CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Why is it those on the Left do not fear a corrupt Government controlling the people?
We see it every day. Politicians lieing to us, making laws behind closed doors, not allowing the people to even know what's in the bill before it is passed and then after it is passed, Pelosi telling us we will then find out what's in it. Why is it Democrats were not outraged by Obamacare and all the lies.
We all know that to make it to Congress or President, it takes big money and big pay backs. An honest moral man can not make it to Congress without selling his soul to the powers to be.
Now knowing all this, why on earth do Democrats not fear bigger and bigger Government? Ask yourself why they are ok with these corrupt liars making ever more controlling laws on the people. Do you like being lied to about Obamacare? Do you like the IRS picking sides and singling out groups they don't agree with? Is that the America people fought and died for? Why would you keep supporting these liars? I don't care if you think the GOP is just as bad. They are not but for sake of argument lets say they are. Conservatives vote for SMALLER Government becuse we know most of them are corrupt. So tell me why you keep voting in Big Government politicians. Big Government is the problem, not the answer!
Do you like a biased free press that takes sides and influences people to think as they want you to think? The media buries stories that hurt their Left wing agendas and play up every story that hurts their opponents. Yes Fox does it also but they are but one conservative news network compared to hundreds of Liberal biased news outlets. The Left also enjoys the biased support of Hollywood and sitcoms pushing their Liberal agendas while making fun of conservatives and Christians. The thing about Conservative views is that they do not constantly try to make new laws forcing Americans to bow to their politicaly correct thinking.
This nation is becoming a dictator like nation and we are witnessing how it can come to be. A corrupt Government tied to a corrupt biased media, redistributing the people's money to create a power base of voters who will vote for them no matter how corrupt they might be, all for the love of free subsidies given to them. Money is a powerful weapon and Democrats weild it like a sword.
I laugh every time I remember how outraged Liberals were when Bush helped pass the patriot act which made it easier to catch terrorists by tapping their phone conversations. Where was the outcry when Obama did the same types of things. Where was your outcry when the IRS singled out groups of people? This is much more dangerous but pure silence from the Left. Do you people have any idea how hypocritical and laughable it makes you look? Are you truly phonies?
"We see it every day. Politicians lieing to us, making laws behind closed doors, not allowing the people to even know what's in the bill before it is passed and then after it is passed, Pelosi telling us we will then find out what's in it. Why is it Democrats were not outraged by Obamacare and all the lies."
"We all know that to make it to Congress or President, it takes big money and big pay backs. An honest moral man can not make it to Congress without selling his soul to the powers to be."
Very true, which is why we need legitimate, comprehensive campaign finance reform, something that (unfortunately) more Democrats have supported than Republicans. But hopefully that changes.
"Now knowing all this, why on earth do Democrats not fear bigger and bigger Government?"
It depends on the type of "bigger" government. Why do Republicans not fear increases in the executive branch, or government surveillance? Both sides fear different kinds of big government.
"Conservatives vote for SMALLER Government becuse we know most of them are corrupt."
Conservatives THINK they are voting for smaller government, but they end up voting for Republicans that increase the size of government, just in different ways (some of which you support).
"Do you like a biased free press that takes sides and influences people to think as they want you to think? "
If you believe in the free market, that would indicate that most people who consume that media approve of the bias.
"The Left also enjoys the biased support of Hollywood and sitcoms pushing their Liberal agendas while making fun of conservatives and Christians. The thing about Conservative views is that they do not constantly try to make new laws forcing Americans to bow to their politicaly correct thinking."
"This nation is becoming a dictator like nation and we are witnessing how it can come to be. "
Not at all. We still have elected officials, we still have three distinct branches of government and the separation of powers, etc. We are becoming more oligarchical, however.
"A corrupt Government tied to a corrupt biased media, redistributing the people's money to create a power base of voters who will vote for them no matter how corrupt they might be, all for the love of free subsidies given to them. Money is a powerful weapon and Democrats weild it like a sword."
So why do you think it is that rich Democrats vote that way? People who are voting to increase their own tax rates?
And do you give Republicans a pass when they vote for pork-based military contracts for their districts, including ones the Pentagon has said they do not want?
"I laugh every time I remember how outraged Liberals were when Bush helped pass the patriot act which made it easier to catch terrorists by tapping their phone conversations. Where was the outcry when Obama did the same types of things. "
The outcry was EVERYWHERE, but you don't actually listen to what the left does, and FOX had no reason to report it.
"Where was your outcry when the IRS singled out groups of people?"
Minimal, because it had no actual effect. During that period of time, more liberal groups were denied non-profit status than Conservative groups, so what was there to be outraged by?
"This is much more dangerous but pure silence from the Left. Do you people have any idea how hypocritical and laughable it makes you look? Are you truly phonies?"
You might have some legitimacy if you actually knew what people on the Left think and say, but you don't, so why don't you try a new approach and NOT speaking for others?
Why is it those on the Left do not fear a corrupt Government controlling the people?
I'd describe myself as more left than I am right and yes I do worry about about corruption. I'm afraid your rant was made on the incorrect assumption that we don't. You were mistaken. End of debate.
To answer the question, no one has given liberals any reason to fear the government. What has the government done that is so bad? Take away guns, but liberals don't care about losing guns because they want that. Forced people to buy insurance, but the liberals don't care because they had it already, or were able to finally get it cheaper and they want that. The corrupt government has not posed a threat to them yet and this is not how you convince them they are wrong.
So you at least finally admit what fanatical control freaks Liberals are. For you not to care when a Government decides to take away a people's rights to own guns, makes you an arrogant control fanatic. To not understand that when a Government can take away a people's right to own guns, the next Government can take away something that you like. Can your simple mind grasp that? Any decent freedom loving person understands that Government has no right to take our personal freedoms from us. Guns are even protected in the Constitution, not that it should matter if it were not.
Can your simple mind understand that just because you don't like guns, or don't care if Government forces us to buy their pathetic brand of healthcare, gives you NO RIGHT to force your views on others.
It is at least very very nice to finally have a Liberal admit they have no problem forcing others to bow to their will. Most Liberals spend their time denying what control freaks they truly are.
For you not to care when a Government decides to take away a people's rights to own guns, makes you an arrogant control fanatic. To not understand that when a Government can take away a people's right to own guns, the next Government can take away something that you like.
I do care, I am not a Liberal you idiot. I am more pro gun than you are.
Any decent freedom loving person understands that Government has no right to take our personal freedoms from us.
This isn't true, and that's the problem. We have to give away some freedoms to live in a society.
Can your simple mind understand that just because you don't like guns, or don't care if Government forces us to buy their pathetic brand of healthcare, gives you NO RIGHT to force your views on others.
Just because you are a Christian doesn't mean that it should be ok to declare a school prayer. See where your argument falls apart yet?
It is at least very very nice to finally have a Liberal admit they have no problem forcing others to bow to their will. Most Liberals spend their time denying what control freaks they truly are.
You are so dumb it hurts. I as a non Liberal am admitting that Liberals like to take away my rights.
I am an independent, so I don't know which political affiliation I fall under. I am for personal freedom and financial discipline. Sort of like conservatives claim to be.
Out of curiosity, economically do you often support regulation (outside of contract enforcement), or do you tend towards "free-market", laissez faire ideals?
Yeah, I don't know. I don't like regulations, but companies aren't paying enough without regulations. Maybe something in the middle. If you don't change your ways you get regulated on a case by case basis. I definitely believe in case by case regulation since weird things happen. Like, chicken farmers having to follow cow regulations. That stuff doesn't make sense. I try to avoid people who want taxes.
You are more a LIBERAL than any person I ave ever debated. You are a total phony. School prayer was always a freedom to any school that chose to have one for our entire nation's history. IT IS THE LEFT THAT STOLE THAT FREEDOM WITH THE LIE OF SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.... THOSE WORDS NO WHERE WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION.
This is the FromWithin persona we're talking about. Everyone it debates with is the most LIBERAL person it has ever debated. I've held that title on at least two occasions, with someone else holding it in between.
But instead of trying to understand an ideology that you are not familiar with, you just yell at me and try to categorize me into another ideology you do not understand. Does that make it easier for you, somehow? I really would like to understand why it is that you do that.
It's ok. Don't worry about it too much. You're not debating with a person- you're debating with one of several troll personas the operator crafts to be inflammatory around here. You can have fun with it if you keep that in mind.
It's my running theory, based on many bits here and there. The evidence is no longer there since attention was called to it and it was deleted, but there were a couple cases of a known different troll persona posting outside of its characteristic style, but rather in FromWithin's, suddenly 'replacing' FromWithin in the debate yet continuing the discussion (such as it was) seamlessly. This is characteristic of the type who runs multiple concurrent troll personas; I've done this myself, and made the same mistake.
