So are you a Republican, Democrat, or what? :hi:
I'm a Republican (yeah I can't vote, but I'm still Republican).
Interesting. Do you have any idea why you're Republican, or does it just sound like the thing to do this week? If you want to take a political stand, do it. Tell us why you think that way. What is it about the GOP that makes you identify with them? The floor is yours.
im a republicrat
republicans and democrats have not stayed true to thier roots, for the most part, they have the same views, please the public screw tradition
i just go with w/e i feel right, even though i cant vote, i pretend
Your awfully young to identify with a group that would discriminate against other humans, and deny them privileges that the rest of us enjoy... that don’t wish to have to help the poor, or the sick... That would love to spend more in the military yet want to lower taxes (how you going to pay for the tanks?).
And you wonder why people on this forum view you the way they do.
LOL... Hey I’m not the only one with these views... I cant possibly
be the only liberal on the forum.
And I didn’t say anything about the republicans that wasn’t true...
Typically they are against gay rights, Medicaid and Medicare, and want to increase military spending and lower taxes...
Is it the way I come across? Am I too harsh?
And I want to honestly know... just like you, what makes him a young boy with a whole life ahead of him would choose the GOP. And you were just as bad as me with "or does it just sound like the thing to do this week?"... which was very funny by the way.
Yup most Republicans are against gay rights (ME INCLUDED). And so are we
supposed to lower military spending and invite terrorists? :banghead:
And lowering taxes helps the economy. :screwy:
Okay, if we must. Provide supporting evidence for your charges that the
For numbers one and two I want to see direct support. For number three I want you to show me where you have some information that the most learned economists in the world don't know, such as... How increasing taxes will increase revenue. It's already been proven that lowering taxes works to increase tax revenue by increasing discretionary spending and invesment. As a matter of fact, it's happening right now. Remember, no country has EVER taxed itself into prosperity.
Yup nothing like blind hate to help socity grow, :laughing:
You cant have your cake and eat it two... maybe your too young to actually understand how the economy works... but in the real world we all know that peace isn’t good for business... the best economical growth in our countries history was during the cold war (learned this in econ 120).
So if we lower taxes where is the government going to get the money they need to run all the programs they have and pay for military either cut social programs or raise taxes... and we all know that cutting social programs is just what we need with a country with such a high unemployment rate. Nothing better then the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer.
This is a privilege that we straights get to enjoy, but cons. would like to make sure homosexuals don’t get this privilege... and the idea of civil unions is just stupid... I mean we all know that separate but equal always works...right?
I hope news articals count as proof
OH I already knew this, and I don’t support higher taxes at all... but we also know that a lot of money comes from the income tax... and no matter how much you shift it, the government will have to come up at least in the short term with another source to replace what they’ve lost through income tax cuts, and that will come from cutting social programs.
You've already lost the battle. You readily admit that you were being
intellectually dishonest in the portrayal of one of your statements, and
the other two you support with far left reporting. One of them is even
called "Liberal Politics US" on a web site called usliberals.about.com .
And if you click on the "Liberal Politics US" it takes you straight to the
CNN site. Intellectual dishonesty at it's finest, just what I would expect
from a liberal.
I can introduce you to a Nazi who says the Holocaust never happened. Are you going to believe him to? If you want to play games, I'll change the requirements to REPUTABLE sources.
no news source is truly impartial, and if CNN isnt reputable news what is?
no matter political affiliation, news will allways put slants on the story,
the people of higher intelect will actually see what is being said.
and if you think republicans are not against gay rights, wake up and smell the coffee
I'm a Conserative....oh wait, I'm also Canadian.
+1 For Canada, but I guess I'd be neutral lol...Until I start voting :smoke:
Which one? When I said I know what you said is true? I would have thought
this would have made you happy. I honestly don’t remember using the
”intellectually dishonest” so if you could point out a specific sentence where I am being so, ill be happy to rectify my sentence.
CNN doesn’t work for you?
Fine I have news stories from news week, the wall street journal, the Detroit free press and countless others, but they are all on the ProQuest database and I’m not entirely sure that the links will work here if you don’t have a subscription to the service. When I get home form work this afternoon ill be happy to post a few links.
You actually associate your self with a Nazi?
And do you really think that the right doesn’t want to get ride of Medicaid and Medicare and they don’t want gay rights? Listen to like one show of Rush Limbaugh or Michael Savage... I did for like 3 weeks to write a paper on Liberal VS conservative talk radio... and what they said made me what to vomit.
i dont like gay people. they're weird:ticking:
Well, I don't really have a political party...I'm probably closest to
Libertarian(sp?), but I'm by no means a pacifist.
About this whole taxes and medicare thing, get rid of medicare and medicade, give some of the extra to the military, and use the rest to fill in the hole that would be left from cut taxes. duh!! lol
In fact, we should just get rid of welfare while we're at it, instate the fair tax after getting rid of the income tax, gradually phase out public education, and probably alot of other things that aren't coming to my mind this early in the morning. Then we could really increase military spending and cut taxes. :thumbs:
Wow, something lately about the verbal fighting here just makes me not want to read the rest of the thread. Personaly I am niether, I do not vote a ticket nor consider myself to be a true blue "insert party here". I do find myself voting however for things that matter the most for me, whether Dem or Rep. I would however say I am more conservative thean most, but that does not make one a Rep.
