# Teaching biblical truth could get your kids taken away



## MindWars

(Reported By Andrea Mrozek) Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, just passed a law that could allow the government to remove kids from their home if their parents oppose the new transgender ideology. Could there be anything more terrifying for parents than that? It’s not hard to see why the passage of Bill 89 captured the attention of so many across the globe. But how did this bill—


Teaching Biblical Truth Could Get Your Kids Taken Away
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is beyond wrong and immoral because nobody should be blackmailed via their kids because they don't believe the same ideas, ideology whatever. It's just wrong. 
For you assholes who say good, well turn the tables and say how would it feel to you if things flip back to the way they were and you all are told you lose everything because you get ousted for being gay. 

Or how about you don't believe in praying to Allah, but are forced to and if you don't you lose your kids.................


----------



## RodISHI

They have been doing it here to if people do not let doctors tell them what is best for their children when they are the parents and they disagree. Think of all the antis on this site alone that claim Bible believers that don't wanna go with their programming should lose their children.


----------



## ScienceRocks

So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


----------



## RodISHI

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


Just because you do not believe and have never seen anything in the spirit of God doesn't mean that others haven't. Thousands of years of spiritual reports from people and you are the one that denies those. That tells me you are a very screwed up individual.


----------



## MindWars

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.



Don't worry Karma's coming for you.  You'll just be to soul less to realize what it is when it comes for you lmao.


----------



## RodISHI

MindWars said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't worry Karma's coming for you.  You'll just be to soul less to realize what it is when it comes for you lmao.
Click to expand...

That sleeping in the dust (confusion) of the earth as the dead (spiritually speaking) is actually hell (separation from God). It their personal problem.


----------



## Dale Smith

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.




There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.


----------



## RodISHI

Dale Smith said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
Click to expand...

People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.


----------



## MindWars

RodISHI said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
Click to expand...


You wouldn't believe the how Alex Jones gets picked on when he explains what so many causes of this gayness is from.  People are  in so much denial it's incredible.  

Maybe it's just the way I am, but I would want to know what caused it if I were gay. Not that anything could be changed, but to know why and how come.  When it comes down to it , this is why we say this Government has caused so many crimes against humanity is mind blowing. 

No matter what gay denies it,  tech. none of them come out saying hey I want to be gay .  " yes some say they were born that  way"  let's say that's true for those who are.   There again comes what did their mothers eat or drink etc. 

It is highly believed plastic " BPA" has caused this epidemic of gays.   

Our men are becoming more feminized due to the estrogen mimickers from drugs in the water, the water we drink in general has so many drugs in it. the list is huge.


----------



## Dale Smith

RodISHI said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
Click to expand...


WOW! You know about Atrazine? I am friends with Tyrone Hayes that did the lab work on the affects of Atrazine that was being manufactured by Syngenta and when he gave the lab reports that it was causing gender confusion and genitalia deformities in amphibians? He was attacked unmercifully and was stalked and hounded. I have to say that I am beyond impressed with your knowledge....I'd tip my hat to you if I wore one. LOL! Good on ya!


----------



## RodISHI

Yes the alterations via chemicals have caused a lot more physiological issues for all concerned. I have a cousin that is gay but he was weird when he was a child. His mom was a party girl though so it is not surprising her children have had issues. I believe there are both spiritual issues and physiological issues at play. I also had some relatives that did drugs as teens and acid made them more f'd up than they were already due to physiological issues. Both mental and physical issues are being dealt with by a lot of people. We also a few years back started counting and tracking how many people that live around us that are on drugs or pharmaceuticals of some type and it is well over half. (Its a mess)


----------



## Dale Smith

MindWars said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You wouldn't believe the how Alex Jones gets picked on when he explains what so many causes of this gayness is from.  People are  in so much denial it's incredible.
> 
> Maybe it's just the way I am, but I would want to know what caused it if I were gay. Not that anything could be changed, but to know why and how come.  When it comes down to it , this is why we say this Government has caused so many crimes against humanity is mind blowing.
> 
> No matter what gay denies it,  tech. none of them come out saying hey I want to be gay .  " yes some say they were born that  way"  let's say that's true for those who are.   There again comes what did their mothers eat or drink etc.
> 
> It is highly believed plastic " BPA" has caused this epidemic of gays.
> 
> Our men are becoming more feminized due to the estrogen mimickers from drugs in the water, the water we drink in general has so many drugs in it. the list is huge.
Click to expand...


You knocked that out of the ball park and it still hasn't landed....great job as usual.


----------



## QuickHitCurepon

If that keeps up, they will demand everyone to say they are gay so no one CAN get offended.


----------



## MindWars

Dale Smith said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You wouldn't believe the how Alex Jones gets picked on when he explains what so many causes of this gayness is from.  People are  in so much denial it's incredible.
> 
> Maybe it's just the way I am, but I would want to know what caused it if I were gay. Not that anything could be changed, but to know why and how come.  When it comes down to it , this is why we say this Government has caused so many crimes against humanity is mind blowing.
> 
> No matter what gay denies it,  tech. none of them come out saying hey I want to be gay .  " yes some say they were born that  way"  let's say that's true for those who are.   There again comes what did their mothers eat or drink etc.
> 
> It is highly believed plastic " BPA" has caused this epidemic of gays.
> 
> Our men are becoming more feminized due to the estrogen mimickers from drugs in the water, the water we drink in general has so many drugs in it. the list is huge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You knocked that out of the ball park and it still hasn't landed....great job as usual.
Click to expand...


Thank you.  Hope everything turned out ok . meant to ask you that the past few days now.


----------



## RodISHI

Dale Smith said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WOW! You know about Atrazine? I am friends with Tyrone Hayes that did the lab work on the affects of Atrazine that was being manufactured by Syngenta and when he gave the lab reports that it was causing gender confusion and genitalia deformities in amphibians? He was attacked unmercifully and was stalked and hounded. I have to say that I am beyond impressed with your knowledge....I'd tip my hat to you if I wore one. LOL! Good on ya!
Click to expand...

When I found Tyrone's studies I knew I had to look at see what was in the area where Ron/da the tranny guy (I can't recall his last name or I'd search for him) was from and try to see what the Atrazine load was there. It was a high area for Atrazine use.  After he'd divorced, etc.. he moved away from there I am assuming that his hormones and such started normalizing. When I sat and listened to him he cried and cried telling me what he'd been through. He also believes on Jesus and he said he was going to try to get some sort of normal back into his life but if he moved back there he would be  getting those doses of Atrazine again in the water supply.

I wrote Tyrone an email but I don't know if he ever got it. It amazes me when I start thinking of all the people and things I have been allowed to see and how things work in this world.


----------



## RodISHI

QuickHitCurepon said:


> If that keeps up, they will demand everyone to say they are gay so no one CAN get offended.


A lot of the 'wanna control the population'/ eugenics nuts want people to to be all screwed up.


----------



## Dale Smith

MindWars said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You wouldn't believe the how Alex Jones gets picked on when he explains what so many causes of this gayness is from.  People are  in so much denial it's incredible.
> 
> Maybe it's just the way I am, but I would want to know what caused it if I were gay. Not that anything could be changed, but to know why and how come.  When it comes down to it , this is why we say this Government has caused so many crimes against humanity is mind blowing.
> 
> No matter what gay denies it,  tech. none of them come out saying hey I want to be gay .  " yes some say they were born that  way"  let's say that's true for those who are.   There again comes what did their mothers eat or drink etc.
> 
> It is highly believed plastic " BPA" has caused this epidemic of gays.
> 
> Our men are becoming more feminized due to the estrogen mimickers from drugs in the water, the water we drink in general has so many drugs in it. the list is huge.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You knocked that out of the ball park and it still hasn't landed....great job as usual.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you.  Hope everything turned out ok . meant to ask you that the past few days now.
Click to expand...


They had to put in a plate and some screws and I hate the bulky cast but I'll be fine. God always sees us through. I am very blessed. Thanks for asking!


----------



## Dale Smith

RodISHI said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WOW! You know about Atrazine? I am friends with Tyrone Hayes that did the lab work on the affects of Atrazine that was being manufactured by Syngenta and when he gave the lab reports that it was causing gender confusion and genitalia deformities in amphibians? He was attacked unmercifully and was stalked and hounded. I have to say that I am beyond impressed with your knowledge....I'd tip my hat to you if I wore one. LOL! Good on ya!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When I found Tyrone's studies I knew I had to look at see what was in the area where Ron/da the tranny guy (I can't recall his last name or I'd search for him) was from and try to see what the Atrazine load was there. It was a high area for Atrazine use.  After he'd divorced, etc.. he moved away from there I am assuming that his hormones and such started normalizing. When I sat and listened to him he cried and cried telling me what he'd been through. He also believes on Jesus and he said he was going to try to get some sort of normal back into his life but if he moved back there he would be  getting those doses of Atrazine again in the water supply.
> 
> I wrote Tyrone an email but I don't know if he ever got it. It amazes me when I start thinking of all the people and things I have been allowed to see and how things work in this world.
Click to expand...


I found him on FB and we chatted back and forth because he knew I was a dedicated researcher so he "friended" me. I tell ya, you have to have nads of steel to buck the big multi-nation corporations and they will make it their mission to ruin your life and reputation. I was glad that he went public because it does provide him some protection but I am sure that he is looking over his shoulder constantly. 20 other researchers did the same experiments with mammals and found the same results and this crap is sprayed on half the corn crop in America. Good job of bringing this to light...the more that know and expose it, the better.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

MindWars said:


> (Reported By Andrea Mrozek) Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, just passed a law that could allow the government to remove kids from their home if their parents oppose the new transgender ideology. Could there be anything more terrifying for parents than that? It’s not hard to see why the passage of Bill 89 captured the attention of so many across the globe. But how did this bill—
> 
> 
> Teaching Biblical Truth Could Get Your Kids Taken Away
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This is beyond wrong and immoral because nobody should be blackmailed via their kids because they don't believe the same ideas, ideology whatever. It's just wrong.
> For you assholes who say good, well turn the tables and say how would it feel to you if things flip back to the way they were and you all are told you lose everything because you get ousted for being gay.
> 
> Or how about you don't believe in praying to Allah, but are forced to and if you don't you lose your kids.................




  No need to frame this as being over _“biblical truth”_.  Just basic science and biology.  Boys are not girls, and girls are not boys, one cannot become the other, and one has to be quite f•••-ed up in the head to not know the difference.


----------



## JoeB131

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.



  Nobody is talking about teaching kids to hate anyone, here.  This is about recognizing the difference between boys and girls, and acknowledging the immutable scientific fact that one is not, and cannot become, the other.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

RodISHI said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you do not believe and have never seen anything in the spirit of God doesn't mean that others haven't. Thousands of years of spiritual reports from people and you are the one that denies those. That tells me you are a very screwed up individual.
Click to expand...


  Not only does he deny God; but he also denies basic and obvious scientific facts, such as the distinction between boys and girls.  How much more screwed-up than that can an individual get?


----------



## ricechickie

"Biblical truth" is an oxymoron, isn't it?


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> Not only does he deny God; but he also denies basic and obvious scientific facts, such as the distinction between boys and girls. How much more screwed-up than that can an individual get?



Except people with science and degrees say gender is more than DNA or genitals... but never mind.  

I know it's tough for your bigots, you can't pick on minorities, women or gays anymore, so all you are left with is picking on the "Trannies".


----------



## JoeB131

ricechickie said:


> "Biblical truth" is an oxymoron, isn't it?



What a book about talking snakes and giants isn't true?


----------



## ricechickie

JoeB131 said:


> ricechickie said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Biblical truth" is an oxymoron, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a book about talking snakes and giants isn't true?
Click to expand...


I have all respect for it, but I don't take it literally.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only does he deny God; but he also denies basic and obvious scientific facts, such as the distinction between boys and girls. How much more screwed-up than that can an individual get?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except people with science and degrees say gender is more than DNA or genitals... but never mind.
> 
> I know it's tough for your bigots, you can't pick on minorities, women or gays anymore, so all you are left with is picking on the "Trannies".
Click to expand...


  Madness is not science.  And holding genuine science  in greater credence than the insane delusions pf immoral left *wrong*-wing perverts does not make one a bigot.

  Just goes to show just how f•••-ed-up perverted filth such as you and Matthew are—You call biology _“hate”_ and science _“bigotry”_.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> Madness is not science. And holding genuine science in greater credence than the insane delusions pf immoral left *wrong*-wing perverts does not make one a bigot.
> 
> Just goes to show just how f•••-ed-up perverted filth such as you and Matthew are—You call biology _“hate”_ and science _“bigotry”_.



I got to ask the obvious question... if some dude thinks he's a chick, why does that bother you in the least?  How does this  have any affect on your life?

I doesn't, other than the emotional baggage you bring to the table with your sexual insecurities.


----------



## JoeB131

ricechickie said:


> I have all respect for it, but I don't take it literally.



The thing is, 90% of what is in the bible is actually- pretty awful. Harsh laws and harsh punishments we'd consider cruel today. Yet Christians will pull out the few nice bits, ignore all the nasty stuff, and claim this is a guide for morality.


----------



## MindWars

JoeB131 said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
Click to expand...



But quacks like you think this is Normal ...................>Mmmmk


----------



## MindWars

MindWars said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> But quacks like you think this is Normal ...................>Mmmmk
Click to expand...



CHILDREN SEE THIS FREAK AND YOU FREAKS THINK THIS IS NORMAL..............MMMMK


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Madness is not science. And holding genuine science in greater credence than the insane delusions pf immoral left *wrong*-wing perverts does not make one a bigot.
> 
> Just goes to show just how f•••-ed-up perverted filth such as you and Matthew are—You call biology _“hate”_ and science _“bigotry”_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got to ask the obvious question... if some dude thinks he's a chick, why does that bother you in the least?  How does this  have any affect on your life?
> 
> I doesn't, other than the emotional baggage you bring to the table with your sexual insecurities.
Click to expand...


  Someone who denies the difference between men and women is in no credible position to accuse anyone else of _“sexual insecurities”_ or other sexual issues.

  But to answer your question, as long as they keep their sick perversions to themselves, it doesn't affect me.  As a husband, as a brother, as a son, as a nephew, and as a male acquaintance of many other women in many different capacities—as a man—I have a duty and an obligation to protect those women with whom I am acquainted from the sick, disgusting perverts whose side you choose to take against that of these and all other women.  If you were any kind of decent man, you would feel the exact same obligation.  If one of these filthy perverts chooses to follow my wife, my mother, my sister, my aunt, or any of my other female acquaintances into the ladies' room, then it becomes very much my business.


----------



## AvgGuyIA

MindWars said:


> (Reported By Andrea Mrozek) Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, just passed a law that could allow the government to remove kids from their home if their parents oppose the new transgender ideology. Could there be anything more terrifying for parents than that? It’s not hard to see why the passage of Bill 89 captured the attention of so many across the globe. But how did this bill—
> 
> 
> Teaching Biblical Truth Could Get Your Kids Taken Away
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This is beyond wrong and immoral because nobody should be blackmailed via their kids because they don't believe the same ideas, ideology whatever. It's just wrong.
> For you assholes who say good, well turn the tables and say how would it feel to you if things flip back to the way they were and you all are told you lose everything because you get ousted for being gay.
> 
> Or how about you don't believe in praying to Allah, but are forced to and if you don't you lose your kids.................


  Our libs want to tiring this shit to our country.


----------



## ricechickie

Bob Blaylock said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Madness is not science. And holding genuine science in greater credence than the insane delusions pf immoral left *wrong*-wing perverts does not make one a bigot.
> 
> Just goes to show just how f•••-ed-up perverted filth such as you and Matthew are—You call biology _“hate”_ and science _“bigotry”_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got to ask the obvious question... if some dude thinks he's a chick, why does that bother you in the least?  How does this  have any affect on your life?
> 
> I doesn't, other than the emotional baggage you bring to the table with your sexual insecurities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Someone who denies the difference between men and women is in no credible position to accuse anyone else of _“sexual insecurities”_ or other sexual issues.
> 
> But to answer your question, as long as they keep their sick perversions to themselves, it doesn't affect me.  As a husband, as a brother, as a son, as a nephew, and as a male acquaintance of many other women in many different capacities—as a man—I have a duty and an obligation to protect those women with whom I am acquainted from the sick, disgusting perverts whose side you choose to take against that of these and all other women.  If you were any kind of decent man, you would feel the exact same obligation.  If one of these filthy perverts chooses to follow my wife, my mother, my sister, my aunt, or any of my other female acquaintances into the ladies' room, then it becomes very much my business.
Click to expand...


Guys who want to be females are not generally interested in sexually engaging females.

And even if they were, there are already people who are attracted to females and have complete legal access to the same restroom as your wife, mother, sister, aunt, and any other lady in your family or acquaintance.  They are called lesbians.

Get a grip.


----------



## JOSweetHeart

I thought that the goal was to attract people, not make them pack their bags and go live elsewhere.

God bless you always!!!

Holly


----------



## JoeB131

MindWars said:


> But quacks like you think this is Normal ...................>Mmmmk



When did I say that was "normal". That guy looks a bit disturbed, or maybe just high. 