That said, there is the remote possibility that it was a coincidence that FromWithin went offline at that moment and that the troll was targeting FromWithin specifically, but I have to go with Occam's Razor on this personally.
I understand if you have your own theory as I can't give you proof. The rest of it involves a number of premises I'd have to first establish and a lot of detail to 'connect the dots' and likely has some underlying problems, as I haven't approached it from the perspective of one who later needed to prove it, if that makes sense. FromWithin will no doubt call it convenient. Or ban me. Or both.
I know. It's actually almost impressive that such a simple formulae makes for such a successfully inflammatory persona. When I troll I tend to do it far more elaborately, and I just don't get the results that FromWithin's operator does.
This has been explained to you so many times. The term "Separation of Church and State" is used in reference to the Establishment and Free Worship Clauses of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Jefferson was saying that the First Amendment created a wall of separation between church and state.
Please, at least try to avoid caps lock and insults.
It is so very hard to not call Liberals idiots. I mean the things you say are moronic! Tell me how allowing schools the choice to have a prayer or not have a prayer is restricting people's rights. No child would ever be forced to pray. Your words are crazy.
I agree, but I am trying my hardest not to call you an idiot.
Tell me how allowing schools the choice to have a prayer or not have a prayer is restricting people's rights.
First, it does not matter in the slightest if giving schools the option of prayer restricts anyones rights for my argument. Your argument about the constitution not having the words separation of church and state is equally valid in the school prayer discussion. You believe that schools should not be allowed to choose a school prayer because the constitution does not have the words choose a school prayer in it. Second, look at it from the other direction, why should schools be given the right to choose a prayer? Schools are institutions, not individuals. Institutions don't need rights. The constitution protects individuals from institutions. Giving an institution rights doesn't make sense. Third, if your claim is accurate and there is no restriction of rights, then there is no point in declaring a school prayer. The only thing you can possibly accomplish with a school prayer is the restriction of rights. Either, you declare a school prayer and people can opt out of it, which means you have created a pointless declaration since no one has to follow it. And if no one has to follow it all you have done is created the exact system we have now. Or, you have created a system where everyone has to participate in the determined school prayer regardless of their own religious affiliation. Making a Jew pray to Jesus would be violating his rights to reject Jesus according to his religion.
If you want a guaranteed amount of time devoted to prayer than you are asking for something else entirely. That is the only way to not force a child to pray. A dedicated time for prayer can be used to sit quietly waiting for everyone to be ready. But, you aren't asking for that.
Tell me how allowing schools the choice to have a prayer or not have a prayer is restricting people's rights.
It's not restricting people's rights, but it does qualify as the government promoting one religion over another, which it is constitutionally barred from doing. There is legal precedent establishing this, unfortunately. You'd need to overturn decades of case law to even get to a starting point where this could conceivably be tabled for discussion.
And what if it passed, and you didn't like the form of prayer the school decided on? If your hypothetical child was enrolled in a school with a Muslim majority, that decided to allot time throughout the school day for the Zuhr and Asr prayers (these fall within the school day)? You seriously wouldn't object to that? Even if the non-Muslim students aren't compelled to take part, this still represents time in school wherein they are not learning, but waiting for the Muslims to finish their prayers.
Same thing, for Satanism. If you would have the slightest objection should a school opt to open with a Satanist prayer, your stance falls complete flat.
And what if the school has a predominately atheist population, they bristle at the legislation, and decide to add a daily prayer to the Flying Spaghetti Monster into the school schedule? If they were also subjected to another requirement you're pushing for, of teaching creationism alongside evolution in science classes, I'm almost certain they would respond by adopting such a prayer. The christian minority in such a school, even if not compelled to take part, would still have to sit through these blasphemous prayers. That's really acceptable to you?
If you take issue with ANY of these scenarios, then you can see the reasons why many (even many christians!) are opposed to school time allotted for prayer.
For the millionth time, I am for school choice and would never send my child to a Muslim majority school. I believe in my school taxes going toward the school of my choice. Of course Democrats do not! They would funnel our children into any public school no matter how bad it is.
You do the same thing all Liberals do. First you get Liberal activist lawyers and Judges who will twist the words in the Constitution to fit your agendas of censoring a community's choice to have a prayer or not. It is like you did with abortion. The Liberal justices ok'd Roe v Wade by using a privacy statement n the Constitution. PRIVACY TO KILL! Unbelievable and you are going to talk to me bout legal precedent?
Fine. School choice, ok. But what if, hypothetically, there was no local school available with a christian or atheist majority, and every single school was holding non-christian prayers. In this scenario, there aren't any affordable private schools local either, and you cannot afford to pack up and move either, nor can you take time off of work to home school your child. Your only school options are public schools that WILL be conducting prayer, and not christian prayer.
Would you be ok with that? Maybe these specifically aren't YOUR circumstances, but there are plenty of people- christians even- who cannot afford private school and cannot afford to move. Or can you not see beyond your own personal interests at all?
And a conservative extremist is talking to me about twisting the words in the constitution to fit an agenda? Spare me. Yes, I'll talk about legal precedent. Our legal system is built on case law. That's not speculation or opinion, that's fact. You can't sidestep that to push your agenda, you'd have a lot of tape to go through before you could even possibly get it to a vote by any legislative body. That's reality- you should consider getting in touch with it ;)
For anyone following, the post I'm replying to amounts to 5 drinks in the FW drinking game; 1 for each of 3 uses of Liberal, 1 for dodging a direct question, and 1 for trying to change an unrelated topic to abortion.
For anyone following, the post I'm replying to amounts to 5 drinks in the FW drinking game; 1 for each of 3 uses of Liberal, 1 for dodging a direct question, and 1 for trying to change an unrelated topic to abortion.
Careful, you may get alcohol poisoning. Oh, and he used Democrat, shouldn't that fall under the liberal count?
I always get a laugh out of Liberals. The sky is always falling if their agendas are not passed and if our schools were once gain given the freedom to choose a prayer, under your hypothetical hogwash, Muslims could all of a sudden become the majority religion in this nation and control our community schools! The communities choose what their schools will do.
If this nation becomes a majority Muslim religion, it will be as dead as all the Arab states. That will never happen unless we keep electing Liberals who seem bent on making enemies of Israel while supporting Muslims.
They wouldn't need to be a majority religion in this nation for this scenario to arrive. With the way our schools are structured, they would only need to be a majority religion in a single county of a single state to have that effect on some people.
Even if it could never happen, why not bite? Or would your answer reveal hypocrisy?
We all know it. You can answer the question or continue to dodge it. Man up and admit you have a double standard here. Your attempts at deflection are pathetic, and if you don't have the cojones to answer, you're no man at all. Can't even stand up for your own religion if doing so means someone might disapprove of you.
The sky is always falling if their agendas are not passed and if our schools were once gain given the freedom to choose a prayer
Ha! Isn't the sky falling on your religious beliefs because you can't have prayer?
Muslims could all of a sudden become the majority religion in this nation
No, the majority for the school you are at. Why would the nation need to be majority Muslim for the school's choice? It sounds like you don't even believe in your own process.
The thing is, we don't even need you to answer the questions he's been asking. You have already admitted that you would just send your kid to another school, which is something you are opposed to doing right now. Why do you want a system that you oppose?
Because hypocrisy is king with this persona- and it loves to call others hypocrites too. I'm sure the operator thinks he's being ironic, but it's far too predictable to qualify.
Make some sense and i might reply....................................................... I never said I would not send my kids to another school. I did send my kids to a private school at a very great expense because I had to pay for the public schools as well. We went without to afford that school and parents should be able to have their taxes go to the school their children attend.
the past has clearly shown that you refuse to debate no matter what, and instead do Hogwash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! followed by some random rant irrelevant to the topic at hand.
The past has clearly shown that I post the facts of what Politicians are doing and most of you totally ignore the content of the post and instead insult me. You just did it again.
You have never once posted a fact of what any politician is doing without buttressing it with significant amounts of spin mixed with blatant lie. Meanwhile, you conveniently ignore anything that you feel hurts your position, whether it's horrible misconduct by conservatives (ranging from individual scandals to persistent problems with the entire movement) or beneficial conduct by liberals.
You try to paint a black and white picture, with Conservatives as the benevolent good guys and Liberals as the malevolent villain. A small child can see that it is not that simple, at least until he's been indoctrinated- as you would have done in public schools (rather than limiting it to households of idiots and their weekend fantasy clubs) if you got your way.
If you were really interested in pushing a conservative agenda, you would both admit to the problems in your party- not just the bad apples, but the persistent ones that you don't have answers to- as well as the beneficial aspects of the Liberal movement. You'd gain a lot more ground if you were fair, and your position stands to benefit too- as I said, there are persistent problems with the conservative movement that need to be addressed, and that requires a perspective that you lack. I can only presume that your dishonest tactics are due to your knowing deep down that your take on being conservative is a gross caricature that even most conservatives would have trouble swallowing.
