I haven't read the whole thing, but I got the gist of it. Assassination? That's not even funny. Even at my most heated during the Clinton administration, I never thought killing the man would be a good idea.
I do have to admit that I'm leery of the whole Supreme Court thing right now - we'll have enough problems getting John Roberts in. Now we have to find another justice. I don't understand the uproar these people have about reproductive rights - I honestly don't see it eroding anytime soon, but that's just my opinion.
I don't understand this kneejerk reaction to people like Scalia - who I think will be our next Chief Justice if the Dems don't go compeletely cow over the pick. Republicans in general try to guarantee personal liberties. Just because they don't shove the liberal stance down people's throat, they are somehow taking personal liberties away? (I certainly hope I was reading that one woman's posts wrong, because that's what it seemed like. Forgive me if I'm not making sense - hella tired.)
*bangs head against wall* Okay, the asassination thing was bad and I didn't really mean it and I'm sorry.
Republicans in general try to guarantee personal liberties.
Wow! I'd love to meet those Republicans! I guess that isn't fair, I know there are moderate Republicans and Christians, but what Bush represents is not in any way moderate. That's what the discussion was about originally anyway. The people who Bush empowers by being in office aren't, for the most part, moderate either. confettiofstars mentioned that she wishes the moderates would speak out more, and I have to say I wish that too, because right now the right-wing extremists have a pretty loud voice that's drowning out everyone else. Maybe if the moderate Republicans spoke up more, people wouldn't think they're all extremists.
Just because they don't shove the liberal stance down people's throat, they are somehow taking personal liberties away?I guess it's my turn to be offended. Liberals do not, or should not, force their beliefs down anyone's throat. The whole point of liberalism
( ... )
Hello. I'm one of the debators from childfree. Just read the invite, so I thought I'd come over because I'm actually enjoying this. Anyway...
Posting on Sunday? I guess you mean that if Bush was really forcing his religion on us, we'd be in church instead of on the Internet and then home reading our Bibles. I certainly hope it never gets to that. But I do feel that Bush in the postition that he is provides a rallying point for those who are interested in forcing their morals on others through the form of laws and constitutional amendments. If a group gets together and puts a proposal on the ballot of any state to outlaw same sex marriage, that is those people forcing their beliefs on me. Because that law is not going to affect those people, it is going to affect GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and transexual) people. So it might not be Bush actually doing the forcing, but he is making it possible for citizens to get laws passed which do force their beliefs on others. Because you can't tell me that any of the people who fought to
( ... )
Unfortunately, you would be one of few indeed who understand that. Everyone assumes that anytime the word "God" comes up, it equals "religion" by default. Everyone who is a Christian (or any true believer and not just a fanboy/fangirl of a particular faith) understands that true faith and one's life are indivisible. A true believer does not go to church once a week to "get religion" and then act secular the rest of the week. People of faith understand that one must conduct himself/herself in a way pleasing to God every waking hour. And unfortunately, because only the true believer understands this, the weak believer/fanboy/nonbeliever has issues with the actual practise of such faith.Thing is, I have no problem with people living their lives in accordance with their beliefs. It's when they inisist that everyone else do so I have issues. Which is terribly convoluted, I suppose
( ... )
If the only argument I have for something is rooted in that faith, then it's clearly just mine. Other people who are present as whole people will be rooting such things in their own faiths, which I am highly unlikely to share (I should really write down some of my increasingly unorthodox takes on Kemetic stuff somewhere, but I'm afraid to do so publically for wank reasons), and that may not line up with mine. I need to couch arguments to convince other people in terms of things that are not internal to myself; I need to appeal to facts first of all, shared human emotion and response secondly (and this is less dependable), and only if necessary point out my personal convictions.And there's the thing. If you can use sources outside yourself for your arguments for things that include other people, it's a fairly good sign that you've got an argument that has a chance. If your only support is "it's my opinion" or "God said so" then there's going to be a problem. For all anyone else knows your logic may be flawed or when God was speaking
( ... )
Exactly. Even if I didn't have ethical reasons for that approach (the whole "If I'm present as a whole, I should expect that other people are too" thing), it's just infinitely more practical to refer to stuff that other people can confirm with some level of objectivity.
Comments 46
I do have to admit that I'm leery of the whole Supreme Court thing right now - we'll have enough problems getting John Roberts in. Now we have to find another justice. I don't understand the uproar these people have about reproductive rights - I honestly don't see it eroding anytime soon, but that's just my opinion.
I don't understand this kneejerk reaction to people like Scalia - who I think will be our next Chief Justice if the Dems don't go compeletely cow over the pick. Republicans in general try to guarantee personal liberties. Just because they don't shove the liberal stance down people's throat, they are somehow taking personal liberties away? (I certainly hope I was reading that one woman's posts wrong, because that's what it seemed like. Forgive me if I'm not making sense - hella tired.)
There are plenty of Christians ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Republicans in general try to guarantee personal liberties.
Wow! I'd love to meet those Republicans! I guess that isn't fair, I know there are moderate Republicans and Christians, but what Bush represents is not in any way moderate. That's what the discussion was about originally anyway. The people who Bush empowers by being in office aren't, for the most part, moderate either. confettiofstars mentioned that she wishes the moderates would speak out more, and I have to say I wish that too, because right now the right-wing extremists have a pretty loud voice that's drowning out everyone else. Maybe if the moderate Republicans spoke up more, people wouldn't think they're all extremists.
Just because they don't shove the liberal stance down people's throat, they are somehow taking personal liberties away?I guess it's my turn to be offended. Liberals do not, or should not, force their beliefs down anyone's throat. The whole point of liberalism ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
Posting on Sunday? I guess you mean that if Bush was really forcing his religion on us, we'd be in church instead of on the Internet and then home reading our Bibles. I certainly hope it never gets to that. But I do feel that Bush in the postition that he is provides a rallying point for those who are interested in forcing their morals on others through the form of laws and constitutional amendments. If a group gets together and puts a proposal on the ballot of any state to outlaw same sex marriage, that is those people forcing their beliefs on me. Because that law is not going to affect those people, it is going to affect GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and transexual) people. So it might not be Bush actually doing the forcing, but he is making it possible for citizens to get laws passed which do force their beliefs on others. Because you can't tell me that any of the people who fought to ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment