Discussion in 'General Nonsense' started by das müffin mann, Jan 31, 2008.
Understandable because persecution often entails that.
Eff, like I keep saying, you and the church you belong to have every right to deny gays to marry within your church. But you just have no right to tell a government how it can treat its people. If your main reason for being against it is that its a sin, let us homo and bisexuals deal with our eternal damnation.
I dont believe they will have eternal damnation but that they will rather be in purgatory but that is my personal religious beliefs not everyone elses, some people think gays and lesbians should go to hell while others think they should go to purgatory whil still others think that they should go to heaven as well.
If I were to tell this government who to have as President I would say it needs to have a Catholic as a President if I were to base my government on the beliefs that I have. But I would never say that we can only have a Catholic President, because that is telling the government how it should be run which is wrong. However I have said enough for now.
Then why do we ... never mind Im too tired to finish saying this I will finish it tommorrow sometime
agreed good debate, I just can't see how if a Dem wins we attain secruity. Downsizing the military will not ensure security it will ensure defenselessness. Removing Federal officers from the airports means one thing, another 9/11. Hiliary and Obama are not thinking about National Security they are thinking about votes, if National security was a concern they wouldn't be saying what they are. Every Terrorist wants a democract because it makes there job alot easier overnight.
As for the post above me, we do need a man of god in office, someone that can lead this country in the right path, which we won't get.
Republicans deny this all the time, but one of the main reasons we were attacked is because we have troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. Mecca is the holy land of all these people, how pissed off would you Christians be if the US decided to station troops in the Vatican and disrespect your religion? I'm not saying that gives anyone the right to come fly planes into buildings, but I am saying that you don't fight terrorism with a conventional army and a conventional war.
Also, Republicans argue 9/11 was made possible because of funding cuts to defense made under the Clinton administration. I'll agree that it could have played a part, I lean democrat but I'm not the type who thinks Bill Clinton is God and without faults. But Bush also had a lot of responsibility, on August 6th, 2001 Bush's presidential briefing said "Bin Laden Determined To Strike" and went largely ignored. I never understand the Republican argument that Democrats can't keep us safe. Going around and starting wars does not increase the safety of this country, it increases our number of enemies and potentially puts us at more risk.
which, if any of the candidates, want to:
back stem cell research
close guantamino bay
stay out of wars
become the leader in reducing greenhouse emissions
become the leader in space exploration
stay out of other countries business, when it really really doesn't concern them
and pick the slums of America of their feet and get them into work and prosperity?
any one tick any of those boxes?
Oh, Iraq did concern them, It's got oil. Afghanistan, well the US needed a bit of retaliation for the rude it got with 9/11. So they send their boys to carpet-bomb deserts, claim to shred Osama to bits but return home after staging a classic wild goose chase.
People might think why does the US import oil from the Arab world when it has its own natural resources, the truth is that the US doesn't want to touch its own oil now, play the Jew and import oil, when in the near future fossil fuels do run dry/in shortage with the Arabs, US will start bringing out its oil and sell it to other countries for the price of diamonds.
Alas! All those wonderful Beyond 2000 shows we'd see on Discovery Channel before 2000 with those wonderful alternate fuel technology, et. al. is no more/less to be seen now. Whatever Shell and Honda show people in their ads about alternate fuel/cleaner vehicles research is all eye-wash for marketing purposes, else the TV commercials we'd see back in 1990's had led us to thinking that we'd be completely running on ethanol by now .
We may finally have an alternative to Oil one day, but I doubt it will fully come into effect until after the worlds oil resources run dry, lol thats when we will start to get flying cars, lol.
Well I think all candidates are for being the leader in space exploration.
I also sure hope that they are all for helping the slums of America to actually get off their
lazy asses and find themselves some jobs.
Greenhouse emissions :well Al Gore is out of the race unfortunately
The U.S. can never fully stay out of wars, its in our blood, now if its ground wars that you speak of then the Democrats as well as Ron Paul support leaving Iraq (but not Afghanistan), there will always be air wars like Bosnia, ad Cyprus unfortunately as well as Southeastern Europe.
Stem cell research? Well I dont know what to think about that unfortunately, this is an isuue I have mixed emotions about and I do nt quite know what the candidates stand for on that.
I cant answer any more of your questions though due to my lack of knowledge on who wants to get rid of Guantanamo and who doesnt
The whole reason we even have Soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia is because their leaders asked for it. We protected them from an invasion by Saddam Hussein in 1990 (or maybe 1991 either way you get the picture).