What a great idea!
"I'm a Democrat , What the hell is that? Take my sh!t better mail it back."
-SPM: All Cot Up.
But seriously, I got screwed over 2 years ago (along with about 8,000 other students at SIUC) when Bush didn't let me vote because I couldn't vote down here in Carbondale, only back in Chicago wherever I was registered:screwy: (not that it mattered, Illinois voted Democrat anyways).
Okay, I actually managed to force myself to read this
drivel. I'll have to take this one little distasteful bite at a time.
This is your supplied "proof" of "Republicans discriminating against
humans, blah, blah, blah". All I can say is oh my, where to start?
Show me where there is any discrimination. The homosexual community at large claims they only want to be married for the legal (medical, taxes, next of kin, etc) reasons. Civil unions would allow that to happen. If that's all they truly want, instead of pushing some not so well hidden agenda, they'd say thank you very much and go on their way. What they actually want to do is change the fabric of society and to have special rights granted to them. Like so many special interest groups before, they're not looking for equal rights, they're looking for extra-legal rights. Additionally, they want to have marriage "rights" when for everyone else it's a privilege.
So let's just say that the law is changed and the mos win. Where exactly does it stop. Will humans then have the 'right" to marry animals? Will they have the right to marry children or maybe have multiple spouses? How far will it have to go before you say enough is enough, it's going too far? You and people like you need to get over the fact that like it or not, marriage between a man and a woman is an institution that cuts across all racial, ethnic and religious beliefs, barring some crackpot religions that 99.9% of the world simply ignores. And for someone like you who claims to be agnostic, why is the institution of marriage so important? Marriage is essentially a religious and spiritual thing. Because you have an agenda, plain and simple. And to give you the benefit of the doubt, I think it's also because you too young and inexperienced to actually think things through.
President Bush prevented you from voting in Carbondale? Why don't you explain in great detail exactly how he did that. :banghead:
I was down here at Carbondale at the time of the elections. I couldn't vote down here because suposedly I could only vote in my registered district or something like that:screwy: . The whole thing was screwy and alot of us "just turned 18 year olds" couldn't vote becasue of this.
Newsflash. That's the way it works everywhere in the USA. When I was
stationed in California but was still a legal resident of Florida I had to
vote by absentee ballot. It's the law and has been for MANY years. During
the last presidential election, I was working in a different county and to
vote had to drive back to the precinct I'm registered in. It's the law and
has been for MANY years. There is nothing screwy about it. If a lot of
you chose not to vote, that sounds like laziness and/or apathy on your
So now explain to me exactly what President Bush had to do with this situation. Was it his fault because he didn't drive to Carbondale, load you all up on a bus and take you to your registered voting precincts? Somthing tells me you're shifting blame intead of taking responsibility for your own (in)actions. I just can't put my finger on what. :roll:
Typically I could be labeled a Conservative leaning Libertarian, but I'd
vote either Libertarian or Republican depending on the candidate. Last
presidental election I did not vote Libertarian because Badnarik is bit
nuts and left for my tatses. So I voted for the lesser of the two
evils...Bush. He hasn't really let my vote down yet, but I think he could
be doing better in some areas and get congress on his side more. I'm hoping
we can get A GOOD Conservative president next so we can CONTINUE tax cuts
and start rolling back on plans like welfare and social security (which
obviously the back has been way broken there). Living off the government is
quite possibly the worst aspect of life I can possibly see...and I hope we
can trim these "social contracts".
I want to get a president in there that wont succumb to the gay agenda of marriage, I like how it is now, civil unions. I want a president in there that will continue to not support abortions and not support stem cell research on aborted babies (Stem cell research is fine on anything else). I think our country is going in the RIGHT direction as far as we are socially speaking. One thing Bush has let me down on is getting a balanced budget. I know we are trying to fund the war, but I seriously doubt we SHOULD be in this much debt. I think the economy is doing just fine but isnt really growing nor declining. I guess you could say the economy is still kind of being stagnant from the dot com burst in the late 90's and the attack on 9/11, both which majorly affected the economy negatively.
On a lighter note I wouldnt mind a president who would support the legalization of marijuana, and then tax it EXTREMELY heavily (much like we do Tobacco). I think this could create some serious revenue with all the pot heads we have in the country. This should also seriously cut DOWN the aimless money we spend on the War on Drugs. This would ONLY happen with a Libertarian president though.
Slap a nice 20-25% tax on that and we should see some good revenue.
Most conservatives want them both banded
I can give you the number for my uncle, I know he can more articulately explain why he wants to be able to MARRY his partner! A lawyer he’s been with for over 40 years!
Are you equating homosexuals to animals? Because that’s how this stupid argument comes across every time I hear it! You’ll have to come up with a better reason then these outrageous what ifs to support your argument, they don’t hold ground.
