Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
Author Message
Know Nothing Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 344
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Big East
Location: Illinois
Post: #21
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 12:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:14 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 11:08 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Abortion is too controversial to even be a part of a platform. I agree with the Republican Liberty Caucus which states that in its platform, and denotes that proper beginning point is to turn it over to the states.

The only way to turn it over to the states is to overturn Roe V Wade. Congratulations, you just made abortion a part of your platform. More accurately your first sentence should actually read:

"Abortion is too controversial to not have it be a part of the platform."

It's a polarizing issue that the American people won't ignore. There is no way for politicians to avoid taking a stance.

The more controversial the issue is the more local the solution should be. That's the heart and soul of federalism. And I love how you social cons are against the projection of force in economics ... but when it comes to how people live their life outside of money you're all too happy to use government force to mandate how they need to live. Philosophically, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a fiscal liberal and a social conservative.

When it comes to upholding the rights to life, liberty, and property(in that order of importance) then absolutely I am in favor of government interference, at a local level if possible but at the federal level if necessary. After all had it not been by government force, then the institution of slavery would still exist in the South.

And philosophically there is a major difference between social conservatives and fiscal liberals. Social cons want to use government to protect people's rights(again life, liberty, and property), where as fiscal liberals want to use the force of government to destroy them through the re-distribution of wealth and social engineering. I think your libertarian fanaticism may have blinded you to this.
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2010 12:50 PM by Know Nothing.)
05-07-2010 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,436
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2022
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #22
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 12:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Philosophically, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a fiscal liberal and a social conservative.

This one's easy:
You are 100% wrong.

(05-07-2010 12:48 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:14 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 11:08 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Abortion is too controversial to even be a part of a platform. I agree with the Republican Liberty Caucus which states that in its platform, and denotes that proper beginning point is to turn it over to the states.

The only way to turn it over to the states is to overturn Roe V Wade. Congratulations, you just made abortion a part of your platform. More accurately your first sentence should actually read:

"Abortion is too controversial to not have it be a part of the platform."

It's a polarizing issue that the American people won't ignore. There is no way for politicians to avoid taking a stance.

The more controversial the issue is the more local the solution should be. That's the heart and soul of federalism. And I love how you social cons are against the projection of force in economics ... but when it comes to how people live their life outside of money you're all too happy to use government force to mandate how they need to live. Philosophically, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a fiscal liberal and a social conservative.

When it comes to upholding the rights to life, liberty, and property(in that order of importance) then absolutely I am in favor of government interference, at a local level if possible but at the federal level if necessary. After all had it not been by government force, then the institution of slavery would still exist in the South.

And philosophically there is a major difference between social conservatives and fiscal liberals. Social cons want to use government to protect people's rights(again life, liberty, and property), where as fiscal liberals want to use the force of government to destroy them through the re-distribution of wealth and social engineering. I think your libertarian fanaticism may have blinded you to this.

So let's peel back the muddy waters and dig deeper, instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage?
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage?
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana?
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause?
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school?
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school?
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs?
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research?
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States?
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries?
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal?

I'm looking forward to your answers on issues where your desire to project government force to support your beliefs will be a little more obvious.
05-07-2010 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
THE NC Herd Fan Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,168
Joined: Oct 2003
Reputation: 521
I Root For: Marshall
Location: Charlotte
Post: #23
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
SO LIBS tickle me they "ACT" all tolerant for every group but Christians and the judge Christians much more harshly than militant gay groups or militant dope head groups etc.

When you READ the story and the beginning of the thread the man in question is a founding member NOT an actual appointed leader of the Christian group. It is no different than a charter member of the NRA going CRAZY and mowing down a group of people with an AK-47 the listening to SO LIBS drone on about the NRA being a evil organization.

Da gubment has NO business defining marriage PERIOD! Marriage was a religious institution long before there was a US gubment. Marriage became a means to bestow certain defined gubmental rights. If anything that link should be separated and those rights defined in a legal setting not a religious one.

SO LIBS don't see a problem with militant gays wanting to force the gay marriage issue which will ultimately force gay values on churches. What a double standard.
05-07-2010 04:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Know Nothing Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 344
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Big East
Location: Illinois
Post: #24
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
So let's peel back the muddy waters and dig deeper, instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage?


