#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.
|
Was Trump was fly in globalist elite's soup?
was fly
Side Score: 123
|
 |
wasn't fly
Side Score: 89
|
|
5
points
What you say is true. Trump is not only a fly in their soup, he is their worst nightmare. Finally for the first time in our lifetime we have a President who does not care what they think or say about him. He does not care if he gets re elected. He only cares about making America great again and in doing so will put him down in history as the greatest President ever. A miracle he would be and a miracle is what it took to stop these radical Leftist Socialists from taking over this nation. He is standing up for the tens of millions of Americans that the Liberal Left had abandoned. He actually cares for the working man more than the lazy people scamming our system. He's standing up for our Constitution as written and as should be interpreted. He cares about keeping all Americans safe from those who would harm us, or use us. He's accomplished more in 100 days than Obama did in eight years. Already illegal immigrations has gone way down. Alredy the stock market is taking off with good job numbers and relief from intrusive Democrat mandates. Side: was fly
He has filled his cabinet with his business friends and still has many business interests that he has failed to give up despite it being a requirement of bring president. He has also passed much legislation to benefit multiple national cooperation - favouring oil companies over environmental concern and costing the state billions in lost taxes due to tax cuts on companies or very high earners. You're living in lala land. Side: wasn't fly
6
points
LOL, the nay sayers such as yourself from the Left would still be complaining about companies getting rich no matter how many jobs and wage increases they provided. As always, your socialized war on Business is what HURTS people, creates more poverty, creates more Government dependence, etc. and you lack the simple intellect to see these proven facts decade after decade. CAPITALISM WORKS MUCH BETTER THAN SOCIALISM! Side: was fly
3
points
That complete lie of corporatios paying their fair share is based on lunacy! Corporations are not people. The personal INCOME of the people who run these corportions is taxable and should be at what ever rate is fair, but the CORPORATION is the entity that creates the jobs, that provides products to people around the world, and should not be taxed above and beyond the incomes of the owners. The money a corportion creates is invested back into the business to grow jobs, grow profits, etc. etc. Republicans want to fix the the tax code so there are not so many loop holes allowing rich people to elude paying their fair share. Democrats always fight to leave the loop holes where they are. Ask yourself why that is. Side: was fly
1
point
He has cut both company tax AND tax for high earners. The two go hand in hand. Often large business have huge sums of cash just sitting in their companies being withdrawn steadily by the owners and their offspring for generations to come. Company tax cuts down on that. If companies want to use some of that money to invest in more employees then great - THAT wouldnt be taxed by company tax. Why is it that you Americans have to wave the flag for your presidents all the time? Accept that they screw you over every single time. They are not your Messiah. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Hogwash. If a person takes money out of a corporation for personal use, it is income tax and will be taxed as such. If there are loops to allow getting around that fact, then get the Democrat Party to end the loop holes. They never do. When the GOP ends the loop holes, they will be able to lower the tax rates because these people will no longer be able to get around paying their taxes. The rich will pay no less taxes than they used to pay. Side: was fly
1
point
Once again At Rag, whatever that is? You butt into our affairs with little to no understanding of the laws of our land. Trump HAS in fact divested his business. Further there is NO legal requirement for US Presidents to divest their personal interest in business. So Rag on with your lefty rant, but know that the facts do NOT support your pointless and powerless claim. Globalists everywhere are cowering before the man they cannot buy. 😋 Side: was fly
This was the last I heard. Is there more news? He is a man that is already bought. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
|
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Did you try googling balls? Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
Every time I give you a link it takes you to arguments to actually acknowledge the link. Here is another try. Talk to you about it in 2 posts. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
Your eyesight being bad doesn't have anything to do with the fact that people with working vision can see those as spheres. Every single point you have made is that you personally can't see in 3D. We know for a fact that humans can see in 3D. You are an exception. Go get glasses. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
You earlier asked " does the sphere ever appear to not be a circle?" Now you claim you can make "it look like a sphere". So, you believe it is possible for something to not appear to be a circle, but instead appear to be a sphere. There is nothing more to discuss. You lose. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