Im not saying that I would be happy if we stationed U.S. troops in the Vatican but I highly doubt that that land is a STRATEGIC ENOUGH PLACE TO MERIT HAVING U.S. TROOPS StATIONED THERE ANYWAYS. Now what do we do if the U.S. troops were there and disrespected the vatican there by doing some action that was rude there, do you not think that the U.S. troops would be disciplined?
You think that Clinton isnt God. Well neither is Bush. We all should realize that things would have been the same whether we had had Al Gore or some other Democrat as a Democrat. They wouldnt have realized it in time either ufortunately.
We all know that Saddam Hussein never had WMD's. But what he did say while being interrogated by the U.S. troops (after they had captured him in Iraq) was that he never expected the U.S. to actually invade Iraq on the ground, he had simply expected an air strike which was why he had been so defiant with the U.S. about the WMD's that were not there. He was toying with the U.S.
Bush may have started this war by going in early but in reality it was the decision that he felt was right at the time, because at that time everyone had feared that Iraq was going to use its WMD's on us. And hey we did overthrow a tyrant didnt we? Well look at Iraq now, the last major battle to be fought with the terrorists and other extremists is in Mosul. Anywhere else they are now scattered in very small remnamts.
Sorry for the long post guys. I will leave it at that and let the flamers move in on me due to their disrespect for my personal knowledge.
don't be sorry i enjoyed your long post it simply expressed your personal knowledge and stances on things, we aren't here to flame you simply debate, yes there is a little bit of a difference but sometimes its hard to see, this has turned into rather civilized debate and i am throughly enjoying it, but the fact is with Iraq, terrorism is only increasing and they are getting much better at making and deploying their bombs, the fact is we are not ready and equipped to fight this kind of war, and the fact that the American people don't like the idea of casualties, the terrorists are playing to this fact because sadam knew that this would be a war of attrition, because he knew his forces never had a chance in a traditional engagement with us, we should have saw something like this coming and prepared before we went all gung-ho into a country that we did not belong, also the only way democracy is going to work in Iraq is if they choose it, they can't have it forced it on them like we did
as for stem cell research i have a very mixed stance on it, i can see the great potential to help a great number of people, but then there is the moral aspect of it
as for space exploration i really hope NASA gets their funding again, or a much more collective effort between the UN for this area
but as for an alternate fuel, at least in the US something drastic will have to happen with either the people or oil companies in order for that to happen, we are making progress but we could be much farther
Now on to other news. FOX has just posted a news alert saying that Mike Huckabee just won the state of West Virginia.
anytime i enjoy other peoples opinions, it makes this country what it is, and if everyone had te same opinion things would be boring------- really thats interesting, who is it down to now for the rep. Mccain, huckabee,and romney? i wish MR. Paul had a real shot, atm he earned my vote, followed closely by obama(yes they are two very different people
why should we even be in space there is nothing there but a bunch of dead rocks, we need funding for tanks and planes to be honest, lets go live in fantasy land after the world is safe from terrorism.
i agree but unfortunately atm we really shouldn't be trying to rebuild their country or go into space, until we rebuild new Orleans and fix the problems we have at home, as for the space thing i beleive we need a much more collective effort between countries for exploration purposes, that way it would be more cost effective and help build relations, and who knows what we could find out there maybe we could come acroos something on mars that may lead to further vacinations, or a new fuel source, or a really hot alien chick, its in our nature to explore in MANY ways
im all for exploration but not in space, there is unknown things that could do wonders miles below the ocean, why not start there. We can shoot a man to the moon, im sure we can go to the bottom of the ocean
that is true we know very little about the oceans, and there is alot we could stand to learn from our planet yet, lets hope we don't mess it up to badly before we get a chance to learn all we can from it
A military IMO does not mean security.
Think of the Cold War, everyone was paranoid that someone might strike, and nations increased their military. Not cool.
Shit is gonna happen, there is going to be no way we can stop terrorists or gangs or whoever from causing harm, and passing a bunch of laws that limit everyone's freedom isn't going to help. Terrorists will just get around those, and the rest of us are screwed.
What we should do is avoid war in the first place, we make friends and relations with other countries. Even if they have different views! Cuba isn't going to nuke the U.S if the U.S is friends and they establish a mutual relationship! I scratch your back, you scratch mine. You give us some cigars and fuel, we provide you with whatever you need.
China, EU, whoever, we need them as much as they need us. Arguing over if Capitalism or Communism is better doesn't help.