Now I want you to read your entire post to yourself ok? You want me to address the bad in the Conservative movement and speak of the beneficial aspects of the Liberal movement. I must have missed it where you were going to address the bad in the Liberal movement and the beneficial aspects of the Conservative movement.
AGAIN, CAN YOU GRASP YOUR HYPOCRISY AND DOUBLE STANDARDS.
I would gladly address the problems with the entire Conservative movement if there are any but you first must spell them out as I constantly do with Democrats.(Conservatism is not a movement, it's what we used to be as a nation. It's trying to get our nation back to our traditional roots of individual freedoms and liberties. The vast majority of Americans were Conservative 60 years ago).
The reasons why you never give me serious examples of the so called persistent problems in the Conservative ideology, is because there are none.
All I ever get from Liberals is that Conservatives are for a strong defense (that benefits all Americans) and they are tied to the Rich and Corporations. You constantly bring up the Koch brothers but never mention the Liberal Billionaire George Soros who constantly funnels money to Democrat movements. You refuse to address the big union money funneled into the Democrat party.
Try looking at the facts and see how the Democrats received more campaign money from Corporations than did the GOP. Conservatives are for cutting spending to balance our debt, they are for freedoms from an intrusive Government. They are for a safety net for those who can not help themselves while getting tough on those able bodied people who scam our social programs.
I will agree there have been some benefits from Democrats over the years but the Democrat party of old is NO MORE. They have become the extreme Liberal Left bent on controlling the people to push their extreme Liberal agendas.
Now I want you to read your entire post to yourself ok? You want me to address the bad in the Conservative movement and speak of the beneficial aspects of the Liberal movement. I must have missed it where you were going to address the bad in the Liberal movement and the beneficial aspects of the Conservative movement.
Yes, that's correct. On numerous occasions some of us with moderate, conservative (just not conservative enough for you, apparently), and even liberal mindsets have acknowledged problems with liberalism and recognized good points made by the conservative side.
I would gladly address the problems with the entire Conservative movement if there are any but you first must spell them out as I constantly do with Democrats.
A lie, plain and simple. You have been presented with problems on numerous occasions. You do not address them- you either deny them, or accuse Liberals of doing something similar. Neither one addresses the issue. You don't address anything negative, you just steer the discussion towards one of the limited bullet points that you can bark at, primarily abortion. You even go so far as to say that nothing in either the conservative movement or liberal movement should be examined, that only the abortion issue should be looked at, etc.
(Conservatism is not a movement, it's what we used to be as a nation. It's trying to get our nation back to our traditional roots of individual freedoms and liberties. The vast majority of Americans were Conservative 60 years ago).
And therein lies the problem. There is no going back. We live in a different world now than the one where our nation was formed, with much more information available and much different outcomes of particular decisions. You're artificially glorifying one point in time that had its own trials, some of which it accomplished.
Conservative meant something entirely different 60 years ago than it does today, as the terms conservative and liberal both have to do with viewpoints regarding the status quo, and the status quo is now different.
The reasons why you never give me serious examples of the so called persistent problems in the Conservative ideology, is because there are none.
You mean you deny them, just as you do here.
I will agree there have been some benefits from Democrats over the years but the Democrat party of old is NO MORE. They have become the extreme Liberal Left bent on controlling the people to push their extreme Liberal agendas.
You're right in the first sentence, though the second involves your subjective viewpoint of a gross caricature of liberalism, not an accurate assessment of the movement. The Republican party of old is no more either- Republicans have divided into numerous camps, segmenting themselves in all but name. The extreme difficulties in getting a republican into office these days, compared to older days, is due to this. Your house is divided. Blaming the liberal media amounts to sticking your head in the stand. If you really cared about this stuff, you'd be working on fixing your own party, not howling impotently in the dark at perceived liberal bogeymen.
That is why Democrats receive more campaign money- for all their problems, they are far more united than Republicans are these days. It's not some great conspiracy, it's the fact that The Republican party as a whole these days does not even represent itself, much less its constituents.
Try looking at the facts
After you.
AGAIN, CAN YOU GRASP YOUR HYPOCRISY AND DOUBLE STANDARDS.
I am somewhat guilty of holding double standards in some areas. Nothing political, more to do with my personal life. Oftentimes I don't even realize I'm doing it, and when I notice I'm doing it I try to revise it.