People in simulators think they are in 3d space, but it's only circles "switching" in a programmed circle loop that "switches" to a certain circle and size depending on where you are on the X,Y axis, tricking you into thinking it isn't 2 dimensional. And with the findings in Super Symmetry and people like James Gates, we have no reason to believe that our reality is any different. Side: was fly
1
point
Show us where this ball ever shows the appearance of not being a circle. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
A circle can have a spherical shadow depending on lighting and position. Or a circle can have a spherical shadow if one is put there by a computer programmer or an artist. In this link is this a circle made to look like Earth, or is it a sphere and actually is the real Earth? https:// I'll help you out. It's a circle. It appears to be a sphere, yet it isn't. It's on a flat piece of paper. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
I call leftists racists when they are being racist. The left's shouts of racism mean, you have white privilege and are racist by default. They destroy having a debate by simply pointing out that their opposition is white. If that's hard for you to grasp, I can send you a download of the dictionary for reference. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
You are, of course, absolutely right. Trump, with his golden elevators, cabinet stuffed full of investment bankers and massive tax cuts for the already ludicrously wealthy, is the one person who is willing to stand up for the interests of the working man, and could not possibly be a member of any "elite". Do you guys even realise how ridiculous you sound? Side: wasn't fly
1
point
George Soros, the man who broke the Bank of England, versus Donald Trump, the man behind SIX separate bankruptcies? I'd like to see that! And when did all this nonsense about Soros start anyway? It only seems to have become a wingnut trope in the last few months. I guess it just fits in with the general conservative pattern of believing that some nefarious international conspiracy is responsible for their own failures, but it still seems decidedly odd. And no, I don't believe that making the rich pay their fair share of taxes into the public purse would necessarily make me richer directly. The point, though, is that in a civilised society we have responsibilities towards each other, and one of those responsibilities is paying one's fair share of tax, something which it is becoming increasingly obvious that the rich aren't doing. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
George Soros, the man who broke the Bank of England, versus Donald Trump, the man behind SIX separate bankruptcies? I'd like to see that 1)You forgot to look up Soros' and every other billionaire's bankruptcies, which is a normal part of business at that level. 2)You are seeing it. That's why the Soro's media is in meltdown. 3)Why would you applaud someone who destroys nations? Side: was fly
Once again, yawn. Are you guys ever going to take any personal responsibility for how badly you've screwed the economy and society in general? Or are you just going to blame more international conspiracies? What I don't understand is why you guys are so miserable. On both sides of the Atlantic, your views, for better or for (as far as I'm concerned) worse, have won. Why are conservatives not only such bad losers, but such bad winners? It's an interesting question. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
We are standing against a Left that burns the flag, kneels at the National Anthem, shuts down speeches with violence in mobs, wears masks in giant mobs while burning buildings and cars, is silent on the oppression of Muslim women, takes over Bernie Sanders' rallies, and uses yelling buzz words and catch phrases as a political tool. How on Earth could we not oppose you... Side: was fly
1
point
1)Liberals praise Bill Clinton as a great President. He was proven in court to be a "sex pest", not random claims. It was proven with evidence. The left yawns. 2)It's not a fantasy. It's the news and from your very own liberal networks. 3)Trump's personal life doesn't affect public policy, law, the protection of this country, or the economy. That's me parroting the left during Bill's sex scandal. Side: was fly
0
points
Believe it or not, he (trump) is screwing up nations, he vows to fix america but nobody talks about damage behind the stage!! I believe he is spoiling the peace we've had throughout nations and I believe he could potentially start a big war! the peace for which everyone has worked for decades, is probably coming to an end just because of one man, donald trump!! Side: was fly
1
point
0
points
Trump is a super wealthy cronyist Democrat. He isn't doing any of the Republican minded things he said he would do. Wasn't he going to "lock her up", "build a wall", and "repeal and replace"? Instead he is letting let her go (why does it even matter?), maintaining a fence, (built under Obama), and keeping ObamaCare (with minor alterations). He has never been a Capitalist. I don't know how anyone can think he is a hero of the Right. But hey, at least he is also pretty shitty person. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Trump said he wasn't going to Perdue prosecution of Hillary. He already provided ObamaCare light without ever talking of actual repeal. He pointed at Obamas Fence and took credit as if it's his wall. The failures I pointed to were achieved already. He never will repeal. He never will persue Hillary. There's still time for his wall but not with the way he "makes deals". He may be the worst deal person to ever deal with deals. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Instead he is letting let her go (why does it even matter?) "Art of the Deal". Read his book. He has leverage to keep her out and strongarm the left. Once she goes to prison that leverage is gone, and it'd be political suicide with independents and moderates to bull towards a political arrest. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