A spiritual thing that’s right! im a very spiritual person doesn’t mean I’m religious. Why is it so important to you? Obviously you a fellow agnostic is hell bent on keeping things the way they are... no room for improvement?
There’s an article ill track down tonight about the origins of marriage... and how in the begging it had nothing to do with religion or love.... and the question really is that in a world where half of all marriages end in divorce is it really an institution worth "saving".
I don't want to talk to your uncle, and I have never compared mos to
animals, although my barber assures me he is one in bed. If you don't
think that we as a species have already started sliding down that slippery
slope of "I'm a minority, I need special rights", you're sadly mistaken.
As a fellow agnostic, I'm smart enough to understand that some things are the way they are for a reason. Marriage is between a man and a woman and that should not change. Sometimes change brings improvement and sometimes it just makes things different. Allowing same sex couples to marry would simply be different. And if marriage is really such a bad deal, why do the mos want in on it anyway?
P.S. Don't bother supplying links for the Lansing Community College Library. I don't have a password.
NO he wasnt equating gays to animals, he was simply stating WHERE do we
stop? 20 years ago nobody would even mention granting Gays the priviledge
of marriage. Today it's a major issue (although doesn't get much support as
we found out from elections, from what I recall most states voted down
giving gays marriage priviledges by a factor of over 2:1, sometimes 3:1).
So, if we granted the priviledge of marriage to gays, what's to say 20
years later somebody says " I should have the right to marry my first
cousin" - what's to stop you from saying they shouldn't be able to do this?
There has to be line drawn somewhere for a Marriage Priviledge and it has
clearly been drawn throughout marriage's existence that the ONLY definition
of Marriage is a holy binding contract between MAN and WOMAN. There is no
changing this, as much as the gay agenda wants to, they never will.
Also, just because Americans are divorce happy doesn't mean we should FURTHER lessen the great contract of Marriage. That's not a good reason at all. Marriage is still special for those other half of Americans and they dont want it further to be tainted and left to be more meaningless.
50 years ago the idea of a black man marrying a white woman wasn’t even
considered now its common practice. Would you like us to return to this
belief structure as well?
200 years ago Edgar Allan Poe married his first cousin a 13 year old. This was common place back then (remember that human life expectancy wasn’t what it is now)... in the time since we as a society have determined that 1. Marriage cant occur between first cousins because of the known birth defects that are associated with such unions, and 2. That a 13 year old is a child and can’t enter into contract.
In 20 years these will still be true, but marriage should be between 2 consenting adult humans... sex shouldn’t matter... love knows no gender boundaries.
Its only lessening to you... to me it can only strengthen it... I mean there are straights who don’t stay together 40 years and I here is a gay couple who have been together for 4 decades... longer then you or I have been alive, hell double my life time... are you saying their love isn’t true? That they shouldn’t be allowed the same privileges as the rest of us? Because that is what your saying.
Marriage by the state is a legal contract between 2 peoples, marriage in a church is a spiritual bond and there is a difference. If you remember a little thing called separation of church and state that our founding fathers painstakingly put into practice so that injustice like this could be avoided, please don’t say “they never intended it this” because you cant know that, hey left it open for a reason. So the state can’t make policy based on religious views, and aside from vwhobo (who is the only agnostic I have ever met that isn’t pro gay marriage) these are greatly religious based... Id like for you to tell me why you feel homosexuality is wrong, but the trick is you’ll have to stay away from anything religious, I want documentation where homosexuality has hurt someone (just being gay not acts that are stereotypical of homosexuals). You cant say I feel either, because that’s not proof and if its not good.
Oh and hobo it isn’t “I'm a minority, I need special rights" its “ I’m a minority, and I disserve the same privileges as you”.
What so your calling my cousin weird? Just because he has a different
preferance than most of us? Watch your mouth pendejo.
And Thermo, please enlighten me, why don't you support gay marriage? Is it because you just don't like gay people? GET A ****ING CLUE YOU IMMATURE PRICK......This has torn my cousin because he has found someone he really loves but can't get married do to THIS ****ING LAW :cussing:
Jesus I'm mad as hell right now, can't people understand that homosexuals love to and are just like everybody else but because they favor the same sex then that makes them not fit into ****ing society.
No they don’t, and they won't.
My uncle says it’s like when you were 5 and you didn’t understand you did something wrong but when every one else got ice-cream but when you asked "can I have some ice cream too?" you were told no because you were bad...
Those of us who understand their plight are the rare middle ground that have to be able to convince the rest that they disserve the same happiness we get to feel.
If I feel in love with a guy I would not be allowed to spend marry him, a symbolic gesture that means as much to an agnostic as it does to a devote catholic but for different reasons... but if I want to marry a woman I’m more then welcome... and the only difference is that I’d be marrying a girl not a guy... so, if my religion doesn’t matter why does the sexual preference of those who are in love?
we will never understand their side either... they have blind hate because their parents, a bible and a church have all conspired to tell them that homosexuality was wrong... its a shame what some of our fellow humans have to go through.
See how messed up that is! Society is just...****ed up
I whole heartedly agree. I know a guy who moved to Spain 5 years ago and he says its great, they are open to peoples sexualities, he’s able to walk down the street of any town and hold his husbands hand and not worry about getting dirty looks, or have someone throw stuff, or spit in their food.
im with you on this one, even though i cant stand most homosexuals. they are human just like the rest of us.
