Support NeoGAF

[Docwiz]

"Erosion of morals" is one of those things that's, you know, entirely subjective.

yeah, and your opinion is entirely subjective as well

 

[Docwiz]

Matthew Shephard (Sp) was not that long ago.

guess you didn't read when I posted... "Well not long ago gay people were killed in the USA"

 

[mrmyth]

You still miss the point that nothing has changed enough to prevent it from happening today. Just because you might actually get prosecuted for it nowadays doesn't mean we've made any progress.

 

[etiolate]

So Doc, you want the subarban life? The Father with a job, the mother at home making babies and dinner. Community house parties and such?

 

[Sirpopopop]

Well not long ago gay people will killed in the USA and even that is much better now.
It is getting better. I don't advocate any violence to anyone, gay or not. That's just wrong.

Has enough time really passed to say that things are better now? There were quite a few people who looked on Shephard's death with approval. They are still alive as can be seen by the fact that gays are treated as second class citizens in this country.

Matthew Shephard's death was an event pertaining to modern times... so by saying that things are much better now, I say you're ignoring what happened to him. The events surrounding his death are still very much a part of the present and not a part of "history".

Also you said, "Well not long ago gay people will killed in the USA", not "Well not long ago gay people were killed in the USA". When you mangle English it's hard for me to understand what you're saying.

 

[Docwiz]

Based on what research? Do you have any percentages of parents not caring for their kids, or are you just assuming things?

My wife works for a daycare and my mother-in-law helps kids at church and I can definately tell you that around the USA this is the case. I have heard statistics and I can't remember where I saw them but they said the same thing.

For some reason, I think the last time we tried to force people in the military, things that you have been railing against (sex, drugs, and liberalism) became very mainstream.

You must be young, because this wasn't the case at all. It was because we were in Vietnam and they didn't allow the soilders to defend themselves (at first) and they didn't plan for a way out and people were angry because of these reasons and not because there was a draft. There was a draft a long time before vietnam and even in peace time.

Whats preventing the Bible Studies from taking place at the Church?

Well they have to drive to a church, where if they want to study about the Bible after school where they are already at then that should be fine. No matter if it is Christian or Muslim, they should have the right to assemble after school as long as it does not interfer with other school activities.

I live in Texas, and I can say with certainty, liberals DON'T control the schools down here, and besides a couple good schools in the wealthier areas, the system is pretty shitty.

I live in Los Angeles which is one of the most liberal cities around the USA and the educational system here is so poor that most of the students will not gradute and will drop out. I can't remember the statistics but do a google search and I was shocked when I read the percentages.

I have listened, and no, I don't see what you are saying. Please, provide examples where he says he doesn't believe in Jesus.

He doesn't say that, but you can tell in the way he speaks and talks. Sometimes it's what people don't say that's more important than what they do say.

 

[mrmyth]

My wife works for a daycare and my mother-in-law helps kids at church and I can definately tell you that around the USA this is the case. I have heard statistics and I can't remember where I saw them but they said the same thing.

Two points of anecdotal evidence! = situation across entire continental US. Try again, sparky.

 

[Docwiz]

Has enough time really passed to say that things are better now? There were quite a few people who looked on Shephard's death with approval.

Matthew Shephard's death was an event pertaining to this time period... so by saying that things are much better now, I say you're ignoring what happened to him.

Also you said, "Well not long ago gay people will killed in the USA", not "Well not long ago gay people were killed in the USA". When you mangle English it's hard for me to understand what you're saying.

It was a typo and if you can't understand that, then you have other problems that you need to be worried about.

I am not ignoring him at all, but since his death things have become better because a lot of people have woken up, and some others haven't.

I have had gays hit on me in NYC and West Hollywood and you don't see me killing them just because I don't agree with their lifestyle.

I don't agree with killing anyone like that or strait or whatever. That is not only immoral and is a sin and it's wrong against God and the person that has been killed.

I did not mean to make his death a minor point, but a major point as in the USA I have not heard of that many deaths after his nationally. I am sure it still happens, but not as often as before.

 

[Docwiz]

Two points of anecdotal evidence! = situation across entire continental US. Try again, sparky.

I have one word for you, sparky: Denial

 

[Docwiz]

So Doc, you want the subarban life? The Father with a job, the mother at home making babies and dinner. Community house parties and such?

As my own personal opinion, why not? As long as we both agree and not just myself then what makes both of us happy makes sense now doesn't it?

I talked to my wife about it and she would rather not have a job like she does now and stays home and looks after the kids during the day and then I can come home and take care of them at night and she would have dinner on the table.

She is hearing impaired as well so I am sure some of that plays in there as well.
Which again is fine with me.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Liberals have also taken anything religious out of schools even if it does not involve church and state.

Religion necessarily involves church. Public school necessarily involves state.

Also Reverend Al Sharpton isn't very religious, I don't care if he is a Reverend or not. It's more politically motivated than anything else. If you listen what he says you will see what I am saying.

I haven't paid enough attention to Al Sharpton to say how religious he is, but I must agree that the Reverend title means little. I'm legally a reverend; it's a throwaway title in the government sense.

I am for the environment instead of oil and we should be looking to ween ourselves off of oil and look into other alternatives and I am not a liberal.

On this particular issue, you seem to lean that way.

However, if they want extra rights for being gay, then where is my rights for wanting to go outside of my marriage and have other women to marry?

Equal rights != extra rights. Hey, I'm all for legal polygamy too. Harmless.

 

[Docwiz]

You still miss the point that nothing has changed enough to prevent it from happening today. Just because you might actually get prosecuted for it nowadays doesn't mean we've made any progress.

Well, sure there are some igonorant people out there and some of them are in this forum.
I surely wouldn't mind having an african American wife (if I didn't already have a wife) and I have seen plenty of beautiful african American women out there. Some even in the area I live. I don't mind my children dating or getting married to anyone like this either.

Believe it or not the area I live in is mostly african american and then hispanic. Where white guys like me are in the minority.

The area I live in I have to pay $1524 a month for a one bedroom apartment with a Den of about 1050 square feet. So, its a higher income area.

 

[Triumph]

yeah, and your opinion is entirely subjective as well

POT. KETTLE. BLACK.

So is yours. Thread over!

 

[ConfusingJazz]

My wife works for a daycare and my mother-in-law helps kids at church and I can definately tell you that around the USA this is the case. I have heard statistics and I can't remember where I saw them but they said the same thing.

Sir, thats anecdoctal evidence that really won't hold up to actual scientific statistics. I could hang around a methadone clinic and say that 90% of America was recovering from a heroin addiction, but that wouldn't make it true.

You must be young, because this wasn't the case at all. It was because we were in Vietnam and they didn't allow the soilders to defend themselves (at first) and they didn't plan for a way out and people were angry because of these reasons and not because there was a draft. There was a draft a long time before vietnam and even in peace time.

Yes, there was a draft between 1948-1973, but past that, I have no idea what the hell you just garbled out.

Well they have to drive to a church, where if they want to study about the Bible after school where they are already at then that should be fine. No matter if it is Christian or Muslim, they should have the right to assemble after school as long as it does not interfer with other school activities.

I still see no reason why they would not be able to do it at a Church or Mosque. You already missed the bus, so somebody is going to have to pick you up anyways, so why not just drive your kids over to Church if Bible Study is REALLY that important for your kids.

I live in Los Angeles which is one of the most liberal cities around the USA and the educational system here is so poor that most of the students will not gradute and will drop out. I can't remember the statistics but do a google search and I was shocked when I read the percentages.

I don't know what the exact problem with the LA school system is, so I really can't comment on that, but I would imagine it has more to do with the size of the system more then anything else.

He doesn't say that, but you can tell in the way he speaks and talks. Sometimes it's what people don't say that's more important than what they do say.

Thats just a fucking cop out.

