What Is Wrong With Liberals??

[Redfish]

Sending advisors and arms is not the same as sending 500,000 combat troops, of which 58,000 for nothing.
The deaths in viet nam are on Kennedy and Johnson. I lived through that crap, I know what happened.

No, it's not the same. However, we all know had Eisenhower been Democrat and the Kennedy and Johnson been Republican you'd have been blaming it all on Eisenhower.

Fact is, no president started the war. The war was going on from 1945 onwards before US intervention happened.

No, unlike you, I put the blame where it belongs regardless of party. the 58,000 americans died as a direct result of the escalation under Kennedy and Johnson, not because Ike sent a few advisors.

 

[BluesLegend]

What Is Wrong With Liberals??

The OP would be well-advised to instead find out what's wrong with conservatives.

For example, one of her fellow rightwing loons thinks private citizens critical of talk radio constitutes a 'violation' of free speech.

Look who's talking your fellow liberal JFK Junior thinks anyone who dares disagree with global warming should be convicted of a crime and sent to jail.

 

[RKMBrown]

How many times have said declarations fallen on your deaf and dumb ears?

You tell me. I thought I'd always been pretty open to your 'declarations'.

Depends on the topic. We agree on topics where democrats are for liberty... and we disagree on topics where democrats are against liberty.

Like the liberty for gays to marry one another? The liberty for a women to obtain an abortion? The liberty to board an airplane without having to be poked, prodded, and x-rayed?

Two consenting adults of the same sex getting married harms no one.

Abortion kills the baby.. killing someone with forethought is not liberty, it is murder.

Yes, one with no record of violence, and having shown no evidence that they might be about to do something violent, should be able to get in their car or bus or train or plane without being poked, prodded, and x-rayed.

Many believe that gay marriage harms society and would lead to all forms of multiple marriage. I am one of those.

If you think otherwise, fine. Is it to be a crime to disagree with some mandated government societal policy?

Thats the real danger here------------thought control and punishment for illegal thoughts and beliefs.

I don't think anyone is saying you can't "say" what you want to say. I believe the issue is that of harm, for example a law that states two homosexuals can't be married. In that case a tangible harm has been done to those two homosexuals. In the case of those homosexuals being allowed to be married and the government recognizing said marriage the harm done to people in opposition is not tangible, it is more a harm to their "pride and prejudice."

 

[Redfish]

You tell me. I thought I'd always been pretty open to your 'declarations'.

Depends on the topic. We agree on topics where democrats are for liberty... and we disagree on topics where democrats are against liberty.

Like the liberty for gays to marry one another? The liberty for a women to obtain an abortion? The liberty to board an airplane without having to be poked, prodded, and x-rayed?

Two consenting adults of the same sex getting married harms no one.

Abortion kills the baby.. killing someone with forethought is not liberty, it is murder.

Yes, one with no record of violence, and having shown no evidence that they might be about to do something violent, should be able to get in their car or bus or train or plane without being poked, prodded, and x-rayed.

Many believe that gay marriage harms society and would lead to all forms of multiple marriage. I am one of those.

If you think otherwise, fine. Is it to be a crime to disagree with some mandated government societal policy?

Thats the real danger here------------thought control and punishment for illegal thoughts and beliefs.

I don't think anyone is saying you can't "say" what you want to say. I believe the issue is that of harm, for example a law that states two homosexuals can't be married. In that case a tangible harm has been done to those two homosexuals. In the case of those homosexuals being allowed to be married and the government recognizing said marriage the harm done to people in opposition is not tangible, it is more a harm to their "pride and prejudice."

two gays should be able to enter into a civil union or a mutual support contract that would give them the same rights and priviledges as a man/woman marriage.

the gay agenda is not about equality or rights, its about using the government to mandate societal acceptance of an aberant abnormal lifestyle. the gay agenda insists on the word marriage because they think it would signal society that it must accept homosexuality as a normal human condition.

Thats the issue, not equality or rights. you may think homosexuality is a normal human condition, a vast majority of the people on planet earth do not.

 

[Redfish]

Back to the OP

What is wrong with liberals?

They have a defective gene. It has been identified as DRD4 in the human genome.

