UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-08-2011, 03:53 PM   #51
unownmew
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
You're crazy enough to be sent to a psych ward and locked up for a good long while if you honestly believe that this nation would elect Newt Gingrich over Barack Obama.
Well, it's a good thing you're not a licensed doctor, because I think that kind of a diagnosis would be worthy of a mal-practice suit.

I honestly have faith in the nation, and believe that the majority would rather see Obama ousted, then care who gets put in his place. Those that do care, care that the replacement will actually reverse his policies, instead of just going with the political flow.

And if I need evidence for my claims, I point to you: The Sweeping Republican Victory in the House of Representatives
So, with that, I can affirm that my beliefs are firmly rooted in something real, and I am not crazy in having them.


The TEA party isn't gone, we're just biding our time for the next election to oust the Democrats from the Senate and the Presidency, so we can finally start getting things done about fixing our nation.

Last edited by unownmew; 12-08-2011 at 04:02 PM.
unownmew is offline  
Old 12-08-2011, 04:05 PM   #52
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
I'm just saying. You're nuts if you think Gingrich has a snowball's chance in hell against Obama. Every single person who voted in Obama and voted out the Republican establishment will re-elect Obama if it's between him and a CAPTAIN of the Republican establishment.
Talon87 is offline  
Old 12-08-2011, 04:21 PM   #53
Tyranidos
beebooboobopbooboobop
 
Tyranidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Krusty Krab
Posts: 3,800
Send a message via AIM to Tyranidos Send a message via MSN to Tyranidos
Spoiler: show


Stretches page.
__________________
Tyranidos is offline  
Old 12-08-2011, 05:32 PM   #54
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyranidos View Post
Spoiler: show


Stretches page.
This made me laugh quite loudly and now the librarians hate me.BORKED

I think I showed you guys this link before.
Quote:
Newt Gingrich is his own worst enemy.
That sums it up quite nicely, DTFG.

Quote:
The laws of Economics are called laws for a reason, because they are tried and true, infallible, and without exception. The only time they could fail, is when there is outside interference forcing and changing certain things in unnatural ways (AKA Government) It's That Simple.
I thought the Law of Economics was that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Okay, then, we'll use the Jeri/Socratic method and see if it works. What is the "trickle down" effect, and how does it work?
__________________
Shuckle is offline  
Old 12-08-2011, 09:54 PM   #55
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
>Stretches page.

Perry might as well have announced his resignation from the race by making that commercial. The amount of shit he's gotten already is basically enough to cost him any chance of being elected, either in primaries or in the general election.

Additionally:

Fuck him.

This. This is homphobia. I feel completely justified in my use of the word to describe Michelle Bachman and I can confidently say that I am 100% justified in using it to describe Rick Perry. This kind of rampant discrimination and hate speech is not characteristic of a good leader, especially one that represents the most powerful and progressive country in the world.

"Obama's War on Religion" is a bullshit scare tactic. Gays have nothing to do with religion. And no one says you can't celebrate Christmas openly. Fuck, Christmas is represented faaaaaaar more widely than any other religious holiday around this time.

I'm sorry. If you're behind this man for any reason, I can't help but label you as off your rocker. This kind of speech and behavior is intolerable and hardly fitting of a president.
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline  
Old 12-08-2011, 11:47 PM   #56
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
I'm sorry. If you're behind this man for any reason, I can't help but label you as off your rocker.
Dammit, now we're going to get an unintelligible response again. It's difficult to measure the consequences of insulting unownmew.

Nice speech, though.

>hate speech not characteristic of good leader

I dunno, Hitler did pretty well anti-Semite. /vicious sarcasm
__________________
Shuckle is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 01:46 AM   #57
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by unownmew View Post
Well, it's a good thing you're not a licensed doctor,

it's funny because talon is a doctor

also
deoxys is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 02:02 AM   #58
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
>Stretches page.

Perry might as well have announced his resignation from the race by making that commercial. The amount of shit he's gotten already is basically enough to cost him any chance of being elected, either in primaries or in the general election.

Additionally:

Fuck him.

This. This is homphobia. I feel completely justified in my use of the word to describe Michelle Bachman and I can confidently say that I am 100% justified in using it to describe Rick Perry. This kind of rampant discrimination and hate speech is not characteristic of a good leader, especially one that represents the most powerful and progressive country in the world.

"Obama's War on Religion" is a bullshit scare tactic. Gays have nothing to do with religion. And no one says you can't celebrate Christmas openly. Fuck, Christmas is represented faaaaaaar more widely than any other religious holiday around this time.

I'm sorry. If you're behind this man for any reason, I can't help but label you as off your rocker. This kind of speech and behavior is intolerable and hardly fitting of a president.
Holy FUCK I just saw that ad.

