Republican nominations - Page 41

On August 21 2011 23:18 KiaL.Kiwi wrote:

Well since there's evidence that abstinence-programs seem to be not only not working, but even harmful and contradictory to their goals (higher pregnancy and std infection rates among teens who pledged abstinence), I don't think its possible to defend such an completly ideologically motivated approach without stuttering/lots of silence.
Yeah, other politicians might have been more eloquent in hiding their incompetence, but I'd argue that the interviewer in this clip just did an awesome job because he kept asking and forcing Perry back to the point of discussion. Politicans often seem to be more astute just because the media allows them to get away with blurry, off-topic explanations.

On August 21 2011 23:50 Fleebenworth wrote:
The endgame in the evolution debate is a system where only creationism is taught, right now they are just trying to make inroads so that they can establish a sense of normalcy around religious indoctrination in schools.

It really should come as no surprise that conservatives have a disdain for reality or results-oriented approaches to problems. After all they routinely deny global warming, believe that social security is bankrupt, and that Obama is some sort of foreign black liberation islamosocialist. The entire christian worldview is based on accepting a rigid dogmatic worldview without question or independent thought.

On August 22 2011 00:23 FarmI3oy wrote:
Waiting for someone to grow a pair and call out the media for determining the president of the united states for the past 30 years and not leaving it up to the people to draw their own conclusions.

Bandwagoning/following the crowd is all that happens now because the youth of the nation thinks politics are stupid and are for old people. Of my graduating class 4 years ago I was the only one that even knew what was happening in the world and there was a junior under me that actually knew what I was talking about. Except she was very liberal while I was an extreme conservative.

I don't think there is an honest man running in this race besides Ron Paul even though I disagree with one of his policies I'd rather put an honest outspoken man in office then another corrupt governor from Texas or Michele Bachmann. Michele who is just a tool, the number of dumb things and mistakes shes made so far is appalling. IE. Wishing Elvis happy birthday on his death anniversary. (Shes even from my own state.) How embarrassing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPT2drqX16Y

Even though I don't think Ron Paul has a chance in hell I'll still vote for him I'll right him in if I have to. The media doesn't like Ron Paul SO America in turn will not like him either.

"Yes, Ron Paul is a conservative. But he's not one of those who hits you over the head with his bible. And looking at the current batch of republican wanna-bees, he stands out as maybe the only adult in the room. "

Quote from Jack Cafferty full article here http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/16/ron-paul-only-grown-up-running-for-president-in-gop/

On August 22 2011 00:23 FarmI3oy wrote:

"Yes, Ron Paul is a conservative. But he's not one of those who hits you over the head with his bible. And looking at the current batch of republican wanna-bees, he stands out as maybe the only adult in the room. "

On August 22 2011 00:02 radscorpion9 wrote:


I find it amazing that, you can actually find an entire party that appeals to the crazies/extremists and is anti-science, while the democratic party represents the opposite.

I'm sure there are some exceptions in the Republican party, but its just so interesting that politics can actually be divided into black and white, good and evil (or smart and dumb). I always thought there must be grey areas, but the polarization of America's politics appears to be ongoing (i.e. the recent debt deal).

On August 22 2011 00:48 Fleebenworth wrote:


Don't kid yourself, the Democrats are basically the same as Republicans in virtually every important way. They just happen to be less obvious about their corporatism.

On August 22 2011 00:42 FreddYCooL wrote:


http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html?reposttherepost

I dont know, according to this he still seems like somewhat of an christian fundamentalist

On August 22 2011 00:42 FreddYCooL wrote:


http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html?reposttherepost

I dont know, according to this he still seems like somewhat of an christian fundamentalist

The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

On August 22 2011 01:01 thoradycus wrote:
Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

On August 22 2011 01:09 Kiwifruit wrote:


What a load of bullshit. It's parents that teach kids right and wrong... Churches are just a collection of parents, and the right and wrong that is taught in Church is extremely arbitrary. If that is a Ron Paul quote then I've just lost a lot of respect for him. Plus Christmas has fuck all to do with Christianity besides being a random holiday where businesses profits soar yet the Christians defend it like Jesus fucking Christ depends on it.

On August 22 2011 01:00 FarmI3oy wrote:


The man is a christian there's no arguing that point. The point that he was trying to make in that article is that why are the Christian's being biased against as opposed to other religions. In that article he states.

"Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody. Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of “Merry Christmas” has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous “Happy Holidays.”

If that's not biased I don't know what is. All hes saying is that Christian's beliefs and celebrations/holidays are being targeted first because they are the majority. The point hes trying to make is that no one should have the right to impede on each others religions. If someone wants to advertise "Hanukkah" , "Ashura" or "Vesak". They should damn well be allowed to and not have to take the sign down.

I myself am somewhat of an atheist even though I dislike that term. But if someone has to take down a sign because it says "Merry Christmas" that's terrible and against the Constitution.

On August 22 2011 01:27 FarmI3oy wrote:


Far to many people associate Church with christian yes Church is where Christians go to worship their god. But many people including myself view the definition of church as a religious group or community.

And the reason hes so disappointed with Christian beliefs being trampled on is that it will start to spread that way (he uses the word chipping) to other religions which will intern give the state governments more power.

btw this arguing about something that is said in 2003 seems almost pointless and I'm not gonna post again on it.

On August 22 2011 01:00 FarmI3oy wrote:
"Earlier this month, firemen near Chicago reluctantly removed Christmas decorations from their firehouse after a complaint by some embittered busybody. Most noticeably, however, the once commonplace refrain of “Merry Christmas” has been replaced by the vague, ubiquitous “Happy Holidays.”

If that's not biased I don't know what is. All hes saying is that Christian's beliefs and celebrations/holidays are being targeted first because they are the majority. The point hes trying to make is that no one should have the right to impede on each others religions. If someone wants to advertise "Hanukkah" , "Ashura" or "Vesak". They should damn well be allowed to and not have to take the sign down.

I myself am somewhat of an atheist even though I dislike that term. But if someone has to take down a sign because it says "Merry Christmas" that's terrible and against the Constitution.

On August 22 2011 03:01 Vore210 wrote:


It is better to give a state power when it is accountable to its voters and citizens, than to give a church power when it's accountable to nobody.