Science should be looking for a cure.

 

[RKMBrown]

Depends on the topic. We agree on topics where democrats are for liberty... and we disagree on topics where democrats are against liberty.

Like the liberty for gays to marry one another? The liberty for a women to obtain an abortion? The liberty to board an airplane without having to be poked, prodded, and x-rayed?

Two consenting adults of the same sex getting married harms no one.

Abortion kills the baby.. killing someone with forethought is not liberty, it is murder.

Yes, one with no record of violence, and having shown no evidence that they might be about to do something violent, should be able to get in their car or bus or train or plane without being poked, prodded, and x-rayed.

Many believe that gay marriage harms society and would lead to all forms of multiple marriage. I am one of those.

If you think otherwise, fine. Is it to be a crime to disagree with some mandated government societal policy?

Thats the real danger here------------thought control and punishment for illegal thoughts and beliefs.

I don't think anyone is saying you can't "say" what you want to say. I believe the issue is that of harm, for example a law that states two homosexuals can't be married. In that case a tangible harm has been done to those two homosexuals. In the case of those homosexuals being allowed to be married and the government recognizing said marriage the harm done to people in opposition is not tangible, it is more a harm to their "pride and prejudice."

two gays should be able to enter into a civil union or a mutual support contract that would give them the same rights and priviledges as a man/woman marriage.

the gay agenda is not about equality or rights, its about using the government to mandate societal acceptance of an aberant abnormal lifestyle. the gay agenda insists on the word marriage because they think it would signal society that it must accept homosexuality as a normal human condition.

Thats the issue, not equality or rights. you may think homosexuality is a normal human condition, a vast majority of the people on planet earth do not.

BS

First why should gays have to use the term civil union vs. heterosexual marriage? What are you the term police?

Second who the hell cares what the agenda is, the issue is not agenda the issue is ACTUAL HARM OUR LAWS ARE CAUSING THEM.

Third I don't think homosexuality is a normal human condition, nor do I think homosexuals think they are "normal." What is wrong with being unique or novel? We're all different in our own ways. Sure the vast majority aka normal human condition is heterosexuality, so what? Most people are over 5' tall does that mean we should have laws restricting people under 5' from getting married? OMFG look that person's to short that's not normal, we need to remove their genes and keep them from getting married?

 

[BlindBoo]

Sending advisors and arms is not the same as sending 500,000 combat troops, of which 58,000 for nothing.
The deaths in viet nam are on Kennedy and Johnson. I lived through that crap, I know what happened.

No, it's not the same. However, we all know had Eisenhower been Democrat and the Kennedy and Johnson been Republican you'd have been blaming it all on Eisenhower.

Fact is, no president started the war. The war was going on from 1945 onwards before US intervention happened.

No, unlike you, I put the blame where it belongs regardless of party. the 58,000 americans died as a direct result of the escalation under Kennedy and Johnson, not because Ike sent a few advisors.

Funny that you skip Nixon, but not real funny.

 

[BlindBoo]

What Is Wrong With Liberals??

The OP would be well-advised to instead find out what's wrong with conservatives.

For example, one of her fellow rightwing loons thinks private citizens critical of talk radio constitutes a 'violation' of free speech.

Look who's talking your fellow liberal JFK Junior thinks anyone who dares disagree with global warming should be convicted of a crime and sent to jail.

Yeah right, except he doesn't think that.

 

[BluesLegend]

What Is Wrong With Liberals??

The OP would be well-advised to instead find out what's wrong with conservatives.

For example, one of her fellow rightwing loons thinks private citizens critical of talk radio constitutes a 'violation' of free speech.

Look who's talking your fellow liberal JFK Junior thinks anyone who dares disagree with global warming should be convicted of a crime and sent to jail.

Yeah right, except he doesn't think that.

Yeah right except he's on tape saying exactly that. OH SNAP!

 

[frigidweirdo]

hate crime legislation is punishment for thoughts. its already with us.

your second sentence is too stupid to merit a response.

Who has been punished for thinking something and who has been punished for acting on this?