Holy fucking SHIT Rick Perry is a dumbass. He's such an asshole and a homophobe (and that's a word I almost NEVER use, because I think that it's used way too often in situations where it's not true). How can someone like him even be considered a serious contender? That entire video was "HURR DURR I'M GOING TO PANDER TO THE BIBLE BELT AND AND AND OBAMA HAS A WAR ON RELIGION EVERYONE". No he fucking doesn't.

As a Christian myself... let me quote the words of Jon Stewart (OH WAIT IS HE TOO FAR LEFT OR MAYBE THIS STATEMENT JUST MAKES SENSE):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Stewart
Yes, the long war on Christianity. I pray that one day we may live in America where Christians can worship freely! In broad daylight! Openly wearing the symbols of their religion.... perhaps around their necks and maybe.... dare I dream it?--Maybe one day there can be an openly Christian President. Or, perhaps, 43 of them.

Consecutively.
And need I remind you what GEORGE W. BUSH SAID.


Quote:
Originally Posted by George W. Bush
I will be your President regardless of your faith, and I don't expect you to agree with me necessarily on religion. As a matter of fact, no President should ever try to impose religion on our society. A great -- the great tradition of America is one where people can worship the way they want to worship. And if they choose not to worship, they're just as patriotic as your neighbor.

In our country, we recognize our fellow citizens are free to profess any faith they choose, or no faith at all. You're equally American if you're a Jew, or a Christian, or a Muslim. You're equally American if you choose not to have faith.

Last edited by deoxys; 12-09-2011 at 02:12 AM.
deoxys is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 02:30 PM   #59
unownmew
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
I'm just saying. You're nuts if you think Gingrich has a snowball's chance in hell against Obama. Every single person who voted in Obama and voted out the Republican establishment will re-elect Obama if it's between him and a CAPTAIN of the Republican establishment.
You may be comfortable asserting absolutes without a shred of definitive evidence, but I won't allow myself such luxury. You can never know for certain, until it happens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyranidos View Post
Spoiler: show


Stretches page.
Hmm, considering the type of people who would spend any significant amount of time browsing youtube and would make a point to "dislike" something like that are not business owners, or other activists for any cause, I can safely believe the numbers there are not representative of America.

(Note, I am not claiming the majority of America prefers Perry, polling data suggests otherwise, but certainly I doubt the numbers that "hate" Perry are that disproportionate.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
>Stretches page.

Perry might as well have announced his resignation from the race by making that commercial. The amount of shit he's gotten already is basically enough to cost him any chance of being elected, either in primaries or in the general election.

Yeah, your correct he stalled in the debates, but that doesn't mean he can't pull back support later.

Quote:
Additionally:

Fuck him.

This. This is homphobia. I feel completely justified in my use of the word to describe Michelle Bachman and I can confidently say that I am 100% justified in using it to describe Rick Perry. This kind of rampant discrimination and hate speech is not characteristic of a good leader, especially one that represents the most powerful and progressive country in the world.

"Obama's War on Religion" is a bullshit scare tactic. Gays have nothing to do with religion. And no one says you can't celebrate Christmas openly. Fuck, Christmas is represented faaaaaaar more widely than any other religious holiday around this time.

I'm sorry. If you're behind this man for any reason, I can't help but label you as off your rocker. This kind of speech and behavior is intolerable and hardly fitting of a president.
I disagree. "Rampant Discrimination"? Where? Because he said that gays shouldn't be able to serve openly in the Military? It's ALWAYS been that way, up until Obama. Nowhere have gays been PREVENTED from serving in the military, that's not the problem, there's a much subtler issue here.

Discipline, Unity, and Commitment.
In the Military, it is essential for each soldier to be fully committed to their unit, and everyone in it. There is very very little room for personal space.
When you have a gay serving in your unit, and you know he's gay, this disrupts the unit, it can create discomfort for some in the unit, and it also opens the door for numerous possible allegations of "prejudice" that will completely undermine the unity required to complete the objectives.

You all know there are people who file frivolous lawsuits against companies just for settlement money (even if there's absolutely no evidence, it's usually cheaper to pay people off then to bring it to court), and the "curious and experimenting" guys that are allowed to be open in school (and the resulting reactions). Hopefully you can see how much more damaging this can be for the military, who are charged with keeping all of us safe, and any margin of error is the difference between life and death.



Actually, gays have Everything to do with religion. A rant I'll get to later.
And, Christmas is widely publicized, because it has been a long standing tradition. However, to deny there is a war on the Christian Religion, not just from Obama but others, is just outright uninformed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
Holy FUCK I just saw that ad.

Holy fucking SHIT Rick Perry is a dumbass. He's such an asshole and a homophobe (and that's a word I almost NEVER use, because I think that it's used way too often in situations where it's not true). How can someone like him even be considered a serious contender? That entire video was "HURR DURR I'M GOING TO PANDER TO THE BIBLE BELT AND AND AND OBAMA HAS A WAR ON RELIGION EVERYONE". No he fucking doesn't.
Is it pandering, if you are personally a part of it? If Perry's a Bible Belter himself, one of us "Bitter Americans Clinging to our Guns and Religion" it would actually be pandering to differentiate himself from it.
Personally, it's better he stands on his principles regardless of what they are, then being a wishy-washy, pandering, moderate.