 

[Docwiz]

Religion necessarily involves church. Public school necessarily involves state.

You missed the point I made above. church and state is way overrated. It was made like this for a big reason that I quoted above. It should be out for schools for the same reason as Arnold should allowed to be president.

On this particular issue, you seem to lean that way.

Wanting the environment to be better isn't a liberal value its a mankind value.
Nuclear Waste sitting out there in the ocean leaking is a problem beyond liberals or conservatives, its a problem for everyone.

Equal rights != extra rights. Hey, I'm all for legal polygamy too. Harmless.

Live where I have lived and maybe you might begin to understand what I am saying.
Walk in my shoes and see what happens.

Anyway I am off for awhile. I have some time off from work with Thanksgiving so I am going to chill with my family for awhile and get off the computer.

 

[soundwave05]

Difference being, corporations pander to society. If we stop buying their shit eventually they'll listen. So discounting liberals/conservatives doesn't work. Big business doesn't own us yet, and still needs us to consume.

I disagree with this. No one is going to stop buying their "shit". Once you have a little, then you want even more. Its inevitable.

Docwiz is naive to the extreme. What do you think is gonna happen? That MTV is going to be replaced by some Christian values music channel? :lol

Corporations give us this stuff because they know we'll eat it up. And then it begins the cycle of free market competition -- the next guys has to offer more.

The 1950s styled society couldn't stand because it was never sustainable. A consumer driven society by nature demands progression, which is the opposite of what conservatives want to keep.

And its never going to stop.

I was raised in a Catholic school system, you think kids at my school were any better off or behaved any better or weren't having sex and doing drugs and drinking because we had religion class? Because I can tell you that wasn't the case, in many cases it was actually worse than the stuff I'd see at public schools.

 

[lachesis]

I agree with Soundwave 100%.

It's easy to give a child a candy, but it's hard to take away once they have it.
In this capitalistic society driven by "greed" and "consumption", there's no escape for this endless downward sprial of corruption.

Call me pessimistic, but I don't see how it's going to end - perhaps we've reached point of no return already. And those who worry about such, is ruled out as liberal nuts here in U.S.

Sigh.

lachesis

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

You missed the point I made above. church and state is way overrated. It was made like this for a big reason that I quoted above. It should be out for schools for the same reason as Arnold should allowed to be president.

I agree that naturalized citizens should be able to run for president, but not that religion should be in public schools. What is the "same reason"?

Wanting the environment to be better isn't a liberal value its a mankind value.
Nuclear Waste sitting out there in the ocean leaking is a problem beyond liberals or conservatives, its a problem for everyone.

I agree. That doesn't change the fact, though, that the political left tends to be the one wanting to do things about these problems.

 

[Sirpopopop]

It was a typo and if you can't understand that, then you have other problems that you need to be worried about.

A typo is getting a letter wrong. A typo is not getting a word wrong. If you can't understand that, then you have other problems that you need to be worried about.

I am not ignoring him at all, but since his death things have become better because a lot of people have woken up, and some others haven't.

Shephard's death was unusual. Not enough time has passed to say, "All Clear". Especially when you have amendments being passed that render homosexuals as second class citizens.

I have had gays hit on me in NYC and West Hollywood and you don't see me killing them just because I don't agree with their lifestyle.

Anecdotal evidence. Good for you, but you don't speak for everyone in America.

I did not mean to make his death a minor point, but a major point as in the USA I have not heard of that many deaths after his nationally. I am sure it still happens, but not as often as before.

Deaths due to Sexual Orientation were never common everyday occurences. Shepherd's death made news due to the brutality of it. However, what needs to be noted is that hate crimes against homosexuals still occur quite regularly.

A more telling sign is this:

Overall, NCAVP's report noted an 8% increase in reported incidents of anti-LGBT violence. Included in that 8% increase for the year, was an 80% increase in anti-LGBT murders, which rose in the reporting locations from 10 in 2002 to 18 in 2003.

http://gaytoday.com/events/042904ev.asp

 

[Triumph]

I agree with Soundwave 100%.