Still he hates when some homosexuals have a lisp and wear wierd ass clothing so you would never know he was gay until you really got to meet him.
Thats good, sometimes I just hate not just the presidents opinion but also societys, cause if they allowed gay marriage, I have a feeling hell would break loose
Well, since you're so tweaked up, I'm not even sure what is directed at me
or where to jump in. I'll just address the two things that I think are for
1. If I'm the only agnostic you know who isn't "pro gay", you need to get out more. As a matter of fact, because you've determined that I'm not "pro gay" that must mean that I'm "anti gay". And if you think about it, BOTH of those terms are ridiculous. I'm quite sure that during the course of my life I've know, been friends with and even lived with more homosexuals then you've ever come across. I really didn't and don't care about their sexual preference, and in the end, isn't that the true meaning of equality? Note. If people are so proud to be homosexual, they need to call themselves what they are, homosexuals. Why the need to hide behind names like gay? Something to hide?
2. Okay, and being bound by a civil union will give them all the same rights as a married couple. If you can Mr Constitutional Scholar, please show me where anyone in the US is gauranteed the right to marriage. I don't recall seeing it either.
Final note. If you want to be taken seriously, which I'm trying to do, you need to lose the bomb throwers that say things like "President Bush kept me from voting". Unfortunately we have them on both sides of the aisle, and it lower credibility for both of us.
When you say things like that you show just how ignorant you are. There is
no blind hate. There isn't even cloudy dislike. It has nothing at all to
do with homosexuals as people. It has everything to do with the sanctity
of the institution of marriage. You are also a bomb thrower.
Isn't it ironic that the people who pretend to be the most open minded (liberals) are the ones least likely to have an open mind to someone elses viewpoint? You're so closed minded that you have to fabricate lies to support your stance. Pathetic.
Strange world isn't it. Underneath the veneer of tolerance a vast majority
of normally programmed people are appalled at the practices of queers. From
birth we are taught not to play with shit, but not only do homosexuals
play with it they go looking for it. They even injest the stuff!
I made sure my teenage children gave thought to the actual practices of sodomites, rather than picturing them as people with clothes just like normal people, but with a different lifestyle choices.
I made sure they thought about the consequences of disease, not just venereal and autoimmune, but the coliforms transferred through handshakes, door knobs, telephones, kiss on the cheek etc... How the entertainment industry is used to promote anal sex, how TV and film is used as a means to trivialise the behaviour through supposed comedy shows with lisping stooges, how the legal system is infiltrated, how the legislators are intimidated and how our "Christian" based societies choose to ignore the bible on this issue.
So next time you turn on Will and Grace and let out a little laugh on cue with the canned laughter machine, think about whether you are laughing at the intellectual humour or whether your primal instincts are forcing an hysterical reaction.
I never said you were anti gay rights, I said you weren’t pro gay
marriage; I have no idea on your stance for the rest.
But yes you are the only agnostic I know who isn’t pro gay marriage... tho I do know a gay person who is isn’t pro gay marriage (he’s that goth guy I told you about in another thread).
I don’t actually know why gay went from being happy to being homosexual... perhaps an insult that was turned around and embraced by the gay community... or perhaps its as simple as its shorter then homosexual.
I’m not a Scholar by any stretch of the imagination but I know that policy and laws cant be based on religious beliefs.
Also you look back I’ve been very careful never to say its a right... I always say privilege... and in this country there are lots of privileges that are given to certain people and not other and I’ve never thought this was fair... for one example drinking, in Europe a 10 year old can drink wine with dinner but in America this is against the law, but they also have a much lower teen drinking rate because its not the forbidden fruit that it is here but that’s not the subject at hand.
Crap class starts in 3 min, we can continue our adult discussion when I return.
So he hates queers who look and act like stereotypical queers. Sounds like a bit of discrimination to me. Do you see the irony in that? He dislikes them because they're different from him, the same reason I'm being accused of not liking queers. Except that I don't hate them. One of my best friends is a big old flaming mo that you can spot from 100 yards. He's proud to look and act the way he does, and I'm proud he's my friend.
This is a ****ing out right god damn lie! Do not make stuff up! Go away
from this thread right now, you have no place here if you are going to make
stuff like this up... the rest of your statement here or any that would
follow no longer have any value to me or any other rational thinking
person! Good day to you sir!
Read what this guy said and tell me that again with a straight face.
Great now I have to go to class on a bad note... my art will suffer. :banghead:
I have a friend thats one of my best friends that is really flaming, but my cousin just doesn't like the whole lisp thing, I guess he still is somewhat ashamed of it because when he came out he thought no one would like him because of how different he was.
Truth hurts doesn't it. Maybe you should look up big words like felching. Maybe, like I did you should attend a conference on the subject and see how long you last in your chair listening to what they get up to.