You don't obtain $10 billion simply from investing $1 million. It's almost a mathematical impossibility. And if did do it, he's the greatest investor to have ever lived. Of course, that's not true, so it doesn't matter. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
So what? The guantlet of bribes and favors you are talking about would be beyond comprehension. Now do it for America. Why do you think he wouldn't arrogantly want to meet that challenge? I want a President who's claims are so big that he has to do everything in his power to secure his legacy. Especially if it is the legacy Trump says he wants. His rep is on the line. Game on. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
1)Get the debt out of the junkyard. What Obama and Bush did debtwise is treason. Ahem... 2)Protect freedom of speech like you are the angel of death. 3)Be a patriot for the United States. Make kneeling at the National Anthem and burning the flag a disgrace to society. Get the schools to teach that America is great rather than some anti American bs. 4)Protect the religion that made this country great and secularism, not for a monopoly but as a political agent that is founded on protecting America and its own. 5)Don't allow foreign ideologies that are beyond barbaric, to have any say in this country. Period. Side: was fly
Cops protect freedom of speech, not the president. Kneeling for the anthem and burning the flag is a disgrace to society, that's why it gets attention. If you want that freedom of speech though, there will be no law against it. Religion isn't what made this country great. Christianity is largely Socialist. This country was made great by secular and capitalist values adopted by its people, regardless of their religion. And Christianity comes from the same region as Islam. It's just as foreign. I am against Trump because he will end up helping the left. I am no leftist. But I am certainly not on your side. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
So back to the way it was before, before premiums were jacked and you were literally punished financially for not having insurance? That'd be better anway. Look, we get that cancer sucks, but covering 20 million and forsaking the rest, and destroying the system doesn't help. Obamacare was a mindless pipedream. If they want universal healthcare the government has to completely take over the system. One step closer to full government control. Orwell's 1984 anyone? Submit or don't get your meds... Side: was fly
When I said that Christianity is largely Socialist, you attempted a rebuttal with The Bible says that if a man does not work, he will not eat. Well that’s kind of perfect, because that’s just what Vladimir Lenin said was a necessary principle under socialism. He refers to that phrase in his 1917 work “The State and Revolution”. Go tell the Soviets how Christianity is not Socialist… If they want universal healthcare the government has to completely take over the system Trump did nothing to stop the ultimate failure of this system set up by Obama. It was intended to fail. When it does (now with the help of Trump), you will see the government completely take over the system. They will blame Trump and they will blame capitalism. Tyrant is a semantical word All words are semantical words. they would have burned you at the stake as a witch for your comments Yeah, that’s not what made us great… If "secularism" ever had some power over social politics Secularism is not atheism. It’s not anti-religious. It’s non-religious. You know like the rule of law, freedom of speech, and the Constitution. Back when everyone was religious, referencing “god” was secular because you didn’t say whose god you meant. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
When I said that Christianity is largely Socialist, you attempted a rebuttal with The Bible says that if a man does not work, he will not eat. Well that’s kind of perfect, because that’s just what Vladimir Lenin said was a necessary principle under socialism. He refers to that phrase in his 1917 work “The State and Revolution”. Go tell the Soviets how Christianity is not Socialist… It's not my fault if certain Socialists can or cannot read or have misled views. The Bible is ridden with men who were rich and powerful. What kind of socialism is that? It isn't. It's an absolute monarachy, God's Biblical and chosen method of rule. Side: was fly
It's not my fault if certain Socialists can or cannot read or have misled views In the matter in question, Lenin (THE Socialist) had misled views that were exactly in line with the bible as you quoted it. an absolute monarachy, God's Biblical and chosen method of rule. What do you call a monarchy where the monarch owns the means of production? Socialism. You're making my point. If Monarchy is God's chosen method of Rule, then America as founded was very anti-god and god is very pro-big government. That's not my view, but it appears to be yours. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Socialism definition- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism 1)The system in Biblical Heaven rewards those who did the most with more. (Pseudo Capitalism?) http://www.bible-knowledge.com/rewards-in-heaven/ 2)"Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them." Matthew 13:12 biblehub.com/matthew/13-12.htm 3)There are different versions of "Socialism", so it depends on which version you are referring to. 4)Any concept of "government control" proposed by Christ was an absolute monarchy controlled by He himself. http://biblehub.com/revelation/19-16.htm Side: was fly