Do you have any rational arguments?


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> Someone who denies the difference between men and women is in no credible position to accuse anyone else of _“sexual insecurities”_ or other sexual issues.
> 
> But to answer your question, as long as they keep their sick perversions to themselves, it doesn't affect me. As a husband, as a brother, as a son, as a nephew, and as a male acquaintance of many other women in many different capacities—as a man—I have a duty and an obligation to protect those women with whom I am acquainted from the sick, disgusting perverts whose side you choose to take against that of these and all other women. If you were any kind of decent man, you would feel the exact same obligation. If one of these filthy perverts chooses to follow my wife, my mother, my sister, my aunt, or any of my other female acquaintances into the ladies' room, then it becomes very much my business.



Dude, that's kind of patronizing. first, this is the 21st century. Women are capable of taking care of themselves.  I know this thought frightens you even more than a dude in a dress.  

Second, most of these women have probably peed next to a trans woman dozens of times and never knew the difference.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Dude, that's kind of patronizing. first, this is the 21st century. Women are capable of taking care of themselves.



  There are those of us who have been brought up to be real men, and those who have not.  I guess it's clear enough which sort you are.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Canada is slipping into the abyss, the dark side.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
Click to expand...


The religiously triggered asshat JoeBlow infests another thread...


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not only does he deny God; but he also denies basic and obvious scientific facts, such as the distinction between boys and girls. How much more screwed-up than that can an individual get?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except people with science and degrees say gender is more than DNA or genitals... but never mind.
> 
> I know it's tough for your bigots, you can't pick on minorities, women or gays anymore, so all you are left with is picking on the "Trannies".
Click to expand...


people with science and degrees used to say you can determine intelligence by head measurements. 

The only bigot I am seeing right now is you.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Someone who denies the difference between men and women is in no credible position to accuse anyone else of _“sexual insecurities”_ or other sexual issues.
> 
> But to answer your question, as long as they keep their sick perversions to themselves, it doesn't affect me. As a husband, as a brother, as a son, as a nephew, and as a male acquaintance of many other women in many different capacities—as a man—I have a duty and an obligation to protect those women with whom I am acquainted from the sick, disgusting perverts whose side you choose to take against that of these and all other women. If you were any kind of decent man, you would feel the exact same obligation. If one of these filthy perverts chooses to follow my wife, my mother, my sister, my aunt, or any of my other female acquaintances into the ladies' room, then it becomes very much my business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, that's kind of patronizing. first, this is the 21st century. Women are capable of taking care of themselves.  I know this thought frightens you even more than a dude in a dress.
> 
> Second, most of these women have probably peed next to a trans woman dozens of times and never knew the difference.
Click to expand...



The way progressives act, Women need big daddy government to pay for their things and take care of them. Progressive patronize all women.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> There are those of us who have been brought up to be real men, and those who have not. I guess it's clear enough which sort you are.



I'm the one who has a box full of medals from the US Army, so not so much. What did you do?


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> The way progressives act, Women need big daddy government to pay for their things and take care of them. Progressive patronize all women.



Not really. Most people on welfare are only on it for a few years in a rough patch in their lives.  

Meanwhile, you have middle class white people who are on medicare and social security for decades. 

But you keep working those racist stereotypes, marty.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> people with science and degrees used to say you can determine intelligence by head measurements.



Until other people with science tested the theory and proved it wrong. Not that it wasn't a bad theory in 1800, given much of the world still believed witches were a thing.  

The difference between faith and science is that faith fits reality around the theory, and science fits theory around reality.


----------



## Skull Pilot

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


there is a big difference between tolerance and acceptance

I can tolerate anything while not necessarily accepting it and without liking or hating it.

It's my opinion on most things that it's none of my fucking business and I will neither support nor defend things that are none of my business


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The way progressives act, Women need big daddy government to pay for their things and take care of them. Progressive patronize all women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really. Most people on welfare are only on it for a few years in a rough patch in their lives.
> 
> Meanwhile, you have middle class white people who are on medicare and social security for decades.
> 
> But you keep working those racist stereotypes, marty.
Click to expand...


It's not just welfare. Remember the whole "Life of Julia" crap that was foisted years ago?

Obama's 'Life of Julia' Was Made to Be Mocked

Both of those programs have serious issues. Medicare is not even close to funded enough, and Social Security's "trust fund" is an illusion.

But at least with SS people pay into it their whole lives before taking it back. 

Not so much with Welfare and all those other programs.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> people with science and degrees used to say you can determine intelligence by head measurements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Until other people with science tested the theory and proved it wrong. Not that it wasn't a bad theory in 1800, given much of the world still believed witches were a thing.
> 
> The difference between faith and science is that faith fits reality around the theory, and science fits theory around reality.
Click to expand...


yet you assume that currently we have all the answers, and some scientist in 2100 will not look back and say "what a bunch of idiots they were"

You have fallen for the assumption that our current scientific understanding is the end all be all, same thing the head measure guy probably did back then.


----------



## hadit

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


Do you support the idea that people should lose their children if they don't agree with a particular orthodoxy?  That is the question at hand.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> It's not just welfare. Remember the whole "Life of Julia" crap that was foisted years ago?
> 
> Obama's 'Life of Julia' Was Made to Be Mocked
> 
> Both of those programs have serious issues. Medicare is not even close to funded enough, and Social Security's "trust fund" is an illusion.
> 
> But at least with SS people pay into it their whole lives before taking it back.
> 
> Not so much with Welfare and all those other programs.



If you live to be 72, you've gotten back everything you paid into SS. 

If you have one serious illness, you've gotten back everythign you've paid into Medicare. 

If you are on welfare for 1 year (the average) and you are working a job the other 49 we find ourselves in the workforce, you are also paying in more than you get out. 

So the question is, who gets ahead in these programs. For instance, I paid for my college by joining the Army. Did the Army benefit more form that or did I. I'd say we both did.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Do you support the idea that people should lose their children if they don't agree with a particular orthodoxy? That is the question at hand.



That's a good question. 

The guy who named his kid Adolf Hitler and the state came in and took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy.


----------



## Skull Pilot

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you support the idea that people should lose their children if they don't agree with a particular orthodoxy? That is the question at hand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good question.
> 
> The guy who named his kid Adolf Hitler and the state came in and took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy.
Click to expand...

a huge government overstep


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not just welfare. Remember the whole "Life of Julia" crap that was foisted years ago?
> 
> Obama's 'Life of Julia' Was Made to Be Mocked
> 
> Both of those programs have serious issues. Medicare is not even close to funded enough, and Social Security's "trust fund" is an illusion.
> 
> But at least with SS people pay into it their whole lives before taking it back.
> 
> Not so much with Welfare and all those other programs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you live to be 72, you've gotten back everything you paid into SS.
> 
> If you have one serious illness, you've gotten back everythign you've paid into Medicare.
> 
> If you are on welfare for 1 year (the average) and you are working a job the other 49 we find ourselves in the workforce, you are also paying in more than you get out.
> 
> So the question is, who gets ahead in these programs. For instance, I paid for my college by joining the Army. Did the Army benefit more form that or did I. I'd say we both did.
Click to expand...


If I even get Social Security, and unless they fix it, it's a big iff. 

The problem is the programs can't function anymore on their own, and require general fund money. That is not sustainable. 

You are confusing unemployment insurance with welfare. The issue with welfare is that it isn't just one program anymore, and the design of it discourages people from getting off it.


----------



## Skull Pilot

martybegan said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not just welfare. Remember the whole "Life of Julia" crap that was foisted years ago?
> 
> Obama's 'Life of Julia' Was Made to Be Mocked
> 
> Both of those programs have serious issues. Medicare is not even close to funded enough, and Social Security's "trust fund" is an illusion.
> 
> But at least with SS people pay into it their whole lives before taking it back.
> 
> Not so much with Welfare and all those other programs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you live to be 72, you've gotten back everything you paid into SS.
> 
> If you have one serious illness, you've gotten back everythign you've paid into Medicare.
> 
> If you are on welfare for 1 year (the average) and you are working a job the other 49 we find ourselves in the workforce, you are also paying in more than you get out.
> 
> So the question is, who gets ahead in these programs. For instance, I paid for my college by joining the Army. Did the Army benefit more form that or did I. I'd say we both did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I even get Social Security, and unless they fix it, it's a big iff.
> 
> The problem is the programs can't function anymore on their own, and require general fund money. That is not sustainable.
> 
> You are confusing unemployment insurance with welfare. The issue with welfare is that it isn't just one program anymore, and the design of it discourages people from getting off it.
Click to expand...

Social Security contributions have been going into the general fund for years.
You have no money in your name in the SS trust fund because there is no SS trust fund


----------



## martybegan

Skull Pilot said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's not just welfare. Remember the whole "Life of Julia" crap that was foisted years ago?
> 
> Obama's 'Life of Julia' Was Made to Be Mocked
> 
> Both of those programs have serious issues. Medicare is not even close to funded enough, and Social Security's "trust fund" is an illusion.
> 
> But at least with SS people pay into it their whole lives before taking it back.
> 
> Not so much with Welfare and all those other programs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you live to be 72, you've gotten back everything you paid into SS.
> 
> If you have one serious illness, you've gotten back everythign you've paid into Medicare.
> 
> If you are on welfare for 1 year (the average) and you are working a job the other 49 we find ourselves in the workforce, you are also paying in more than you get out.
> 
> So the question is, who gets ahead in these programs. For instance, I paid for my college by joining the Army. Did the Army benefit more form that or did I. I'd say we both did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If I even get Social Security, and unless they fix it, it's a big iff.
> 
> The problem is the programs can't function anymore on their own, and require general fund money. That is not sustainable.
> 
> You are confusing unemployment insurance with welfare. The issue with welfare is that it isn't just one program anymore, and the design of it discourages people from getting off it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Social Security contributions have been going into the general fund for years.
> You have no money in your name in the SS trust fund because there is no SS trust fund
Click to expand...


I know that. the problem is they have to start taking makeup money OUT of the general fund. The IOU's are coming home to roost.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you support the idea that people should lose their children if they don't agree with a particular orthodoxy? That is the question at hand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good question.
> 
> The guy who named his kid Adolf Hitler and the state came in and took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in a link to that.  Did it happen here in America?


----------



## Luddly Neddite

All this tip- toeing around so the RWNJs don't all offended and triggered -- 

Sheesh, it's exhausting.

[emoji849]


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## jknowgood

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


You're an idiot, the hate is on the left forcing their perverted ways on normal people. You cannot change your DNA. Get over it.


----------



## ding

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.


----------



## OnePercenter

MindWars said:


> RodISHI said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing in the Bible about hating transgendered........but God made Adam and Eve. The genetic egineering of our genomes has been going on since the late 40's so it's of little wonder to me that chemically induced genetic defects are showing up on the radar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> People like this one do not realize its not a hate as much as an unwillingness to put up with the deviance of some people. Just because someone is screwed up doesn't mean a lot of their behavior is acceptable. Shitting on the sidewalk in most places will get you tossed in jail. My compassion is limited to those attempting to overcome their personal issues not for those who desire to press me into accepting their errors and deviance. We had a tranny sit out here on the porch and he told me his whole story. He was in an area that had high concentrations of Atrazine. There was nothing female about him other than the chemical alterations and the surgeries he had gone through to be a female. Once he lived away from that area where there was Atrazine heavily used he no longer wanted to be a female but it was too late so he got heavily into drugs and was miserable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You wouldn't believe the how Alex Jones gets picked on when he explains what so many causes of this gayness is from.  People are  in so much denial it's incredible.
> 
> Maybe it's just the way I am, but I would want to know what caused it if I were gay. Not that anything could be changed, but to know why and how come.  When it comes down to it , this is why we say this Government has caused so many crimes against humanity is mind blowing.
> 
> No matter what gay denies it,  tech. none of them come out saying hey I want to be gay .  " yes some say they were born that  way"  let's say that's true for those who are.   There again comes what did their mothers eat or drink etc.
> 
> It is highly believed plastic " BPA" has caused this epidemic of gays.
> 
> Our men are becoming more feminized due to the estrogen mimickers from drugs in the water, the water we drink in general has so many drugs in it. the list is huge.
Click to expand...


Right out of the Putin handbook. There isn't any Russian collusion.....RIGHT ;-)


----------



## OnePercenter

ding said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.
Click to expand...


What about socialist ideals? ie; funding tax-based services.


----------



## ding

OnePercenter said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about socialist ideals? ie; funding tax-based services.
Click to expand...

They are eventually corrupted by the inevitable march of socialism.  Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism can not stand up to communism.  It is only a matter of time and crisis.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> You are confusing unemployment insurance with welfare. The issue with welfare is that it isn't just one program anymore, and the design of it discourages people from getting off it.



Unemployment is is welfare for middle class white people... kind of like social security.   

The real problem is that after 30 years of shifting the wealth from the working class to the investor class, we are all welfare recipients now.  Most people who are using programs like Medicaid, SNAP and Section 8 have jobs.  Jobs that maybe paid a living wage 30 years ago, but not so much now.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> I'd be interested in a link to that. Did it happen here in America?



Yes, it did.  

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/dad-who-named-kid-hitler-is-tired-of-being-treated-like-garbage/


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be interested in a link to that. Did it happen here in America?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it did.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/dad-who-named-kid-hitler-is-tired-of-being-treated-like-garbage/
Click to expand...

Interesting.  You said they "took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy."  In your link, the authorities claim it happened because there was violence in the home, something that he got into trouble for again later on.  Basically, we don't have enough of the story to state definitively if this is a case of bureaucratic overreach or a violent individual trying to gain sympathy for his cause.

But, that still doesn't answer the question as to whether you support a family's children being taken from them because of an ideology the parents hold.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Interesting. You said they "took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy." In your link, the authorities claim it happened because there was violence in the home, something that he got into trouble for again later on. Basically, we don't have enough of the story to state definitively if this is a case of bureaucratic overreach or a violent individual trying to gain sympathy for his cause.



What put these meth-Nazis on the government's radar was the Hitler Cake. 



hadit said:


> But, that still doesn't answer the question as to whether you support a family's children being taken from them because of an ideology the parents hold.



Yes, absolutely. If they are teaching kids to hate, they are creating problems down the road.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. You said they "took his kid because they found that they were teaching them white supremacy." In your link, the authorities claim it happened because there was violence in the home, something that he got into trouble for again later on. Basically, we don't have enough of the story to state definitively if this is a case of bureaucratic overreach or a violent individual trying to gain sympathy for his cause.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What put these meth-Nazis on the government's radar was the Hitler Cake.
> 
> 
> 
> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> But, that still doesn't answer the question as to whether you support a family's children being taken from them because of an ideology the parents hold.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, absolutely. If they are teaching kids to hate, they are creating problems down the road.
Click to expand...

Do you then agree that children growing up learning to hate LEO should be taken from their parents?  A traffic stop in which a dad cusses out a cop triggers investigations like this?  Should a black or white supremacist automatically lose their children if they participate in a racist protest?

Just where do you draw the line, and should you be the defining authority of what constitutes hate?


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Do you then agree that children growing up learning to hate LEO should be taken from their parents? A traffic stop in which a dad cusses out a cop triggers investigations like this? Should a black or white supremacist automatically lose their children if they participate in a racist protest?



When LEO's routinely shoot black kids in the back and suffer no legal consequences for it, I think that any fear that the community has for them is kind of justified. 



hadit said:


> Just where do you draw the line, and should you be the defining authority of what constitutes hate?



Better than making sad ass excuses for it with false equivlencies...


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you then agree that children growing up learning to hate LEO should be taken from their parents? A traffic stop in which a dad cusses out a cop triggers investigations like this? Should a black or white supremacist automatically lose their children if they participate in a racist protest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When LEO's routinely shoot black kids in the back and suffer no legal consequences for it, I think that any fear that the community has for them is kind of justified.
Click to expand...


Now you're equivocating.  First you say that parents who teach their kids to hate should lose their kids, now you're saying some hate is justified.  That's where I was headed with this.  Doing this just gives the entrenched bureaucracy more power over families, power ripe for abuse.



> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just where do you draw the line, and should you be the defining authority of what constitutes hate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Better than making sad ass excuses for it with false equivlencies...
Click to expand...

Tell you what, I'll go along with it as long as I get to define hate.


----------



## Dragonlady

I would like to say that the OP is a lie. Your children will NOT be taken away from you in Ontario if you believe being transgendered is false. Children's Aid dont have the resources to deal with the children of drug addicts or those who are physically or sexually abused. 

I live in Ontario and Wynne may be widely reviled for her economic failings and hated because of the new sex Ed program, but I wouldn't have even known about this so-called danger if I hadn't read it here.


----------



## OnePercenter

ding said:


> OnePercenter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ding said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism intentionally denies examination because it is irrational. There is no formal defined dogma of socialism. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Socialism seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Socialism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Socialists dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Socialism is a religion. The religious nature of socialism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What about socialist ideals? ie; funding tax-based services.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are eventually corrupted by the inevitable march of socialism.  Liberalism was inevitably pushed aside by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism, and socialism can not stand up to communism.  It is only a matter of time and crisis.
Click to expand...


