User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 138

  1. #61
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince View Post
    Exactly. There's no difference whatsoever with Ayatollahs in Arabian countries, when you have people, who believe in creationism, running for vice president.
    Dude, I am an agnostic who suffered through thirteen years of Catholic schooling, but this is completely outrageous. How dare you compare an evangelical Christian in American politics to people who drop homosexuals and adulterers off cliffs after a kangaroo trial? You CANNOT be serious.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #62
    Senior Member vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Well..I meant in ways of mixing religion with politics & law, not particulary torture tactics.

  3. #63
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince View Post
    Well..I meant in ways of mixing religion with politics & law, not particulary torture tactics.
    It's still an awful comparison. There is a GIGANTIC difference between being an evangelical politician and starting a violent revolution in order to institute religious law, subvert civil liberties, and bypass democratic elections. That type of rhetoric only serves to outrage religious people in the United States, and it's fodder for "Christians are the only group you can persecute" mentality many of them have nowadays.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #64
    Senior Member vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    321

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    It's still an awful comparison. There is a GIGANTIC difference between being an evangelical politician and starting a violent revolution in order to institute religious law, subvert civil liberties, and bypass democratic elections. That type of rhetoric only serves to outrage religious people in the United States, and it's fodder for "Christians are the only group you can persecute" mentality many of them have nowadays.
    Maybe comparison is never a good thing. I give you that. I just think the word "evangelic" alone shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

    One can also wonder how democratic elections are when you only have 2 major parties, who are, on top of that, paid by companies during their campaign. I hope nobody thinks those payments are "gifts" or "charity". These same companies are gonna want something in return.
    Anyway, I'l give it a rest here, cause I could go on and on about what's wrong in politics. And you may take me for anti-American, but things in Europe aren't that much better.

  5. #65
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince View Post
    Maybe comparison is never a good thing. I give you that. I just think the word "evangelic" alone shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

    One can also wonder how democratic elections are when you only have 2 major parties, who are, on top of that, paid by companies during their campaign. I hope nobody thinks those payments are "gifts" or "charity". These same companies are gonna want something in return.
    Anyway, I'l give it a rest here, cause I could go on and on about what's wrong in politics. And you may take me for anti-American, but things in Europe aren't that much better.

    I don't find it anti-American, just a little hyperbolic and perhaps snap-judgmental. I wish Americans would vote third parties more often myself. I will be.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #66
    Babylon Candle Venom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Posts
    2,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I don't find it anti-American, just a little hyperbolic and perhaps snap-judgmental. I wish Americans would vote third parties more often myself. I will be.
    the problem with "false" third parties is that then all that does is "nader" votes away from the decesion you should be voting for: A or B (not that im trying to tell you how to vote)

    countries that then have "true" contender third parties then have another problem. instead of having only 50% of the nation's support for the current regime, countries with more than 2 parties can elect regimes that only had 35% of the original vote! Sure you can do run offs, but the fact is that having many parties isnt that much better. Look at Italy. They kept having to form coalition governments so that the tiny fractions could make up a significant % of votes. Then the coalitions would fail etc....

    Now if there were to be a 3rd party that in one fell swoop REPLACED one of the currents like has happened in our history before, then Im all for that.


    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Dude, I am an agnostic who suffered through thirteen years of Catholic schooling, but this is completely outrageous. How dare you compare an evangelical Christian in American politics to people who drop homosexuals and adulterers off cliffs after a kangaroo trial? You CANNOT be serious.
    you act as if people like bush and huckabee dont secretly wish they could do the same to OUR homosexuals and "infadels" . bush Sr was
    quoted as saying that atheists shouldnt even be considered citizens.


    An across-the-board tax cut would benefit everyone in this country. Relying on the government to effect long-term social change almost always hurts everyone in this country. The Republicans are actually far too PRO-education spending at this point. NCLB was a huge, expensive boondoggle. Less than fifteen years ago, the GOP wanted to abolish the Department of Education. I don't see what your point is here at all.

    Furthermore, you are no one to judge how people spend their money. The government has no money of its own; it belongs to the people who make it. Buying a huge TV is way better for the economy and the country as a whole than is 80% of what the government spends its money on.
    I agree that wealth redistribution is not inherently always a good thing. I however, think that its extremely naive to think that eliminating public education would somehow be good for our work force. I cant imagine how any form of social mobility would even be possible without education (i have no idea how you personally feel about removing the dept of edu, just that you brought it up).

    The second issue is the taxes. Cutting taxes is not this magic marker fix all. The fact is we have a national debt that at the current rate is going to one day be a grossy insane % of our GDP. No body wants to pay taxes, take out the trash or go to work but its shit we have to do. If we never pay down the national debt then we are fucked. And yes, I understand that obama probably wont do any better job of paying down the debt just because he raises taxes. I do know that cutting taxes will probably make our debt situation only worse.