It's easy to give a child a candy, but it's hard to take away once they have it.
In this capitalistic society driven by "greed" and "consumption", there's no escape for this endless downward sprial of corruption.

Call me pessimistic, but I don't see how it's going to end - perhaps we've reached point of no return already. And those who worry about such, is ruled out as liberal nuts here in U.S.

Sigh.

lachesis

"The first rule of Project Mayhem is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT PROJECT MAYHEM."

 

[Minotauro]

Is anyone else amused by his use of terms like "hearing impaired" and "African American"? These terms are the result of a liberal push for a more politically correct language. You would think someone yearning for a time period like the 50's could muster up the courage to use words like "deaf" and "black."

 

[Flynn]

Is anyone else amused by his use of terms like "hearing impaired" and "African American"? These terms are the result of a liberal push for a more politically correct language. You would think someone yearning for a time period like the 50's could muster up the courage to use words like "deaf" and "black."

Actually they used a different word than "black" back then.

 

[Manabanana]

Call me naive, but I think this is a joke character. No way could someone who has such weak arguments and nothing but anecdotal evidence have graduated college to make that much a year. I have a little more faith in the education system than that.

 

[Ned Flanders]

Doc's posts are like a broom with instructions: Full of sweeping generalizations.

 

[Docwiz]

I disagree with this. No one is going to stop buying their "shit". Once you have a little, then you want even more. Its inevitable.

Docwiz is naive to the extreme. What do you think is gonna happen? That MTV is going to be replaced by some Christian values music channel? :lol

Corporations give us this stuff because they know we'll eat it up. And then it begins the cycle of free market competition -- the next guys has to offer more.

The 1950s styled society couldn't stand because it was never sustainable. A consumer driven society by nature demands progression, which is the opposite of what conservatives want to keep.

And its never going to stop.

I was raised in a Catholic school system, you think kids at my school were any better off or behaved any better or weren't having sex and doing drugs and drinking because we had religion class? Because I can tell you that wasn't the case, in many cases it was actually worse than the stuff I'd see at public schools.

Soundwave, carefull what you say. The things you say I am naive about I never said.
I said all of this liberalism is why the right is now standing up and saying something.

I didn't say that MTV was going to be replaced or things were going to get better.
Next time try to read what I say instead of putting words into my mouth. Might be a little better for your reading skills.

 

[Docwiz]

This is exactly the kind of liberalism we have here in California.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6578096/

Please read the entire thing and not skim through it.
Even though the mention of "God" is in the Declaration of Independence
or other documents of historical interest you know the liberals don't want
this to be shown. God in their eyes should be illegal.

I think their teachings of anti-God should be thrown away.

 

[Docwiz]

Doc's posts are like a broom with instructions: Full of sweeping generalizations.

generalizations or a lot of denial by forums posters because they have been brain washed full of liberal ideas and hate against religion.

 

[Boogie]

So, how is buddy here still not banned?

 

[xsarien]

generalizations by one forum poster because he has been brain washed full of paranoid, conservative delusions and an over-reliance on religion.

This makes a lot more sense.

 

[Docwiz]

So, how is buddy here still not banned?

I did nothing that is against the TOS. I am not trolling but just telling how I feel on a forum without resulting to violence or using cursewords and I have not insulted anyone or told anyone off.

Is it wrong to tell the truth even though other folks don't agree with you and that you are not trolling to get a rise out of anyone but that you are sick of others doing hating of Christianity or other religions and always putting down people who worship at churches because they think they are rednecks or hicks? Is this wrong? According to the TOS it isn't.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Why would he be banned? He's an idiot, but so are a lot of folks around here. He hasn't gotten personal, and he's responded -- poorly, granted -- to the arguments he deliberately generated.

 

[Docwiz]

This makes a lot more sense.

You have what you have and I have what I have.
The greatest things about America is that both viewpoints can be shown.