Quote:
As a Christian myself... let me quote the words of Jon Stewart (OH WAIT IS HE TOO FAR LEFT OR MAYBE THIS STATEMENT JUST MAKES SENSE):
"Yes, the long war on Christianity. I pray that one day we may live in America where Christians can worship freely! In broad daylight! Openly wearing the symbols of their religion.... perhaps around their necks and maybe.... dare I dream it?--Maybe one day there can be an openly Christian President. Or, perhaps, 43 of them.

Consecutively."
It's called the War on Christianity, because some people don't want that anymore, so they're warring us. It says nothing on which side was the original.
We've had Christianity since our founding, and now people are warring against it, trying to change our heritage. They "pray that one day they may live in an America where Christians are no longer able to 'push their religion on them' any more, through their disgusting symbols they wear around their neck, and pictures of Jesus. They desire an X-mas where Santa is worshipped instead of honoring the Nativity. Maybe one day there can be an openly Christian hating President."
And so they war to that end, because Christians already have the upper hand.

This is the war on Christianity.


Quote:
And need I remind you what GEORGE W. BUSH SAID.
"I will be your President regardless of your faith, and I don't expect you to agree with me necessarily on religion. As a matter of fact, no President should ever try to impose religion on our society. A great -- the great tradition of America is one where people can worship the way they want to worship. And if they choose not to worship, they're just as patriotic as your neighbor.

In our country, we recognize our fellow citizens are free to profess any faith they choose, or no faith at all. You're equally American if you're a Jew, or a Christian, or a Muslim. You're equally American if you choose not to have faith."
I completely agree. But allowing open practice and symbols in government, is not imposing religion.
Imposing religion, is forcing a person to worship as you do by government law.

Just because Perry is proud of his faith, and touts it in his campaign does not mean he is imposing his religion on others.
unownmew is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 03:00 PM   #60
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766

>Nowhere have gays been PREVENTED from serving in the military, that's not the problem, there's a much subtler issue here.

Bullshit. A huge number of perfectly qualified and honorable soldiers have been ejected from the military for their sexuality. Sure, it's not "prevention" outright but it's just as good. No one should have to conceal a major part of their identity to protect their wellbeing just because someone thinks its "gross".

>When you have a gay serving in your unit, and you know he's gay, this disrupts the unit, it can create discomfort for some in the unit, and it also opens the door for numerous possible allegations of "prejudice" that will completely undermine the unity required to complete the objectives.

The simple fact that this is a problem is EXACTLY what's wrong. This homophobia (and yes, this is a phobia - it is an irrational fear that, due to their sexuality, someone will commit an act the phobic person feels violates them) is the whole reason why any of this is an issue.

>And, Christmas is widely publicized, because it has been a long standing tradition. However, to deny there is a war on the Christian Religion, not just from Obama but others, is just outright uninformed.

Really now? Uninformed? I'd like to think I'm pretty well informed. Why don't you show me some information about it? Or, better yet, I'll look for it myself.

Hm, let's see... Is Christmas banned? Is it the holiday representative of the minority? No, I don't think so. I'm also pretty sure that a lot of people choose to celebrate it with religious-themed decorations! Most of which stand, untouched, for the length of their display, which is a LOT better than you could say about just about any other decoration you might decide to display.

Oh, these religious displays are being fought in public places controlled by a secular government, are they? That sounds like discrimination! Or is it just the fact that our government is best shown as neutral to reflect the (hope that it has) neutrality towards its citizens of every race and religion?

Children aren't allowed to pray in schools, though! Wait... isn't a moment of silence during the day a common policy in many public schools? And, I believe, if you ask any administrator its purpose, they will tell you that it is for "personal reflection"... that sounds a lot like prayer to me. Oh, and, another thing I noticed - these same public schools often have a large and active student-run and faculty-sponsored Christian-based organization! I also believe that they largely outnumber other potential clubs that may deal with issues that, while equally worthy and legitimate, are, in some ways, in opposition. How surprising!

Well, Christians are still being persecuted, right? Wait... I don't think so... How many assaults, verbal, emotional and physical cases of abuse or even murders have there been recently where the main cause of the act was because the victim was Christian? Hm, I can't think of very many. There have been quite a few against innocent youths (and even adults!) for being just about everything BUT that though.

Hm, that's odd. I just can't seem to find anything that indicates any kind of War on Christianity. Though it does seem like other groups are still being discriminated against. That's a shame.

To be perfectly honest, I actually agree with you that some of the measures that have been taken to eliminate things such as the usage of "Merry Christmas" are a bit extreme and violate First Amendment rights. But this HARDLY constitutes a WAR.

>Is it pandering, if you are personally a part of it? If Perry's a Bible Belter himself, one of us "Bitter Americans Clinging to our Guns and Religion" it would actually be pandering to differentiate himself from it.

Not when you're trying to win a Republican primary when your core voter base to win over is the "Bitter Americans Clinging to our Guns and Religion".

>Personally, it's better he stands on his principles regardless of what they are, then being a wishy-washy, pandering, moderate.

Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate standing by your beliefs. But.

You'd rather have someone continue to be ignorant and misinformed than admit they're wrong?

Suddenly everything makes so much more sense.

>Just because Perry is proud of his faith, and touts it in his campaign does not mean he is imposing his religion on others.

Hell yes, he is, if he's touting faith-based initiatives. There's something called Separation of Church and State we have in this country. It's a pretty essential principle that our country was founded on.

Fuck this shit. I'm not taking this anymore. Enjoy your idealized conservative lala-land while I go fight for my right to be treated equally.

Last edited by Jerichi; 12-09-2011 at 03:12 PM.
Jerichi is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 06:18 PM   #61
unownmew
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post


>Nowhere have gays been PREVENTED from serving in the military, that's not the problem, there's a much subtler issue here.

Bullshit. A huge number of perfectly qualified and honorable soldiers have been ejected from the military for their sexuality. Sure, it's not "prevention" outright but it's just as good. No one should have to conceal a major part of their identity to protect their wellbeing just because someone thinks its "gross".

Source? They were ejected precisely, and ONLY for their sexuality, and not for breaking a certain law (like trying to serve openly)?

Also, they're not being forced to conceal for their wellbeing, it's for higher discipline and commitment in the unit. (more further down)

Quote:
>When you have a gay serving in your unit, and you know he's gay, this disrupts the unit, it can create discomfort for some in the unit, and it also opens the door for numerous possible allegations of "prejudice" that will completely undermine the unity required to complete the objectives.

The simple fact that this is a problem is EXACTLY what's wrong. This homophobia (and yes, this is a phobia - it is an irrational fear that, due to their sexuality, someone will commit an act the phobic person feels violates them) is the whole reason why any of this is an issue.
Not the WHOLE reason. As I tried to say earlier:
Consider a Gay, serving openly, ordered to perform a very dangerous task, which is vital to the success of whatever the mission is.
Regardless of the success or failure of the task, the Gay gets injured and returned home. He then sues the military or the commanding officer for deliberately putting a GAY in a position where he could have gotten killed or disabled, as if it was prejudiced, and intentionally meant to injure or kill him, BECAUSE he's gay, to get rid of him.


This completely throws the discipline of the unit in disarray.
The only way to provide, and require, true equal partiality for an officer, is for him to be completely blind of the differences. Thus, no serving openly.

(And if you think this WON'T ever happen eventually if soldiers are allowed to serve open, you're deluded)


Not to mention, if homophobia is truly a phobia, just like gay is apparently an inherent and incurable human condition, so is the phobia of it. So let's be equal to both sides, instead of just the one.

Quote:
>And, Christmas is widely publicized, because it has been a long standing tradition. However, to deny there is a war on the Christian Religion, not just from Obama but others, is just outright uninformed.

Really now? Uninformed? I'd like to think I'm pretty well informed. Why don't you show me some information about it? Or, better yet, I'll look for it myself.
I will, as I refute your points.

Quote:
Hm, let's see... Is Christmas banned? Is it the holiday representative of the minority? No, I don't think so. I'm also pretty sure that a lot of people choose to celebrate it with religious-themed decorations! Most of which stand, untouched, for the length of their display, which is a LOT better than you could say about just about any other decoration you might decide to display.
I said War on the Religion, and Christmas is only a part of it, absence of evidence here does not disprove anything.

However:
Religious Christmas Songs Banned at School
Another Source for ^
Christmas Carols banned in Wisconsin School, but Hanukkah Ok
Christmas Controversy: Wikipedia
School Prevents kindergarten student from distributing Christmas cards with Jesus on them
Florida School bans everything associated with Christmas
Christmas Symbols (not precisely related, but, used to show, most everything associated with Christmas, relates to Jesus in some way.)
Book about the War on Christmas (I haven't read it yet, but I'm sure you daren't read it regardless. Too "Conservative rightwinger," to possibly be "true"? Great way to not have to address valid arguments. )


Quote:
Oh, these religious displays are being fought in public places controlled by a secular government, are they? That sounds like discrimination! Or is it just the fact that our government is best shown as neutral to reflect the (hope that it has) neutrality towards its citizens of every race and religion?
Neutrality, in the way of not forcing it's citizens to worship and believe a certain way, is different from neutrality in the way of not favoring one religion over another, as well is different from favoring no-religion policy.

Nowhere in the constitution is it required that our government not favor a certain religion, nor engage in practices of a certain religion, only that it does not prevent other religions from worshiping as they see fit, nor force it's citizens to engage in any religious activities.