    Republicans get up in arms about raising taxes during economic bliss (you cant raise taxes!!! itll ruin our great time!)
    Republicans get up in arms about raising taxes during economic hell (you cant raise taxes in a recession!)

    well then when the hell are we going to pay down this debt? The government has created a moral hazard. Wonder why everyone lives outside their means and never pays down credit cards? The government sets the precedent. (again im fully aware that the democrats are not necessarily promising to pay it off either)

  7. #67
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Be that as it may, that is why I think the whole angle of argument needs to be dropped -- because neither is entirely right -- but conservative Christians keep leaning on the horn as if they can somehow make an "appeal to authority" [the Founding Fathers] in order to legitimize their own desires over those of other equal-blooded Americans.
    Lots of groups make appeals to the Founding Fathers. Why single out one group?

    I just flipped past a Christian station this morning, I was listening to music, and then they ran all their typical political mumbo-jumbo and had some cheesy sketch (even with goofy "Adventures in Odyssey" style voiceovers) about how we all had to please God by getting out to vote... and how we need to vote based on "Christian values" -- as if there's one definition of "Christian values" and one candidate is obviously aligned and the other is completely not. No talk of issues or appropriateness of the times for a particular personality approach or anything else... and I had a pretty good idea of which candidate(s) they were encouraging people to vote for.
    The funny thing is that Obama is considerably more religious than McCain. I don't really understand how Christians accepted so many Republican ideas as if it's part of their religion. There are plenty of ideas in politics that are contrary to Biblical teaching (and you can find them in either party).
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  8. #68
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Benjamin Franklin said, "God helps those who help themselves".

    While Jesus said, "Love your neighbour as yourself".

    This is a good example of cognitive dissonance.

  9. #69
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Babylon Candle View Post
    the problem with "false" third parties is that then all that does is "nader" votes away from the decesion you should be voting for: A or B (not that im trying to tell you how to vote)
    There is no such thing as a "false" third party. That doesn't even make sense.


    countries that then have "true" contender third parties then have another problem. instead of having only 50% of the nation's support for the current regime, countries with more than 2 parties can elect regimes that only had 35% of the original vote! Sure you can do run offs, but the fact is that having many parties isnt that much better. Look at Italy. They kept having to form coalition governments so that the tiny fractions could make up a significant % of votes. Then the coalitions would fail etc....

    Now if there were to be a 3rd party that in one fell swoop REPLACED one of the currents like has happened in our history before, then Im all for that.
    I am still a fan of our winner-take-all, first-past-the-post system. I am not a fan of proportional representation.


    you act as if people like bush and huckabee dont secretly wish they could do the same to OUR homosexuals and "infadels" . bush Sr was
    quoted as saying that atheists shouldnt even be considered citizens.
    They'd have trouble getting elected without homosexuals. There are plenty of rumors about high-ranking GOP officials being gay.


    I agree that wealth redistribution is not inherently always a good thing. I however, think that its extremely naive to think that eliminating public education would somehow be good for our work force. I cant imagine how any form of social mobility would even be possible without education (i have no idea how you personally feel about removing the dept of edu, just that you brought it up).
    Education clearly does not have to be government-run, though. If not outright abolition, I'd like to see the federal government less involved, and more decisions made at the state and local levels. Also, vouchers would be nice things to have. The Department of Education is definitely not at the top of my list of things to abolish in the federal government. Personally, I am going to work extra hard to make sure my children get a private education, and the best one money can buy.

    Oh, and the government shouldn't be redistributing any income, ever.


    The second issue is the taxes. Cutting taxes is not this magic marker fix all. The fact is we have a national debt that at the current rate is going to one day be a grossy insane % of our GDP. No body wants to pay taxes, take out the trash or go to work but its shit we have to do. If we never pay down the national debt then we are fucked. And yes, I understand that obama probably wont do any better job of paying down the debt just because he raises taxes. I do know that cutting taxes will probably make our debt situation only worse.
    Have you ever considered that we could slash spending by a ton and the country would still be completely and totally fine?


    Republicans get up in arms about raising taxes during economic bliss (you cant raise taxes!!! itll ruin our great time!)
    Republicans get up in arms about raising taxes during economic hell (you cant raise taxes in a recession!)

    well then when the hell are we going to pay down this debt? The government has created a moral hazard. Wonder why everyone lives outside their means and never pays down credit cards? The government sets the precedent. (again im fully aware that the democrats are not necessarily promising to pay it off either)

    I agree, but I think it would be a lot better if we lowered taxes by a lot, and lowered spending even more. Pulling out of Iraq, shuttering a bunch of useless military installations in foreign countries, letting people opt out of Social Security, and getting rid of corporate welfare would save hundreds of billions, if not trillions.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #70
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I am still a fan of our winner-take-all, first-past-the-post system. I am not a fan of proportional representation.
    We have proportional representation and it works quite well.

    The great advantage of proportional representation is that it is fair.

    And we are the land of the fair go.

    Fair go, mate.

Similar Threads

  1. Canadian banks with branches commonly found in the USA?
    By Usehername in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-29-2012, 04:19 PM
  2. Love the New Fact Verifying Culture of the USA
    By nomadic in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-03-2008, 01:14 PM
  3. When the house was standing...
    By Makaub in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 07:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO