Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I didn't think this would get so furious!
um, it's not a misspelling you doosh.
ROFLMNAO... Oh GOD that's precious... "IGNORANT AND PROUD OF IT!"
you still don't get IT.
why am I not surprised?
And yet you've yet to prove that it will inevitably lead to anything, all you've done is give assurances that you are in fact right.
Ahh... so you feel that the lowering of standards will potentially lead to a rise in the standard performance... Yep... you're a leftist; note the stark intellectual limitations which evoke a doubt in natural certainty.
I never said anything of that sort, you assume that because I don't take your word at face value I must have a direct opposite opinion.
Nonsense...
Did you just say morality is subjective then try to objectively prove a piece of morality?
Nope...
Where did I say I was certain what was best for everyone? Nowhere. In fact I'm pretty sure that there is no specific moral code that works best for every person in the country.
It's implied throughout that which I qouted...
I was talking bring the force of government down to enforce your morality not simply advocating it.
Civilization has always used force to enforce cultural standards... In the US we establish this standard in our legal code, which is then enforced through Police power. It's more than likely you're confusing cultural standards with Religious tenets...
PI said:The difference is that I can support my position; I can prove the viability of the standards for which I advocate... point for point, line for line and time for time, everywhere you try...
Then please do that instead of verbal assurances.
I've done so repeatedly... what you need to understand is that proof is not relegated to that which you will accept.
PI said:What you need to understand is that where one exercises their rights to the detriment of the rights of another, they forfeit their rights... and that is the basis of holding accountable, those who infringe on my rights to pursue the fulfillment of my life, by undermining the viability of my culture...
Which culture? There are many.
That which is relevant...
And are those people who are 'undermining' it also part of the very same culture of which you speak?
Yep...
by your statement you assume anyone who has morals must be conservative, therefore saying conservatives are the only ones with morals and values. Conservatives are not the only ones who go to church or have strong families.
actually most of liberals I know are the best people I know. My parents friends for example and their son who is one of my best friends are liberals when it comes to politics but are very religious. Their son is my age and is still waitng to have sex until he is married. I can give a few other examples a people just like them.
See when you grow up with liberal parents it usually means you have freedom to be whatever you want to be and that if you make a mistake you know they will stand behind you no matter what, and will stand by whatever decisions you make regarding your life.
My mom who is very liberal when it comes to politics raised two sons and two stepsons and they became the best men I know faithful to their wives and devoted fathers.Who also work very hard to support their families!
As for conservatives I see more of you putting people into boxes and have no room for anything that is different from you!
Well, Ok... and given that conclusion and given all the boxes you packed in advancing that position, we're left to conclude that you must be a conservative.
Your opinions of those you've boxed up as liberals is subjective and based solely upon your observation... so we're in no position to contest that observation; all of which means there's nothing to discuss.
What I hear you saying is your mother exemplief conservative principles in her personal life, while publically advocating for liberal policy.
The fact is that most Americans are apolitical, meaning that they spend most of their time focused on their lives; raising their families and pursuing the fulfillment of their lives... they like to think of themselves as 'liberals' because liberal to them means 'live and let live' and naturally, they don't like to be screwed with, so they don't want to screw with others. But that idea is filled with misnomers... Liberals.. OKA: Leftists are the antithesis of 'live and let live'... they're tyrants and as tyrants are wont to do, they lie in their advertising...
So I don't get too caught up in the status of those you feel are 'liberal', while you define that by their conservative behavior...
I just want to point out that this is what you're doin'... and I really enjoy doin' it.
And speaking of tyrant, telling someone their lifestyle is wrong is being tyrant, telling someone what they can do with their body is being a tyrant, saying the only way to survive is to be a religious conseravative is being a tyrant.
Assuming everyone who is on welfare is lazy and taking advantage of the system is putting people into boxes along with saying all liberals just want to live off the government is also putting people into boxes.
Tekkan, I had the opposite experience. When I was younger I was a conservative. I thought they did no wrong. As I got older, I started to disagree with their opinions on social issues, their interpretation of the Constitution, the intent of the Founders, and I saw the hypocrisy in the way they handled public money. Now I'm a man without a Party.
ROFLMNAO... Oh GOD that's precious... "IGNORANT AND PROUD OF IT!"
you still don't get IT.
why am I not surprised?
What's not to get? You're a sub-par intellectual who desperately wants to participate in the discussion, but, due to the aforementioned cognitve deficiency you're unable to do so; resulting in your relegating yourself to off topic appeals for attention, manifested in chronic spam, not at all dissimilar from the spam advanced directly above.
Nothing terribly complex really...
you still don't get IT.
why am I not surprised?
What's not to get? You're a sub-par intellectual who desperately wants to participate in the discussion, but, due to the aforementioned cognitve deficiency you're unable to do so; resulting in your relegating yourself to off topic appeals for attention, manifested in chronic spam, not at all dissimilar from the spam advanced directly above.
Nothing terribly complex really...
you're as idiotic as you signature is juvenile.
fuk off you wingnut loser.
I do agree.Many of my friends of my age (young) are indulging in drink, dope, sex before marriage, debauchery and wildness. Don't get me wrong - up until about a year ago I was doing the same.
Then I had a change of heart and a change of mind.
I realised, over time, that liberalism leads to a free-for-all, a life that promises absolute freedom but which, in reality, leads to destruction. All the things above taste good for a time but ultimately people who indulge in them will come to grief. You can see it happening, sometimes even before your eyes.
I turned back to the faith last year (a faith I'd been brough up with, but turned away from in my madness) and it helped me re-learn my self-discipline and control. It's the only way forward, and without those things you can achieve nothing.
I realised that religious conservative values are the only ones on which an individual or a nation can build a future. The values on which the only promise of a stable future lives. Marriage, family, monogamy - how can we have a proper life it we don't abide by those standards?
And I've been a lot happier since embracing those values, even though some of my friends think it's strange at my age. I don't care what they think. This is the way for me and, I believe, for most rational thinking people.
Hope people agree.
Publius, The first problem I had with the conservatives was their take on the intent of the Founders. I was a volunteer for the GOP for several years, and the Constitution was a favorite topic among the local GOP officials in my area. They often talked with us about the intended meaning, yet they only referenced the Constitution itself. Once I actually bothered to read other sources such as the Federalist Papers and correspondence between the people involved in government during Revolutionary times, I realized that my take on what they were saying didn't jibe with what the conservatives were telling me. I felt that their interpretation was based less upon the intent of the Founders and more upon wishful thinking. I also had a serious problem with some of the state issues that were being pushed at the time. The conservatives here preached about self-determination, yet at the same time were campaigning in favor of issues which I felt directly opposed self-determination,such as the removal of local control of school boards to the state, mandatory insurance laws which deprived individuals of choice, drunk driving check lanes on public roads( which may sound good at first ,but in reality are nothing but an imposition on citizens who have done nothing wrong and had no reason to be stopped). The conservatives at that time also campaigned against the Dems here by calling the Dems "statist"(which in my opinion they were). When the GOP won here, they implemented all of those policies. They also raised 138 seperate taxes in this state within 8 months, but they passed a minimal reduction in the income tax(0.02% decrease).They were guilty of being statist because they obviously defined the right of self-determination as being centered in the state by their actions. Then they started campaigning as tax cutters because they lowered one tax. Another problem for me was the "Hillarycare" debacle. I disliked the plan as much as the conservatives did, but I disagreed with their reasoning. Their position was that since the Constitution doesn't mention healthcare as a right, then the Founders must not have intended for it to be a right. Two points on that. First, by that reasoning the AirForce is un-constitutional(which it is clearly not).Second, of course the Founders didn't mention it. During their time medical science and the health care industry were practically non-existent by our standard. Their talking points sounded great, but their actions left much to be desired in my opinion, which is the only opinion that counts as far as my beliefs are concerned. Now, I know we're not supposed to reference other threads, but I want you to know that I'm familiar with your work. So, in closing, I know that I didn't know every conservative in the country. I can only go by what I have personally experienced, so my local experience is valid. The GOP in my state at the time I worked with them(1992-1998) self-identified themselves as "conservative", so don't attempt to draw the distinction between conservative and GOP. I also object to you labeling me as a leftie. I am not. I just disagree with conservatives in this country, I also disagree with the vast majority of people in both major Parties. How nice of you to inaccurately define my position and then make your argument against said incorrectly defined position. You asked for clarification, you got clarification. If that's not enough for you and you want to play the name calling/insult game that you are so obviously fond of, go play with DevNell. I won't play that game with you. One more thing, If the GOP wants my vote, they have to give me a reason to vote for them. It's not my fault that they've done a piss poor job.
Tekkan, I had the opposite experience. When I was younger I was a conservative. I thought they did no wrong. As I got older, I started to disagree with their opinions on social issues, their interpretation of the Constitution, the intent of the Founders, and I saw the hypocrisy in the way they handled public money. Now I'm a man without a Party.
del, he asked for clarification, he got it. If it's board policy to post sound-byte style, let me know. I'll leave.
What's not to get? You're a sub-par intellectual who desperately wants to participate in the discussion, but, due to the aforementioned cognitve deficiency you're unable to do so; resulting in your relegating yourself to off topic appeals for attention, manifested in chronic spam, not at all dissimilar from the spam advanced directly above.
Nothing terribly complex really...
you're as idiotic as you signature is juvenile.
fuk off you wingnut loser.
Well even for spam, that's pretty lame... you're losing your troll mojo Dull-Ni'l...
If you say that again, I will bake you a birthday cake.del, he asked for clarification, he got it. If it's board policy to post sound-byte style, let me know. I'll leave.
you misunderstood me. IMO, breaking a post up into paragraphs with appropriate spacing makes it more readable annd thus more likely to be read.
i apologize if you took it as a criticism of you personally; that was not my intent.
board policy is to say what you want, barring obvious exceptions (threats, etc).
please make yourself at home.
If you say that again, I will bake you a birthday cake.del, he asked for clarification, he got it. If it's board policy to post sound-byte style, let me know. I'll leave.
you misunderstood me. IMO, breaking a post up into paragraphs with appropriate spacing makes it more readable annd thus more likely to be read.
i apologize if you took it as a criticism of you personally; that was not my intent.
board policy is to say what you want, barring obvious exceptions (threats, etc).
please make yourself at home.
