generations of inbreeding. All of the information is available, but the options are better for some than others. I never even implied that the options were not there; just that it wasn't as black and white as you suggest.Quote:
There are ways. All you need is the will!
The mentality of "I can't afford school because I'm poor" is what keeps people poor. It's what makes drug addicts and alcoholics when a young man sees no way out of his entry-level job except for lighting up or boozing. He has no way out, not because he's poor but because he believes he has no way out. It isn't true until you believe it.
"As a man believes in his heart, so is he"- Proverbs.
You have the power.
Your statement is an oxymoron. It contradicts itself. Saying that the rich have an interest in keeping rich is agreeing with my statement. You speak only in extremes when it suits you. There are many "poor" people who are taking action to improve their own live, without great success. What benefit is it to the "rich" to help make others rich?Quote:
There will always be competition for resources, but to say the rich have an interests in keeping "the poor down" is false. The rich have an interest in keeping rich.... and that's exactly why they are rich. They know how and what to do to get it and keep it. While the poor blame "The man" and take no action to improve their own lives, the rich work on their riches.
That is your opinion, and is widely debated. Don't state it as a fact. Without going in to a long debate about life at conception and a fetus versus a human, just remember people more intelligent than either one of us are on both sides of this issue.Quote:
Abortion is murder, plain and simple. It does have tremendous moral implications but murder trumps whatever psychology you can through at it.
You are speaking of radical fundamentalism. This also exists in Christianity to this day. Again, you take the extreme and apply it across the board. Typical debate tactics, but not reality. If you analyze the core of most religions you get a similar theme. And the one thing that holds true for most is they believe that theirs is the only true one.Quote:
I don't see Christians out in taliban gear wacking women in the head for dressing provacatively. Christians wrote the very laws that allow for the very freedoms you enjoy. From pornography to rock concerts.
There are no forced conversions to Christianity. We worked that shit out centuries ago. Muslims are still doing it, though.
Christians wrote the constitution and the bill of rights, both of which strictly forbid religious restriction of behavior.
No society is 100% moral and just. The American society needs checks and balances the same as they all do. It seems to be human nature to look out for yourself. That is the reason the constitution is so great, as they knew the probability of majority rule and allowed for minority representation. The ability of the rich and powerful to control was what brought them to start their own country and create a government ruled by the people.Quote:
Enterprise has no limits in a moral and just society.
You are speaking semantics. By separation of church and state I refer to the guarantees of no laws requiring or preventing the practice of my religion. Your other post speaks of preventing a judge from hanging the 10 commandments in his courtroom. What you seem to not understand is that the courtroom is not his. It belongs to the government, which is all citizens. His personal beliefs should not be reflected. The act of recognizing one particular religion goes against the spirit of the constitution simply because it infers taking sides. Numerous court rulings have confirmed that.Quote:
They did not insist on "separation of church and state". That's a phrase coined in the 20th century by a bigoted and anti-semitic supreme court justice.
"Separation of Church and State" is not mentioned once in the constitution. Not ONCE.
If you are speaking specifically of me, I am not really taking a position here. I have not bought in to the complete rhetoric of either party. I am playing devils advocate and trying to convey that your opinions are biased based on your beliefs as much as the facts. This applies to most people. I myself am a fairly successful person, and take advantage of some of the things I believe may be hurting others. At least I can admit that. I don't need someone to spout propaganda to rationalize my actions and make me feel better about myself. I try and see things how they are. I also do not accept things on face value or even historical acceptance.Quote:
Listen. You're the one who's allowed yourself to believe the liberal lies. That the individual is relatively powerless and at the mercy of the rich. I'm telling you. The minute you believe you are powerless in this country, is the minute you are.... and that's when they come after your rights and property. Just like in Russia, Venezuela and China. They believed the lie.
I'm not calling you weak-minded. But at least consider the possibility that you are very powerful in determining your destiny. The constitution guarantees it.
I will end my participation in this debate here. I actually enjoy the process, and appreciate your ability to challenge my intellect. I also accept your right to believe as you see fit, as I do all people, insofar as it does not restrict my own freedom.
i only read the title and first message... so my message will be based off of that.
anything could really be considered child abuse... whatever you "force" upon a child that doesn't know better, religion, or what he does, watches, or if he chooses to wear a dress even if he's your lil boy..
for the religion part...; religions are just an organized cult.. where a lot of child molestation happens, suicide by cool aid (didnt one cult do that?), and mean old ladies that push the cross onto you, then flip you off when u pass them on the road.
now put the two together.... if u want your children molested, and to grow up mean, send him to organized cults or religions..just warn them that the cool aid has a kick to it..
.............sorry, i couldnt read thru all the other messages, that maze is uncomprehendable with a hangover