Can you grasp YOUR hypocrisy and double standards? I understand correcting them is a long and difficult undertaking that may never be completed, given the asserted age of this persona of yours and the sheer magnitude of hypocrisy and double standards at play- but at the very least you could own them, admit to them, and make an effort. Although that would probably require breaking character.
Lets see, the GOP just had a record landslide midterm Congressional and Governor election victories and you actually made the statement that it is now extremely hard to get Republicans in office? GET REAL! If this were true it would explain the depth of the failure of Liberalism. Liberals have most of the media on their side and they still got crucified in the elections.
Again I gave you the opportunity to tell me the problems and corruptions in the Conservative ideology. Again you gave nothing. What a shock. Don't waste my time with big money in politics because both parties wallow in it.
The only opportunity you gave anyone was the opportunity for them to say something for you to deny, reflect, and tu quoque. Just how many times do you expect us to repeat the same thing?
Lets see, the GOP just had a record landslide midterm Congressional and Governor election victories and you actually made the statement that it is now extremely hard to get Republicans in office?
I see you lack an eye for subtleties. This was building off of your claims of a Liberal controlled media and the Republican message 'not getting out.' And you've basically recanted both of those claims now, revealing them for the utter lies they are.
We're done here. You can't even keep your lies straight, and you don't even have the intellect to work out when you're being goaded into revealing your lies in an extremely obvious fashion.
Help yourself to the last word- not that it'll be a particularly intellgible one.
What lies!!!!!!!!!! The media is Liberal biased and has NOTHING to do with the GOP winning this last election. Yes the liberal media did get Obama elected twice but his total failures as a president could not be over come by the media in the last election. Democrats supported our liar and chief and they lost DESPITE the help of the Liberal media. MSNBC was beside themselves in depression every time another Republican won the state. If you deny the media is Liberal biased, we are done here. I will not debate an ignorant fool or a liar.
For the millionth time, people are not denying a liberal bias when they say that your Chicken Little tactics are wrong. You keep claiming this liberal bias is putting up a massive wall that is stopping Republicans from getting elected.
I never said I would not send my kids to another school.
Yes, I said that.
We went without to afford that school and parents should be able to have their taxes go to the school their children attend.
Right, so hypothetically you oppose the Muslim school that you live near. You clearly think that declaring a school prayer that isn't Christian violates your ability to be Christian. It works both ways, and that's the point.
"So you at least finally admit what fanatical control freaks Liberals are. For you not to care when a Government decides to take away a people's rights to own guns, makes you an arrogant control fanatic. "
You really don't bother to actually read what people say, do you? It is clear that he was not endorsing what he said, he was speaking to what he believed was a possible explanation for the behavior of a group that he did not belong to.
"To not understand that when a Government can take away a people's right to own guns, the next Government can take away something that you like. Can your simple mind grasp that? Any decent freedom loving person understands that Government has no right to take our personal freedoms from us. "
And yet you are all about taking away other freedoms that you find less desirable. Freedom of religion? No need. Equal Protections and Due Process? Not for the gays!
"Can your simple mind understand that just because you don't like guns, or don't care if Government forces us to buy their pathetic brand of healthcare, gives you NO RIGHT to force your views on others."
You are all about forcing your views on others regarding certain topics, while he wasn't endorsing any of the ideas he stated, and you call HIM simple minded? Really?
"It is at least very very nice to finally have a Liberal admit they have no problem forcing others to bow to their will. Most Liberals spend their time denying what control freaks they truly are."
Again, try actually reading what he said. He did not admit anything.
Just because you are probably Gay does not give your beliefs or sexual orientation any special rights over others who do not force entire states to change their marriage laws. Why do you never fight for the right's of polygamists? Obviously you live in a world of only caring for your particular rights. The right of life to all innocent people including Babies is not important to you. Boy but when it comes to Gay marriage, you are constantly all over that one.
"oes not give your beliefs or sexual orientation any special rights over others who do not force entire states to change their marriage laws. "
You keep using the term "special rights", yet whenever I ask you how allowing two consenting adults to get married is a special right, you never address it. Seriously, what "special right" is involved, and were you opposed to Loving v. Virginia changing states marriage laws? It is only because of Loving v. Virginia that my marriage is legal, by the way.
"Why do you never fight for the right's of polygamists? "
I actually do. You do not know me, so do not speak for me.
"Obviously you live in a world of only caring for your particular rights."