 

[maharg]

If I don't teach you about, say, chickens, does that mean I'm 'anti-chickens'?

Could you please qualify the leap from "not wanting religion in public education" to being "anti-religious" or, in particular, anti-christian?

This is the leap you're not being convincing on, and carting out stupid decisions like the one you linked to doesn't help your case. I don't think there are many who would defend a decision not to show the declaration of independence in an american school. It's a questionable decision even from an anti-establishment point of view, since the god in that declaration is called "Nature's God," iirc, which is at least a generic statement and at most not even Christian.

 

[Boogie]

Why would he be banned? He's an idiot, but so are a lot of folks around here. He hasn't gotten personal, and he's responded -- poorly, granted -- to the arguments he deliberately generated.

Okay, I was just wondering about jinx's statement around page 2:

Moderator hat:

As of this writing, you've been a member since November 7, have 17 total posts, and the last 14 posts have been split between this thread and the infamous "gays choosing Canada" thread. You're fond of stirring up controversy and firing off sweeping, unsubstantiated generalizations. If I were you, I'd start phrasing my arguments a LOT more tightly, and presenting some evidence for what you're talking about. You are being watched.

 

[xsarien]

Is it wrong to tell the truth even though other folks don't agree with you and that you are not trolling to get a rise out of anyone but that you are sick of others doing hating of Christianity or other religions and always putting down people who worship at churches because they think they are rednecks or hicks? Is this wrong? According to the TOS it isn't.

Congratulations, you have not read a single reply to any one of your posts throughout this entire thread.

 

[Ned Flanders]

I think we need to stop equating conservatism with this current era of moralistic posturing. This neo-con era has come about because the relgious right has hijacked the Republican party and turned it into a value-enforcement coalition. Republicanism used to mean getting the government out of your business through less taxation, bureaucracy, and regulation. But as progressive movements (womens lib, civil rights) began impeding on the moral sensibilities of the religious right, they began making a conscious effort to mutate Republicanism into the defender of Judeo-Chrisitan values through legislation. In my estimation, the main thing keeping neo-conservative movement from becoming what it is now back in the 80's was the lack of a media platform from which to "preach to the choir". The 700 Club, Limbaugh, and now Fox News have provided a means of spreading the message of this bastardized moralistic neo-conservative movement to the people, who now equate conceptions of conservatism with that of the religious right, NOT with limited government. This also correlates to the subsequent demonization of the term "liberal" (which essentially means "more freedom"..how ironic that we're now threatened by such a word) and the polarization of the current political climate. Which in turn, spawns great thinkers like Docwiz.

Abandon hope.

 

[Docwiz]

Congratulations, you have not read a single reply to any one of your posts throughout this entire thread.

I have read them, but I do not agree with them.

 

[Docwiz]

I think we need to stop equating conservatism with this current era of moralistic posturing. This neo-con era has come about because the relgious right has hijacked the Republican party and turned it into a value-enforcement coalition. Republicanism used to mean getting the government out of your business through less taxation, bureaucracy, and regulation. But as progressive movements (womens lib, civil rights) began impeding on the moral sensibilities of the religious right, they began making a conscious effort to mutate Republicanism into the defender of Judeo-Chrisitan values through legislation. In my estimation, the main thing keeping neo-conservative movement from becoming what it is now back in the 80's was the lack of a media platform from which to "preach to the choir". The 700 Club, Limbaugh, and now Fox News have provided a means of spreading the message of this bastardized moralistic neo-conservative movement to the people, who now equate conceptions of conservatism with that of the religious right, NOT with limited government. This also correlates to the subsequent demonization of the term "liberal" (which essentially means "more freedom"..how ironic that we're now threatened by such a word) and the polarization of the current political climate. Which in turn, spawns great thinkers like Docwiz.

Abandon hope.

Well thats great, but that isn't what it means now. You want to look back in the past, I would rather look towards the future. The left wing liberals also hijacked the Democratic party with whom I do like some ideas about the democrats including National Healthcare, but they can leave the left wing liberal stuff at home.