That's why all our coinage has on it "In God We Trust"
Our Pledge says we are "One Nation, under God"
Our laws and founding documents are based on Christian Principles, Morals, and Laws (as opposed to Sharia Law, Wiccan Law, Buddist, Taoist, or Hindu Law, Etc.)

As well:
Of which:
Spoiler: show

Quote:
July 4, 1821 – John Quincy Adams:

“The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. From the day of the Declaration … they (the American people) were bound by the laws of God, which they all, and by the laws of the Gospel, which they nearly all, acknowledged as the rules of their conduct.”
Quote:
Summer 8, 1845 – President Andrew Jackson asserts:

“The Bible is the rock upon which our Republic rests.”
Quote:
1891 – The U.S. Supreme Court restates that America is a “Christian Nation.”

“Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian … this is a religious people. This is historically true. From the discovery of this continent to the present hour, there is a single voice making this affirmation … we find everywhere a clear definition of the same truth … this is a Christian nation.” (Church of the Holy Trinity vs. United States, 143 US 457, 36 L ed 226, Justice Brewer)
Quote:
1952 – US Supreme Court defines the “Separation of Church and State.”

“We are a religious people and our institutions presuppose a Supreme Being … No Constitutional requirement makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against the efforts to widen the scope of religious influence. The government must remain neutral when it comes to competition between sects … The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every respect there shall be a separation of Church and State.”

However, much of what government is being required to do, in order to "not promote one religion of another," can be categorized under Atheism, which is being imposed upon us as a populace. Which Atheism, truly is a religion itself, and by enforcing such in the government, actually is a violation of our First Amendment Rights.

My government shall not tell me how to practice my religion, nor impose upon me a government religion, yet, in the free practice of my religion, I must not offend others, and in my Government there shall be a No God, which I am required to teach in government-funded schools, and I shall not be allowed to teach my own God? And my government must forsake longstanding traditions (such as having a nativity or Christmas tree in public square, in order to comply with the No God religion. Really? Really?

An now with that preface:
Quote:
Children aren't allowed to pray in schools, though! Wait... isn't a moment of silence during the day a common policy in many public schools? And, I believe, if you ask any administrator its purpose, they will tell you that it is for "personal reflection"... that sounds a lot like prayer to me. Oh, and, another thing I noticed - these same public schools often have a large and active student-run and faculty-sponsored Christian-based organization! I also believe that they largely outnumber other potential clubs that may deal with issues that, while equally worthy and legitimate, are, in some ways, in opposition. How surprising!
This does not prove against a War on Christianity, only that Christianity, thankfully, is still the dominant religion in America.

Quote:
Well, Christians are still being persecuted, right? Wait... I don't think so... How many assaults, verbal, emotional and physical cases of abuse or even murders have there been recently where the main cause of the act was because the victim was Christian? Hm, I can't think of very many. There have been quite a few against innocent youths (and even adults!) for being just about everything BUT that though.
Persecution does not need to involve violence to be persecution. And Discrimination against Christianity, is undeniable.
Persecution of Christians growing in the United States.
Arrested for Preaching
Hated for the Name
The Wall between Church and State goes just one way.

Quote:
Hm, that's odd. I just can't seem to find anything that indicates any kind of War on Christianity. Though it does seem like other groups are still being discriminated against. That's a shame.
Hmm, that's odd, because I did, and referenced as such, perhaps you didn't look hard enough? That's quite a shame.

Quote:
To be perfectly honest, I actually agree with you that some of the measures that have been taken to eliminate things such as the usage of "Merry Christmas" are a bit extreme and violate First Amendment rights. But this HARDLY constitutes a WAR.
Well, among the numerous other things that are occurring, that you seemed not aware of, I'd say there is a war.

And there will always be a war between Good and Evil.

Quote:
>Is it pandering, if you are personally a part of it? If Perry's a Bible Belter himself, one of us "Bitter Americans Clinging to our Guns and Religion" it would actually be pandering to differentiate himself from it.

Not when you're trying to win a Republican primary when your core voter base to win over is the "Bitter Americans Clinging to our Guns and Religion".
It's always best to secure the base first, which unfortunately, most Republican Elite can't stand, which is why they always push for "moderate centrist" candidates. However, it's still not pandering if you're simply standing on your own principles.


Quote:
>Personally, it's better he stands on his principles regardless of what they are, then being a wishy-washy, pandering, moderate.

Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate standing by your beliefs. But.

You'd rather have someone continue to be ignorant and misinformed than admit they're wrong?
If they're provably wrong, obviously they should admit to it.
The problem is, most people just claim they're wrong, loud and incessantly, or using false information to back themselves up, as if repeating themselves and others agreeing with them makes it true.

Most beliefs however, are entirely subjective, and can not truly be proven either way. It's when people try to change these, that they ought to be ignored.

"I made this decision, it turned out to be wrong, but I'm not sorry, because I did the best I could with what I knew at the time."
This is the ideal statement.


Quote:
Suddenly everything makes so much more sense.

>Just because Perry is proud of his faith, and touts it in his campaign does not mean he is imposing his religion on others.