The 'inevitable march of Socialism' that hasn't occurred even though taxed based services have been around for centuries. You suffer from paranoia over reason caused by ignorance.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Now you're equivocating. First you say that parents who teach their kids to hate should lose their kids, now you're saying some hate is justified. That's where I was headed with this. Doing this just gives the entrenched bureaucracy more power over families, power ripe for abuse.



No, i'm just not defining hate the way you are. Black families letting their kids know, that cop might shoot you for no good reason isn't hate, it's actually a fairly sound life hack. Now, if they were teaching them to shoot cops, you might have a point here. 

Now, if we started holding cops accountable when they shoot kids in the back or when they are lying on the ground, you might have a point. 



hadit said:


> Tell you what, I'll go along with it as long as I get to define hate.



Absolutely. I think you should totally advocate for Nazi meth-heads to keep their kids.  Let me know how much support you get for that, 'kay?


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're equivocating. First you say that parents who teach their kids to hate should lose their kids, now you're saying some hate is justified. That's where I was headed with this. Doing this just gives the entrenched bureaucracy more power over families, power ripe for abuse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, i'm just not defining hate the way you are. Black families letting their kids know, that cop might shoot you for no good reason isn't hate, it's actually a fairly sound life hack. Now, if they were teaching them to shoot cops, you might have a point here.
Click to expand...


Was this family teaching their kids to shoot anyone?  Obviously, their ideology has been rejected by civil society, but to automatically pull kids from an otherwise stable home where they are not being abused raises big time red flags.



> Now, if we started holding cops accountable when they shoot kids in the back or when they are lying on the ground, you might have a point.
> 
> 
> 
> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell you what, I'll go along with it as long as I get to define hate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely. I think you should totally advocate for Nazi meth-heads to keep their kids.  Let me know how much support you get for that, 'kay?
Click to expand...

I would advocate for everyone to keep their kids unless those kids are being abused.  If, however, either the parents or the kids indulge in violent behavior, they need to face consequences.

The bottom line is that we do NOT want to give the government power to pull kids from homes just because the parents have a belief system that angers an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Was this family teaching their kids to shoot anyone? Obviously, their ideology has been rejected by civil society, but to automatically pull kids from an otherwise stable home where they are not being abused raises big time red flags.



given the propensity of Neo-Nazi groups to use violence to achieve their ends, it was a good bet these kids were being taught some awful stuff. 



hadit said:


> I would advocate for everyone to keep their kids unless those kids are being abused. If, however, either the parents or the kids indulge in violent behavior, they need to face consequences.



I agree. Teaching kids to hate is abuse.  



hadit said:


> The bottom line is that we do NOT want to give the government power to pull kids from homes just because the parents have a belief system that angers an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat.



There was a whole appeals process these people could go through to get those kids back.  






Some reason they didn't think these people were any more fit to raise children than Feral Wolves.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Was this family teaching their kids to shoot anyone? Obviously, their ideology has been rejected by civil society, but to automatically pull kids from an otherwise stable home where they are not being abused raises big time red flags.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> given the propensity of Neo-Nazi groups to use violence to achieve their ends, it was a good bet these kids were being taught some awful stuff.
Click to expand...


"It was a good bet" is flimsy grounds to uproot children's lives.  Now again, there apparently were at least allegations of violence in the home.  That's a reason to take action, but without that, not really.



> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would advocate for everyone to keep their kids unless those kids are being abused. If, however, either the parents or the kids indulge in violent behavior, they need to face consequences.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. Teaching kids to hate is abuse.
Click to expand...


There are a lot of kids being taught to hate conservatives, to hate cops, to hate authority.  Are they being abused?  You don't want to say so, but when a teenager wraps a scarf around his head and throws rocks at cops, he's displaying hate that had to come from somewhere.  Are you willing to be safe more than sorry and take those kids out of their homes?



> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that we do NOT want to give the government power to pull kids from homes just because the parents have a belief system that angers an unelected and unaccountable bureaucrat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There was a whole appeals process these people could go through to get those kids back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some reason they didn't think these people were any more fit to raise children than Feral Wolves.
Click to expand...

Right, take the kids away and make the parents jump through endless legal hoops for months trying to get them back, all the while traumatizing the kids who don't know from day to day where home is and who family is any more.  In the case of these people, I don't know them and so I can't say they were fine upstanding parents, but if you give government the power to take children out of homes because the parents believe something the government does not approve of, how hard is it to imagine where that leads?  Do you really want to open that door?

Think of the potential for abuse.  Would you want, say, sheriff Arpaio to have influence on what children get taken out of homes because of their parents' beliefs?


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are confusing unemployment insurance with welfare. The issue with welfare is that it isn't just one program anymore, and the design of it discourages people from getting off it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment is is welfare for middle class white people... kind of like social security.
> 
> The real problem is that after 30 years of shifting the wealth from the working class to the investor class, we are all welfare recipients now.  Most people who are using programs like Medicaid, SNAP and Section 8 have jobs.  Jobs that maybe paid a living wage 30 years ago, but not so much now.
Click to expand...


Unemployment also has a timer, and is funded separate from most general funds, unlike SS which has started dipping into it's IOU's.

Actually wealth has been shifted to the bureaucratic class, or are you ignoring the large increases in both government work rolls, and the compensation given to those on those work rolls? Also a lot of the $$ owed to them isn't coming due for a few decades, and there is no funding for most of it.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Unemployment also has a timer, and is funded separate from most general funds, unlike SS which has started dipping into it's IOU's.



except when you have a really bad recession, they extend the time limits and dip into general funds... which again- WELFARE FOR WHITE PEOPLE. 

actually, what Unemployment does is preserve working skills.  It keeps the engineer from taking the job at WalMart by allowing him some cushion to look for another engineering gig. 



martybegan said:


> Actually wealth has been shifted to the bureaucratic class, or are you ignoring the large increases in both government work rolls, and the compensation given to those on those work rolls? Also a lot of the $$ owed to them isn't coming due for a few decades, and there is no funding for most of it.



The reason why there is no funding is because the One Percenters have spent the last 40 years getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests. so, yeah, when you get rid of all the good union jobs, there isn't enough revenue to pay pensions and salaries for government workers who managed to hang on to a middle class lifestyle.  

So the Marty Solution to Arson is to pay the arsonist to burn down the neighbor's house, too!


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unemployment also has a timer, and is funded separate from most general funds, unlike SS which has started dipping into it's IOU's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> except when you have a really bad recession, they extend the time limits and dip into general funds... which again- WELFARE FOR WHITE PEOPLE.
> 
> actually, what Unemployment does is preserve working skills.  It keeps the engineer from taking the job at WalMart by allowing him some cushion to look for another engineering gig.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually wealth has been shifted to the bureaucratic class, or are you ignoring the large increases in both government work rolls, and the compensation given to those on those work rolls? Also a lot of the $$ owed to them isn't coming due for a few decades, and there is no funding for most of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The reason why there is no funding is because the One Percenters have spent the last 40 years getting stupid white people to vote against their own economic interests. so, yeah, when you get rid of all the good union jobs, there isn't enough revenue to pay pensions and salaries for government workers who managed to hang on to a middle class lifestyle.
> 
> So the Marty Solution to Arson is to pay the arsonist to burn down the neighbor's house, too!
Click to expand...


So only white People collect unemployment? Who knew?

And the object is to get the person back to work. The object of Welfare appears to be to keep people on it, and keep cushy jobs you can't get fired from for government wonks.

No, my solution is to shrink government down to what it should be, and for each level to only care about what's in front of it.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> So only white People collect unemployment? Who knew?
> 
> And the object is to get the person back to work. The object of Welfare appears to be to keep people on it, and keep cushy jobs you can't get fired from for government wonks.
> 
> No, my solution is to shrink government down to what it should be, and for each level to only care about what's in front of it.



Yes, yes, the Lib-retard-ian dream of having government that just does what you want and fuck those people. got it. 

Again, most people on welfare are only on it for a few years.  A lot of other programs like Medicaid, Section 8 and SNAP go to working folks who are being cheated by the one-percenters you love so much. But I don't think we are going to see you advocate for fair wage laws, because that's a little too "socialistic-y" for you.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> So only white People collect unemployment? Who knew?
> 
> And the object is to get the person back to work. The object of Welfare appears to be to keep people on it, and keep cushy jobs you can't get fired from for government wonks.
> 
> No, my solution is to shrink government down to what it should be, and for each level to only care about what's in front of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, the Lib-retard-ian dream of having government that just does what you want and fuck those people. got it.
> 
> Again, most people on welfare are only on it for a few years.  A lot of other programs like Medicaid, Section 8 and SNAP go to working folks who are being cheated by the one-percenters you love so much. But I don't think we are going to see you advocate for fair wage laws, because that's a little too "socialistic-y" for you.
Click to expand...


Always with your "us against them" mentality

But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Always with your "us against them" mentality
> 
> But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"



Actually, I blame others for what they did, but usually I overcome them. The guy who jerked me around in 2008 spends a lot of time ingratiating himself to me now to get business.  

All that said, you avoided the point. We have welfare because we had wealth inequality. Full stop. There's enough wealth in this country to put everyone in a nice, middle class lifestyle. Fair wage laws, a guarunteed job for every able-bodied American, you wouldn't have any welfare. 

Except for sick and old people, those slackers...


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Always with your "us against them" mentality
> 
> But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I blame others for what they did, but usually I overcome them. The guy who jerked me around in 2008 spends a lot of time ingratiating himself to me now to get business.
> 
> All that said, you avoided the point. We have welfare because we had wealth inequality. Full stop. There's enough wealth in this country to put everyone in a nice, middle class lifestyle. Fair wage laws, a guarunteed job for every able-bodied American, you wouldn't have any welfare.
> 
> Except for sick and old people, those slackers...
Click to expand...


Still a bitter old fart.

Wealth inequality is another bullshit progressive line meaning "WE WANT YOUR MONIES!!!"

If you forced "fair wage laws" you would destroy the economy. You simply can't pay someone $15 an hour for $5 worth of labor.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Still a bitter old fart.
> 
> Wealth inequality is another bullshit progressive line meaning "WE WANT YOUR MONIES!!!"
> 
> If you forced "fair wage laws" you would destroy the economy. You simply can't pay someone $15 an hour for $5 worth of labor.



We already do.  You see, what you mutants don't get that $5.00 in wages and $10.00 in benefits is still $15.00. 

Because those fucking poor people just refuse to starve to death.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still a bitter old fart.
> 
> Wealth inequality is another bullshit progressive line meaning "WE WANT YOUR MONIES!!!"
> 
> If you forced "fair wage laws" you would destroy the economy. You simply can't pay someone $15 an hour for $5 worth of labor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We already do.  You see, what you mutants don't get that $5.00 in wages and $10.00 in benefits is still $15.00.
> 
> Because those fucking poor people just refuse to starve to death.
Click to expand...


Sigh, appeal to emotion. 

No, what you want is $15 in wages and the same $10 in benefits, and that isn't sustainable for certain jobs unless you want a hamburger to cost $10 minimum.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Sigh, appeal to emotion.
> 
> No, what you want is $15 in wages and the same $10 in benefits, and that isn't sustainable for certain jobs unless you want a hamburger to cost $10 minimum.



Bullshit.  they've already determined a living wage would only add about 17 cents to the cost of a hamburger. 

This Is How Much A Big Mac Would Cost If The Minimum Wage Was $15

Again, dummy, when that burger flipper is getting more from the government than he gets from McDonald's, he's just gonna want more government. 

If you guys were serious about this 'I don't needs no gummit in my life' stuff, you'd be for living wages and unions and strong workers' rights.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh, appeal to emotion.
> 
> No, what you want is $15 in wages and the same $10 in benefits, and that isn't sustainable for certain jobs unless you want a hamburger to cost $10 minimum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.  they've already determined a living wage would only add about 17 cents to the cost of a hamburger.
> 
> This Is How Much A Big Mac Would Cost If The Minimum Wage Was $15
> 
> Again, dummy, when that burger flipper is getting more from the government than he gets from McDonald's, he's just gonna want more government.
> 
> If you guys were serious about this 'I don't needs no gummit in my life' stuff, you'd be for living wages and unions and strong workers' rights.
Click to expand...

It's a moot point as automation gets cheaper.  Sorry, but it just is.  The day of a guy graduating from high school, working the assembly line for 40 years, sending 5 kids to college and retiring with a big nest egg are gone.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh, appeal to emotion.
> 
> No, what you want is $15 in wages and the same $10 in benefits, and that isn't sustainable for certain jobs unless you want a hamburger to cost $10 minimum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit.  they've already determined a living wage would only add about 17 cents to the cost of a hamburger.
> 
> This Is How Much A Big Mac Would Cost If The Minimum Wage Was $15
> 
> Again, dummy, when that burger flipper is getting more from the government than he gets from McDonald's, he's just gonna want more government.
> 
> If you guys were serious about this 'I don't needs no gummit in my life' stuff, you'd be for living wages and unions and strong workers' rights.
Click to expand...


Bullshit on that #. It probably includes a cut in the owners profit margins, and a lot of these franchises run on small ones. 

If a burger flipper makes enough to be comfortable flipping burgers, then you get two results. 1) the idiot will stay at that job, a job not meant as a permanent position, or 2) you will attract someone worth closer to that $15 an hour, doing an easier job than they used to do, and the guy worth $8 an hour is now unemployed.


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> It's a moot point as automation gets cheaper. Sorry, but it just is. The day of a guy graduating from high school, working the assembly line for 40 years, sending 5 kids to college and retiring with a big nest egg are gone.



Then maybe it's time to just have a guaranteed income for everyone, whether they work or not.  YOu get just enough money to pay for food, shelter and utilities... 

And if you want more then you get the skills and apply for the jobs. 

I think we can do better than that, but I think that might end up being the path of least resistance.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a moot point as automation gets cheaper. Sorry, but it just is. The day of a guy graduating from high school, working the assembly line for 40 years, sending 5 kids to college and retiring with a big nest egg are gone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then maybe it's time to just have a guaranteed income for everyone, whether they work or not.  YOu get just enough money to pay for food, shelter and utilities...
> 
> And if you want more then you get the skills and apply for the jobs.
> 
> I think we can do better than that, but I think that might end up being the path of least resistance.
Click to expand...


Giving people money for a given behavior incentivises that behavior, so pay them to do nothing and they will do nothing, and society will collapse.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Bullshit on that #. It probably includes a cut in the owners profit margins, and a lot of these franchises run on small ones.



Here's one from FOrtune that comes to the same conclusion.

Here’s What A $15 Per Hour Wage Means For Fast Food Prices



martybegan said:


> If a burger flipper makes enough to be comfortable flipping burgers, then you get two results. 1) the idiot will stay at that job, a job not meant as a permanent position, or



Why would that not be meant as a permanent position? Maybe some people would just be happy doing that until they retire. 



martybegan said:


> or 2) you will attract someone worth closer to that $15 an hour, doing an easier job than they used to do, and the guy worth $8 an hour is now unemployed.



You mean people wouldn't have to work themselves to death to earn a decent living? Oh, my God, that's horrible!!!!  

Which wasn't even my point.  The $8.00 an hour person is going to get food stamps, Section 8 and Medicaid, so it's not like he's just costing $8.00.  It's just that his cost is going to be spread around to the rest of us who don't even step foot into a Mcdonalds.[/quote][/QUOTE]


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Giving people money for a given behavior incentivises that behavior, so pay them to do nothing and they will do nothing, and society will collapse.



So your solution is to have them do something for a pittance that doesn't even pay the rent, and you think that's going to incentivize them more? Really?


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit on that #. It probably includes a cut in the owners profit margins, and a lot of these franchises run on small ones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's one from FOrtune that comes to the same conclusion.
> 
> Here’s What A $15 Per Hour Wage Means For Fast Food Prices
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> If a burger flipper makes enough to be comfortable flipping burgers, then you get two results. 1) the idiot will stay at that job, a job not meant as a permanent position, or
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would that not be meant as a permanent position? Maybe some people would just be happy doing that until they retire.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> or 2) you will attract someone worth closer to that $15 an hour, doing an easier job than they used to do, and the guy worth $8 an hour is now unemployed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean people wouldn't have to work themselves to death to earn a decent living? Oh, my God, that's horrible!!!!
> 
> Which wasn't even my point.  The $8.00 an hour person is going to get food stamps, Section 8 and Medicaid, so it's not like he's just costing $8.00.  It's just that his cost is going to be spread around to the rest of us who don't even step foot into a Mcdonalds.
Click to expand...

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

More bullshit. Why then are so many restaurants closing in places where the $15 wage is being implemented? 

Entry level jobs are just that, entry level, you are supposed to move on to something worth more so said entry level jobs become available for new people entering the workforce. 

Maybe the $8.00 an hour person should be motivated to get off his ass and work harder.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Giving people money for a given behavior incentivises that behavior, so pay them to do nothing and they will do nothing, and society will collapse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your solution is to have them do something for a pittance that doesn't even pay the rent, and you think that's going to incentivize them more? Really?
Click to expand...