Then we can downsize our armies, nobody is gonna attack X if X is friends with Y, and Y is your pal.
After that, we can build space shuttles and deep sea submarines, and we can all live happily ever after.
really, read up on War War 1, then tell me they wont.
The best defense is a strong offense.
not necessarily, because that mentality applies to ww1, they all went along with oh hey the best defense is a good offense, or oh no Germany is becoming stronger we should build up our armies because we don't feel safe, but then there is the need of having to be the best and all that junk, but if ww1 taught us anything is that two separate alliances just ends badly, wars in general have proven that most of the time they don't offer a permanent long term solution, ie Africa, there messed up but thats another story, the longest lasting situations come from diplomacy, the only problem is we like war its the American way we were built on it, we make way to much money off it (well some people do) and we enjoy a good war until we get board or realize that there really isn't a good cause to be fighting for, also if we can get every country involved in teh UN that would greatly help limit the armed conflicts (except maybe Africa, they need much more help then a little sit down with eh rest of the world) but unfortunately the UN is very flawed because we along with china, Russia, Britain, France, we control the UN, any idea can easily be shot down by any of these 5 countries, and before any productive steps can be taken those five nations, the US included will have to get rid of most of that power(which isn't going to happen anytime soon) in order to give every nation an equal say
dipolmacy failed in the middle east long ago. We have been tring for 20 years and it did not work. Also it is the postition of not only the US, but of the UN not to negiate with terrorists.
And the UN is a flaw, there is no need for them. The world got on fine without them.
well we really didn't include most of the mid east we just went after who ever suited our needs best, well an all out war with terrorists will never work unless drastic measure was taken, ie the dropping of the nukes on japan most historians will agree that is the major reason as to why the kamikaze attacks stopped, although that may or may not have been a good idea, and that certainly IS NOT a good idea in this day and age, diplomacy failed in part due to us, for as you know we are not the most accepting people because we generally think the way we do things is the right way to do things, also we are a bit greedy which didn't help to much although Dubai is quickly becoming a world trading partner and is a shining example in the mid east (that last part really didnt have much to do with anything )
the UN should wield the power that it has the potential to do.
The United States of America and its people will never agree with such an idea, we are independent and the idea of the UN world courts is sickening enough. I would fight and die to keep such from happening. I will never be under the power of a forigner. Nor will I stand for one world power, that is something as an American i could not and would not allow. I would gladly do anything to prevent such from happening, even if it meant global war and millions dead, id do it to protect my Nation.
we said nothing of falling under control of a foreign power, even i would not except that, the point im trying to make is that SEPARATE and INDEPENDENT nations come together to make various choices regarding various aspects of the world stage, im not say all nations should join together because only a moron would think thats possible. but as for the UN the idea of nations cooperating towards a common goal sickens you?
so international law is something you detest?
so for example, a person committing child porn and posting it in a country that allows it to happen and somebody in the US viewing it, that's fine by you is it?
international law needs to be governed, yes by the UN. laws like greenhouse, child porn etc etc need to be set up.
On the questions of gay marriage within Roman Catholicism i completely agree with the church.
WE Catholics believe to love another man is not GAY its affection which encouraged but the act of gay sex is forbidden and goes against the laws of creation.
Gay marriage is not allowed because marriage in Catholicism is the union of a man and a women under the eyes of God professing there love for each other acknowledgement of the union of creation.
On the other hand i do not agree about no women priests or a such equivalent, the whole idea is that the disciples where all men so priest should be men but i do not think god or Jesus intended us to exclude females. When priests cannot get married under the eyes of God i do not understand this at all, its not like nuns who proclaim GOD is their whole life like they are married to GOD so to speak.
Such a pessimistic idea of the world is not what America stands for you must embrace the world and help each other not close your self and your Xenophobia.
WE ARE ALL HUMAN why hate each other soon everyone on the planet will speak English its sure fast becoming a universal language and there will be no communication barriers.
There are no modern day enemies so to speak, you want a strong economy so your people will have a good quality of life BUT why are there so many poor people then, you have to much extreme in your country to much rich to much poor no average wealth and quality of life.
The UN was designed so that there would be no more wars well it seems like you hve had the most wars since WW2, so that there would be equality and justice in the Earth so that if you had a problem then other nations would help you out NOT to run your country or tell you what the hell to do.
Yeah Britain/Uk is in a war right now but i dont agree with it at all.
Leave the peacekeeping to the UN thanks we dont need you to go to war and call it peacekeeping.
Separate names with a comma.