I do not support any Government involvement in the institution of marriage, the liberalizing of divorce laws in the 1980's(no fault divorce) has nearly destroyed marriage in this country and the recognition of gay "marriage" would only make matters worse. The only marriages that are valid in my opinion are those recognized by the Catholic Church. The state trying to force me to recognize anything beyond that is a violation of religious freedoms.


2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage?


Same as above.

3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana?

No.

4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause?

Absolutely not.

5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school?

I support the abolition of public schools and the money used to support them going to directly to the parents in the form of vouchers to be spent on education in however the parents see fit. Public schools were created in the 19th century for the expressed purpose of wiping out Catholicism. The Church has always opposed them and will continue to do so.

6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school?

See above and this becomes a non-issue. Catholic schools already have daily prayer time.

7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs?

More liberal social engineering programs. No.

8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research?


On embryonic Stem Cell research? Absolutely. No government or anyone else has the right to pick and choose some human lives as more valuable than others. Government exists to protect life, not destroy it.

9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States?

No, this being a Christian nation is a historical fact. But if you tried to legislate it as such it leads to the tricky problem of "whose form of Christianity is the official one?" The founding father knew this and that is the reason for the establishment clause.

10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries?


See my earlier thoughts on public education and this also becomes a moot point.


11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal?


I have no interest in or need for prostitutes, so I could care less if it is legal or not.
05-07-2010 04:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,436
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2022
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #25
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
Congrats -- this makes you bare minimum a social moderate. I'm far more interested however in Torch's response, as he's been a fairly vocal social con over the years. You're relatively new to these parts.
05-07-2010 06:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #26
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 12:48 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  After all had it not been by government force, then the institution of slavery would still exist in the South.

You don't really believe that, do you?
05-07-2010 08:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul M Offline
American-American
*

Posts: 21,196
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 649
I Root For: OU
Location: Next to Boomer
Post: #27
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 10:40 AM)RobertN Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 09:53 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 09:37 AM)BGSUalum1987 Wrote:  I don't get politicians who make their core issues things like homosexuality and abortion and such. Just an example of government over-reaching its boundaries, IMO.

Abortion over-reaching? Hmm, protecting the life of citizens, somehow that always struck me as the MAIN purpose of gov't.
It is between them and their God. It is NONE of your business Jesus man. Comprende?

Works for me. We can save a lot of money doing away with courts, lawyers, police forces. If your going to leave murder up to God's judgment, can't see any reason to not leave all the lesser crimes to Him.

Someone wants to pop a cap in your butt, NONE of mine, or Torch's, business. That's between your jealous gay lover and Allah.
05-07-2010 08:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
smn1256 Offline
I miss Tripster
*

Posts: 28,878
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Lower taxes
Location: North Mexico
Post: #28
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 08:24 AM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  Some have suggested that the most homophobic are in fact hiding internal homosexual tendencies themselves, and their anger is a way of desperately trying to 'deny' themselves. When you read cases like this, you gotta wonder if there is something to that.

Doubt it, that's the same logic used by the people who accuse the Tea Party of all being racists simply because one or two of them are.
05-07-2010 08:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Paul of Troy Offline
The Man Who Watches
*

Posts: 2,483
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 223
I Root For: Tennessee, Troy
Location: Dothan, AL
Post: #29
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
So let's peel back the muddy waters and dig deeper, instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? No
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? No
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? No
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? Yes
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? No
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? No
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? No
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? No
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries? No
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal?

This is a tough one for me. I believe that a person should be able to do with their own body as they please, however, the major problems with illegal prostitution are very serious. (Disease, rape, violence, etc...) If legalizing prostitution involved setting up institutions like the Cathouse on HBO, where these girls are in a safe environment and prospective clients are checked for disease, then I could support a legalization of prostitution. Only in that instance though.

I'm looking forward to your answers on issues where your desire to project government force to support your beliefs will be a little more obvious.
[/quote]

I'm interested to see what label you give me GTS...if you are willing.
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2010 08:49 PM by Paul of Troy.)
05-07-2010 08:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
smn1256 Offline
I miss Tripster
*

Posts: 28,878
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 337
I Root For: Lower taxes
Location: North Mexico
Post: #30
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? Yes
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? Yes
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? Yes

4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? No
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? No
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? No
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? F'ck No
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? No
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries? No
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal? as long as it's not in my backyard
05-07-2010 08:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,436
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2022
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #31
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 08:30 PM)Paul of Troy Wrote:  So let's peel back the muddy waters and dig deeper, instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? No
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? No
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? No
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? Yes
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? No
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? No
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? No
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? No
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries? No
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal?

This is a tough one for me. I believe that a person should be able to do with their own body as they please, however, the major problems with illegal prostitution are very serious. (Disease, rape, violence, etc...) If legalizing prostitution involved setting up institutions like the Cathouse on HBO, where these girls are in a safe environment and prospective clients are checked for disease, then I could support a legalization of prostitution. Only in that instance though.

I'm looking forward to your answers on issues where your desire to project government force to support your beliefs will be a little more obvious.

Social liberal. You think what a person does in their private life is nobody else's business. Fiscally is more troubling. Your yes to those taxes is an approval of government redistribution of wealth from one arbitrary group to another. And when I say legalization of prostitution, think Nevada. It is regulated. The workers are tested for diseases. And the owners do provide security services.
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2010 09:56 PM by georgia_tech_swagger.)
05-07-2010 09:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,436
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2022
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #32
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 08:42 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? Yes
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? Yes
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? Yes

4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? No
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? No
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? No
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? F'ck No
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? No
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries? No
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal? as long as it's not in my backyard

Moderately social conservative. You support the projection of force by the government to enforce lifestyle choices you agree with -- in certain instances.
05-07-2010 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,813
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #33
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
I laugh at the few "Social Conservatives" I have to deal with.

IMO their "bad press" as well as the fiscal insanity of the Republican Congressional Leadership from 2002-2006 paved the way for Obama.

The prevailing attitude at CPAC the past couple of years is for the "anti gay marriage/anti-abortion/'traditional family values'" bunch to STHU, go back to their corner, and stay out of the way of Fiscal Conservatives who have the issues to beat the Progressives in November.
05-07-2010 10:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Pragmatic Classical Liberal
*

Posts: 42,023
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 1206
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #34
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 03:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Philosophically, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a fiscal liberal and a social conservative.

This one's easy:
You are 100% wrong.

(05-07-2010 12:48 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:14 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 11:08 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Abortion is too controversial to even be a part of a platform. I agree with the Republican Liberty Caucus which states that in its platform, and denotes that proper beginning point is to turn it over to the states.

The only way to turn it over to the states is to overturn Roe V Wade. Congratulations, you just made abortion a part of your platform. More accurately your first sentence should actually read:

"Abortion is too controversial to not have it be a part of the platform."

It's a polarizing issue that the American people won't ignore. There is no way for politicians to avoid taking a stance.

The more controversial the issue is the more local the solution should be. That's the heart and soul of federalism. And I love how you social cons are against the projection of force in economics ... but when it comes to how people live their life outside of money you're all too happy to use government force to mandate how they need to live. Philosophically, there is NO DIFFERENCE between a fiscal liberal and a social conservative.

When it comes to upholding the rights to life, liberty, and property(in that order of importance) then absolutely I am in favor of government interference, at a local level if possible but at the federal level if necessary. After all had it not been by government force, then the institution of slavery would still exist in the South.

And philosophically there is a major difference between social conservatives and fiscal liberals. Social cons want to use government to protect people's rights(again life, liberty, and property), where as fiscal liberals want to use the force of government to destroy them through the re-distribution of wealth and social engineering. I think your libertarian fanaticism may have blinded you to this.

So let's peel back the muddy waters and dig deeper, instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage?
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage?
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana?
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause?
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school?
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school?
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs?
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research?
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States?
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries?
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal?

I'm looking forward to your answers on issues where your desire to project government force to support your beliefs will be a little more obvious.

I can answer almost any question that begins with..."Would you support the government" a resounding....NO!

Defense of OUR landmass?...YES.
Basic infrastructures..(roads and such)?..YES
System of justice?...YES

I still think that even most the above can be addressed using the marketplace..but..I could live with THIS limited governmental intrusion.

What we now have is a overbearing, violent system of control that is growing by the second and is heading us toward a very messy implosion.
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2010 10:32 PM by Fo Shizzle.)
05-07-2010 10:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Motown Bronco Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,784
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 214
I Root For: WMU
Location: Metro Detroit
Post: #35
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? No
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? No
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? No
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? Only the regular sales tax.
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? No
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? No
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? No
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? No
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries?
I don't know. Before answering, I would first want to know if public schools allow bibles and other religious material in its libraries (keeping in mind the separation of church and state). If not, then this book likely doesn't belong in its library either.
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal? No
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2010 12:29 AM by Motown Bronco.)
05-08-2010 12:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Know Nothing Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 344
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Big East
Location: Illinois
Post: #36
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 10:02 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I laugh at the few "Social Conservatives" I have to deal with.