Maybe it will force them to work harder or smarter. I got yelled at as a kid if I got below a 90 on a test, it did wonders for my motivation.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Giving people money for a given behavior incentivises that behavior, so pay them to do nothing and they will do nothing, and society will collapse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your solution is to have them do something for a pittance that doesn't even pay the rent, and you think that's going to incentivize them more? Really?
Click to expand...

If it's a requirement for receiving the benefit, you bet it's an incentive.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a moot point as automation gets cheaper. Sorry, but it just is. The day of a guy graduating from high school, working the assembly line for 40 years, sending 5 kids to college and retiring with a big nest egg are gone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then maybe it's time to just have a guaranteed income for everyone, whether they work or not.  YOu get just enough money to pay for food, shelter and utilities...
> 
> And if you want more then you get the skills and apply for the jobs.
> 
> I think we can do better than that, but I think that might end up being the path of least resistance.
Click to expand...

Why not just provide the basic services for free?  It's worked so well everywhere it's been tried.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> More bullshit. Why then are so many restaurants closing in places where the $15 wage is being implemented?



Same reason they would have closed if it stayed at $7.00. They suck as business people.  I have a restaurant right down the block from me. It's closed and reopened four times since it was built.  



martybegan said:


> Maybe it will force them to work harder or smarter. I got yelled at as a kid if I got below a 90 on a test, it did wonders for my motivation.



Dude, given the kind of person you are, that's not saying much. 



martybegan said:


> Entry level jobs are just that, entry level, you are supposed to move on to something worth more so said entry level jobs become available for new people entering the workforce.



Really? Where is that written?  When did that become a law. 



martybegan said:


> Maybe the $8.00 an hour person should be motivated to get off his ass and work harder.



Dude, we got adjunct professors on food stamps and airline pilots selling their blood plasma. The whole notion that you need to "work harder" just means the One Percent will have to be more inventive in finding ways to screw  you and cheat you.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> More bullshit. Why then are so many restaurants closing in places where the $15 wage is being implemented?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same reason they would have closed if it stayed at $7.00. They suck as business people.  I have a restaurant right down the block from me. It's closed and reopened four times since it was built.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it will force them to work harder or smarter. I got yelled at as a kid if I got below a 90 on a test, it did wonders for my motivation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, given the kind of person you are, that's not saying much.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Entry level jobs are just that, entry level, you are supposed to move on to something worth more so said entry level jobs become available for new people entering the workforce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really? Where is that written?  When did that become a law.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the $8.00 an hour person should be motivated to get off his ass and work harder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, we got adjunct professors on food stamps and airline pilots selling their blood plasma. The whole notion that you need to "work harder" just means the One Percent will have to be more inventive in finding ways to screw  you and cheat you.
Click to expand...


Figures you would make that excuse. 

I am a far better person than you, you hateful fucking twat. 

It's basic economics. 

Maybe if we removed some of the bureaucratic bloat and lowered tax burdens people would have more money.


----------



## Moonglow

MindWars said:


> (Reported By Andrea Mrozek) Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, just passed a law that could allow the government to remove kids from their home if their parents oppose the new transgender ideology. Could there be anything more terrifying for parents than that? It’s not hard to see why the passage of Bill 89 captured the attention of so many across the globe. But how did this bill—
> 
> 
> Teaching Biblical Truth Could Get Your Kids Taken Away
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> This is beyond wrong and immoral because nobody should be blackmailed via their kids because they don't believe the same ideas, ideology whatever. It's just wrong.
> For you assholes who say good, well turn the tables and say how would it feel to you if things flip back to the way they were and you all are told you lose everything because you get ousted for being gay.
> 
> Or how about you don't believe in praying to Allah, but are forced to and if you don't you lose your kids.................


You really never read the story or the actual bill in itself, and therefore make remarks that have not a damn thing to do with the subject matter...


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Maybe if we removed some of the bureaucratic bloat and lowered tax burdens people would have more money.



no, guy, we did just fine when the rich paid their fair share and the government kept the one percent from screwing working people. 

Basic economics. When people make good wages, everything else falls into place.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if we removed some of the bureaucratic bloat and lowered tax burdens people would have more money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, guy, we did just fine when the rich paid their fair share and the government kept the one percent from screwing working people.
> 
> Basic economics. When people make good wages, everything else falls into place.
Click to expand...


  And you think that the way to achieve this is by increasing tax burdens and regulatory burdens on those who would provide the opportunities for people to be employed and make good wages.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> And you think that the way to achieve this is by increasing tax burdens and regulatory burdens on those who would provide the opportunities for people to be employed and make good wages.



again, you are one of these people who've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ. 

What provides opportunities is consumer demand. Not some rich people cashing in on it. 

they can still cash in on it, they just can't cheat their employees, customers and the community.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if we removed some of the bureaucratic bloat and lowered tax burdens people would have more money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, guy, we did just fine when the rich paid their fair share and the government kept the one percent from screwing working people.
> 
> Basic economics. When people make good wages, everything else falls into place.
Click to expand...


Fair share, one percent, standard commie asshole lines.

when people makes wages they didn't earn, the whole system will break. That is basic economics.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you think that the way to achieve this is by increasing tax burdens and regulatory burdens on those who would provide the opportunities for people to be employed and make good wages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again, you are one of these people who've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ.
> 
> What provides opportunities is consumer demand. Not some rich people cashing in on it.
> 
> they can still cash in on it, they just can't cheat their employees, customers and the community.
Click to expand...


It's all about Joe Joe Joe and his anger from being stupid 30 years ago. Since Joe can't be blamed for his own incompetence, he has to blame people with more shit than he has. 

What a fucking wanker you are.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you think that the way to achieve this is by increasing tax burdens and regulatory burdens on those who would provide the opportunities for people to be employed and make good wages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again, you are one of these people who've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ.
> 
> What provides opportunities is consumer demand. Not some rich people cashing in on it.
> 
> they can still cash in on it, they just can't cheat their employees, customers and the community.
Click to expand...


  There is no amount of consumer demand that will cause a product to become available, and people to be employed producing that product, without there being someone who has the talents and resources to organize a company to produce it.


----------



## JusticeHammer

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


Anti Christian be libs are the ones screwed up. Come get my kid, dare them, fight is on. One more reason not to live in that screwed up country.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Fair share, one percent, standard commie asshole lines.
> 
> when people makes wages they didn't earn, the whole system will break. That is basic economics.



But people do that all the time now.  Unemployment, Social Security, Medicare... you know "White People Welfare". 

The thing is, when I pay $8.00 for a big mac, and only .10 goes to the kid who made it and 4.00 goes to the executives and stockholders, isn't that giving wages to people who didn't earn it? 

Clearly, the one percent who control 43% of the wealth do not do 43% of the physical labor involved in creating said wealth. so there is already an uneven distribution.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> There is no amount of consumer demand that will cause a product to become available, and people to be employed producing that product, without there being someone who has the talents and resources to organize a company to produce it.



Bullshit. IN fact, through most of history, goods and services and staples were created locally.  The Capitalist no more made that happen than the King in his castle.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> It's all about Joe Joe Joe and his anger from being stupid 30 years ago. Since Joe can't be blamed for his own incompetence, he has to blame people with more shit than he has.
> 
> What a fucking wanker you are.



Your inability to argue the point is duly noted. It usualy doesn't take this long to get you to cry uncle. Don't forget to whine about something I said about Mormons once. 

Now, back to my point. let's see if you can counter this without sputtering. 



JoeB131 said:


> again, you are one of these people who've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ.
> 
> What provides opportunities is consumer demand. Not some rich people cashing in on it.
> 
> they can still cash in on it, they just can't cheat their employees, customers and the community.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no amount of consumer demand that will cause a product to become available, and people to be employed producing that product, without there being someone who has the talents and resources to organize a company to produce it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bullshit. IN fact, through most of history, goods and services and staples were created locally.  The Capitalist no more made that happen than the King in his castle.
Click to expand...


  Without the capitalist, it simply wouldn't happen.  The product would not get made, it wouldn't be available for anyone to buy, and nobody would get paid to produce it.  Whether it's done locally, on a small scale, by a small company, or globally by a huge international company, the principle remains the same.  Someone has to create the business, someone has to organize it, someone has to invest in it; or else it just doesn't happen.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fair share, one percent, standard commie asshole lines.
> 
> when people makes wages they didn't earn, the whole system will break. That is basic economics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But people do that all the time now.  Unemployment, Social Security, Medicare... you know "White People Welfare".
> 
> The thing is, when I pay $8.00 for a big mac, and only .10 goes to the kid who made it and 4.00 goes to the executives and stockholders, isn't that giving wages to people who didn't earn it?
> 
> Clearly, the one percent who control 43% of the wealth do not do 43% of the physical labor involved in creating said wealth. so there is already an uneven distribution.
Click to expand...


Blah Blah Blah Blah, Joe is a commie asshole, blah blah blah.

And I doubt your percentages, you have never been known to be truthful with that shit. 

And you ignore risk, capital and other things in the breakdown. Nevermind that most mcdonalds are franchises, owned by people who are well off, but not the 1%.

It's all simply jealousy on your part, they made it to the point you tried to and failed.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's all about Joe Joe Joe and his anger from being stupid 30 years ago. Since Joe can't be blamed for his own incompetence, he has to blame people with more shit than he has.
> 
> What a fucking wanker you are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your inability to argue the point is duly noted. It usualy doesn't take this long to get you to cry uncle. Don't forget to whine about something I said about Mormons once.
> 
> Now, back to my point. let's see if you can counter this without sputtering.
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> again, you are one of these people who've mistaken a parasite for a vital organ.
> 
> What provides opportunities is consumer demand. Not some rich people cashing in on it.
> 
> they can still cash in on it, they just can't cheat their employees, customers and the community.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


What point are YOU making? It's nothing but your own anger at people who have done better than you, or your anger at religious people, or your anger at people who think differently than you do. You are in a state of perpetual "get of my lawn" or more to the point "hey police officer get those people off my lawn"

What you call "cheating" is profit, and people who invest their capital in businesses deserve it, despite your whining about it like a mewling little bitch.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> Without the capitalist, it simply wouldn't happen. The product would not get made, it wouldn't be available for anyone to buy, and nobody would get paid to produce it. Whether it's done locally, on a small scale, by a small company, or globally by a huge international company, the principle remains the same. Someone has to create the business, someone has to organize it, someone has to invest in it; or else it just doesn't happen.



Capitalism has only been around since the 16th century...  So um, no, we had millenia before that where the world did just fine without it.  

I think you also confuse people who trade their skills and knowledge for people who just invest and produce nothing.  The true parasite class.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Capitalism has only been around since the 16th century...  So um, no, we had millenia before that where the world did just fine without it.
> 
> I think you also confuse people who trade their skills and knowledge for people who just invest and produce nothing.  The true parasite class.



  Capitalism has been around for almost as long as Mankind has existed.  The very first time that one human entered into a voluntary exchange with another, to trade one item for another, that was capitalism.

  And investors don't produce nothing.  If that was true, then no one would want their investments, and they would have no reason to invest.  Factories and stores and warehouses and all other manner of facilities where goods and services are produced, and sold, do not just come into existence _ex nihilo_.  Someone has to invest in their creation.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Without the capitalist, it simply wouldn't happen. The product would not get made, it wouldn't be available for anyone to buy, and nobody would get paid to produce it. Whether it's done locally, on a small scale, by a small company, or globally by a huge international company, the principle remains the same. Someone has to create the business, someone has to organize it, someone has to invest in it; or else it just doesn't happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitalism has only been around since the 16th century...  So um, no, we had millenia before that where the world did just fine without it.
> 
> I think you also confuse people who trade their skills and knowledge for people who just invest and produce nothing.  The true parasite class.
Click to expand...


Yes before that we had rule by the strong, something Joe idiot wants to go back to because he hates guns. 

And of course your jealousy is your prime motivator. See my sig for my view on the real parasite class, the bureaucratic progressive morons, and you, their enablers.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> And I doubt your percentages, you have never been known to be truthful with that shit.



Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia









martybegan said:


> And you ignore risk, capital and other things in the breakdown. Nevermind that most mcdonalds are franchises, owned by people who are well off, but not the 1%.



Naw, I just don't hold a pity party for greedy assholes who exploit child labor.  Fuck 'em, I'm happy when they lose their shirts.  



martybegan said:


> It's all simply jealousy on your part, they made it to the point you tried to and failed.



Naw, guy, being a greedy asshole who exploits child labor was never a big goal in my life.  When I see a Fast Food Franchise that closed down, I just laugh.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> What point are YOU making? It's nothing but your own anger at people who have done better than you, or your anger at religious people, or your anger at people who think differently than you do. You are in a state of perpetual "get of my lawn" or more to the point "hey police officer get those people off my lawn"
> 
> What you call "cheating" is profit, and people who invest their capital in businesses deserve it, despite your whining about it like a mewling little bitch.



Nope, it CHEATING people. Period. if there are 100 People working at an enterprise, they should all get 1% of the profits. Period.


----------



## peach174

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.



The Bible does not teach hate.
That there is a difference between good and bad behavior is not hate.
I know for certain that God exists.


----------



## peach174

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> What point are YOU making? It's nothing but your own anger at people who have done better than you, or your anger at religious people, or your anger at people who think differently than you do. You are in a state of perpetual "get of my lawn" or more to the point "hey police officer get those people off my lawn"
> 
> What you call "cheating" is profit, and people who invest their capital in businesses deserve it, despite your whining about it like a mewling little bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, it CHEATING people. Period. if there are 100 People working at an enterprise, they should all get 1% of the profits. Period.
Click to expand...



Then they should also pay for the supplies and materials to run the enterprise.


----------



## JoeB131

peach174 said:


> The Bible does not teach hate.
> That there is a difference between good and bad behavior is not hate.
> I know for certain that God exists.



The problem I have with that is that a lot of the things the Bible mandates is not only not "Good" by any stretch of the imagination, but would get you thrown in jail today. 

or do you think parents should kill their children when they mouth off? 



peach174 said:


> Then they should also pay for the supplies and materials to run the enterprise.



Except nobody really does that. Most businesses are started with loans. But never mind.  

Here's the thing. Im not advocating every company become a people's collective.  

I'm advocating that we don't cheat the people who do the work.


----------



## peach174

JoeB131 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Bible does not teach hate.
> That there is a difference between good and bad behavior is not hate.
> I know for certain that God exists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem I have with that is that a lot of the things the Bible mandates is not only not "Good" by any stretch of the imagination, but would get you thrown in jail today.
> 
> or do you think parents should kill their children when they mouth off?
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then they should also pay for the supplies and materials to run the enterprise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except nobody really does that. Most businesses are started with loans. But never mind.
> 
> Here's the thing. Im not advocating every company become a people's collective.
> 
> I'm advocating that we don't cheat the people who do the work.
Click to expand...



Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't  understand the meaning of it.

And I have no idea of the left field stone thrown in about starting up a business.
I was referring to employees, that if they get 1% profit from the companies stock or profit from sales, they should also pay to help run it. Like rent and supplies.
The owner has to pay their  home bills also , like monthly bills ,food and clothing for the family just like all of the other employees do.
You don't seem to get that a business must make profits in order to stay in business.


----------



## JoeB131

peach174 said:


> Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
> If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't understand the meaning of it.



I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible. 

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21



He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15


He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17





peach174 said:


> The owner has to pay their home bills also , like monthly bills ,food and clothing for the family just like all of the other employees do.
> You don't seem to get that a business must make profits in order to stay in business.



And it's not my problem to worry about every under capitalized business.


----------



## peach174

JoeB131 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
> If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't understand the meaning of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible.
> 
> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21
> 
> 
> 
> He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15
> 
> 
> He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The owner has to pay their home bills also , like monthly bills ,food and clothing for the family just like all of the other employees do.
> You don't seem to get that a business must make profits in order to stay in business.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And it's not my problem to worry about every under capitalized business.
Click to expand...


Yes we do  read it and after Jesus death we are no longer under the old rules.
How about you reading it, seems you missed that part.

My comment  had nothing to do with ,under capitalized.
You're still stuck on starting a business.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
> If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't understand the meaning of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible.
> 
> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21
> 
> 
> 
> He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15
> 
> 
> He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The owner has to pay their home bills also , like monthly bills ,food and clothing for the family just like all of the other employees do.
> You don't seem to get that a business must make profits in order to stay in business.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And it's not my problem to worry about every under capitalized business.
Click to expand...


/----- you would  if you cared about employees as much as you claim. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Always with your "us against them" mentality
> 
> But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I blame others for what they did, but usually I overcome them. The guy who jerked me around in 2008 spends a lot of time ingratiating himself to me now to get business.
> 
> All that said, you avoided the point. We have welfare because we had wealth inequality. Full stop. There's enough wealth in this country to put everyone in a nice, middle class lifestyle. Fair wage laws, a guarunteed job for every able-bodied American, you wouldn't have any welfare.
> 
> Except for sick and old people, those slackers...
Click to expand...


/----- We have welfare because of stupid life choices and I don't mean the sick and informed. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe if we removed some of the bureaucratic bloat and lowered tax burdens people would have more money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no, guy, we did just fine when the rich paid their fair share and the government kept the one percent from screwing working people.
> 
> Basic economics. When people make good wages, everything else falls into place.
Click to expand...