It's been a long time since I met someone else who knew what felching was. Somehow, I thought you would you old felcher you. :hi:
:mrgreen: I'm sure it gives tooth decay, because I've got a mouthful of fillings:heh:
I always thought you had a shit eatin' grin. :laughing:
Damvnit I just realised when my friends told me I was shitfaced, it wasn't being drunk they were referring to.:mrgreen:
There is just no point in debating with you, you totally misconstrue what I say, totally dont know what you're talking about, and backpeddal. I'm done, hobo can deal with you.
Oh no you don't. You got him wound up, it's your job to bring him down. He still hasn't read Wally's rant about felching. That should be good for some laughs.
Well then I guess your Uncle Tristan will never know the delights
You've said basically everything that needs to be said...
People like you and I DO NOT hate homosexuals we have gay friends, we are merely backing the historical definition and sanctity of Marriage. There is no reason to change it. It's like saying pots should be belong in the definition of pans.
I cant believe he says stuff like this...
Then I say this...
"Also, just because Americans are divorce happy doesn't mean we should FURTHER lessen the great contract of Marriage. That's not a good reason at all. Marriage is still special for those other half of Americans and they dont want it further to be tainted and left to be more meaningless."
I mean, he says one thing, than completely refutes his own point!
How you argue with someone who is already putting down their own points.
And also, If I'm the only person that it's lessening too, what about the other 75% of americans who voted "no" to gay marriage? What's their reason?
They are in denial
You don't have to convince me big fella, we're on the same side. Here's
something that I just thought of. Why is it that none of the great "pro
gay" minds ever complain when some Twink gets pissed off on the forum and
starts calling people, "gay", "faggot", "homo", etc? Where is the moral
outrage that should accompany those who are "pro gay"? Unless their agenda
is more appearance and politically driven than being truly concerned.
BTW, I fully support National Faggot Week (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2698507.stm). I like mine rare.
I am a republican, but I cannot vote. Before you say "omfg he is a rep
because hes from Texas," I'd like to point out that both of my sisters are
I simply think that the economic idea of cutting taxes to pump that money back into the economy is a good idea. Also, the fact is that something like the top 10% (based on income) of the Upper Class of the United States pay like 75% of the taxes. Why not give them a bit of a break? I cannot remember where I heard this, or the exact numbers, but it was very similar to this.
I believe that if homosexuals wish to be joined with their lover that is fine, but in a civil union only. I just think that "marriage" is a religious thing, and from what I have seen in my religion and my interpretation of it, that God did not plan or endorse same-sex unions, and it is one of the sacred aspects of my religion. I also think that homosexuals want to be able to go through the idea of "marriage" simply to make a point to the world.
I am glad it was banned in Texas, but once again I cannot vote and this is only my opinion. This thread is useless, it can solve nothing. We will just keep argueing until someone locks this because we all flamed the shit out of each other.
But where do you stand on National Faggot Week?
Actually the top 50% of income earners in the United States pay 96% of the nations income taxes...Bottom 50%? you do the math.
Ahh, thats it. I couldnt remember the figures. Thanks tbird. :thumbs:
Lol, National Faggot Week. Cliffy, what is a faggot? :screwy:
:lol: The Poms are a tough lot, they'll eat faggots for breakfast.
The idea is that if a poor family had to pay an extra $1000 in taxes it
might mean less food on the table for the kids. The $ has to come from
somewhere, and although it may not be fair to the rich folks, they can
Yes, that is pretty much the definition of weird. If a guy prefferd to put ham on his ice cream would you call that weird?
You're right, they left it open for a reason. It was so that the states could interpret it for themselves. The Seperation of Church and State is not as simple as it sounds. The two will ALWAYS intertwine. The idea is that nobody gets persecuted simply because of their religous beliefs. The state isn't persecuting anybody, and if they were, in this case they wouldn't be singling out any religon.
Personally I say if gays want to get married, and the church wants to marry them, then let them be. In spite of this however, I don't find it unconstitutional. This to me is at the state's discretion, as somebody mentioned earlier, marriage is a privelage, not a right.
I also fully support National Faggot Week. Those juicy faggots taste great, especially with a nice pair of buns.
The majority of the taxbreaks go to the wealthy. Are you saying that they
dont pay taxes to feed their family, or are you saying that the idea of a
tax break is to help the poor feed their family? The idea of the tax break
is to put more money in the pockets of those that spend the most (rich) so
they buy more shit, thereby boosting the economy. In theory some of this
money will go to the poor.
I think I dont understand what you are saying, so I cannot fully discuss what you said directly.
This link might help to clarify the current discussion.
It's a few years old but the info is still reasonably accurate. I for one teeter on the line of the top 10-20% income earners (current numbers, not the old ones). I can assure you that it doesn't seem as though I get any tax breaks. As a matter of fact, out tax burden is equal to the income of people in the middle 20%. I hope somebody is enjoying our money, we're not.
As a side note, in the last 15 minutes I just bought a nice '88 Conquest TSI and a Javelin bass boat. I wonder what the old lady is gonna call me when she gets home.
You seemed to be questioning why the rich people pay so much of the taxes in this country. I simply answered that a certain amount of taxes have to be collected, and the poor can't afford to give a lot, so that burden is placed on the rich.