That's why I fight for the rights of a sexual orientation (multiple, actually) that I am not a part of? Because I only care for MY rights? How does that make sense?
"The right of life to all innocent people including Babies is not important to you. Boy but when it comes to Gay marriage, you are constantly all over that one."
Again, I oppose abortion. I often take a devil's advocate stance with you on abortion because I find the adamantly pro-life stance to be rife with inconsistencies, particularly relating to miscarriages, but I am not a fan of abortion and would support increased restrictions on it.
No, abortion is the only topic I take a devil's advocate stance on for you.
Everything else is me stating my opinion, you just have difficulties with opinions that differ from yours. You also seem to have difficulties posting without employing insults.
Yes, it is very difficult for any thinking adult to try and debate someone like you and NOT insult them. I'm through for the night and if i waste my time in the future with you, I will become the idiot.
But you aren't debating, you are just insulting and yelling. I would love to actually and legitimately debate with you, it is the reason I stopped employing the tactics you use. In fact I seriously do challenge you to actually debate me in a civil and legitimate way.
I do so with plenty of people on the right all the time, and they never have to resort to insults. So what do you say?
Your heart felt emotions indicate your deep concern for even handedness in the administration of government. I think your expression of indignation at what you perceive as prejudiced government to be a most commendable personal trait. Of course the contrary vultures are always circling, waiting to swoop with a tirade of self opinionated drivel. You were a little provocative in the wording and delivery of your viewpoint, so the 'comebacks' were predictably openly hostile.
The idea that it's "the governments fault" is an illusion because the government is a shadow controlled and staffed by corporations. There are individuals who pull the strings, and if nobody is named it is an obvious diversion. "Blame the government" is a coverup to protect powerful individuals.
People on the left don't fear a totalitarian state to the same extent, but have a better idea of who to keep an eye on and how the system is functioning. Also I have heard intellectuals on the left (Chomsky, Zizek) recognize that there is a basic level of totalitarianism in the media today that restricts what type of dialog is in or out of society, which is a definite form of totalitarianism.
So tell me what kind of fool blames those who give money to politicians to keep politicians from regulating and taxing their businesses out of business? Tell me why you would not blame the corrupt politicians who take the money? Are you that blind? It amazes me how Left wing people are so quick to blame Corporations for fighting against corrupt controlling anti business Government and never blaming those corrupt politicians who spend their lives trying to steal money from business.
If you lot of Don Quixote type characters, who clearly live in ''Cyber Cloud Cuckoo Land''cannot recognise yourselves in my description of you then there is no point trying to enlighten you. How you clucking hens must relish scouring the posts searching for an insult to which you can respond with your standard venomous text. You take the bait so easily that it's of no surprise that so many other participants, including me, enjoy glancing over your responses to gauge the depth of irritation they have been able to inflict. As soon as you identify a really good insult, you all must all shout in harmony, yipeeee, and immediately commence spewing out your literary diahorrea in an orgy of frenzied and meaningless indignant pomposity. As Spock would have said, ''fascinating''.
Liberals want me to address the bad in the Conservative movement and speak of the beneficial aspects of the Liberal movement. I must have missed it where you were going to address the bad in the Liberal movement and the beneficial aspects of the Conservative movement.
AGAIN, CAN YOU GRASP YOUR HYPOCRISY AND DOUBLE STANDARDS.
I would gladly address the problems with the entire Conservative movement if there are any but you first must spell them out as I constantly do with Democrats.(Conservatism is not a movement, it's what we used to be as a nation. It's trying to get our nation back to our traditional roots of individual freedoms and liberties. The vast majority of Americans were Conservative 60 years ago).
The reasons why you never give me serious examples of the so called persistent problems in the Conservative ideology, is because there are none.
All I ever get from Liberals is that Conservatives are for a strong defense (that benefits all Americans) and they are tied to the Rich and Corporations. You constantly bring up the Koch brothers but never mention the Liberal Billionaire George Soros who constantly funnels money to Democrat movements. You refuse to address the big union money funneled into the Democrat party.
Try looking at the facts and see how the Democrats received more campaign money from Corporations than did the GOP. Conservatives are for cutting spending to balance our debt, they are for freedoms from an intrusive Government. They are for a safety net for those who can not help themselves while getting tough on those able bodied people who scam our social programs.
I will agree there have been some benefits from Democrats over the years but the Democrat party of old is NO MORE. They have become the extreme Liberal Left bent on controlling the people to push their extreme Liberal agendas.