Hell yes, he is, if he's touting faith-based initiatives. There's something called Separation of Church and State we have in this country. It's a pretty essential principle that our country was founded on.

Fuck this shit. I'm not taking this anymore. Enjoy your idealized conservative lala-land while I go fight for my right to be treated equally.
Again, the separation of church and state goes just one way.
The government has no right to interfere with the exercise of religion by anyone, but that does not mean the citizens are free from having a government based in religion. We are, and have been, such a nation, despite actions attempted by others.
And it shall be precisely when this stops being the case, that America will fall forever.

Last edited by unownmew; 12-09-2011 at 06:45 PM.
unownmew is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 07:12 PM   #62
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 7,030
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
Quote:
Originally Posted by unownmew View Post
Not the WHOLE reason. As I tried to say earlier:
Consider a Gay, serving openly, ordered to perform a very dangerous task, which is vital to the success of whatever the mission is.
Regardless of the success or failure of the task, the Gay gets injured and returned home. He then sues the military or the commanding officer for deliberately putting a GAY in a position where he could have gotten killed or disabled, as if it was prejudiced, and intentionally meant to injure or kill him, BECAUSE he's gay, to get rid of him.

This completely throws the discipline of the unit in disarray.
The only way to provide, and require, true equal partiality for an officer, is for him to be completely blind of the differences. Thus, no serving openly.

(And if you think this WON'T ever happen eventually if soldiers are allowed to serve open, you're deluded)
This is a silly argument, unless you also propose to make women disguise themselves as men, and ethnic minorities white up. Or ban anyone who's openly non-christian. Or anyone who's openly non-protestant ("fuck off Mormons, you might sue us claiming we put you in danger because you're mormon).

"Under the new DADT policy, all American soldiers must present themselves as white protestant males between the ages of 18 and 35."

Quote:
Not to mention, if homophobia is truly a phobia, just like gay is apparently an inherent and incurable human condition, so is the phobia of it. So let's be equal to both sides, instead of just the one.
Curing arachnaphobia is easy. Try stopping a spider being a spider. Also a person being gay doesn't harm anyone (I know gay people, their being gay doesn't harm me in the least), acting on homophobia kinda does. Also also, speaking of "curing" someone of being gay makes me kind of uncomfortable, in the same way I'm sure you'd find it uncomfortable or offensive if I talked about "curing" you of being a Mormon, or "curing" you of being right wing.

EDIT the first: I just dropped in because of something said in TO and saw these points about homosexuality, I don't actually particularly want to get involved in a debate about American presidential candidates - partly because as a Brit, I don't know much more than their names for some of the Republican nominees, and partly because my position on politics is basically that humans are too retarded and downright uncaring to ever get a half-decent society working so why give a fuck.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?

Last edited by Concept; 12-09-2011 at 07:55 PM.
Concept is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 09:41 PM   #63
unownmew
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
This is a silly argument, unless you also propose to make women disguise themselves as men, and ethnic minorities white up. Or ban anyone who's openly non-christian. Or anyone who's openly non-protestant ("fuck off Mormons, you might sue us claiming we put you in danger because you're mormon).

"Under the new DADT policy, all American soldiers must present themselves as white protestant males between the ages of 18 and 35."
Well, guess that's what I get for trying to come up with reasons myself instead of doing research. Although, not just that exact example was my intention to convey, but the idea of it, Gays suing over "possible" discrimination in the military.

here's a better argument
A Petition Website against it. (I'm not endorsing this site, simply stating it has further information on the issue.)
Which then links to this website with more information.

Quote:
Curing arachnaphobia is easy. Try stopping a spider being a spider. Also a person being gay doesn't harm anyone (I know gay people, their being gay doesn't harm me in the least), acting on homophobia kinda does. Also also, speaking of "curing" someone of being gay makes me kind of uncomfortable, in the same way I'm sure you'd find it uncomfortable or offensive if I talked about "curing" you of being a Mormon, or "curing" you of being right wing.
Well, people here are already trying to do that, they're just not stating it in those definitive words

The Homosexuality debate is a tricky one, and liable to get quite heated. If possible I'd like to avoid it, specifically here, but altogether as well. And debating Don't Ask Don't Tell, will be impossible to do here without getting into it.
If others here wish to debate it however, I will make a thread with my case, or participate in a thread of another's making.

Quote:
EDIT the first: I just dropped in because of something said in TO and saw these points about homosexuality, I don't actually particularly want to get involved in a debate about American presidential candidates - partly because as a Brit, I don't know much more than their names for some of the Republican nominees, and partly because my position on politics is basically that humans are too retarded and downright uncaring to ever get a half-decent society working so why give a fuck.
Well, your input is appreciated anyway, and helped me clarify my meanings for the others here.

Last edited by unownmew; 12-09-2011 at 10:00 PM.
unownmew is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 10:49 PM   #64
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I'm sorry, why are we using "gay" as a noun here? Is it some way for you to pretend they're not humans and belong to a seperate "gay" species?