1
point
1)"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Romans 13:1 biblehub.com/romans/13-1.htm By this statement, God allowed us to be in a Capitalist society by His own power, thus it is a valid system. 2)God having control is good. Manmade goverments having absolute control is bad. If God allows it, it serves a purpose as the ends justify the means, but that doesn't mean you'll enjoy the trip of manmade government control. As a statement of fact, God warns against it. "So that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name." Revelation 17:13 biblehub.com/revelation/13-17.htm Side: was fly
1
point
"It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, Revelation 13:16" Side: was fly
1
point
It wasn't his job to. When Obama was President, Trump wasn't an elected official. Why didn't you stop it? I would stop it if I could. And if I was elected on the promise that I would repeal it, as Trump was, I would do that. Especially if I had majority in both houses. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Looks like they are trying to. They did drop the ball on this one. The Republicans whined for years. They should have had a coherant plan in place before Trump was even elected. I think Trump knew it was bad but it wasn't exactly his field of expertise, healthcare. He may simply be trying to figure out exactly how the system works and how to fix it per a learning curve. You don't have to be a healthcare expert though to see Obamacare simply is demonstrably flawed and doesn't work. Fixing it is a whole different situation though. I think they (Republicans) got lazy thinking Hillary had no chance of losing to any Republican nominee. Now the noose of responsibility is around their necks. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
I don't see the correlation to come to your hunch, assumption, guess. Do you have visible reasons for saying this that you can share, or are you making an emotionally appealing decleration? Give us an intellectually appealing assessment for why you think Trump/the government will push us into a government takeover. Side: was fly
And during that time the nation was over 90% Christian. What do you think they meant by "God"? In a world where everyone is religious, though of different religions, “god” is whatever deity a person believes in. Referring to God as opposed to, say, our lord jesus Christ, is a secular reference. It is also secular to refer to our Creator, Nature, and Natures God. You can be any religion and hold true the statements of the Declaration of Independence. Even an atheist who believes we are created through a process of evolution can get on board. This all-inclusive approach is secularism. I know that others of the time agreed, because of the 1st Amendment. You mean a secular creator... riiiiiiight.... Yes, that is right. I’m not surprised, and neither should you be, that a religious person such as yourself is relatively unfamiliar with Secular philosophy. Since secular is not the same as atheist, a secular notion of God is perfectly consistent. If I say I believe in God, you have no idea if I am a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, a Zoroastrian, a Hindu etc. That’s because God is not necessarily a religious notion. and it doesn't change the religious history of the nation The nations religious history is a history of culture, not of institutions. We don’t have, and have never had, governmental institutions of religion. The variations of religious notions (different Christian beliefs mostly) among the the Founders and their people made it clear that no single religion could be given any kind of legal preference. Their own Christian ancestors fled other Christians in Europe. Thus, ours is a secular nation built mostly by Christians, but not strictly for Christians. God allowed us to be in a Capitalist society by His own power Allowing for Capitalism doesn’t indicate preference. Your earlier statement that God prefers a monarchy indicates more of a preference for Kim Jung Un than for any given president. Give us an intellectually appealing assessment for why you think Trump/the government will push us into a government takeover Due to the mandatory acceptance of pre-existing conditions, ObamaCare couldn’t last without a punitive individual mandate. Justice Roberts stated that, in order for that mandate to be a tax, it cannot be punitive. This cut off the longevity of ObamaCare making it doomed to eventual collapse. This wasn’t problematic for Obama’s legacy because the Leviathan healthcare structure was successfully installed. The only way to change the course in healthcare that government always takes, to grow and encroach, would be to remove the structure itself. To repeal ObamaCare as promised. Rather than do that, Trump left the majority of Obamas healthcare structure in place. Under TrumpCare, States can opt out of covering pre-existing conditions, but this would be political suicide, and even Trump won’t do that. They will all do what is politically expedient, and maintain the structure. Trump actually gave back to ObamaCare it’s teeth by creating mandatory punitive premium hikes for anyone who has a lapse in coverage. That’s a nice lefty work around to Justice Roberts statement that punitive taxes would delegitimize ObamaCare. No worries, we will just have punitive premiums instead. None of these changes will lead to better healthcare or lower costs. As such people will continue to suffer, blame the free market (as they always do) and ultimately call for more. The people will cry for more and the government will be happy to abide, as they always do. Given the speed with which the monstrosity of healthcare has grown, I estimate full single payer by the term of the next president. Obama built it and Trump was hired to repeal it. He failed. Thanks Trump. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