Oh, no. Thats not really what I was saying. I was simply justifying. :thumbs:
I've heard this plenty of times before, and am not questioning it validity, but wouldn't poor people be more likely to spend money from a tax break? I honestly don't see people living in a trailer home hoarding their $. Heck, they might need even less financial help from the government.
Here's something that you really need to think about. My wife and I pay a
substantial amount of our yearly earnings as taxes. There are many people
already that pay zero taxes and many more that actually get refunded more
than they paid in. How much of a break should people get? Why are people
getting paid to stay at home and procreate, drink and watch TV instead of
making a contribution to society?
What you're advocating is wealth re-distribution. Shouldn't everyone have the same responsibility for the financial well being of this country? I don't mind paying my share, but I don't like paying for other people. How would you feel if you went out for supper and when you left you found out you had to pay for the table next to you because you make more money? I think yopu'll agree the word for that is bullsh*t.
I learned a long time ago that Wally writes about roughly three or four
drafts before he actually posts something. You have to read into what he
says, instead of just reading what he says.
This is the problem with online arguments/convos. People think that they're talking to someone else, instead of writing out thoughtful, edited, metaphorical mini-essays. And because of this, people talk back, instead of writing back.
Oh, and firebird: Calm down a bit. By talking when you're infuriated/frustrated/emotional, you're only going to dig yourself a deeper hole. Calm down, collect yourself, and write.
Based on those figures I would be in the top 5%. As a reward I have 51% ripped out of my pay for income tax and compulsary healthcare levies. I haven't bought a Conquest or a boat though. I think I'm being pinged for being an homophobe.
For an eighteen yearold you are very observant. The trick is to assess the enemy and think three steps in front of any direction he would logically take. In this particular thread whiley VWhobo spotted my intent. If you can keep up at your age, you have a promising future.
I was just wondering why it makes more sense financially to give tax breaks
to the wealthy instead of the poor. I always heard that the rich will
spend more of it, but I don't see how a rich person is more likely to spend
a $1,000 tax break than a poor person. It seems to me that that $1,000
could end up just sitting in a rich person's checking account, and I'm
pretty sure that wouldn't happen if it were given to a poor person.
I agree 100% with you about all of the jobless low-lifes popping out kids while living off of welfare. I work pretty hard for the little $ I make, and I see chunks of it taken away, and I know that some of it is going to somebody that is a parasite to society. As I said earlier:
Very simply it makes more sense financially because if I get to keep an additional 5% of my income to spend, that's alot more than an additional 5% for someone who makes $20k a year. Plus, geenerally speaking, weathier people are more likely to invest their money (wealth expansion), use it for major purchases (think manufacturing jobs) or having something done for them (think of construction or service industry). An extra $100 in my pocket gets spread out to many people, including those with low incomes that need help.
That post was pure and unadulterated hate pure and simple.
I will not respond any more to this thread any one who will agree with someone who says such things will never earn my respect nor will I listen to them on the subject at hand.
It was not cool for him to say it, and I for one will not forgive it or tolerate it... the fact that no one else is appalled by those statements is sickening to me. If I were a mod he’d be banned.
Did you even read this part???
Doesn't sound like hate to me. Sounds more like truth.
Why are you appalled? Whether you like it or not, whether you find it
distasteful or not, IT IS THE TRUTH. It happens, and it is primarily a
homosexual activity. Sometime the truth hurts, I guess you'll just have to
suck it up. No pun intended.
I'm a left-leaning centrist. I usually go on the liberal side but I can see the values of both sides.
You actually attended a conference on sucking semen out of a ass?
I had to do some real digging (no pun intended) to find the meaning of this word... i just asked my buddy (another gay man) if he knew what the word meant he’d never heard it.
You implying that homosexuals are deviants is just another in the long line of ignorant statements you’ve made, and why I’m done in this thread… not because you’ve won but because you have no room in your mind for fact… because if this is your view I don’t even want to associate with you even on this level. You make me sick.
Just because its a stereotype doesnt make it true for all... "Not every thing in the world is black and white not every body is a stereo type."
You have previously and are currently displaying that YOU are the one who doesn't have room in your mind for facts. Not only that, YOU'RE entirely intolerant of other peoples opinions. Why is it that the only person in this thread who has called for anyone to be banned is the self proclaimed liberal thinker? Because you're really just another left wing loony who doesn't want to hear the truth and wants opposing viewpoints censored. Shocking.
NO, I want hate speech banned... sorry but I see that as hate speech
whether or not its true. Freedom of speech only extends until it impedes on
You know there a stereotype that all black people like gold plated teeth... but in reality its only a few rich extravagant people who like it... but that’s what made the stereotype, not a single of my black friends think its cool.
And trying to pass this fetish off as a normal act for all homosexuals and thus a reason for teaching your kids not to like them or hoping to convince others not to... well that’s hate! plain and simple.
I’m more then happy to hear other ideas, I was honestly entertaining YOUR opinions and I was seriously considering them... then this guy comes in and says what he did and you just go along with him, and thus losing the ground with me you had gained.