 

[HyperionX]

Well thats great, but that isn't what it means now. You want to look back in the past, I would rather look towards the future. The left wing liberals also hijacked the Democratic party with whom I do like some ideas about the democrats including National Healthcare, but they can leave the left wing liberal stuff at home.

Such as?

 

[Ned Flanders]

Doc, people aren't asking you to agree with them, they are asking you to base your opinions on rationality and evidence, instead of the generalized "impressions". There are plenty of skilled authors who support your causes and do so in a far more eloquent, coherent, and factually supported manner. You seem content to deal in anecdotes or broad, unprovable claims in order to support your arguement.

For instance, I can claim that fast food is making America fat, but without some empirical evidence or consideration for the other factors involved, the statement rings hollow, even thought it may be in large part correct. In other words, you can't help your case simply by stating it. You need to be more informed about what you're discussing if you intend for others to take you and your cause seriously, else you're just providing grounds for a general dismissal of your viewpoint.

 

[Docwiz]

Such as?

Pro Abortion
Pro Gay rights
Legalising drugs
Anti-Christianity
Pro-Pornography (which some of you will be like WTH?)

What I like about Democrats is:
National Healthcare
Care for the Poor such as tax breaks
Minority support (support for hispanics and African Americans)

 

[Docwiz]

Doc, people aren't asking you to agree with them, they are asking you to base your opinions on rationality and evidence, instead of the generalized "impressions". There are plenty of skilled authors who support your causes and do so in a far more eloquent, coherent, and factually supported manner. You seem content to deal in anecdotes or broad, unprovable claims in order to support your arguement.

For instance, I can claim that fast food is making America fat, but without some empirical evidence or consideration for the other factors involved, the statement rings hollow, even thought it may be in large part correct. In other words, you can't help your case simply by stating it. You need to be more informed about what you're discussing if you intend for others to take you and your cause seriously, else you're just providing grounds for a general dismissal of your viewpoint.

You need evidence that fast food is making America fat? You are kidding right?
Do you need evidence that the sun is coming up tomorrow?

If you want numbers it would take a huge amount of time to google everything.
I don't think I have that much time.

While you are waiting check this link out:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6578096/

 

[explodet]

And once again he misses the point ENTIRELY.

 

[Docwiz]

Doc, people aren't asking you to agree with them, they are asking you to base your opinions on rationality and evidence, instead of the generalized "impressions". There are plenty of skilled authors who support your causes and do so in a far more eloquent, coherent, and factually supported manner. You seem content to deal in anecdotes or broad, unprovable claims in order to support your arguement.

For instance, I can claim that fast food is making America fat, but without some empirical evidence or consideration for the other factors involved, the statement rings hollow, even thought it may be in large part correct. In other words, you can't help your case simply by stating it. You need to be more informed about what you're discussing if you intend for others to take you and your cause seriously, else you're just providing grounds for a general dismissal of your viewpoint.

oh, can you give me some obvious proof that the christian right has hijacked the Republicans?

see how silly that sounds, I don't need proof because I know that is true.

 

[Ned Flanders]

Well thats great, but that isn't what it means now. You want to look back in the past, I would rather look towards the future. The left wing liberals also hijacked the Democratic party with whom I do like some ideas about the democrats including National Healthcare, but they can leave the left wing liberal stuff at home.

"Liberals" didn't hijack the Democratic party, but you could argue that fiscal socialists did around the middle of the century, which has led in part to the reponse of true conservatives (Bush, defecit spender and champion of fundless mandates for social programs, is far from true fiscal conservatism) to oppose broad-base welfare, corporate protectionism, and socialized medicine.

I think, particularly during the 90's, Democrats and liberals in general became linked to political correctness, which to me is more a product of a capitalist society where everyone is trying to sell you something (and thus go overboard in trying not to offend your sensibilities by portending absolute indiscriminance) than some kind of progressive social/political movement. But the resentment built up against PC figureheads (Clinton's being chief among them) and Democrats have reaped the backlash ever since the Republican majority landed in Congress in the mid-90's. But this backlash is misplaced, because Republicans are just as savy at dealing in PC as Dems, as evidenced by the "compassionate conservatism" movement that shot up pre-election 2000. It's more cognitive dissonance and scapegoating than genuine opposition IMO..