/----- what's fair about 47% who pay no taxes? 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> More bullshit. Why then are so many restaurants closing in places where the $15 wage is being implemented?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same reason they would have closed if it stayed at $7.00. They suck as business people.  I have a restaurant right down the block from me. It's closed and reopened four times since it was built.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it will force them to work harder or smarter. I got yelled at as a kid if I got below a 90 on a test, it did wonders for my motivation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, given the kind of person you are, that's not saying much.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Entry level jobs are just that, entry level, you are supposed to move on to something worth more so said entry level jobs become available for new people entering the workforce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really? Where is that written?  When did that become a law.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the $8.00 an hour person should be motivated to get off his ass and work harder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dude, we got adjunct professors on food stamps and airline pilots selling their blood plasma. The whole notion that you need to "work harder" just means the One Percent will have to be more inventive in finding ways to screw  you and cheat you.
Click to expand...


/----- airline pilots belong to a glamor industry and will work for peanuts to fly. It's their choice. As far as adjunct professors they need to find a better paying job. I left advertising in 1980 because of low pay and horrible work conditions. I went into commission sales and increased my income from $8,000 to $100,000 in about 8 years. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's a moot point as automation gets cheaper. Sorry, but it just is. The day of a guy graduating from high school, working the assembly line for 40 years, sending 5 kids to college and retiring with a big nest egg are gone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then maybe it's time to just have a guaranteed income for everyone, whether they work or not.  YOu get just enough money to pay for food, shelter and utilities...
> 
> And if you want more then you get the skills and apply for the jobs.
> 
> I think we can do better than that, but I think that might end up being the path of least resistance.
Click to expand...


/---- Venezuela did that and how did it work out? 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## JoeB131

peach174 said:


> Yes we do read it and after Jesus death we are no longer under the old rules.
> How about you reading it, seems you missed that part.



Where does Jesus specifically say that?  Because in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says. 

_Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven_. Matthew 5:18-19

And Luke said...

_It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Luke 16:17

One came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him ... if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Luke 19:16-17_

So, um, no.  Jesus didn't revoke the laws.  God didn't change his mind, we changed ours.  



peach174 said:


> How about you reading it, seems you missed that part.



No, I really didn't. You missed the parts I listed...though. 



peach174 said:


> My comment had nothing to do with ,under capitalized.
> You're still stuck on starting a business.



Not at all.  You missed my point entirely. I have a lot of respect for people who start businesses. I've started one myself (but not ready to quit my day job, yet.)  

But if you are going to insist that working people pay their own way through life, then they people who create jobs should provide a decent living wage.  

Unless you want to just pay everyone an entitlement and let them work when they feel like it.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> /---- Venezuela did that and how did it work out?



Actually, it did nothing of the sort.  And, yes, big oil did a good job of waging economic war on those folks for daring to claim their own resources. 



Cellblock2429 said:


> /----- airline pilots belong to a glamor industry and will work for peanuts to fly. It's their choice. As far as adjunct professors they need to find a better paying job. I left advertising in 1980 because of low pay and horrible work conditions. I went into commission sales and increased my income from $8,000 to $100,000 in about 8 years.



Maybe not everyone wants to be a salesman. I find them kind of sleezy myself, and I work with them every day.  



Cellblock2429 said:


> /----- what's fair about 47% who pay no taxes?



They don't exist. Everyone is paying some kind of tax. Property tax, income tax, sales tax, etc.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /---- Venezuela did that and how did it work out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it did nothing of the sort.  And, yes, big oil did a good job of waging economic war on those folks for daring to claim their own resources.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /----- airline pilots belong to a glamor industry and will work for peanuts to fly. It's their choice. As far as adjunct professors they need to find a better paying job. I left advertising in 1980 because of low pay and horrible work conditions. I went into commission sales and increased my income from $8,000 to $100,000 in about 8 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe not everyone wants to be a salesman. I find them kind of sleezy myself, and I work with them every day.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /----- what's fair about 47% who pay no taxes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They don't exist. Everyone is paying some kind of tax. Property tax, income tax, sales tax, etc.
Click to expand...

/----- 1.) You're wrong on Venezuela: 
*Venezuela's Disaster Demonstrates Socialism's | The Daily Caller*
dailycaller.com/2017/05/17/venezuelas-disaster-demonstrates-socialisms-failure/
2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there.  BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
*45% of Americans pay no federal income tax - MarketWatch*
www.marketwatch.com › Personal Finance › Taxes
Apr 18, 2016 - 77.5 million households do not pay federal individual income tax. ... Many Americans don't have to worry about giving Uncle Sam part of their ... Rich people pay nearly 87% of all federal individual income tax in America ...
May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ...


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> And I doubt your percentages, you have never been known to be truthful with that shit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you ignore risk, capital and other things in the breakdown. Nevermind that most mcdonalds are franchises, owned by people who are well off, but not the 1%.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Naw, I just don't hold a pity party for greedy assholes who exploit child labor.  Fuck 'em, I'm happy when they lose their shirts.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's all simply jealousy on your part, they made it to the point you tried to and failed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Naw, guy, being a greedy asshole who exploits child labor was never a big goal in my life.  When I see a Fast Food Franchise that closed down, I just laugh.
Click to expand...


Who cares? The fact is even our freaking poor are better off than middle class people 100 years ago. There will always be inequality in wealth, all getting government involved does is make the top people shift a bit. George Orwell saw that when he wrote 1984, and he was a freaking socialist. 

There is a simple solution to overseas labor issues, massive tarriffs on imports. 

So you laugh at a local business guy going under, and those jobs disappearing. and what does a Mcdonalds have to do with child labor?


----------



## bodecea

Bob Blaylock said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody is talking about teaching kids to hate anyone, here.  This is about recognizing the difference between boys and girls, and acknowledging the immutable scientific fact that one is not, and cannot become, the other.
Click to expand...

What exactly is biblical "truth"?


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> What point are YOU making? It's nothing but your own anger at people who have done better than you, or your anger at religious people, or your anger at people who think differently than you do. You are in a state of perpetual "get of my lawn" or more to the point "hey police officer get those people off my lawn"
> 
> What you call "cheating" is profit, and people who invest their capital in businesses deserve it, despite your whining about it like a mewling little bitch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, it CHEATING people. Period. if there are 100 People working at an enterprise, they should all get 1% of the profits. Period.
Click to expand...


Will they give back some of their pay if there is no profit or a loss? Will they put up their own property as collateral for loans to keep the business afloat?

Spare me your Marxist bullshit.


----------



## Slyhunter

ScienceRocks said:


> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.


Teaching kids the simple truths is illegal.
Like we are born with penises, men, or without, women. That feeling like a woman when your a man is a mental disease much like feeling like a dog, or a hippopotamus would be.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
> If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't understand the meaning of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible.
> 
> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21
> 
> 
> 
> He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15
> 
> 
> He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The owner has to pay their home bills also , like monthly bills ,food and clothing for the family just like all of the other employees do.
> You don't seem to get that a business must make profits in order to stay in business.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And it's not my problem to worry about every under capitalized business.
Click to expand...

Then there is a the New Testament with Jesus Christ which made such blatherings obsolete.


----------



## Slyhunter

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Always with your "us against them" mentality
> 
> But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I blame others for what they did, but usually I overcome them. The guy who jerked me around in 2008 spends a lot of time ingratiating himself to me now to get business.
> 
> All that said, you avoided the point. We have welfare because we had wealth inequality. Full stop. There's enough wealth in this country to put everyone in a nice, middle class lifestyle. Fair wage laws, a guarunteed job for every able-bodied American, you wouldn't have any welfare.
> 
> Except for sick and old people, those slackers...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> /----- We have welfare because of stupid life choices and I don't mean the sick and informed.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...

How about being bi-polar. I got no choice in the matter. Without the VA and my medical care I would be a Raving maniac who belongs in jail. AND IT'S NOT MY FUCKING CHOICE!!!!!!!!


----------



## ScienceRocks

Teaching this shit = making your kids dumb.

There's nothing good about it.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..



Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point? 



Cellblock2429 said:


> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.



Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it. 



Cellblock2429 said:


> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.



So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.


----------



## JoeB131

Slyhunter said:


> How about being bi-polar. I got no choice in the matter. Without the VA and my medical care I would be a Raving maniac who belongs in jail. AND IT'S NOT MY FUCKING CHOICE!!!!!!!!



Yet you still vote Republican.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> So you laugh at a local business guy going under, and those jobs disappearing. and what does a Mcdonalds have to do with child labor?



You realize that most McDonald's hire teenagers, right?  



Slyhunter said:


> Then there is a the New Testament with Jesus Christ which made such blatherings obsolete.



Except it did no such thing.  We didn't end slavery or burning witches because Jesus revoked the old laws. We revoked the old laws because we realized they were cruel and stupid.  God didn't change his mind, we changed ours. 



martybegan said:


> Who cares? The fact is even our freaking poor are better off than middle class people 100 years ago. There will always be inequality in wealth, all getting government involved does is make the top people shift a bit. George Orwell saw that when he wrote 1984, and he was a freaking socialist.



Actually, dumbass, we did just fine in that period after WWII, when the workforce was mostly unionized, the rich paid confiscatory taxes.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Will they give back some of their pay if there is no profit or a loss? Will they put up their own property as collateral for loans to keep the business afloat?
> 
> Spare me your Marxist bullshit.



so your argument is that because bigger capitalists cheat the smaller capitalists, it's okay for the capitalists to cheat the people who do the work?  

This is your argument,eh? 

Guy, here's the thing. When there is a loss, we do end up giving back our pay. We often lose our jobs when we get replaced by someone who will work cheaper.  



Slyhunter said:


> Teaching kids the simple truths is illegal.
> Like we are born with penises, men, or without, women. That feeling like a woman when your a man is a mental disease much like feeling like a dog, or a hippopotamus would be.



so what offends you about Trans women is that they deny their masculinity. I'm still wondering how this really has any effet on your life.


----------



## edthecynic

MindWars said:


> Teaching biblical truth could get your kids taken away


There is no such thing as "biblical truth."


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> so what offends you about Trans women is that they deny their masculinity. I'm still wondering how this really has any effet on your life.



  What is offensive, here, to sane people, is the demand that we treat as truth what any sane person can clearly see to be an insane and immoral falsehood.  A _“trans women”_ is not, and never will be an actual woman, and there is no good or rational reason to pretend that he is, nor to sacrifice the safety, modesty, and well-being of actual women in order to cater to such a freak.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> What is offensive, here, to sane people, is the demand that we treat as truth what any sane person can clearly see to be an insane and immoral falsehood. A _“trans women”_ is not, and never will be an actual woman, and there is no good or rational reason to pretend that he is, nor to sacrifice the safety, modesty, and well-being of actual women in order to cater to such a freak.



still not hearing how this has any effect on your life, dude. 

I frankly don't get the whole "Trans" thing. Someone I knew back in the 1980's recently came out as a trans woman, and I had no idea. But you know what, at the end of the day he/she wasn't hurting anyone and did his/her job just fine.  

Just because it offends your bronze age superstitions, really isn't my problem.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you laugh at a local business guy going under, and those jobs disappearing. and what does a Mcdonalds have to do with child labor?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You realize that most McDonald's hire teenagers, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then there is a the New Testament with Jesus Christ which made such blatherings obsolete.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except it did no such thing.  We didn't end slavery or burning witches because Jesus revoked the old laws. We revoked the old laws because we realized they were cruel and stupid.  God didn't change his mind, we changed ours.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares? The fact is even our freaking poor are better off than middle class people 100 years ago. There will always be inequality in wealth, all getting government involved does is make the top people shift a bit. George Orwell saw that when he wrote 1984, and he was a freaking socialist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, dumbass, we did just fine in that period after WWII, when the workforce was mostly unionized, the rich paid confiscatory taxes.
Click to expand...


Teenagers are not "child labor". My father had me get my working papers at 16, and I am a better person for it today. Also had my paper route papers at 12. 

Stop combing post responses you lazy fuck. 

The confiscatory taxes were for the war effort, and those taxes really only impacted 50 or so people. Now the government considers you "rich" after 250k, and in NYC that isn't realy rich.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Will they give back some of their pay if there is no profit or a loss? Will they put up their own property as collateral for loans to keep the business afloat?
> 
> Spare me your Marxist bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so your argument is that because bigger capitalists cheat the smaller capitalists, it's okay for the capitalists to cheat the people who do the work?
> 
> This is your argument,eh?
> 
> Guy, here's the thing. When there is a loss, we do end up giving back our pay. We often lose our jobs when we get replaced by someone who will work cheaper.
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Teaching kids the simple truths is illegal.
> Like we are born with penises, men, or without, women. That feeling like a woman when your a man is a mental disease much like feeling like a dog, or a hippopotamus would be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> so what offends you about Trans women is that they deny their masculinity. I'm still wondering how this really has any effet on your life.
Click to expand...


No I am saying you have to account for risk. When a person gets paid investors and creditors cannot go after them if the business fails. For the owner, that protection isn't there. 

That isn't a real "loss", you are not losing anything you have already earned. 

Why don't you just come out full commie like you are acting?


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Teenagers are not "child labor". My father had me get my working papers at 16, and I am a better person for it today. Also had my paper route papers at 12.



Again, given your lack of compassion for people who weren't born with the white privilages you  have, I have to question if you are a better person. 

Of course, today nobody reads newspapers anymore, so it's not like we can make the kids get paper routes.  Today most newspapers are delivered by adults because they have cars.  

Which brings us back to the point. THere are more people willing to do work than there is work to be done. So now what? 

The ironic thing is, what you wingnuts advocate is making people work jobs that don't pay a living wage and having government m ake up the difference, and you wonder why you get more government. 



martybegan said:


> The confiscatory taxes were for the war effort, and those taxes really only impacted 50 or so people. Now the government considers you "rich" after 250k, and in NYC that isn't realy rich.



If you are making 250K, you can afford to pay your taxes.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Teenagers are not "child labor". My father had me get my working papers at 16, and I am a better person for it today. Also had my paper route papers at 12.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, given your lack of compassion for people who weren't born with the white privilages you  have, I have to question if you are a better person.
> 
> Of course, today nobody reads newspapers anymore, so it's not like we can make the kids get paper routes.  Today most newspapers are delivered by adults because they have cars.
> 
> Which brings us back to the point. THere are more people willing to do work than there is work to be done. So now what?
> 
> The ironic thing is, what you wingnuts advocate is making people work jobs that don't pay a living wage and having government m ake up the difference, and you wonder why you get more government.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The confiscatory taxes were for the war effort, and those taxes really only impacted 50 or so people. Now the government considers you "rich" after 250k, and in NYC that isn't realy rich.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you are making 250K, you can afford to pay your taxes.
Click to expand...


Lol, white privilege. That may apply to trust fund babies, but not to the son of a check sorting machine technician and a nurse. 

And there are plenty of other things for kids to do if their parents want them to work, bagging groceries for example. 

No, we support people moving from entry level jobs to jobs that add enough value to a product or service to provide a living wage without government interference.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> still not hearing how this has any effect on your life, dude.
> 
> I frankly don't get the whole "Trans" thing. Someone I knew back in the 1980's recently came out as a trans woman, and I had no idea. But you know what, at the end of the day he/she wasn't hurting anyone and did his/her job just fine.
> 
> Just because it offends your bronze age superstitions, really isn't my problem.



  It affects me because I have a wife, I have a mother, I have a sister, and I have a great number of other female acquaintances.  As a man, it is my responsibility and my duty to protect them from the insane, immoral freaks whose side you choose to take against them.

  If it was your wife, your daughter, your mother, your sister, or whomever else, being followed into a women's restroom, locker room, dressing room, or similar facility by one of these perverts, would you be OK with that?  You would not, if you had even the slightest value as a man.

  But then what point is there in arguing with someone who thinks that such responsibility, along with certain obvious principles of hard science and biology, are nothing more than _“bronze-age superstitions”_?


----------



## MindWars

edthecynic said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Teaching biblical truth could get your kids taken away
> 
> 
> 
> There is no such thing as "biblical truth."
Click to expand...


There's no such thing as democratic truth. Historical truth which left behind evidence proves other wise. Something Democratic teaching threw in the trash.  HISTORY was lost in your heads a long time ago.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
Click to expand...

/---- As a professional sales rep with over 35 years experience I 'd like to know why you think sales is a sleazy profession. BTW if you ever applied for a job, as an applicant, you were in sales selling yourself.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Slyhunter said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Always with your "us against them" mentality
> 
> But if figures you have that, because you have repeatedly blamed all the supposed failures in your life on others. You are like a petulant 2 year old that can't take any fault, it's always "those guys fault"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I blame others for what they did, but usually I overcome them. The guy who jerked me around in 2008 spends a lot of time ingratiating himself to me now to get business.
> 
> All that said, you avoided the point. We have welfare because we had wealth inequality. Full stop. There's enough wealth in this country to put everyone in a nice, middle class lifestyle. Fair wage laws, a guarunteed job for every able-bodied American, you wouldn't have any welfare.
> 
> Except for sick and old people, those slackers...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> /----- We have welfare because of stupid life choices and I don't mean the sick and informed.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How about being bi-polar. I got no choice in the matter. Without the VA and my medical care I would be a Raving maniac who belongs in jail. AND IT'S NOT MY FUCKING CHOICE!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

/----- Thank you for your service and sorry for your condition. Auto correct on my iPhone but I meant to post infirmed not informed.  And yes you should receive the medical care you need even if you can't afford it.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /---- As a professional sales rep with over 35 years experience I 'd like to know why you think sales is a sleazy profession. BTW if you ever applied for a job, as an applicant, you were in sales selling yourself.
Click to expand...




JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
Click to expand...

/---- So using your logic - the wealthy pay "social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways" in addition to the income tax.  Interesting.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Lol, white privilege. That may apply to trust fund babies, but not to the son of a check sorting machine technician and a nurse.



Again, you could ride around you neighborhood without fear of a cop shooting you... so that's kind of "privilege" that a lot of black kids don't enjoy.  

If there actually was a God (thankfully there isn't), I'd be on my knees thanking him every day I was born a white dude. 



martybegan said:


> No, we support people moving from entry level jobs to jobs that add enough value to a product or service to provide a living wage without government interference.



Again, as I've said, if the one Percenters can exploit the burger flippers, they'll exploit the rest of us. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> It affects me because I have a wife, I have a mother, I have a sister, and I have a great number of other female acquaintances. As a man, it is my responsibility and my duty to protect them from the insane, immoral freaks whose side you choose to take against them.



Really?  Because you guys babble this all day, but the fact is, you have yet to cite a case of a tranny actually bothering anyone in a bathroom. The reality of it is that your hypothetical relatives have probably peed next to a tranny and never knew it.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> If it was your wife, your daughter, your mother, your sister, or whomever else, being followed into a women's restroom, locker room, dressing room, or similar facility by one of these perverts, would you be OK with that? You would not, if you had even the slightest value as a man.



I have enough respect for women to realize they are capable of handling themselves if someone act inappropriately. Not that kind of thing ever happens.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> /---- So using your logic - the wealthy pay "social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways" in addition to the income tax. Interesting.



Not to the degree the working class does.  For instance, SS caps out at 114K.. after that, they don't pay it.


----------



## keepitreal

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world, 
against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Ephesians 6:12


Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

Matthew 13:13

The devil is real...he is alive and well...
but, so is the one, true living God and Christ

Bible prophecy is unfolding before our very eyes
God is preparing the way for the return of Christ

For those who have hardened their hearts,
open your hearts before it is too late,
so you can perceive what you have been too blind to see
and gain the wisdom to understand as much!


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:
			
		

> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Teaching kids the simple truths is illegal.
> Like we are born with penises, men, or without, women. That feeling like a woman when your a man is a mental disease much like feeling like a dog, or a hippopotamus would be.
> 
> so what offends you about Trans women is that they deny their masculinity. I'm still wondering how this really has any effet on your life.
Click to expand...

how about them sharing bathrooms with our underage girls.
What happens in private is none of our business, but what happens in public is everyone's.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> Which brings us back to the point. THere are more people willing to do work than there is work to be done. So now what?
> 
> The ironic thing is, what you wingnuts advocate is making people work jobs that don't pay a living wage and having government m ake up the difference, and you wonder why you get more government.
> 
> If you are making 250K, you can afford to pay your taxes.


Actually they don't want government to make up the difference. That is the problem. If your not making a living wage how do you live?


----------



## Moonglow

Slyhunter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which brings us back to the point. THere are more people willing to do work than there is work to be done. So now what?
> 
> The ironic thing is, what you wingnuts advocate is making people work jobs that don't pay a living wage and having government m ake up the difference, and you wonder why you get more government.
> 
> If you are making 250K, you can afford to pay your taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually they don't want government to make up the difference. That is the problem. If your not making a living wage how do you live?
Click to expand...

Discarded pizza boxes are an invaluable source of cheese..


----------



## Slyhunter

Cellblock2429 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /---- As a professional sales rep with over 35 years experience I 'd like to know why you think sales is a sleazy profession. BTW if you ever applied for a job, as an applicant, you were in sales selling yourself.
Click to expand...

I work as customer service in a company that sells stuff. Too many times I've had to field calls from customers who were sold stuff that wouldn't work on their car, and then finding out we didn't make that particular stuff for their car and instead of loosing the sale the sales person sold them the wrong stuff.

Or the sales person lies and says something is in stock that is really backordered for weeks sometimes months. If they told the truth they would've lost the sale.

When nothing matters but making the sale, then you loose your ethical side to make the bucks.


----------



## Slyhunter

Cellblock2429 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /---- As a professional sales rep with over 35 years experience I 'd like to know why you think sales is a sleazy profession. BTW if you ever applied for a job, as an applicant, you were in sales selling yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /---- So using your logic - the wealthy pay "social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways" in addition to the income tax.  Interesting.
Click to expand...

they need to get rid of social security caps on the tax end and tax 100% of income for ssn instead of cutting it off after a set amount.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, white privilege. That may apply to trust fund babies, but not to the son of a check sorting machine technician and a nurse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you could ride around you neighborhood without fear of a cop shooting you... so that's kind of "privilege" that a lot of black kids don't enjoy.
> 
> If there actually was a God (thankfully there isn't), I'd be on my knees thanking him every day I was born a white dude.
> 
> .
Click to expand...

LIE!


> as of July 9, whites were 54 percent of the 440 police shooting victims this year whose race was known, blacks were 28 percent and Hispanics were 18 percent, according to The Washington Post’s ongoing database of fatal police shootings. Those ratios are similar to last year’s tally, in which whites made up 50 percent of the 987 fatal police shootings, and blacks, 26 percent. (The vast majority of those police homicide victims were armed or otherwise threatening the officer.)


Opinion | Police shootings and race

The fact is, as a percentage of population, blacks are more likely than whites to commit violent criminal acts.


----------



## keepitreal

JoeB131 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where does the bible order every Christian to kill their children?
> If you are referring to the one story of Abraham, you don't understand the meaning of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible.
> 
> If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. -- Deuteronomy 21:18-21
> 
> 
> 
> He that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. -- Exodus 21:15
> 
> 
> He that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. -- Exodus 21:17
Click to expand...




JoeB131 said:


> so what offends you about Trans women is that they deny their masculinity. *I'm still wondering how this really has any effect on your life.*





JoeB131 said:


> I honestly wonder if you Christians even read your own bible.


I'm honestly wondering what your point is!

The Scriptures you quoted have everything to do with
the effects of depravity and disgraceful behavior
as the main factor which contributes to 
the deterioration and decay to a society!

It's like cancer, it fucking spreads!
Just look around, not only has depravity 
become a cancer on society worldwide,
but, advocating, redefining and instilling depravity
as normal and harmless and people are just out of touch,
has become a fucking plague, to say the least.

It is because I read God's Word,
and by His Grace, reveals His Words with understanding,
I am able to know you are manipulating the reasoning.

The devil is a liar!


----------



## JoeB131

Slyhunter said:


> how about them sharing bathrooms with our underage girls.
> What happens in private is none of our business, but what happens in public is everyone's.



Yeah, you know here's the thing, when everyone is in a stall, it really doesn't matter, does it?


----------



## JoeB131

keepitreal said:


> I'm honestly wondering what your point is!
> 
> The Scriptures you quoted have everything to do with
> the effects of depravity and disgraceful behavior
> as the main factor which contributes to
> the deterioration and decay to a society!



My point is that most of the Bible is pretty awful stuff... advocating racism, genocide, intolerance, cruelty and just plain old bad behavior that no civilized society today would tolerate. It was book of superstition written by bronze age savages. 



keepitreal said:


> It's like cancer, it fucking spreads!
> Just look around, not only has depravity
> become a cancer on society worldwide,
> but, advocating, redefining and instilling depravity
> as normal and harmless and people are just out of touch,
> has become a fucking plague, to say the least.



Again, by your definition.  Frankly, I don't know what makes some people think they are the opposite gender, and I kind of don't care. But discriminating against these people because your magic sky man says so is just... silly.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Slyhunter said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> May 17, 2017 - While Americans are subjected to a political circus in our nation's capital, riots, shortages, and repression are rocking the streets of Venezuela ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the Corporate world has done a very good job at waging economic war on the people of Venezuela for daring to defy them. What is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 2.) I didn't say Sales would be the only path. It's the one I chose. Google highest paying jobs and see what else is out there. BTW I knew sleazy people in all professions and some real top notch people including Sales.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, no, it's a pretty sleazy profession.  The point is, the LIE that all you need to do is get the right education or skills and the world will beat  path to your door is horseshit. The One Percent will ALWAYS try to screw working people as long as they put up with it.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 3.) When folks mention tax we generally mean INCOME TAX. Sorry I didn't spell that out for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you basically made a point that was completely irrelevent, as Income Tax (which should ONLY be paid by the rich to start with, as intended) doesn't touch the retired and the poor.  These folks still pay social security, medicare, sales, property, fees, and other ways the government finds to separate the 80% from the meager 13% of the economy we have.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> /---- As a professional sales rep with over 35 years experience I 'd like to know why you think sales is a sleazy profession. BTW if you ever applied for a job, as an applicant, you were in sales selling yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I work as customer service in a company that sells stuff. Too many times I've had to field calls from customers who were sold stuff that wouldn't work on their car, and then finding out we didn't make that particular stuff for their car and instead of loosing the sale the sales person sold them the wrong stuff.
> 
> Or the sales person lies and says something is in stock that is really backordered for weeks sometimes months. If they told the truth they would've lost the sale.
> 
> When nothing matters but making the sale, then you loose your ethical side to make the bucks.
Click to expand...

/------ Sure it's a short sighted sales rep who does this and part of the blame is the sales directors who put pressure on reps to hit quota or else. I worked with reps who did the same thing in legal publishing. They would write bogus orders so they would have something to report for the week. Reps were required to call their managers 3 times a day to report how much they have sold. The managers always asked the same questions no matter what was reported "Why didn't you sell more?"  Usually the turn over is very high as reps jump ship fast as possible. 

Now let's talk about Customer Service reps who swiped orders faxed in by field reps and used white out then put their name on the order so they would get credit for the sale. The Field Rep had to spin his/her wheels to get commission.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> Now let's talk about Customer Service reps who swiped orders faxed in by field reps and used white out then put their name on the order so they would get credit for the sale. The Field Rep had to spin his/her wheels to get commission.



That sounds like an internal problem.  Did anyone notice that the handwriting was different?


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, white privilege. That may apply to trust fund babies, but not to the son of a check sorting machine technician and a nurse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you could ride around you neighborhood without fear of a cop shooting you... so that's kind of "privilege" that a lot of black kids don't enjoy.
> 
> If there actually was a God (thankfully there isn't), I'd be on my knees thanking him every day I was born a white dude.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, we support people moving from entry level jobs to jobs that add enough value to a product or service to provide a living wage without government interference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, as I've said, if the one Percenters can exploit the burger flippers, they'll exploit the rest of us.
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> It affects me because I have a wife, I have a mother, I have a sister, and I have a great number of other female acquaintances. As a man, it is my responsibility and my duty to protect them from the insane, immoral freaks whose side you choose to take against them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  Because you guys babble this all day, but the fact is, you have yet to cite a case of a tranny actually bothering anyone in a bathroom. The reality of it is that your hypothetical relatives have probably peed next to a tranny and never knew it.
> 
> 
> 
> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it was your wife, your daughter, your mother, your sister, or whomever else, being followed into a women's restroom, locker room, dressing room, or similar facility by one of these perverts, would you be OK with that? You would not, if you had even the slightest value as a man.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have enough respect for women to realize they are capable of handling themselves if someone act inappropriately. Not that kind of thing ever happens.
Click to expand...


Yes, every cop is out there wanting to shoot black kids....


The burger flippers are exploiting themselves when that is all they try to attain to. How some idiots turned an entry level job into a cause is beyond me, oh wait they found gullible suckers like you to follow along...

and again, stop being a lazy fuck and respond to each poster in turn.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Slyhunter said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which brings us back to the point. THere are more people willing to do work than there is work to be done. So now what?
> 
> The ironic thing is, what you wingnuts advocate is making people work jobs that don't pay a living wage and having government m ake up the difference, and you wonder why you get more government.
> 
> If you are making 250K, you can afford to pay your taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually they don't want government to make up the difference. That is the problem. If your not making a living wage how do you live?
Click to expand...

/----- Do what I did when I started out. I worked 40 hours at minimum wage (about $100 a week in 1970) and a part time job on the weekends tending bar ($60 for two shifts). My $160 was enough to not only live on but to build a savings account and open a stock portfolio over time.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now let's talk about Customer Service reps who swiped orders faxed in by field reps and used white out then put their name on the order so they would get credit for the sale. The Field Rep had to spin his/her wheels to get commission.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That sounds like an internal problem.  Did anyone notice that the handwriting was different?
Click to expand...

 /---- Of course it was internal and it was up to the field rep to prove he wrote the business. The CS reps were instructed to call into the filed reps protected territory and close business. They had a quota too. Since the volume of orders was very high, the field reps had to closely monitor their monthly commission reports. Who knows how much fell through the cracks.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Yes, every cop is out there wanting to shoot black kids....



No, it's just that most of them have too much tolerance for the ones that do.  Take Jason van Dyke, the POS who shot LaQuan McDonald.  20 civilian complaints, including one where he dislocated a  suspect's shoulder.  

The city did everything it could to cover it up, and the FOP fought tooth and nail for this guy.  (He still has a fake job at FOP HQ pretending to clean toilets.) 

Of course, white kids don't have to worry about getting shot by a Jason van Dyke.  



martybegan said:


> The burger flippers are exploiting themselves when that is all they try to attain to. How some idiots turned an entry level job into a cause is beyond me, oh wait they found gullible suckers like you to follow along...



Again, if they can exploit the burger flippers, they can - and will - exploit the rest of us. 



martybegan said:


> and again, stop being a lazy fuck and respond to each poster in turn.



Say something interesting and I might.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----- Do what I did when I started out. I worked 40 hours at minimum wage (about $100 a week in 1970) and a part time job on the weekends tending bar ($60 for two shifts). My $160 was enough to not only live on but to build a savings account and open a stock portfolio over time.



160 was worth a lot more back then... 

Again, "I got mine fuck you" isn't a policy. It isn't even a decent human being.


----------



## JoeB131

Cellblock2429 said:


> /---- Of course it was internal and it was up to the field rep to prove he wrote the business. The CS reps were instructed to call into the filed reps protected territory and close business. They had a quota too. Since the volume of orders was very high, the field reps had to closely monitor their monthly commission reports. Who knows how much fell through the cracks.



My guess is, if your CSR's are doing this to you, you are probably kind of a jerk.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, every cop is out there wanting to shoot black kids....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's just that most of them have too much tolerance for the ones that do.  Take Jason van Dyke, the POS who shot LaQuan McDonald.  20 civilian complaints, including one where he dislocated a  suspect's shoulder.
> 
> The city did everything it could to cover it up, and the FOP fought tooth and nail for this guy.  (He still has a fake job at FOP HQ pretending to clean toilets.)
> 
> Of course, white kids don't have to worry about getting shot by a Jason van Dyke.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The burger flippers are exploiting themselves when that is all they try to attain to. How some idiots turned an entry level job into a cause is beyond me, oh wait they found gullible suckers like you to follow along...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, if they can exploit the burger flippers, they can - and will - exploit the rest of us.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> and again, stop being a lazy fuck and respond to each poster in turn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Say something interesting and I might.
Click to expand...


And again, these are the people you want to give MORE power to by making them the only legal armed force in a given community. Make up your fucking mind. 

Slippery slope argument, fail. 

Fuck off.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /----- Do what I did when I started out. I worked 40 hours at minimum wage (about $100 a week in 1970) and a part time job on the weekends tending bar ($60 for two shifts). My $160 was enough to not only live on but to build a savings account and open a stock portfolio over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 160 was worth a lot more back then...
> 
> Again, "I got mine fuck you" isn't a policy. It isn't even a decent human being.
Click to expand...

/----- How can you twist yourself into a pretzel and still manage to post a reply? The question was how can one live on minimum wage and I gave you a solution. How did you twist that into "I got mine fuck you"? $12 x 40 hours = $480. Add 8 hours on Saturday for $96 and then you make $576. Still not a lot but more money until you can get a better paying job.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /---- Of course it was internal and it was up to the field rep to prove he wrote the business. The CS reps were instructed to call into the filed reps protected territory and close business. They had a quota too. Since the volume of orders was very high, the field reps had to closely monitor their monthly commission reports. Who knows how much fell through the cracks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, if your CSR's are doing this to you, you are probably kind of a jerk.
Click to expand...

 /---- Oh so it's the victim who is at fault. How liberal of you.  Someone steals from you, does that make you a jerk? BTW when it happened to me I filed complaints but they went no where. I moved on to a better job.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> how about them sharing bathrooms with our underage girls.
> What happens in private is none of our business, but what happens in public is everyone's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you know here's the thing, when everyone is in a stall, it really doesn't matter, does it?
Click to expand...