I read your links I know what you know about it, and I also know that there’s no way something like that could possibly be a main stream thing for any group of people. But that’s what you were implying, and that my friend is false.
Now if you want to admit that there’s no way this is a normal act for most gay men, then we can continue the free exchange of ideas we were enjoying earlier, if not well then we know who’s who don’t we?
Gee, because I stated it was a primarily homosexual activity so I'm
implying that all homosexuals do it? You simply are interested in no view
other than your own, and will use any excuse to justify that. And once
again you are attempting to justify censorship, now by calling it hate
speech. Hate speech is nothing more than a code phrase for speech that
someone doesn't like or doesn't agree with. I spent 23 years in this great
nation's military to ensure people like you the right to speak freely, and
no matter that many of your ideas are repulsive to my sensibilities, I give
you the opportunity to express them. I would expect you to do the same for
others, if you truly believe in the free exchange of ideas.
EDIT: You may have read the links, but that doesn't mean you know what I know about it. As I have said before, I have had MANY queer friends and some of them were felchers. It made no difference in how I treated them but I always made sure they brushed their teeth before coming over to my place.
I must say that for someone who is actively promoting the homosexual
lifestyle, you are suprisingly ignorant of the activities and names
ascribed to to it.
Yes I attend many conferences, so that I gain knowledge. I've watched executions on TV, but I don't agree with the practice, I socialise with people who have different political opinions, but they are still my closest friends. I have had Muslim friends over for Christmas lunches, last Christmas I had a Hindu family fresh from India in for lunch too.
I suggest next time you visit your Uncle you know longer assume an antiseptic relationship with his boyfriend and ask him just what goes on. I can guarantee that rather than the best mates image you have of the pair, the truth will scar you.
For me, well yes I have a responsibility to tell my children the truth. Not only about homosexuality, but about hetrosexual dangers as well. Should I not make my daughter acutely aware of the risks associated with anal sex..... the resulting infections that could take her life. Should I not make my son aware of the damage to his physical and social well being resulting from playing with septic parts of the body?
Maybe when you have that little bundle of joy laying in your arms you will be less impetuous in your resolve to conceal the truth from him/her for fear of loosing them to disease or suicide.
Maybe you need to see the quote one more time...
I hope your not suggestion that gay men don't have anal or oral sex. And I seriously hope you know that there are risks involved with doing such activities. you keep focusing on felching. Yet you haven't brought up the FACT that anal sex is very dangerous as far as diseases go.
Yeah, but... Any way you look at it, anal sex is for assholes. :wink2:
I thought you were done with this thread... And you need to calm down and start thinking.
Maybe we should all use words beyond Pontiac's lexicon, and hopefully, he'll just start flaming everyone's who on the inside of this joke:laughing: .
Wally, you target one demographic, but use a stratagem that only works on another. I'm trying to figure out if this is what you want, or if this is part of some ingenious plan to bemuse us younglings into doing some delving for erudition:mrgreen: . I think I see a homogeneity between your and Hobo's tactics. The only idiosyncrasy is that one makes his goal ostensible, while the other adumbrates it for the cognizant to read and giggle at.:wink2:
gah, dont catch that one...
Yes I agree I do need to calm down...
Your right him and hobos only real goal is to upset me and make me talk in an irrational way, then when they use their circular logic that for them is much easier to follow they can get a laugh at my expense, and hope that it’ll make them the cool guys on Car forums.
Means extensive learning.
Bzzzzt. Wrong answer.
I'm giggling right now:mrgreen:
you don't have to flatter yourself.
when you start an argument, and people try to prove said argument to be incorrect, you cannot hide behind "they're just trying to get me upset and have a laugh at my expense"
i read "wally, your target is one group of people, but you are using tactics to target another. Is that what you are trying to do, or are you trying to trick the youngings to go dig up (damn you eurdition!!! DAMN YOU). i see the similarity between yours and hobos tactics. The only difference i can see is one of you makes thier goal (hard to read, find? not sure) while the other makes it funny for the rest of the congregation to laugh at.
I'm giggling my ass off:laughing:
your so not cool
Sure I am, just among the cognizant crowd:laughing: .
Not quite, I think you would be suprised at how perfunctory I have been.
Right now I can sense an ambivalence creeping into your writings. Remember
clarity of mind requires non cloistered thinking.
Godlaus you seem to have swallowed a dictionary. :wink2:
Newsflash. You've been irrational since your very first post in this thread, BEFORE you and I had any words. Once again, the lib is not taking resposibility for his actions. It must be terrible going through life being a victim.
ok, maybe cognizant = book learned? very intelectual?
i am way to lazy to go look it up, keep using it in a sentance, ill get it
I think this thread is useless. I suggest that we close it because nothing will be solved and it will just continue on as a giant flame war. No one's mind will change about politics because of a thread on a forum, especially a forum thats about cars.
dammit... i hate you
So then you are in favor of censorship. Is non-participation a possible solution for you or do you feel the only resolution is to disallow others their right to an open forum?