You see, it's not thoughts at all, it's actions that get punished.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, unlike you, I put the blame where it belongs regardless of party. the 58,000 americans died as a direct result of the escalation under Kennedy and Johnson, not because Ike sent a few advisors.

Oh please, don't pretend to be what you're not.

Yes, these soldiers died because of escalation under Kennedy and Johnson. And...... This is hardly even the start of the whole affair.

To say what you have said either shows you have no basic understanding of the war and why it happened, or you're choosing to ignore a hell of a lot.

 

[Redfish]

Like the liberty for gays to marry one another? The liberty for a women to obtain an abortion? The liberty to board an airplane without having to be poked, prodded, and x-rayed?

Two consenting adults of the same sex getting married harms no one.

Abortion kills the baby.. killing someone with forethought is not liberty, it is murder.

Yes, one with no record of violence, and having shown no evidence that they might be about to do something violent, should be able to get in their car or bus or train or plane without being poked, prodded, and x-rayed.

Many believe that gay marriage harms society and would lead to all forms of multiple marriage. I am one of those.

If you think otherwise, fine. Is it to be a crime to disagree with some mandated government societal policy?

Thats the real danger here------------thought control and punishment for illegal thoughts and beliefs.

I don't think anyone is saying you can't "say" what you want to say. I believe the issue is that of harm, for example a law that states two homosexuals can't be married. In that case a tangible harm has been done to those two homosexuals. In the case of those homosexuals being allowed to be married and the government recognizing said marriage the harm done to people in opposition is not tangible, it is more a harm to their "pride and prejudice."

two gays should be able to enter into a civil union or a mutual support contract that would give them the same rights and priviledges as a man/woman marriage.

the gay agenda is not about equality or rights, its about using the government to mandate societal acceptance of an aberant abnormal lifestyle. the gay agenda insists on the word marriage because they think it would signal society that it must accept homosexuality as a normal human condition.

Thats the issue, not equality or rights. you may think homosexuality is a normal human condition, a vast majority of the people on planet earth do not.

BS

First why should gays have to use the term civil union vs. heterosexual marriage? What are you the term police?

Second who the hell cares what the agenda is, the issue is not agenda the issue is ACTUAL HARM OUR LAWS ARE CAUSING THEM.

Third I don't think homosexuality is a normal human condition, nor do I think homosexuals think they are "normal." What is wrong with being unique or novel? We're all different in our own ways. Sure the vast majority aka normal human condition is heterosexuality, so what? Most people are over 5' tall does that mean we should have laws restricting people under 5' from getting married? OMFG look that person's to short that's not normal, we need to remove their genes and keep them from getting married?

It has to do with our society as a whole and the messages that are sent to our children. Societies crumble when they lose their moral compass and their sense of right and wrong.

If you don't care about the future of mankind and want an "anything goes" kind of culture, fine. I do not want that kind of culture for my kids and grandkids and their kids and grandkids.

 

[Redfish]

Sending advisors and arms is not the same as sending 500,000 combat troops, of which 58,000 for nothing.
The deaths in viet nam are on Kennedy and Johnson. I lived through that crap, I know what happened.

No, it's not the same. However, we all know had Eisenhower been Democrat and the Kennedy and Johnson been Republican you'd have been blaming it all on Eisenhower.

Fact is, no president started the war. The war was going on from 1945 onwards before US intervention happened.

No, unlike you, I put the blame where it belongs regardless of party. the 58,000 americans died as a direct result of the escalation under Kennedy and Johnson, not because Ike sent a few advisors.

Funny that you skip Nixon, but not real funny.

there were deaths under Nixon. He also ended it be declaring defeat. Then what we were trying to prevent happened. The "communists" took over. Was Viet Nam ever a threat to the USA? What did those 58,000 americans die for?

 

[Redfish]

hate crime legislation is punishment for thoughts. its already with us.

your second sentence is too stupid to merit a response.

Who has been punished for thinking something and who has been punished for acting on this?

You see, it's not thoughts at all, it's actions that get punished.

if you are killed because of your race, sex, or sexual orientation, the killer will get a more severe punishment than if you are killed to steal your money. It is happening every day. The thoughts of the perp get him/her a harsher sentence. We are already engaging in punishment for thoughts that disagree with those sanctioned by the government----------------can you say, 1984 and Atlas Shrugged?