 

[Docwiz]

And once again he misses the point ENTIRELY.

Yet once again you miss the point that I am trying to make. You give me proof that I am wrong, give me some numbers. so far I haven't seen any proof the other way around telling me that I am wrong.

 

[Ill Saint]

This all just pointless polemic. Nothing's coming out of it. No thought building, no good discussion... Docwiz is clearly not interested in either.

I don't need proof because I know that is true.

...

 

[Docwiz]

"Liberals" didn't hijack the Democratic party, but you could argue that fiscal socialists did around the middle of the century, which has led in part to the reponse of true conservatives (Bush, defecit spender and champion of fundless mandates for social programs, is far from true fiscal conservatism) to oppose broad-base welfare, corporate protectionism, and socialized medicine.

I think, particularly during the 90's, Democrats and liberals in general became linked to political correctness, which to me is more a product of a capitalist society where everyone is trying to sell you something (and thus go overboard in trying not to offend your sensibilities by portending absolute indiscriminance) than some kind of progressive social/political movement. But the resentment built up against PC figureheads (Clinton's being chief among them) and Democrats have reaped the backlash ever since the Republican majority landed in Congress in the mid-90's. But this backlash is misplaced, because Republicans are just as savy at dealing in PC as Dems, as evidenced by the "compassionate conservatism" movement that shot up pre-election 2000. It's more cognitive dissonance and scapegoating than genuine opposition IMO..

Well then the Christian right didn't hijack the Republicans.
It was the facsists neo-nazi's that did.

I read a lot of political commentary and none of what you said makes sense just like the line above that I posted makes no sense.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Pro Abortion -- no, pro-choice. I'm against abortion, but for a woman's right to choose. I'd venture most 'liberals' feel the same way.

Pro Gay rights -- yes. Gay folk are human beings and deserve all the basic rights shared by 'heterosexuals'.

Legalising drugs -- some drugs. Can you demonstrate that marijuana is worse for you than, say, alcohol, beyond any reasonable doubt? And that legalizing drugs would have bad effect on society?

Anti-Christianity -- no, just anti government-sponsored evangelism. No-one wants ANYONE to stop being Christian; they just don't want their children exposed to one religion, and in many cases, one specific flavor of that religion as practiced by the instructor, especially if it countermands the teaching of their own religion or parents.

Pro-Pornography (which some of you will be like WTH?) -- nothing wrong with sexual urges. All pornography is not created equal, though, and the kind that exploits children or people against their will is demonstrably bad for society.

The liberal social stance is one of civil freedom: that a person thus inclined can go down to the store and buy weed and a few skin mags, marry his buddy on the weekend, and do a little life councilling with his recently-pregnant teenage sister. Likewise, a person thus inclined can go to their church and worship the God of their choosing, write long tracts about the evils of buying weed and skin mags and marrying dudes, and stand outside an abortion clinic to remind all the people that pass through its doors of their fiery fate. Everyone is happy, except folks like you who want to codify their peculiar and exclusive perspectives into law.

Once again, we see a common theme in your complaints -- that a refusal to endorse one of your beliefs is somehow magically identical to being against it. The public sphere is about commonality; about those things that are common to all people, by and large. Christianity is a very exclusive and specific thing, and it should not be endorsed or sponsored by the government. (And in case that continues to escape you, that does NOT mean it should be banned, or that people should not be allowed religious expression.)

Specific to your little link: why SHOULD God have a place in a PUBLIC school? Why should the goverment do the work of your church?

 

[way more]

oh, can you give me some obvious proof that the christian right has hijacked the Republicans?

see how silly that sounds, I don't need proof because I know that is true.

A swing and a miss!