Tough call. I'd say Hillary, since Sanders has spoken out against the institution of the Iowa caucus. Iowa has, historically, been pretty touchy about two things: Their electoral position, and ethanol subsidies.

You truly lack the simple intellect to grasp the fact of how I was staying on topic!

And you lack the decency to respond to someone who disagrees with you without insulting people.

The person writing this argument was asking if we should protest the evils in North Korea.

I was using my brain and showing the hypocrisy of people who want to judge others but not look within our own nation and the atrosities within.

Except you demonstrated no hypocrisy. For all you know, Sherlock17 does oppose and speak out against abortion.

Killing even late term babies for any reason is every bit as evil as anything North Korea does. Harvesting Baby organs for sale is what nations like Korea would do.

So are you saying a person can't speak out against multiple issues?

They look at America as hypocrites who try to tell them of their human right's violations while we support killing Babies.

I assure you North Korea does not do that, considering North Korea forces women to have abortions.

CAN YOU STAY ON TOPIC AND GRASP SOMETHING THAT SIMPLE?

I am the one staying on topic here.

The entire hateful rant spewed lies of how Christians could tell everyone what to do.

PURE LIE!!! No one could tell others what to do 50 years ago. Our society actually actually LIFTED UP (not forced) moral values that spoke to the irresponsibiity of lifestyles that hurt family, hurt society, hurt our children etc.

First, you tell people what to do. You have here on this very debate.

Second, there were indeed "morality laws" 50 years ago. Morality laws still exist today.

NO ONE was telling anyone what they could do! But he shows what I have always said. Godless people are so insecure and hate it when Christians speak of moral values.

So do you believe that someone has to be insecure to disagree with you? If so, does that make you insecure for disagreeing with them?

It makes them feel guilty for walking out on their kids.

Statistically speaking, most who walk out on their kids are theists. Not necessarily by proportion, as I doubt any information on that is relevant, but definitively by sum.

Man does not want to hear anything about his selfish choices in life. He wants to be able to get many women pregnant, walk out on his children and never hear one word against it. That in a nutshell explains the bigoted hate from non christians against Christians and conservatives. It's called insecurities of who you are and what you do in life.

But none of that follows what has been said to you at all. You know nothing about the people you disagree with, you simply belittle them for disagreeing with you, then tell them that if they insult you they are bigots.

This fool says nothing against this new age amoral anything goes self righteous culture of bigots telling everyone the political correct way to live.

Probably because this debate is about Christianity.

Progressives are the ones forcing every single state to change their marriage laws to fit man's so called values no matter how the people in those states choose to handle their marriage laws.

No, that was the Supreme Court based on the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

These arrogant Liberals will force their guns laws on everyone one step at a time.

Indeed they will. Hopefully they can be stopped, just like how Conservatives arrogant marriage laws were stopped. Both sides need to have such paternalistic laws struck down.

The only difference from today and 50 years ago is the values lifted up and the fact that progressives DO force their beliefs on the people.

You have stated no ways in which Progressives have forced any beliefs upon people. In fact, it would be technically impossible to do so.

As I said in my argument, the moral values of man have completely changed because without God, there are no moral values to hold to other than PC politics and self love.

And yet, as has been pointed out to you before, the country is getting better in a lot of ways. Less teen pregnancy, less drug use, less poverty, less violence, better education, etc. There are indeed some ways we need to continue to improve, and some places where regressions need to be stopped (such as broken families as you have pointed out), but as a whole the "Godless" morality you are decrying really doesn't seem to have much of a negative effect.

This is why I ban people when they constantly lie to make themselves right. They are a total waste of time to debate.

Except they aren't lying. You are just accusing people of lying if they hold beliefs that differ from yours, as just about everyone on this website has told you. Look at how many people are talking to you on the original version of this debate to see what you have wrought.

You take issue with him telling you what you should be saying. Then you tell him what he should be saying.

How do you not see the hypocrisy?

Can you quote me insulting you, out of curiosity?

And if you have an issue with being insulted, why are you insulting others?

Actually, I have "accused him" of trying to mandate certain moral laws, particularly regarding marriage.

" I only said those comments because you were telling me what I ought to be talking about like you were somehow the boss, when the thread said otherwise.

You've done exactly that over and over to other people.

It's due to the language you use and your choice of words as well. You need to avoid using strict language too often..

Like right there. "

I forgot how quickly you get boring.

I literally just quoted you doing so a few comments ago.

Why am I not surprised. You have no argument, so you rely entirely on ad hominem.

And as I have told you before: I am neither a Democrat, nor a Liberal, which makes your attempt at ad hominem that much more embarrassing.