As I already knew, none of you Liberals would acknowledge the entire point of how most all politicians reaching the Congress are big money corrupt liars and therefore we should be electing those who want smaller Government(that would be Conservatives and tea party types for you who live in some Liberal world of denial). Conservatives are always trying to cut Government waste, but you people spew the same old tired rhetoric of how the GOP wants bigger Government also. What a waste you are.
Since you obviously don't care about a corrupt Government getting bigger, KEEP ELECTING DEMOCRATS! Oh that's right, most of you refuse to admit you are Liberal and vote for those on the Left who want bigger Government.
I never said the GOP does not want to spend money on defense, etc. I said they want to cut the size of Government to get our debt under control. They already agreed to Defense spending cuts but AS ALWAYS the Democrat's refused to cut social programs because that secures their low income votes.
As I already knew, none of you Liberals would acknowledge the entire point of how most all politicians reaching the Congress are big money corrupt liars
False, GenericName acknowledged that it is a problem and that Democrats support campaign reform.
Campaign reform????????????????????????? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, you can't be that big a fool can you? Democrats will take money from anyone or thing that will give it to them. Their campaign reform never includes getting rid of big union money so they are complete phonies who know their laughable laws will never pass. They have the Rich George Soros's of the world who fund their liberal agendas. They take more money from corporations than do the GOP.
"Campaign reform????????????????????????? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, you can't be that big a fool can you? Democrats will take money from anyone or thing that will give it to them. "
As will republicans hence why we NEED campaign finance reform.
"Their campaign reform never includes getting rid of big union money so they are complete phonies who know their laughable laws will never pass. "
Actually, most campaign finance reform proposals effect union contributions as well.
"so they are complete phonies who know their laughable laws will never pass. "
So you give Republicans a pass when they pull that sort of thing, but decry Democrats for doing it? I think the term for that is hypocrisy.
"They have the Rich George Soros's of the world who fund their liberal agendas. They take more money from corporations than do the GOP."
And the right has the rich Koch's of the world who fund theirs. Why don't we push for comprehensive campaign finance reform and take ALL of their contributions out of politics?
"corrupt liars and therefore we should be electing those who want smaller Government(that would be Conservatives and tea party types for you who live in some Liberal world of denial)."
Recognizing that politicians are corrupt does not necessary lead to the need to vote for people who CLAIM to be for smaller government. Conservatives have increased the size of government just like liberals in this country, and both sides are corrupt. Instead, we need campaign finance reform to take out the corruption of both sides.
"corrupt liars and therefore we should be electing those who want smaller Government(that would be Conservatives and tea party types for you who live in some Liberal world of denial)."
Then why do they refuse to cut bloated military spending on projects the military doesn't want? Oh right, because they need those projects to keep their votes within their constituency, exactly what you are yelling at Democrats for.
"but you people spew the same old tired rhetoric of how the GOP wants bigger Government also. What a waste you are."
I don't think you know what rhetoric means, because when people give you specific examples of how the GOP DOES want bigger government as well, that is the antithesis of rhetoric.
"Since you obviously don't care about a corrupt Government getting bigger, KEEP ELECTING DEMOCRATS! Oh that's right, most of you refuse to admit you are Liberal and vote for those on the Left who want bigger Government."
Those on here who say they aren't liberal, aren't liberal. I don't know why you have so much difficulty with that.
Do you realize how stupid you are? You compare supporting military defense for our nation, that all Americans benefit from, to redistributing tax payer money to people who will then vote for Democrats? Tell me how military defense spending helps me more than any other American.
Can you grasp the difference between taking money from a middle class person and giving it to another person to buy their vote, and spending on things we all benefit from.
"Do you realize how stupid you are? You compare supporting military defense for our nation, that all Americans benefit from, to redistributing tax payer money to people who will then vote for Democrats"
You really have a reading comprehension problem. Tell me how supporting military projects that the Pentagon does not want and does not use benefits anyone other than the politicians who use it to provide political points in their home districts. Please, justify expenses that our military DOESN'T WANT.
"Can you grasp the difference between taking money from a middle class person and giving it to another person to buy their vote, and spending on things we all benefit from."
Yes, I can. Can you grasp the difference between legitimate military spending, and continuing to spend money on out-dated and unwanted projects that the military does not use and the Pentagon has said they do not want, that are created only so that representatives can redistribute taxpayer money to their home districts for political favor? This is literally EXACTLY what you are talking about, but you are ignoring it because the Republicans are doing it, which is so hypocritical.