That's because you want it to be unlikely. There were a lot of different Christian notions of God in America at that time. Jefferson and Franklin were called Deists, which was something of an insult at the time because it did not necessitate God to be a Christian god. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
You can be any religion and hold true the statements of the Declaration of Independence Not if the religion itself is militant against those statements and you devoutly adhere to said religion. I doubt "Allah" was on the mind of men hundreds of years ago in America. Side: was fly
1
point
Yes, that is right. I’m not surprised, and neither should you be, that a religious person such as yourself is relatively unfamiliar with Secular philosophy I'm familiar with it. I'm also familiar with Scientology. I think the same thing about both philosophies. Neither shaped our nation. Side: was fly
1
point
Come now Amarel. What do we swear on and put our hand on before giving testimony in court? Last time I testified, nothing. The fact that we used to, was a cultural factor, and not necessitated by our legal institutions. That's why it's fine that there was no bible there for me to swear on, which wouldn't have mattered since I am not a Christian. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Here's what I can tell you. I started studying Trump as a young person, and reading his book would be enlightening for you. He is a person who uses techniques and strategies to leverage or get the upper hand. He also talks about when to retreat slightly or go "all in" on one issue to get the opponents attention and subtly take them over and leverage them on another issue while they are afixed on the first issue because of your drastic move. While they move to his left hand , he is doing what he wants silently with his right hand on something more important to him. Then he gets control of the second thing while they are asleep, goes back to where they are on the first thing and takes them head on, and he believes he can win head on . It's a game of slight of hand in a way. The concepts in his book were demonstrated when he began playing the media as fools. He baited them into covering things they wouldn't have covered otherwise without him being outrageous and over the top. He used social media to rally people and counter them, forcing them to respond to tweets. He used overabrasive and attention grabbing things to make it the media and the world vs Trump. He also tricked them into staring at thing A while he moved thing B to his agenda.This is chess for him, not checkers. Side: was fly
If he is so brilliant at acquiring and utilizing leverage, why is a majority in both houses and control of the highest office in the land not enough leverage to accomplish the things he promised? Maybe he wasn't only playing the media for fools, maybe he was playing his base. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Maybe he wasn't only playing the media for fools, maybe he was playing his base It'd be hard for me to believe. If you listen to him as a young man on youtube, he has always taken a very patriotic "love for America" stance, even in his youth. In one interview with a young Oprah Winfrey, he said he didn't ever want to even be President. He said that he would never fully rule it out because just in case it ever got so bad.... etc. So essentially he was saying the only way he'd ever run was if our country was in serious trouble. People tried to get him to run for decades. He never did. He didn't run until Obama world manifested. If he thought this out from his youth in some 40 year old "I'll trick them as a kid and run for President and do what I want" conspiracy, he'd be evil as hell and a genius thinking 100 moves ahead in chess. I doubt it. I don't think he's that smart or cruel. Side: was fly
It'd be hard for me to believe. Anyone would find it hard to believe they have been fooled. Trump was a Democrat unitl ’87, a Republican through the 90’s, a Democrat again from 2001 to 2009, and a Republican again in 2012. He has always politically affiliated with whomever he needs to in order to get ahead. After years of bribes and favors to politicians, he has bribed the group of people he saw as most gullible with empty promises to get where he wanted to go. None of this is out of some sense of malice for America, his affinity for this country doesn’t concern me. His character and ineptitude do. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