Because your argument is total bullshit. By that logic, anyone- ANYONE- who has ANYTHING out of the ordinary- a goatee, being bald, weird ears, a third nipple, being black- just about anyone could sue for discrimination.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 10:59 PM   #65
Tyranidos
beebooboobopbooboobop
 
Tyranidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Krusty Krab
Posts: 3,800
Send a message via AIM to Tyranidos Send a message via MSN to Tyranidos
Tyranitar

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I'm sorry, why are we using "gay" as a noun here? Is it some way for you to pretend they're not humans and belong to a seperate "gay" species?

Because your argument is total bullshit. By that logic, anyone- ANYONE- who has ANYTHING out of the ordinary- a goatee, being bald, weird ears, a third nipple, being black- just about anyone could sue for discrimination.
Way to miss the problem, Rangeet.
__________________
Tyranidos is offline  
Old 12-09-2011, 11:04 PM   #66
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I'm referring to the part of his post which says gay people can sue the military for "possible" discrimination.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 01:10 AM   #67
Amras.MG
Not sure if gone...
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
unownmew, you don't even have any Christian principles to stand by. You are MORMON. A cult that is technically recognized as heresy by the Christian churches.

Furthermore, your whole light v. dark thing reeks of Manichaean heresy.

I am personally against calling a same-sex union gay marriage, for Biblical reasons. Even I know that Perry is just spewing hate - as are you. You are getting dangerously close to hate speech. Luckily for all of us, that's a bannable offense.
Amras.MG is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 02:51 AM   #68
Muyotwo
Dominator of Bike Levels
 
Muyotwo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,321
MG, you are a credit to your faith.

I say unownmew's next debate topic which eschews reason should be "Were there really golden plates that Joseph Smith read off of with the help of seer stones out of a hat which nobody else was allowed to see, and only changed the wording of his story later because he was reading off of a different plate with the same story (but told differently)." unownmew will take the position that he did.
__________________
The Kim Il Sung of ASB.
Muyotwo is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 04:05 AM   #69
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
It's time for another round of responding to debates with gifs, with your host, deoxys!

Quote:
Originally Posted by unownmew
>there's a war on christmas
>.... blah blah blah x-mas blah blah blah...


Quote:
Originally Posted by MG
Truth

Last edited by deoxys; 12-10-2011 at 04:07 AM.
deoxys is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 09:53 AM   #70
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
So, Newt Gingrinch is out of the race. Well, not officially. But with career-ending statements like these, he soon will be. He may as well have said "The English are a made-up people. What's white is white is white! They should just go back to Denmark or wherever the hell it is that they came from." In Newt Gingrich's mind, English =/= French =/= German =/= Spanish, etc etc, but apparently Jordanian = Palestinian = Saudi = "Arabs." Yes, they are all Arabs, but Jesus Christ, dude, they're as different as the French and the Spanish. It's laughable that you'd be all like "Palestinian people? Make-believe. They're Arabs. They should just move back to Saudi Arabia." lololololol
Talon87 is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 10:47 AM   #71
unownmew
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I'm sorry, why are we using "gay" as a noun here? Is it some way for you to pretend they're not humans and belong to a seperate "gay" species?

Because your argument is total bullshit. By that logic, anyone- ANYONE- who has ANYTHING out of the ordinary- a goatee, being bald, weird ears, a third nipple, being black- just about anyone could sue for discrimination.
There are laws set to enforce against discrimination based on Skin color, Gender, and Sexual orientation.
Not based on "being weird"

Of course everyone should be cordial to everyone else, but those three groups are the only ones who can sue for discrimination with any possible success.

Also, please address my other points if you're going to mention anything at all about it, otherwise you're deliberately omitting information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amras.MG View Post
unownmew, you don't even have any Christian principles to stand by. You are MORMON. A cult that is technically recognized as heresy by the Christian churches.
Are you getting into prejudice based on religion now?
I'd be careful in how you tell me what my Church teaches, I've been a member and going every sunday since I was baptised at 8, have you ever been to a single meeting? Unless you have, you have nothing to stand on and your accusation is baseless.

Also, great way to use charged rhetoric. My Religion is a "cult"? I'm sure you were well aware of the Negative Connotation of the word, and intended to use it as such.
And yet, by definition, you're absolutely correct.
Cult:
1. a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
4.
a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5.
Sociology . a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

Of course, then you'd also be calling every single other Christian Religion, and the Hebrew Religion, a "cult" as well.

Or were you referring to:
3. a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents
?
Because I can assure you, and you can easily see for yourself, if you so chose, this is Not the case.

While I'd consider my religion to be a mix of Hebrew, and Christianity, which if you believe the bible, would be the most logical form of the Religion, we, of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, also known as "Mormons" are Christian, in the sense that, we believe in Jesus Christ, believe he is our Savior and Redeemer, the Son of God, and that he Lived and Died for our sins. We teach his teachings and those of the other prophets in the Bible as well as our own book, which are not at odds with each other at all, and espouse that The Lord Is God.