Everyone isn't in a stall.
Some are in a public locker room. Some are using large bay shower rooms. You'd say anything to win an argument, the truth doesn't matter to you.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> And again, these are the people you want to give MORE power to by making them the only legal armed force in a given community. Make up your fucking mind.



I've made up my mind. 

I want to put a stop to the 32,000 gun deaths, including the 1200 gun deaths at the hands of police.  

Fact is, in the UK, they've already figured this out.  They've shot all of 54 civilians in the last 25 years.  That's what happens when only the police have guns... they show restraint. 



martybegan said:


> Slippery slope argument, fail.



We have airline pilots selling blood plasma and adjunct professors on food stamps. The Slippery Slope is already here.  



Cellblock2429 said:


> /----- How can you twist yourself into a pretzel and still manage to post a reply? The question was how can one live on minimum wage and I gave you a solution. How did you twist that into "I got mine fuck you"? $12 x 40 hours = $480. Add 8 hours on Saturday for $96 and then you make $576. Still not a lot but more money until you can get a better paying job.



You do realize that the minimum wage isn't $12.00 an hour, right? 



Cellblock2429 said:


> Oh so it's the victim who is at fault. How liberal of you. Someone steals from you, does that make you a jerk? BTW when it happened to me I filed complaints but they went no where. I moved on to a better job.



Ah... that's what I thought. YOu made such an ass of yourself that the CSR's intentionally sabotaged you.  



Slyhunter said:


> Everyone isn't in a stall.
> Some are in a public locker room. Some are using large bay shower rooms. You'd say anything to win an argument, the truth doesn't matter to you.



sure it does. Here's the ugly truth.  Trannies are just another group the 1% get you to hate because they want to distract your attention from what they are doing to you.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Again, by your definition.  Frankly, I don't know what makes some people think they are the opposite gender, and I kind of don't care. But discriminating against these people because your magic sky man says so is just... silly.



  We've long held it entirely proper to discriminate against men by denying them access to women's restrooms, dressing rooms, locker rooms, and similar facilities.  It's not about religion, but about basic decency.  There is no reason why exceptions should be made for mentally- and morally-defective perverts who are men but claim to be women.  The only thing it has to do with religion is as an example of some of the insane and immoral crap that Satan uses to fill in the holes left when one foolishly denies God.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Again, "I got mine fuck you" isn't a policy. It isn't even a decent human being.



  Nobody's claiming that.  More like, _“I worked hard for mine.  You do the same for yours.”_

  At a nadir of my career, I sought work through an outfit called Labor Ready.  It was day labor, very often hard, dirty work on construction sites, for not much above minimum wage.  During that time, my attitude toward panhandlers changed.  There was plenty of work available, for anyone willing to do it.  Anyone who was willing to work as hard as I did could make just as much as I was making.  I figured that a panhandler could go to Labor Ready, if he wanted, and do the same work I was doing, make the same money I was making, and thus had no need to beg for handouts from me.  If he wasn't wiling to work as hard as I was, then I saw no reason why I should share with him the fruits of my labor.

  I told several panhandlers about Labor Ready, and urged them to go there and sign up.  You'd be amazed how many guys there were, younger than I was, appearing to be stronger and healthier than I was, who claimed to have all manner of health issues or other reasons why they couldn't do the work I was doing.  F••• them.  Lazy, worthless, incestuous male offspring of female dogs, every one of them.  I very quickly decided that I was doing Labor Ready no favors by trying to refer these subhuman scum to them.

  I really do not see much difference between you and those panhandlers.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> We've long held it entirely proper to discriminate against men by denying them access to women's restrooms, dressing rooms, locker rooms, and similar facilities. It's not about religion, but about basic decency. There is no reason why exceptions should be made for mentally- and morally-defective perverts who are men but claim to be women. The only thing it has to do with religion is as an example of some of the insane and immoral crap that Satan uses to fill in the holes left when one foolishly denies God.



Uh, dude, through most of history, men and women used the same facilities. I fact, the first law mandating separate bathrooms wasn't passed until - wait for it - 1887. 

Why Do We Have Men's and Women's Bathrooms Anyway?



Bob Blaylock said:


> At a nadir of my career, I sought work through an outfit called Labor Ready. It was day labor, very often hard, dirty work on construction sites, for not much above minimum wage. During that time, my attitude toward panhandlers changed. There was plenty of work available, for anyone willing to do it. Anyone who was willing to work as hard as I did could make just as much as I was making. I figured that a panhandler could go to Labor Ready, if he wanted, and do the same work I was doing,and thus had no need to beg for handouts from me. If he wasn't wiling to work as hard as I was, then I saw no reason why I should share with him the fruits of my labor.



I'm not talking about panhandlers, most of whom have mental issues that make it impossible for them to hold down a job.  

I'm talking about kids working minimum wage jobs. 

The thing is, I've seen the economy so bad at times guys with college degrees were working in warehouses, and I've seen times so good they paid teenagers above minimum wage to fill positions.  The thing is, the one percent s houldn't be able to cheat those who do the work. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> I really do not see much difference between you and those panhandlers.



Of course not. Religious assholes ALWAYS have to think that people who don't share their fucked up superstitions must be "bad".


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> And again, these are the people you want to give MORE power to by making them the only legal armed force in a given community. Make up your fucking mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've made up my mind.
> 
> I want to put a stop to the 32,000 gun deaths, including the 1200 gun deaths at the hands of police.
> 
> Fact is, in the UK, they've already figured this out.  They've shot all of 54 civilians in the last 25 years.  That's what happens when only the police have guns... they show restraint.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slippery slope argument, fail.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We have airline pilots selling blood plasma and adjunct professors on food stamps. The Slippery Slope is already here.
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> /----- How can you twist yourself into a pretzel and still manage to post a reply? The question was how can one live on minimum wage and I gave you a solution. How did you twist that into "I got mine fuck you"? $12 x 40 hours = $480. Add 8 hours on Saturday for $96 and then you make $576. Still not a lot but more money until you can get a better paying job.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You do realize that the minimum wage isn't $12.00 an hour, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Cellblock2429 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so it's the victim who is at fault. How liberal of you. Someone steals from you, does that make you a jerk? BTW when it happened to me I filed complaints but they went no where. I moved on to a better job.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah... that's what I thought. YOu made such an ass of yourself that the CSR's intentionally sabotaged you.
> 
> 
> 
> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone isn't in a stall.
> Some are in a public locker room. Some are using large bay shower rooms. You'd say anything to win an argument, the truth doesn't matter to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure it does. Here's the ugly truth.  Trannies are just another group the 1% get you to hate because they want to distract your attention from what they are doing to you.
Click to expand...


Causation does not equal correlation. 

Links

STOP GROUP RESPONDING YOU MISERABLE BASTARD.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Causation does not equal correlation.



Of course it does. 

The reason why cops get away with shooting black children in the back when they have their hands up is "I thought he had a gun!!!!"  

And unless someone bothers to get a videotape, they usually accept that. 

Now, if you take away most of the guns from civilians, "I thought he had a gun before I shot him 16 times when he was lying on the ground" becomes a lot less plausible.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Causation does not equal correlation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it does.
> 
> The reason why cops get away with shooting black children in the back when they have their hands up is "I thought he had a gun!!!!"
> 
> And unless someone bothers to get a videotape, they usually accept that.
> 
> Now, if you take away most of the guns from civilians, "I thought he had a gun before I shot him 16 times when he was lying on the ground" becomes a lot less plausible.
Click to expand...


The problem is you won't take away guns from criminals, because they will always find a way to get them, even if you had to open up machine shops. Are you then going to say "we have to ban all lathes!!!"


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> The problem is you won't take away guns from criminals, because they will always find a way to get them, even if you had to open up machine shops. Are you then going to say "we have to ban all lathes!!!"



The problem with that mentality is--- other countries have done this. 

Japan, Australia, the UK - all have banned private gun ownership, and they have very little gun violence and very little police brutality. 

So saying "It can't be done" ignores the fact that others have done it.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is you won't take away guns from criminals, because they will always find a way to get them, even if you had to open up machine shops. Are you then going to say "we have to ban all lathes!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with that mentality is--- other countries have done this.
> 
> Japan, Australia, the UK - all have banned private gun ownership, and they have very little gun violence and very little police brutality.
> 
> So saying "It can't be done" ignores the fact that others have done it.
Click to expand...


They don't ban it, they just really really restrict it, and they have other issues, such as suicide in Japan, Yobs with knives knowing they can attack people with impunity because they are unarmed, and lots of people in Australia's outback telling the government to fuck off. 

It shouldn't be done because all it does is treat the symptoms and not the disease, and unless you repeal the 2nd amendment, you can't do it here.


----------



## Cellblock2429

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is you won't take away guns from criminals, because they will always find a way to get them, even if you had to open up machine shops. Are you then going to say "we have to ban all lathes!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with that mentality is--- other countries have done this.
> 
> Japan, Australia, the UK - all have banned private gun ownership, and they have very little gun violence and very little police brutality.
> 
> So saying "It can't be done" ignores the fact that others have done it.
Click to expand...

/---- Speaking of Japan, here is an explanation why their culture is different:
The secret of Japan’s mysteriously low crime rate
A Japanese friend of mine explained that going to prison would be an unimaginable social stigma for most people, leading to a widespread public perception that crimes are mostly committed by foreigners. The belief that almost all Japanese are law-abiding also creates a system that routinely treats suspects as guilty until proven otherwise. In such a hierarchical and deferential society, suspects face enormous pressure to cooperate with the investigators and admitting guilt, leading to a conviction rate in the courts of more than 99%.  The criminal justice system is founded on a strong belief that the criminal must repent for his crime – not simply being punished the law – and Japanese prisons are well-known (or notorious) for their strict discipline and order.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

JoeB131 said:


> ricechickie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have all respect for it, but I don't take it literally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, 90% of what is in the bible is actually- pretty awful. Harsh laws and harsh punishments we'd consider cruel today. Yet Christians will pull out the few nice bits, ignore all the nasty stuff, and claim this is a guide for morality.
Click to expand...

That's a lie.


----------



## deanrd

Biblical truth is an oxymoron like "Truthful Republican" or "Jumbo Shrimp".


----------



## Book of Jeremiah

JoeB131 said:


> ScienceRocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> So teaching your kids to hate other people ad believe in things that simply have no evidence is somehow good in your mind?  Man, you're really screwed up.
Click to expand...

Did you steal that sticker from the DNC?


----------



## SassyIrishLass

deanrd said:


> Biblical truth is an oxymoron like "Truthful Republican" or "Jumbo Shrimp".



Or DerpTruth.

This thread is hilarious what with all you naysayers tripping and falling all over yourselves screaming religion is bad!!!!!

Freaking goof balls


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> They don't ban it, they just really really restrict it, and they have other issues, such as suicide in Japan, Yobs with knives knowing they can attack people with impunity because they are unarmed, and lots of people in Australia's outback telling the government to fuck off.



None of which comes anywhere near the crime rates we have in the US. But I'm sure you'll just blame the Darkies. 

Okay, find a country where they have gun laws as permissive as the US, and no crime. Thanks.  



martybegan said:


> It shouldn't be done because all it does is treat the symptoms and not the disease, and unless you repeal the 2nd amendment, you can't do it here.



Sure we can.  Here's a list of ways we can do it. 

1) Get a majority on SCOTUS that can actually read the words, "Well-REgulated Militia" 

2) Keep passing local laws and exhaust the resources of the National Rampage Association. 

3) Pass strict gun liability laws that hold gun sellers and manufacturers responsible for the carnage. 

We can fuck with you gun nuts all day... and eventually, the 78% of us who don't own guns will win.


----------



## JoeB131

SassyIrishLass said:


> This thread is hilarious what with all you naysayers tripping and falling all over yourselves screaming religion is bad!!!!!



Inquisitions
Crusades
Jihads
Heretic Torture
Witch Burning
Altar Boy Sex Abuse
Suppression of Science

Yes. religion is bad.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They don't ban it, they just really really restrict it, and they have other issues, such as suicide in Japan, Yobs with knives knowing they can attack people with impunity because they are unarmed, and lots of people in Australia's outback telling the government to fuck off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of which comes anywhere near the crime rates we have in the US. But I'm sure you'll just blame the Darkies.
> 
> Okay, find a country where they have gun laws as permissive as the US, and no crime. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It shouldn't be done because all it does is treat the symptoms and not the disease, and unless you repeal the 2nd amendment, you can't do it here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure we can.  Here's a list of ways we can do it.
> 
> 1) Get a majority on SCOTUS that can actually read the words, "Well-REgulated Militia"
> 
> 2) Keep passing local laws and exhaust the resources of the National Rampage Association.
> 
> 3) Pass strict gun liability laws that hold gun sellers and manufacturers responsible for the carnage.
> 
> We can fuck with you gun nuts all day... and eventually, the 78% of us who don't own guns will win.
Click to expand...


No crime? Setting an impossible bar is the tactic of a person who knows they don't have a fucking point. 

Fuck you you fascist fuck. The world will be a better place when you are no longer part of it.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> No crime? Setting an impossible bar is the tactic of a person who knows they don't have a fucking point.



Come on, you can't point to one. Mostly because no country has as many guns as we have...



martybegan said:


> Fuck you you fascist fuck. The world will be a better place when you are no longer part of it.



Your little Temper Tantrum aside, I just listed ways that the majority could totally fuck with you gun nuts. 

I can put a few more on there.

4) Change local zoning and environmental laws to make it impossible to run a gun range.

5) Use local business regulations to keep gun stores out of most neighborhoods.

6) Require gun owners to carry expensive insurance.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No crime? Setting an impossible bar is the tactic of a person who knows they don't have a fucking point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, you can't point to one. Mostly because no country has as many guns as we have...
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you you fascist fuck. The world will be a better place when you are no longer part of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your little Temper Tantrum aside, I just listed ways that the majority could totally fuck with you gun nuts.
> 
> I can put a few more on there.
> 
> 4) Change local zoning and environmental laws to make it impossible to run a gun range.
> 
> 5) Use local business regulations to keep gun stores out of most neighborhoods.
> 
> 6) Require gun owners to carry expensive insurance.
Click to expand...


You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker. 

That method basically means the end of constitutional rule as we know it, and a civil war your side would lose. 

4. violates 2nd amendment
5. violates 2nd amendment
6. violates 2nd amendment.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

martybegan said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No crime? Setting an impossible bar is the tactic of a person who knows they don't have a fucking point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on, you can't point to one. Mostly because no country has as many guns as we have...
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck you you fascist fuck. The world will be a better place when you are no longer part of it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your little Temper Tantrum aside, I just listed ways that the majority could totally fuck with you gun nuts.
> 
> I can put a few more on there.
> 
> 4) Change local zoning and environmental laws to make it impossible to run a gun range.
> 
> 5) Use local business regulations to keep gun stores out of most neighborhoods.
> 
> 6) Require gun owners to carry expensive insurance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> That method basically means the end of constitutional rule as we know it, and a civil war your side would lose.
> 
> 4. violates 2nd amendment
> 5. violates 2nd amendment
> 6. violates 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...


He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.



Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.  

Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them. 



SassyIrishLass said:


> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed



sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA. 

These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA


----------



## Slyhunter

I think we should outlaw criminals.
That'll solve the problem.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
Click to expand...


You're stuck on militia and time and time again the courts rule against that argument. The fact remains gun ownership is a constituional right. After all it does say the right of the people....

Our Founding Fathers also understood the inalienable right of the people to protect themselves...and it shall not be infringed


----------



## JoeB131

SassyIrishLass said:


> You're stuck on militia and time and time again the courts rule against that argument.



For most of history, the courts have found the militia clause allowed government to regulate gun ownership.  ONly the awful Heller and McDonald decisions have found otherwise, and the courts have walked even though back a bit.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> For most of history, the courts have found the militia clause allowed government to regulate gun ownership.



  To whatever extent that may be true, the courts were wrong.  The Second Amendment is explicit on the point of who the right belongs to.  It doesn't belong to the militia; it belongs to the people.  And _“…shall not be infringed”_ means that government is absolutely forbidden from even touching the edge of this right.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> To whatever extent that may be true, the courts were wrong. The Second Amendment is explicit on the point of who the right belongs to. It doesn't belong to the militia; it belongs to the people. And _“…shall not be infringed”_ means that government is absolutely forbidden from even touching the edge of this right.



But does it belong to them as a collective right or an individual right?  Clearly, quaifiying it as a "Well-Regulated Militia" determines it is a collective right.  Nobody wanted Joker Holmes showing up with a machine gun.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Second Amendment is explicit on the point of who the right belongs to. It doesn't belong to the militia; it belongs to the people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But does it belong to them as a collective right or an individual right?
Click to expand...


  What does _“the people”_ mean everywhere that it appears in the Bill of Rights?