I'd find it hard to believe based on imperical evidence such as the same narrative for 40 years. Also, he's the oldest person to win the presidency in history. If he served 8 years he'd be in his 80's. For what gain? Also, his patriot, pro American narrative manifested in his youth, and is not a recent phenomenon. He's demonized the press for decades. I even created a debate on this site with video evidence that this is the case. Anything is possible, but some things are improbable. Your middle dialogue makes him appear to not be a political hack or an ideologue. I've always thought of him as a nondogmatic person. I'm a moderate that leans right. I don't care about gay marriage in any way. I don't cringe when people go full environmentalist. I have no opinion on global warming. I just go with what science says. I'm not anti nonChristian religion, just anti Islam because I know how its system is set up, its intent, and find it to be a threat to my fellow Americans, gay, straight, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist alike. In the word "coexist" I see Islam as the enemy of that very word. Not being a full liberal or full conservative feels pragmatic to me. Picking political affiliation as some kind of leverage is meaningless to me. That's the nature of business and politics. He admits to how his lobbyists work. It's typical business/politics. I guess I just don't care, if the country improves. I move back to my earlier Bill Clinton point. Trivial versions and definitions of Morality and ethics don't seem to be what does or doesn't make a President a success. Side: was fly
1
point
Here is a 3 minute clip of his Oprah interview. There are many many others from his 20's and thirties if you go look on youtube. Side: was fly
1
point
I simple bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act. That's what he promised, and that's what Republicans have been promising for years. Republicans have the majority in both houses and the Presidency. If they can't do it now (which they apparently can't) they will never do it. When everyone talked about how broken the system is, my father reminisced about the days when, though he was poor and unemployed, he was able to afford a family policy. Just like college tuition, prices began to rise when government began to interfere. You can't go shift directly to a free market system in one fell swoop without destroying a lot of lives. But you can set in motion the removal of various governmental structures. That is to say, someone other than Trump could have. He is the worst thing to happen to the republican party since Nixon. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
If "secularism" ever had some power over social politics Secularism is not atheism. It’s not anti-religious. It’s non-religious. You know like the rule of law, freedom of speech, and the Constitution. Back when everyone was religious, referencing “god” was secular because you didn’t say whose god you meant. To say that a country with "in God we trust" (that is 80% Christian and was nearly 100% Christian throughout much of history), and has "One nation under God" in its pledge of allegiance(that is 80% Christian and was nearly 100% Christian throughout much of history), is "secular" or "was secular" is a contradiction of terms and turns a completely blind eye to reality and history. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
Religion isn't what made this country great Whether you are a Christian or not, don't make bogus claims. This country was 91% Christian in 1960, much less when the Quakers crossed the ocean and started this whole thing. Sorry, Atheism wasn't a thing at Plymoth in the 1600's... they were all strict religious Protestants.. they would have burned you at the stake as a witch for your comments. Don't go postal on me in regards to basic sense and basic history... Side: was fly
Everyone was religious, but that's not what made this country great. Every culture officially accepted slavery too, but that didn't make us great. The religious people of the time did great things because of their philosophy of life which, though based on religion, does not require religion. Christians lived as Stoics, and Stoicism is secular. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
*This country was made great by secular and capitalist values adopted by its people, regardless of their religion. Atheists claim to be a giant "persecuted minority" even today, much less when I was a kid, and do you really want to go to my grandfather or father's day? I'd never even heard of an Atheist as a kid. Try to keep it real, will ya? If "secularism" ever had some power over social politics, be glad you had us as opposed to Islam.... or something worse... Side: was fly
The abolitionists would have found a hard failure if they had been promised imancipation by John C. Breckinridge. Lincoln was right for the job. Trump is not. But here's a good question that no one ever asks. Why did the civil war happen? I don't know, but it sure made Andrew Jackson sad... Side: wasn't fly
1
point
Lincoln was right for the job. Trump is not You are guessing. 100 days is not enough time. It takes that long just to learn the system just like any job. Unemployment is the lowest in 10 years, and the stock market has hit the highest marks in history. Google it. Side: was fly
1
point
But here's a good question that no one ever asks. Why did the civil war happen? I don't know, but it sure made Andrew Jackson sad... The Civil War was a Southern repudiation of the Northern government. Back then the miles between them were monumental by horseback. When someone is so far away you don't accept their rule, war can happen. The North had rule and attempted to enforce it. At that time the left was more religious than the right is today and the right was beyond the pale. Politics was nothing like today. Two extreme religious factions and no automobiles. It was a feud from a distance. Side: was fly
1
point
I'm not real. I'm in your head. Come closer... closer........ closer.................. ROWR! Now feed me Seymore, as if are old enough to know what that means... Link in case you need the education- Side: was fly