If you consider Christian, as an adherence to the Nicene Creed, which includes the terribly confusing definition of the Holy Trinity, and was written and organized long after Jesus was crucified and the gospels written, then, no, we are not Christian in that sense.


Quote:
Furthermore, your whole light v. dark thing reeks of Manichaean heresy.
Are you saying there is no Satan and no God, nor opposition between them?
That's why I say, there is a constant war between Good and Evil.

Quote:
I am personally against calling a same-sex union gay marriage, for Biblical reasons.
As am I.

Quote:
Even I know that Perry is just spewing hate - as are you. You are getting dangerously close to hate speech. Luckily for all of us, that's a bannable offense.
How am I getting close to hate speech? In what manner am I inciting violence against gays? In what manner have I incited violence at all?

As my religion tells us and Jesus exemplified, Hate the Sin, and Love the Sinner.

Last edited by unownmew; 12-10-2011 at 11:05 AM.
unownmew is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 11:01 AM   #72
Tyranidos
beebooboobopbooboobop
 
Tyranidos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Krusty Krab
Posts: 3,800
Send a message via AIM to Tyranidos Send a message via MSN to Tyranidos
If Satan is evil, then how come he punishes bad people in hell? /philosoraptor
__________________
Tyranidos is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 11:58 AM   #73
Concept
Archbishop of Banterbury
 
Concept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Nipple-Hunting with Elsie and Kairne
Posts: 7,030
Send a message via Skype™ to Concept
Quote:
Originally Posted by unownmew View Post
Or were you referring to:
3. a quasi-religious organization using devious psychological techniques to gain and control adherents.
Whether or not you regard that as the original or current intention or just an unfortunate side effect, this is exactly what the abrahamic religions do - destroy self esteem by teaching that we are all inherently sinful, bad people, labelling any questioning of its doctrine as heretical and leading to eternal damnation and preaching that only by following their rules can we hope to improve ourself. Whether or not the abrahamic religions are correct or not, the above is true.

Quote:
Are you saying there is no Satan and no God, nor opposition between them?
That's why I say, there is a constant war between Good and Evil.
This isn't something you can presuppose in any rational debate, any more than I can presuppose the existance of a strongly left wing God waiting to send all Republican supporters to eternal damnation.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTerry
What can the harvest hope for, if not the care of the reaper man?
Concept is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 12:09 PM   #74
Lonely Cubone
Gee, Brain...
 
Lonely Cubone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,103
Send a message via MSN to Lonely Cubone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Concept View Post
This isn't something you can presuppose in any rational debate, any more than I can presuppose the existance of a strongly left wing God waiting to send all Republican supporters to eternal damnation.
Ah, the Deity Kucinich theory.
Lonely Cubone is offline  
Old 12-10-2011, 12:23 PM   #75
Amras.MG
Not sure if gone...
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Or just lurking.
Posts: 2,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by unownmew View Post
If you consider Christian, as an adherence to the Nicene Creed, which includes the terribly confusing definition of the Holy Trinity, and was written and organized long after Jesus was crucified and the gospels written, then, no, we are not Christian in that sense.
You saying this wins me the argument.

The Nicene Creed is the definition of a Christian. A Christian is a person who believes that there is a Triune God, three persons in one substance, and that furthermore the Word is Jesus Christ, who is both fully man and fully God.

That is the definition of Christianity for the churches around the world. This Creed, and the beliefs it entails, are why I can say that Protestants and the Orthodox Churches are Christian (with only slight exceptions). It's because they follow this definition of Jesus Christ.

You would not include Hindus as Christians merely because they incorporate a certain view of Christ into their religion. You are doing no better than them.

Furthermore, you can't argue that the Nicene Creed is silly because it was composed hundreds of years after Jesus' death because the GOSPELS were composed at least a hundred years after Jesus' death: they weren't even written by apostles, they were written by the students of the disciples. Moreover, if the length of time after Jesus' life that something is written is such a big concern for you, how in the world can you believe in John Smith's golden plates?

Also, evil is a privation of good, not a substance. Satan is not fully evil, because he was made by God, who only makes good things. Satan was originally good and chose to rebel against God: he became less than he was in so doing this. Satan is not equal to God or any bullshit like that. And if you believe in heaven (LOL as a "Christian" you pretty much have to) you believe that there will be a time when there is no more evil: it's called the beatific vision.

Additionally, doesn't the doctrine of a "Third Revelation" - which is what the plates are - really discount the first two revelations? Don't your Mormon plates insinuate that the fullness of Christ's redemptive act was not revealed in the New Testament? Doesn't that mean that you don't think the Old and New Testament are enough for salvation, even though they say they are? Smith's plates are an attack on the very inerrancy of the Bible you claim to uphold and believe.
Amras.MG is offline  
Closed Thread

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.