 

[Redfish]

No, unlike you, I put the blame where it belongs regardless of party. the 58,000 americans died as a direct result of the escalation under Kennedy and Johnson, not because Ike sent a few advisors.

Oh please, don't pretend to be what you're not.

Yes, these soldiers died because of escalation under Kennedy and Johnson. And...... This is hardly even the start of the whole affair.

To say what you have said either shows you have no basic understanding of the war and why it happened, or you're choosing to ignore a hell of a lot.

I lived through it, asshole. I know first hand what it was about. and by the way=========go fuck yourself.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It has to do with our society as a whole and the messages that are sent to our children. Societies crumble when they lose their moral compass and their sense of right and wrong.

If you don't care about the future of mankind and want an "anything goes" kind of culture, fine. I do not want that kind of culture for my kids and grandkids and their kids and grandkids.

Where's the moral compass pointing at a 50% divorce rate then?

What is right about telling children they can freely discriminate against people who are unfortunate enough to not be considered "normal"?
Is it moral to call black people "ni***rs"? Is it right to deny women the vote? Is it right to deny black people to marry? Is it right to deny black and white people the right to marry each other? This is the beginning of the US 200 something years ago. Morally the US has got better. More tolerance, more equality, more morality in this sense.

Accepting gay marriage isn't going to make the US more or less moral, morality problems exist with crimes involving violence, theft and so on.

 

[frigidweirdo]

if you are killed because of your race, sex, or sexual orientation, the killer will get a more severe punishment than if you are killed to steal your money. It is happening every day. The thoughts of the perp get him/her a harsher sentence. We are already engaging in punishment for thoughts that disagree with those sanctioned by the government----------------can you say, 1984 and Atlas Shrugged?

So you're worried that if you kill based on your thoughts, then you might get more time in prison then? However it wasn't the THOUGHT of killing based on this that gets them more time, it's the ACTING ON the thoughts that got them more time.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I lived through it, asshole. I know first hand what it was about. and by the way=========go fuck yourself.

So... living through something makes you an expert on it does it?
Do you know how many soldiers went to Vietnam without a clue why they were they, and they probably still don't. Surely having been there they should be experts.

Also, another question related to a previous post.

How moral is it to call me "asshole" and to say "go fuck yourself"?

You come on here claiming to be the embodiment of morality then...........

 

[Redfish]

It has to do with our society as a whole and the messages that are sent to our children. Societies crumble when they lose their moral compass and their sense of right and wrong.

If you don't care about the future of mankind and want an "anything goes" kind of culture, fine. I do not want that kind of culture for my kids and grandkids and their kids and grandkids.

Where's the moral compass pointing at a 50% divorce rate then?

What is right about telling children they can freely discriminate against people who are unfortunate enough to not be considered "normal"?
Is it moral to call black people "ni***rs"? Is it right to deny women the vote? Is it right to deny black people to marry? Is it right to deny black and white people the right to marry each other? This is the beginning of the US 200 something years ago. Morally the US has got better. More tolerance, more equality, more morality in this sense.

Accepting gay marriage isn't going to make the US more or less moral, morality problems exist with crimes involving violence, theft and so on.

^^^^red herring. you refuse to understand the real issue. it has nothing to do with tolerance or equal treatment. it has to do with the survival of our culture.

 

[Redfish]

if you are killed because of your race, sex, or sexual orientation, the killer will get a more severe punishment than if you are killed to steal your money. It is happening every day. The thoughts of the perp get him/her a harsher sentence. We are already engaging in punishment for thoughts that disagree with those sanctioned by the government----------------can you say, 1984 and Atlas Shrugged?

So you're worried that if you kill based on your thoughts, then you might get more time in prison then? However it wasn't the THOUGHT of killing based on this that gets them more time, it's the ACTING ON the thoughts that got them more time.

its the same thing. the thought caused the act.

but either way the victim is dead and the perp is a murderer------------why is one crime worse because of what the murderer was thinking? why is "I don't like gays" a worse pre-murder thought than "I'm gonna steal this guy's money" ?