Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
jstoesz
Participantyou guys are missing the point. What is this obsession about determining what my kid should learn in school? I do not want to tell you what your child should learn in school.
A school could teach the Epic of Gilgamesh for all I care. (I think mine actually did) It is not my business what you want your child to learn…or not learn.
If you want to keep religion from people, you are as much a fascist as someone who wants to push it on someone. Stop making government take a side on the issue, and we will have a true separation. Ambivalence is the solution not prohibition.
[quote]Those who would seek to eliminate “Separation of Church and State” in the name of local control can look to the consequences of eliminating oversight of the financial industry.[/quote]
Hah. That is perfect.
The banks operated in a vacuum…and the only thing that enabled them to do so much damage was the reduction in regulations. Totally…yeah…its all the regulation removals fault…definitely…and those right wing retards…
Not only is this a complete non sequitur, it is worse. It is simple minded.
Participantucodegen, not that I disagree with you, but your argument will fall on deaf ears on this one.
What becomes increasingly clear is not that they have no problem with O’Donnell’s power or any senators power to legislate their values, they are just angry at the specific values themselves. They are not angry at the fact that her views have no place in a discourse about government. They want too wish to implement their own views of society and legislate them down.
In the place of legislating God in society and education, they want to legislate secular humanism…
But what we should ask ourselves is why the government has a say in the matter at all. Using the government as a weapon against religion is as dumb as using government as a weapon against degrading social values. The federal governments constitutional role is one limited to very few things (not that anyone cares any more). As stated in the 10th amendment…
“The powers not (specifically) delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
If we stick with a limited government, both stripes of fascists, have no leg to stand on. And People get to do what the hell they want with the life and property they earned. When people 3k miles away, Christine O’Donnell included, have their dirty fingers in every aspect of our life, We are screwed. And the corporations and public unions can go on screwing us with their help.
Rant over, back to your right vs left bash fest…
Participantucodegen, not that I disagree with you, but your argument will fall on deaf ears on this one.
What becomes increasingly clear is not that they have no problem with O’Donnell’s power or any senators power to legislate their values, they are just angry at the specific values themselves. They are not angry at the fact that her views have no place in a discourse about government. They want too wish to implement their own views of society and legislate them down.
In the place of legislating God in society and education, they want to legislate secular humanism…
But what we should ask ourselves is why the government has a say in the matter at all. Using the government as a weapon against religion is as dumb as using government as a weapon against degrading social values. The federal governments constitutional role is one limited to very few things (not that anyone cares any more). As stated in the 10th amendment…
“The powers not (specifically) delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
If we stick with a limited government, both stripes of fascists, have no leg to stand on. And People get to do what the hell they want with the life and property they earned. When people 3k miles away, Christine O’Donnell included, have their dirty fingers in every aspect of our life, We are screwed. And the corporations and public unions can go on screwing us with their help.
Rant over, back to your right vs left bash fest…
Participantucodegen, not that I disagree with you, but your argument will fall on deaf ears on this one.
What becomes increasingly clear is not that they have no problem with O’Donnell’s power or any senators power to legislate their values, they are just angry at the specific values themselves. They are not angry at the fact that her views have no place in a discourse about government. They want too wish to implement their own views of society and legislate them down.
In the place of legislating God in society and education, they want to legislate secular humanism…
But what we should ask ourselves is why the government has a say in the matter at all. Using the government as a weapon against religion is as dumb as using government as a weapon against degrading social values. The federal governments constitutional role is one limited to very few things (not that anyone cares any more). As stated in the 10th amendment…
“The powers not (specifically) delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
If we stick with a limited government, both stripes of fascists, have no leg to stand on. And People get to do what the hell they want with the life and property they earned. When people 3k miles away, Christine O’Donnell included, have their dirty fingers in every aspect of our life, We are screwed. And the corporations and public unions can go on screwing us with their help.
Rant over, back to your right vs left bash fest…
Participantucodegen, not that I disagree with you, but your argument will fall on deaf ears on this one.
What becomes increasingly clear is not that they have no problem with O’Donnell’s power or any senators power to legislate their values, they are just angry at the specific values themselves. They are not angry at the fact that her views have no place in a discourse about government. They want too wish to implement their own views of society and legislate them down.
In the place of legislating God in society and education, they want to legislate secular humanism…
But what we should ask ourselves is why the government has a say in the matter at all. Using the government as a weapon against religion is as dumb as using government as a weapon against degrading social values. The federal governments constitutional role is one limited to very few things (not that anyone cares any more). As stated in the 10th amendment…
“The powers not (specifically) delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
If we stick with a limited government, both stripes of fascists, have no leg to stand on. And People get to do what the hell they want with the life and property they earned. When people 3k miles away, Christine O’Donnell included, have their dirty fingers in every aspect of our life, We are screwed. And the corporations and public unions can go on screwing us with their help.
Rant over, back to your right vs left bash fest…
Participantucodegen, not that I disagree with you, but your argument will fall on deaf ears on this one.
What becomes increasingly clear is not that they have no problem with O’Donnell’s power or any senators power to legislate their values, they are just angry at the specific values themselves. They are not angry at the fact that her views have no place in a discourse about government. They want too wish to implement their own views of society and legislate them down.
In the place of legislating God in society and education, they want to legislate secular humanism…
But what we should ask ourselves is why the government has a say in the matter at all. Using the government as a weapon against religion is as dumb as using government as a weapon against degrading social values. The federal governments constitutional role is one limited to very few things (not that anyone cares any more). As stated in the 10th amendment…
“The powers not (specifically) delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
If we stick with a limited government, both stripes of fascists, have no leg to stand on. And People get to do what the hell they want with the life and property they earned. When people 3k miles away, Christine O’Donnell included, have their dirty fingers in every aspect of our life, We are screwed. And the corporations and public unions can go on screwing us with their help.
Rant over, back to your right vs left bash fest…
ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]Participant[quote]I don’t think it matter how stupid you are to be in congress. They get pressured what to vote anyway, in some form or another.
you mine as well put monkeys in the position and save money.
[/quote]I wish I wasn’t so cynical to agree with this post.
Maybe this is only the case 90% of the time…We are so screwed.
Participant[quote]I don’t think it matter how stupid you are to be in congress. They get pressured what to vote anyway, in some form or another.
you mine as well put monkeys in the position and save money.
[/quote]I wish I wasn’t so cynical to agree with this post.
Maybe this is only the case 90% of the time…We are so screwed.
Participant[quote]I don’t think it matter how stupid you are to be in congress. They get pressured what to vote anyway, in some form or another.
you mine as well put monkeys in the position and save money.
[/quote]I wish I wasn’t so cynical to agree with this post.
Maybe this is only the case 90% of the time…We are so screwed.
-
AuthorPosts