"Great" is the semantical word in this case. Again, all words are semantical. Look up the word “semantics” and then come back with whatever word you mean to say. I'm not real. I'm in your head. Come closer... closer........ closer.................. ROWR! Now feed me Seymore, as if are old enough to know what that means... Little Shop of Horrors aired on TV in the late eighties…Now I’m curious, how young do you think I am old man? To say that a country with "in God we trust" (that is 80% Christian and was nearly 100% Christian throughout much of history), and has "One nation under God" in its pledge of allegiance(that is 80% Christian and was nearly 100% Christian throughout much of history), is "secular" or "was secular" is a contradiction of terms and turns a completely blind eye to reality and history. “In God We Trust” wasn’t on our coins until 1864 and wasn’t on our bills until 1956. “Under God” wasn’t added to the Pledge until 1954. The addition to the Pledge and to the Bill wasn’t an expression of Christian sentiment so much as an anti-Communist/anti-atheist sentiment of the Cold War. Secular isn’t atheist, it’s not anti-religious, it’s non-religious. A man’s relationship with God is too personal a matter to bring into the realm of legal discourse. The only way to have a nation where people can make their own way with God is to have a nation of secular institutions. The Founders understood this. Secularism is an asset to theists of all stripes as well as atheists. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
"Great" is the semantical word in this case. Again, all words are semantical. Look up the word “semantics” and then come back with whatever word you mean to say. I know what it means. That's why I keep using it correctly in sentences. The point is to say something is is meaningless to anyone that does not think it is _. Example? "Trump is a tyrant". Millions of people disagree. Side: was fly
1
point
I'm not real. I'm in your head. Come closer... closer........ closer.................. ROWR! Now feed me Seymore, as if are old enough to know what that means... Little Shop of Horrors aired on TV in the late eighties…Now I’m curious, how young do you think I am old man? Younger than I am based on past posts. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
The only way to have a nation where people can make their own way with God is to have a nation of secular institutions. Perhaps, but if something that isn't technically religion but has become dogmatic, like atheism, begins imposing its will in dogmatic ways as though "it is the correct way" (which could be incorrect), you go back to square one on your argument. Side: was fly
1
point
Hello bront: Wait, WHAT?? Haven't you heard?? The Donald is a PROUD globalist now.. Didn't they tell you that over on YouTube? http://www.redstate.com/kylefoley/2016/ excon Side: wasn't fly
2
points
You are following me around like a little puppy. You are all over the website. There is no way to avoid being around you. . I thought you would create at least one debate while I was here, but alas, you don't know how to create debates because then you would have to defend a position. According to you, you don't have to defend a position to create a debate. Side: was fly
1
point
You are following me around like a little puppy. You are all over the website. There is no way to avoid being around you. 1)You don't have to respond, but you do. 2)LittleMisfit has proven your assessment wrong, and you applauded the javascript change like a clown. Side: wasn't fly
2
points
bwahahahhahahahahaha! If I look afraid to respond, you must have hit some shrooms. What you are afraid of is creating a thread on here of your own because you know people would come after your position and you'd have nowhere to retreat to because it is your thread. You debated me on the change and called me stupid and a Nazi. Side: wasn't fly
If I look afraid to respond, you must have hit some shrooms You constantly change the subject and back track on the ridiculous things you say. You debated me on the change and called me stupid and a Nazi. I never called you a Nazi. That's something you like doing. You are stupid so I see no reason why that's a problem. Side: was fly
2
points
1
point
I've never called you a Nazi. If you ever learn to read, you will see that I didn't say you called me personally a Nazi. I said that I was destroying YOU, whom I have never called a Nazi. You didn't say that. You said that you destroyed me and I called you stupid and a Nazi. You then say I lost because I didn't resort to calling you a Nazi. Another lie. Then start telling the truth. Another fail. Oh no, I failed to convince you how wrong you are. Side: was fly
1
point
If you ever learn to read, you will see that I didn't say you called me personally a Nazi. I was talking about defeating YOU in every debate. You said "Calling people a Nazi doesn't win you the debate". So now we are back to I, Brontoraptor have spanked you in debates. Side: wasn't fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
According to you, you don't have to defend a position to create a debate. 1)You are welcome to find the quote of me using those words, which you can't. 2)You don't create debates so that... a)You don't have to defend a tough position, which scares you. b)You can play offense rather than defense. Sadly you still get destroyed in epic fashion. Side: wasn't fly
1) there is no reason to do it. You would never admit you were wrong. 2) a) you can actually go to someone else's debates to actually defend a position. I know this is a foreign concept to you because you are a massive pussy. b) you have never once destroyed me. Who is the one destroying me. Bringing up that you are retired is your form is destroying an argument. Side: was fly
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
|