Everyone can say what they want, but this thread isnt going to solve
anything. It is yet another example of how CF is more about flaming people
than helping people. A good clean debate on the issues is one thing (a
good, healthy thing), but when it just turns out to be one member pitted
against the rest in a brawl in which people's family members are used it is
another. If threads and arguements like this continue, CF isnt going to end
up being very helpful and everyone will be pissed at everyone else.
We arent discussing the issues about politics, but rather talking about whether or not we think homosexuality is ok and talking about how homosexuals interact with each other--far from the basic question of what political party we best associate ourselves with.
This forum is open, and people can speak their mind here freely, but the current discussion of homosexuality has nothing to do with the issues. The issue is about the ban on gay marriage, not about thier sexual tendencies. But feel free to continue on, I am not stopping you all.
In this instance I disagree. I'm certainly not offended by Fiero's tirades.
I also think that the reaction to something I have written evokes such
emotion it must be relevent and should be investigated further. If people
didn't modify or change their minds, you would still be dressing like a
puritan and watching burnings at the stake Salem style, with a Union Jack
flying on the staff pole.
Fiero has a view that precludes any others. He thinks that because his friends and relatives supposedly lead a particular homosexual lifestyle, it represents the majority of homosexuals. The thought of felching actually repulses him (to the point of calling me a liar without even a knowledge of the act), but has he paused to think how many homosexuals have condemned the practice in public.....the answer would be zip because it would repulse mainstream Americans who have been served up a beige image of gay men. Truth is there are even more fantastic activities these people get up to, that if allowed to be brought to the attention of the public, would result in some failry wideranging outcry for devolutionary change.
1. I don't think that anyone at any time thought that this thread would
solve anything. To do so would be ridiculous.
2. I'm not sure when anyone's family member was used, except as examples by the people who they are family members of. If they didn't want them to be part of the discusion, they shouldn't have mentioned them. Notice that my wife and son never came up. Know why? Because I didn't bring them up.
3. One member is not pitted against the rest, unless he puts himself in that position. More to the point, he's the one who brought homosexuality into the discussion. So who is responsible for his situation?
4. You seem to be confused on the issue. The individual that started the thread was asking about political affiliation. It wasn't until that same individual you are now defending began his far left diatribe (post 4) that it degenerated to where it's at now. Maybe the rest of us should be calling for a ban on him.
5. So are you for censorship or not? It still seems to me that you are.
I guess that for the most part you are correct hobo, I am just tired of CF
being solid flame wars. It used to be more than that. I have no want to
argue with you, and one of the last times I did it ended with my
As to #5, what are we talking about being censored? The fact that homosexuals exist? I am lost on this point (dont really know what you are asking), thats why I didnt answer it before. If you are asking if I want the forum to be censored, then no, I dont. I simply want some of the flame wars to stop especially on matters that will not solve anything in real life if one of the parties involved does change his/ her mind.
On #2, several people, including yourself, have used other people's family members, after the member of CF first commented on that family member's actions/ orientation, as examples. For example Wally stated that Fiero should ask his uncle about his relationship with his lover to find that they arent buddy-buddy but do things that would scar him.
Ahh, Flame wars. I love 'em. OK so where do I begin....I guess im
politically conservative to a point. For example I would consider myself
somewhat of a Darwinist and I am naturally opposed to any war without any
real financial benefit to the U.S. Im not a Republican but I'm certainly
Ok this is where im going to get controversial:
I think those who make more money and pay more taxes should naturally get more money back from the government not only because its fair but also because they're more likely to boost the economy by investing back in it. Im pro immigration, anti abbortion, and just apethetic towards homo marriages. Ok so there you go.. I look forward to more conversation and some intersting automotive discussions. I am kinda saying hello here. Uhh lets see. I am a prominent member at Germancarzone (signature) and enjoy talking about cars!
Yes, you might want to remove the link from your signature, it's against forum rules. Otherwise, welcome.
FYI, ads are a bannable offense at CF, I suggest removing that link from your sig. :thumbs:
I don't think he's coming back :laughing::doh:
Crap I didn't want this to turn into a flame thread. I was just wondering
if people were Republicans, Democrats, or a some of each. :banghead:
Okay, but when are you going to answer the questions posed to you at the beginning of the thread?
I have religious beliefs that I guess would make be a Repulican in most areas. :wink2:
Okay, you're tap dancing now. Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and people of every other political affiliation have some sort of religious beliefs. Would you like to answer to questions, or can we assume that you're just calling yourself Republican for no apparent reason and probably don't know why yourself?
Perhaps his church bangs Bush's drum, so he just listens to that all day. :2cents:
Well maybe we should give him a farewell (http://www.melaman2.com/cartoons/looney/themes/merry_melodies_end.mp3)
:laughing: That brought back some memories.
Uh I already said why I'm Republican. :doh:
And I know why I'm Republican. :wink2:
this thread is so crazy and I like missed all of it.... Republican vs
democrat some weird homosexual discussion in which I think for straight
males everyone demonstrated to much knowledge on the subject.
Im a Independant small I I don't pick sides.
But thwn it comes to politics remember it take a left and right wing for the bird to fly.
Uh, no, you said you have religious beliefs. I want to know what it is that draws you to the GOP and their poilicies. Like it or not, I'm trying to make you think.