So does anyone smoke cloves?Follow

My point was that going to either extreme is unreasonable. So we have to weigh the benefits and future ramifications of a specific restriction. A restriction on freedom is, in the end, a restriction on freedom; it doesn't matter who is restricting you. It is an unfortunate result of democratic government that we don't always get what we want.

As long as a congressman can put a good "for the children" spin on something, they're essentially given carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want, anyway.
It's just something I find amusing. Lighten up a little!

gbaji, you are trying really really hard to make this some kind of onesupmanship over the liberals. Is this because Jophiel has emasculated you?

Have you stopped beating your wife?

She can't have a wife to beat, *******

****



Religion influences politics, and basically every person I know who takes their christianity seriously is a republican as a consequence.

Does this mean that the party is entirely religious dogmatism? No. It does mean though, that it happens, and I suspect, not that I'm sure, but I suspect the reason you might minimize that aspect of the party is your geographic bias.

And vice versa.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2009 11:22pm by Pensive

What's ironic about fundie Christian Republicans is that Jesus was a hippie.

Love each other, man. Peace out.

Wouldn't doing drugs while you're pregnant indicate that there's a decent chance that either you are in fact an idiot or didn't know about the pregnancy?

I could honestly give less of a **** about kreteks.

As I said, it's gotten better in the last few years for reasons I don't know. There was a time though, when yes, that was the case. People preach at parks and street-corners. If you walk by them, they will often call you out, with either a description of you or a gesture towards you. If you bother to discuss anything with them, well then you're just asking for it.



Dressing provocatively, I suppose. Maybe I just shouldn't be walking those street corners in the broad light of day.

See, I'm not convinced that you have even the slightest clue what a "fundie" is, or can be. I think that you've been so sheltered by your relative location when growing up that you'll consider anyone who actually takes religion seriously in their lives a fundie, because you have never seen, and apparently can't even consider, the extremes it can be taken to. I didn't expect you to say "yes" when I asked if you could walk downtown without being accosted by a doomsayer. I didn't actually expect that question to fly, and I was going to appeal to your sense of memory, trying to get you to remember something that you may have just forgotten about a demographic within your party.

But apparently you're actually truly and earnestly ignorant to it, and while there is nothing wrong with that in principle, you don't seem very keen on learning either.



This is not my judgment you idiot. Let me remind you of how much this is not my judgment, nor my point: "Does this mean that the party is entirely religious dogmatism? No." Rephrased: Is it the case that militant, religious dogmatism influences the republican party at large? Probably to only a small extent. My judgment is that you are ignorant of certain facets of your own party, and thus should shut the **** up about what you think it means to be a Liberal when you are talking to someone who is trying to educate you on what it means to be a Liberal, because whenever you do something like that, you are being approximately as stupid as I would be if I could abstract that all republicans were bible toting *****, from my personal anecdotes, because I'm not. Is that clear yet? Do you realize that the purpose for talking to you about militant bible thumpers is not to say that all republicans are like that?

I don't have any idea why you would begin to think that, if I mention an anecdote or personal experience, that I would try to apply that to a categorical judgment of principle. The only reason I could think of is if you just totally don't realize how different types of evidence are applicable to different types of points.



Yes, you see the reason I ignored this fraudulent, simplistic, biased, and extremely childish characterization of methodology is mainly because it is fraudulent, simplistic, biased, and extremely childish. It's also false.

That you believe that there are no conservatives who would not use simply free speech to express or fight for their goals is more naive and self-delusional than when I start going on about universal compassion for prisoners, or the reduction of practical application and employment in education. Are you six years old? Can you please stop being a stupid child? It's kind of empathically embarrassing to see a grown man delude himself through so many totally illegitimate lines in the sand.

This is what gbaji gets for not being a southerner--you just don't think someone can earnestly ask whether or not you are a devil-worshipper until you see it. Christ, there were some ignorant @#%^s who accused a younger, more Catholic Sweetums of not being a Christian.


Edited, Sep 25th 2009 3:05am by Sweetums

I'm starting to think Gbaji really does live in a ******* bubble. A bubble of ********* surrounded by his peers.

Well, no. Religious conservatives do want to force everyone to live that way and are delighted to use government to get it. Hence their pushes to make abortion illegal, disallow same sex marriage, etc etc. Or other conservative pushes such as making English the national language, forcing anyone who lives here to learn English in order to use any government forms, the court system, etc regardless of valid citizenship/status.

Even if you agree with these agendas, there's no arguing that they're attempts to force their beliefs on the entire nation.