  Where the First Amendment addresses _“ the right of *the people* peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”_, are these collective rights, or are they rights that belong to every individual?  What about _“ The right of *the people* to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures…”_?  Or the unnamed rights _“…retained by *the people* …”_ mentioned in the Ninth Amendment?  And why does the Tenth Amendment distinguish powers belonging to *the people* from those belonging to the states or to the federal government?

  Nowhere in the Constitution is the term _“the people”_ used to describe a collective right or power.  The Second Amendment is no exception.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> What does _“the people”_ mean everywhere that it appears in the Bill of Rights?
> 
> Where the First Amendment addresses _“ the right of *the people* peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”_



well, that would be a good example of a collective right.  They don't redress every nutbag who has a grievance.  they would be redressing a collective grievance. 

Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where the First Amendment addresses _“ the right of *the people* peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well, that would be a good example of a collective right.  They don't redress every nutbag who has a grievance.  they would be redressing a collective grievance.
> 
> Thanks for proving my point.
Click to expand...


  So, are you saying that as an individual, I do not have the right, as described in the First Amendment, to write a letter to my Congressman to address any grievances I may have with government—that somehow, this right exists only in a collective form?


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> So, are you saying that as an individual, I do not have the right, as described in the First Amendment, to write a letter to my Congressman to address any grievances I may have with government—that somehow, this right exists only in a collective form?



No.  You can write all day.. it's just not that they are going to take your crank letter very seriously. 

Just like not everyone should have a gun if they aren't in a militia.


----------



## Bob Blaylock

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, are you saying that as an individual, I do not have the right, as described in the First Amendment, to write a letter to my Congressman to address any grievances I may have with government—that somehow, this right exists only in a collective form?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  You can write all day.. it's just not that they are going to take your crank letter very seriously.
> 
> Just like not everyone should have a gun if they aren't in a militia.
Click to expand...


  Whether a Congressman responds in a satisfactory manner to a letter from a constituent is beside the point.  The point is that as one of _“the people”_, I have a right to write that letter and send it to my Congressman.  Just as I have a right, as one of _“the people”_, to keep and bear arms.  Nowhere in the Constitution is the term _“the people”_ used to describe a right or a power that is collective in nature.


----------



## JoeB131

Bob Blaylock said:


> Whether a Congressman responds in a satisfactory manner to a letter from a constituent is beside the point. The point is that as one of _“the people”_, I have a right to write that letter and send it to my Congressman. Just as I have a right, as one of _“the people”_, to keep and bear arms. Nowhere in the Constitution is the term _“the people”_ used to describe a right or a power that is collective in nature.



Well, that's an interesting opinion, but that's all it is. 

here's where I got to break the bad news to you.  There are no "rights".  There are privileges the rest of society let's you have.   Any fool who thinks he has "rights" needs to look up "Japanese Americans, 1942"  

For most of our history, the courts have found that the Second Amendment applied to militias, not gun ownership.  Only in 2008 did you have Scalia suddenly discover the crazy talk of the National Rampage Association was right.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
Click to expand...



Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.



No they didn't. Not that anyone wants guns in churches or pre-schools, but Cho attacked a campus that had it's own armed police force.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't. Not that anyone wants guns in churches or pre-schools, but Cho attacked a campus that had it's own armed police force.
Click to expand...

The students and teachers were unarmed. Had they been armed they could've defended themselves.


----------



## JoeB131

Slyhunter said:


> The students and teachers were unarmed. Had they been armed they could've defended themselves.



Or they could have panicked and randomly shot someone in the hall... 

Look, guy, the Good Guy with a gun never shows up. If a mass shooter is stopped, he is either stopped by the cops or he stops himself.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't. Not that anyone wants guns in churches or pre-schools, but Cho attacked a campus that had it's own armed police force.
Click to expand...


Gun free meaning non-government actors were prevented from bringing their own firearms to the location.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The students and teachers were unarmed. Had they been armed they could've defended themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or they could have panicked and randomly shot someone in the hall...
> 
> Look, guy, the Good Guy with a gun never shows up. If a mass shooter is stopped, he is either stopped by the cops or he stops himself.
Click to expand...


hard for him to show up when in most places that shootings occurred he/she isn't allowed to carry.


----------



## Dragonlady

martybegan said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
Click to expand...


The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.


----------



## martybegan

Dragonlady said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
Click to expand...


oh Rily?

John Lott's Website: No guns policy at Cinemark Theaters?


----------



## Dragonlady

martybegan said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh Rily?
> 
> John Lott's Website: No guns policy at Cinemark Theaters?
Click to expand...


There were survivors interviewed who said they had their guns with them and couldn't see what was going on. 

I doubt the theatre frisks those who enter.


----------



## martybegan

Dragonlady said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh Rily?
> 
> John Lott's Website: No guns policy at Cinemark Theaters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were survivors interviewed who said they had their guns with them and couldn't see what was going on.
> 
> I doubt the theatre frisks those who enter.
Click to expand...


Links?


----------



## Dragonlady

martybegan said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh Rily?
> 
> John Lott's Website: No guns policy at Cinemark Theaters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were survivors interviewed who said they had their guns with them and couldn't see what was going on.
> 
> I doubt the theatre frisks those who enter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Links?
Click to expand...


It was four years ago. I don't remember whether this was a TV interview or a print report. I do remember that the the guy was either an off-duty cop or military. He said that the tear gas made it impossible to see, and it all happened too quickly to get a sense of what was going on. 

There was a media barrage of reports and information in every newspaper and TV station. It's impossible to find much of it now without knowing exactly where to look.


----------



## martybegan

Dragonlady said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh Rily?
> 
> John Lott's Website: No guns policy at Cinemark Theaters?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There were survivors interviewed who said they had their guns with them and couldn't see what was going on.
> 
> I doubt the theatre frisks those who enter.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Links?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It was four years ago. I don't remember whether this was a TV interview or a print report. I do remember that the the guy was either an off-duty cop or military. He said that the tear gas made it impossible to see, and it all happened too quickly to get a sense of what was going on.
> 
> There was a media barrage of reports and information in every newspaper and TV station. It's impossible to find much of it now without knowing exactly where to look.
Click to expand...


if he was an off duty cop, he was exempted probably from the gun free zone clause. If he wasn't he was breaking the rules set by the theater.

In any even these idiots target areas they know that:

1) The people are disarmed
2) There is no effective perimeter to enforce said disarmament.


----------



## Dragonlady

But then you have the Dallas Police Chief saying that when cops arrive they can't tell who is the good guy and who is the criminal. Remember the home owner who was shot and killed by police after he called to report his wife was being attacked?  Police saw a man with a gun and killed him.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Gun free meaning non-government actors were prevented from bringing their own firearms to the location.



Yup, somehow I don't think this would have stopped Sandy Hook.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> 
> The students and teachers were unarmed. Had they been armed they could've defended themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or they could have panicked and randomly shot someone in the hall...
> 
> Look, guy, the Good Guy with a gun never shows up. If a mass shooter is stopped, he is either stopped by the cops or he stops himself.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect.
good guy stops bad guy with gun - Bing
Want me to paste and copy examples?
11 times a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy, saving lives - Photos 	  - Washington Times
*NRA: ‘Only Thing That Stops a Bad Guy With a Gun Is a Good Guy With a Gun’*
*NRA: ‘Only Thing That Stops a Bad Guy With a Gun Is a Good Guy With a Gun’*


----------



## Slyhunter

Dragonlady said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said "no crime". Again, impossible bar, wanker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you name a country with shitloads of guns and LITTLE crime.. or even less crime than a gun-controlling democracy... no, no, you can't.
> 
> Because everyone else realized what a terrible thing it is letting people who have no business owning guns have them.
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> He doesn't, or is incapable of, grasping, shall not be infringed
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> sure...it comes after WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
> 
> These guys are not a WELL REGULATED MILITIA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Each one of them attacked a gun free zone. So figure that one out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Colorado shooter did not attack in a gun free zone. There were people with guns in the theatre who did not use them because they couldn't see what was going on and it was too chaotic.
Click to expand...

One example and proof that dr who avatar guy is wrong. Good guys had guns in the movie theater and didn't panic and randomly shoot innocent people trying to get the perp.


----------



## Slyhunter

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gun free meaning non-government actors were prevented from bringing their own firearms to the location.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, somehow I don't think this would have stopped Sandy Hook.
Click to expand...

Depends on the kid. I would go out in the woods and shoot a 12 gauge and a 22 when I was 14. I used to stand gator guard for the kids across the street when they went to the retention pond to take their baths because they didn't have running water in their house.


----------



## JoeB131

Slyhunter said:


> Want me to paste and copy examples?
> 11 times a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy, saving lives - Photos - Washington Times



Guy, we were over that article... and here's what it said. 

Most of the "Good Guys" were cops or military reservists.  In short- trained professionals in a well-regulated militia.  

Not Bubba Mac with his squirrel gun.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gun free meaning non-government actors were prevented from bringing their own firearms to the location.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, somehow I don't think this would have stopped Sandy Hook.
Click to expand...


I figured you were scared of little girls.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> I figured you were scared of little girls.



Yes, the hundreds of children who are shot with guns every year does scare me... 

Why it doesn't bother you is another matter. 

"Um, Founding Fathers. Second Amendment.  Freedom!!!"


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I figured you were scared of little girls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the hundreds of children who are shot with guns every year does scare me...
> 
> Why it doesn't bother you is another matter.
> 
> "Um, Founding Fathers. Second Amendment.  Freedom!!!"
Click to expand...


And the thousands who die in car accidents I guess don't count because they don't give you a political axe to grind.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> And the thousands who die in car accidents I guess don't count because they don't give you a political axe to grind.



Here's the thing. Every year, the car industry does things to make the cars safer. they promote safety, they support things like seat belt laws and no small children in the front seat laws and other things that reduce fatalities that will probably follow when you have millions of vehicles on the road, every day.  They conduct crash tests to make their cars safer. 

And they do this because frankly, if someone dies in a car accident, the car companies can be held liable if is found to be their fault.  

MEANWHILE, the gun companies are constantly pushing more powerful guns, bigger magazines, and they are marketing their products to the most unstable people in the country.  It's not a conincidence that 50% of the guns are owned by 3% of the population. The gun industry isn't interested in the guy who buys a guy and sticks it in his closet for 20 years. 

They want THIS guy as a repeat customer.. 






If the Auto industry acted like the gun industry, they'd market their products to speeders and drunk drivers, and demand all those pesky traffic signs be taken down because Founding Fathers or some such shit. Then insist on cutting the number of traffic cops.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the thousands who die in car accidents I guess don't count because they don't give you a political axe to grind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the thing. Every year, the car industry does things to make the cars safer. they promote safety, they support things like seat belt laws and no small children in the front seat laws and other things that reduce fatalities that will probably follow when you have millions of vehicles on the road, every day.  They conduct crash tests to make their cars safer.
> 
> And they do this because frankly, if someone dies in a car accident, the car companies can be held liable if is found to be their fault.
> 
> MEANWHILE, the gun companies are constantly pushing more powerful guns, bigger magazines, and they are marketing their products to the most unstable people in the country.  It's not a conincidence that 50% of the guns are owned by 3% of the population. The gun industry isn't interested in the guy who buys a guy and sticks it in his closet for 20 years.
> 
> They want THIS guy as a repeat customer..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the Auto industry acted like the gun industry, they'd market their products to speeders and drunk drivers, and demand all those pesky traffic signs be taken down because Founding Fathers or some such shit. Then insist on cutting the number of traffic cops.
Click to expand...


They are held liable if the car is defective or a part of it is defective. Gun manufacturers are held to the same standard.

Drunk driving convictions do not lead to Ford being sued. Wreckless drivers do not lead to Chevy being sued. 

You want to make gun companies liable for other's actions just because you see it as an end run around the 2nd amendment.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> They are held liable if the car is defective or a part of it is defective. Gun manufacturers are held to the same standard.
> 
> Drunk driving convictions do not lead to Ford being sued. Wreckless drivers do not lead to Chevy being sued.



Because they actively discourage that kind of thing.  As opposed to the gun industry, which tells gun nuts, "We needs us some guns because Obama is going to bring socialism!!!"



martybegan said:


> You want to make gun companies liable for other's actions just because you see it as an end run around the 2nd amendment.



I want the industry to change its behavior.  FOr instance, WHEN Ford was found liable for its shenannigans with the Pinto (where they decided it would be cheaper to pay out a few dozen injury suits than recall millions of cars to fix them), they changed their behavior.  

When you hold the gun industry liable for Adam Lanza, they will make damn sure the next Adam Lanza doesn't happen.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are held liable if the car is defective or a part of it is defective. Gun manufacturers are held to the same standard.
> 
> Drunk driving convictions do not lead to Ford being sued. Wreckless drivers do not lead to Chevy being sued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they actively discourage that kind of thing.  As opposed to the gun industry, which tells gun nuts, "We needs us some guns because Obama is going to bring socialism!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You want to make gun companies liable for other's actions just because you see it as an end run around the 2nd amendment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I want the industry to change its behavior.  FOr instance, WHEN Ford was found liable for its shenannigans with the Pinto (where they decided it would be cheaper to pay out a few dozen injury suits than recall millions of cars to fix them), they changed their behavior.
> 
> When you hold the gun industry liable for Adam Lanza, they will make damn sure the next Adam Lanza doesn't happen.
Click to expand...


Considering there are people like you out there who DO want to ban guns for everyone, their fears are warranted. 

Again, the Pinto was an actual defect with the vehicle. You want people to be able to sue Chevy because Camaros can go fast, and chevy advertises how Camaros can go fast.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are held liable if the car is defective or a part of it is defective. Gun manufacturers are held to the same standard.
> 
> Drunk driving convictions do not lead to Ford being sued. Wreckless drivers do not lead to Chevy being sued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they actively discourage that kind of thing.  As opposed to the gun industry, which tells gun nuts, "We needs us some guns because Obama is going to bring socialism!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You want to make gun companies liable for other's actions just because you see it as an end run around the 2nd amendment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I want the industry to change its behavior.  FOr instance, WHEN Ford was found liable for its shenannigans with the Pinto (where they decided it would be cheaper to pay out a few dozen injury suits than recall millions of cars to fix them), they changed their behavior.
> 
> When you hold the gun industry liable for Adam Lanza, they will make damn sure the next Adam Lanza doesn't happen.
Click to expand...


What exactly would you, as CEO of Remington, prevent Adam Lanza?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> Considering there are people like you out there who DO want to ban guns for everyone, their fears are warranted.
> 
> Again, the Pinto was an actual defect with the vehicle. You want people to be able to sue Chevy because Camaros can go fast, and chevy advertises how Camaros can go fast.



No, Dude, I want to sue Chevy for marketing Camaros to reckless drivers, if they did that... which is pretty much what the gun industry does.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Considering there are people like you out there who DO want to ban guns for everyone, their fears are warranted.
> 
> Again, the Pinto was an actual defect with the vehicle. You want people to be able to sue Chevy because Camaros can go fast, and chevy advertises how Camaros can go fast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Dude, I want to sue Chevy for marketing Camaros to reckless drivers, if they did that... which is pretty much what the gun industry does.
Click to expand...


They market the Camaro as a Sports Car, that implies fast driving and hard handling. So you would try to sue them for that?

Good luck.


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> They market the Camaro as a Sports Car, that implies fast driving and hard handling. So you would try to sue them for that?
> 
> Good luck.



I think there's a big difference between "our car is fast" and "Consider your Man Card Reissued", which is what the gun industry does.


----------



## Bonzi

There's all kinds of wacky horrific laws in a lot of countries.

If you don't agree, leave.


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They market the Camaro as a Sports Car, that implies fast driving and hard handling. So you would try to sue them for that?
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think there's a big difference between "our car is fast" and "Consider your Man Card Reissued", which is what the gun industry does.
Click to expand...


No difference at all. Plus we excuse fast driving far more than we excuse irresponsible gun ownership.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> They market the Camaro as a Sports Car, that implies fast driving and hard handling. So you would try to sue them for that?
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think there's a big difference between "our car is fast" and "Consider your Man Card Reissued", which is what the gun industry does.
Click to expand...


Would you be so kind as to post such an ad? I see macho car ads virtually every day, not so many gun ads. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JoeB131

martybegan said:


> No difference at all. Plus we excuse fast driving far more than we excuse irresponsible gun ownership.



Really?  When was the last time someone got sent to prison for leaving their gun out and a child shot himself with it?


----------



## JoeB131

hadit said:


> Would you be so kind as to post such an ad? I see macho car ads virtually every day, not so many gun ads.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> hadit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you be so kind as to post such an ad? I see macho car ads virtually every day, not so many gun ads.
Click to expand...


What publications are those in?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JoeB131

Guy man up and admit you were wrong.


----------



## hadit

JoeB131 said:


> Guy man up and admit you were wrong.



I wasn't wrong about anything. I said I had not seen any such ads. Obviously, you read publications that I do not. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## martybegan

JoeB131 said:


> martybegan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No difference at all. Plus we excuse fast driving far more than we excuse irresponsible gun ownership.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  When was the last time someone got sent to prison for leaving their gun out and a child shot himself with it?
Click to expand...


Probation, mostly because the injury was non life-threatening. and this was last month. 

Father receives probation after toddler shoots self in face


----------