IMO their "bad press" as well as the fiscal insanity of the Republican Congressional Leadership from 2002-2006 paved the way for Obama.

The prevailing attitude at CPAC the past couple of years is for the "anti gay marriage/anti-abortion/'traditional family values'" bunch to STHU, go back to their corner, and stay out of the way of Fiscal Conservatives who have the issues to beat the Progressives in November.

Too bad you can't win without us. Social Conservatives are the most reliable voting constituency(most elderly are social conservatives) and also put in the most leg work as far as campaigning is concerned. The Fiscal issues are important, but the Republican party was founded on a moral issue(slavery) and moral issues will continue to be the party's main draw.
05-08-2010 12:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Know Nothing Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 344
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 8
I Root For: Big East
Location: Illinois
Post: #37
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 08:03 PM)Paul M Wrote:  
(05-07-2010 12:48 PM)Know Nothing Wrote:  After all had it not been by government force, then the institution of slavery would still exist in the South.

You don't really believe that, do you?

There is no way to know for sure. I would hope it would be abolished by now, but I'm sure it would have carried on well into the 20th century. After all Jim Crow didn't end until the 1960's.
05-08-2010 12:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bubbapt Offline
Uh, what?
*

Posts: 12,894
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 480
I Root For: Memphis
Location: St. Louis

Donators
Post: #38
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
1) Would you support a government ban on gay marriage? No
2) Would you support a government ban on transgendered marriage? No
3) Would you support a government ban on marijuana? No
4) Would you support a government tax on alcohol, tobacco, or any other illicit "sin tax" to finance health care, schools, or some other government cause? Let's just rely on a flat sales tax.
5) Would you support government mandated teaching of intelligent design in school? If we didn't have government schools, this question wouldn't be necessary. You'd send your kid to school that taught what you wanted them to.
6) Would you support government mandated prayer time in school? If we didn't have government schools, this question wouldn't be necessary.
7) Would you support government mandated affirmative action programs? No. One lady's affirmative action is another man's SOL letter.
8) Would you support government bans on stem cell research? Certainly not on adult stem cells. Harvesting of embryos for research, however, should be avoided.
9) Would you support making Christianity the official religion of the United States? No. Why start now?
10) Would you support censoring or outright banning books like "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins from all K-12 education libraries? If we didn't have government schools, this question wouldn't be necessary. If one school wants to teach Dawkins, another the Bible, and a third wants to teach both, I'm sending my kid to the third one.
11) Would you support the government keeping prostitution illegal? No.
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2010 07:27 AM by bubbapt.)
05-08-2010 07:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,213
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #39
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 03:38 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  instead of hiding behind a controversial issue which I admit might have merits under the life, liberty, etc parts of the Constitution.

First off, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

Even though Section 8 (of the Constitution) provides for the "general welfare" not a single question you ask falls under that category. These powers are reserved for the States.

Quote:Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

And for the LIMITATIONS on Congress

Quote:Section 9 - Limits on Congress

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2010 11:34 AM by SumOfAllFears.)
05-08-2010 11:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #40
RE: More anti-gay social conservatives gettin ... well ... gay
(05-07-2010 04:40 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  SO LIBS tickle me they "ACT" all tolerant for every group but Christians and the judge Christians much more harshly than militant gay groups or militant dope head groups etc.

When you READ the story and the beginning of the thread the man in question is a founding member NOT an actual appointed leader of the Christian group. It is no different than a charter member of the NRA going CRAZY and mowing down a group of people with an AK-47 the listening to SO LIBS drone on about the NRA being a evil organization.

Da gubment has NO business defining marriage PERIOD! Marriage was a religious institution long before there was a US gubment. Marriage became a means to bestow certain defined gubmental rights. If anything that link should be separated and those rights defined in a legal setting not a religious one.

SO LIBS don't see a problem with militant gays wanting to force the gay marriage issue which will ultimately force gay values on churches. What a double standard.
It is all about the hypocrisy Mr. Props with mops.
05-08-2010 03:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.