What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

near as i can figure he must be a freaking idiot

  • Thread starter rattler
  • Start date
  • #41
I think you can't get any worse than George W. Bush. He is rock bottom. And just plain long STUPID.

nah im pretty sure Kerry and Gore would have been worse....the issues would have been different but overall effect would have been worse.....i still say if the dem's would have found someone with 2 brain cells they would have beat Bush in '04.....however Kerry is dumber than Bush, and i didnt think that was possible myself in '03....and is another one that plain made stuff up........
 
  • #42
I just hope either Hilliary or Obama wins, especially Obama. If McCain wins, I might have o move to Canada :/.
 
  • #43
Well, you said 'I have never heard of a tumor or wisdom tooth turning into a human life" which would imply that you're saying the fetus isn't a human life but will become one... so you're giving me conflicting information.

I think it was clear what I meant. You argued that killing a fertilized egg, zygote, or whatever you want to term it is the equivalent to getting a wisdom tooth removed or a tumor removed. I said I've never seen a human life killed or prevented by removing a tooth or tumor.

I'm not so sure it's better :) That's very debatable. And you can preach abstinence (though you shouldn't) AND safer sex. You can say "Wait until marriage, but IF you don't, here's how to use a birth control.". I do believe the parents should do it, but parents just don't care or would rather get around an awkward discussion my letting the school do it.

I agree that the parents are the main players that should be teaching their children to be responsible. There is no such thing as safe sex, all forms of birth control or contraceptives have the possibility to fail. Instead of encouraging sexuality at such a young age, IMO, we should be encouraging our children to be responsible and educate them on the consequences. Birth control and contraceptives do nothing but encourage sexual activity, and give a false sense of protection from the consequences. We should also be teaching our children to control their natures instead of letting it control them.

You lost me. A single mother with multiple kids... how does that stem from condom use? I'm not shoving condoms down their throats (oh my) any more than you're shoving abstinence down their throats. The difference is they're a LOT more likely to sleep around, so they should know about birth control rather than NOT know about it because they've been told to uphold archaic (Really. Few people "save themselves" until marriage. Really.) notion that sex before marriage is bad. Yeah, it probably is way more meaningful if you wait until your married, and definitely safer, but today that's really seen as lame, and young people don't do it. They just don't as a large majority.

Passing out wrappers does nothing but give the green light for sexual activity. Just because our society and culture deem that having sex as early as possible, as much as possible, with as many people as possible doesn't make it right.


No, it's not an oxymoron. I can believe in God, have Jesus as my personal savior, and still be an ultra-liberal, not go to church, not read the bible, not go to christian rock concerts, not evangelize, not bring up my religion unless prompted, have premarital sex, be gay, etc. etc. If you don't believe that you can not be christian and secular at the same time, then a lot of the people in the statistics who say they are Christian, by your defininion, are not really Christian at all.

It's not my definition. It's what Jesus said and what Paul said to his churches that didn't understand the difference between living your old life with basic knowledge of Jesus verses living the life that Jesus has called us to.

If they were, seven our of ten people would have Bible quotes in their, Jesus fish on their car, WAY more churches, etc. Secularism just means that religion (which doesn't equate God) doesn't play a daily role in your life.

So then you're saying that there's people who believe there's a creator God, and that Jesus died for our sins and then everything else is not important? As long as I hold these 2 truths I'm a Christian? If you accept these 2 truths, and it doesn't impact your life daily in some way then it is nothing but knowledge that you chose to memorize.

It is NOT atheism. It means to exist separately from religion, and to have non-religious policies when at least in a public setting. In THAT sense, you can STILL go to church, read the Bible, and be totally secular as long as you separate it from your public life and policies and pretty much keep it private. Obama and Hillary are examples of this. A secular state is neutral in religious matters, so as much as you may not want to admit it, the US is a secular nation. At least until it officially endorses one religion over another, and that will NEVER. EVER. EVER. happen this country was founded on the opposite. Freedom, including of religion.

Is the life that Christ calls believers to live considered religion to you? How have you determined what is something God/Jesus has commanded/teached us and what is nothing but religious tradition? No one said this country is governed by religion and obviously there is separation in the political arena. What was said is that this country was founded by people who majority wise believed that there exists a God, and the ideas that started this country and that are found in the constitution can be related back to the Bible.
 
  • #44
I welcome Obama's youth, optimism and inexperience. What good did political experience do Bush? He and most other long-time policitians are just part of a political machine who cares nothing about "common folk." I think you can't get any worse than George W. Bush. He is rock bottom. And just plain long STUPID.

Name one President that had as much on his plate as Bush. Everyone seems to forget the experiences this country has gone through in the last 8 years.
 
  • #45
I just hope either Hilliary or Obama wins, especially Obama. If McCain wins, I might have o move to Canada :/.

i hate this statement above all others when talking about presidential candidates.......mainly caus no one has the stones to actually go through with it.....if the person you dont like becoming president is enough to make yah want to leave the country yah might as well move now cause at some point someone you dont like is going to be in office.......you know what THE BIGGEST thing on the plate this year as far as the federal government? it is not the presidential election........its the District of Columbia v. Heller case infront of the supreme court that we should have a decision on in June.......how the supreme court rules on that potentially has the ability to shake this country apart.......atleast one state has openly threatened the possibility of succession if the SC rules against Heller and for DC........
 
  • #46
I just hope either Hilliary or Obama wins, especially Obama. If McCain wins, I might have o move to Canada :/.

That's what my husband said if Obama or Clinton win! But I lived there for 19 years and if you're a republican, then Canada is not the place for you! Obviously Capensis, I know you're not republican, I was just saying for others.
 
  • #47
i hate this statement above all others when talking about presidential candidates.......mainly caus no one has the stones to actually go through with it.....if the person you dont like becoming president is enough to make yah want to leave the country yah might as well move now cause at some point someone you dont like is going to be in office.......you know what THE BIGGEST thing on the plate this year as far as the federal government? it is not the presidential election........its the District of Columbia v. Heller case infront of the supreme court that we should have a decision on in June.......how the supreme court rules on that potentially has the ability to shake this country apart.......atleast one state has openly threatened the possibility of succession if the SC rules against Heller and for DC........

It's not that I might have to move just because he's president, it's because I've heard that he might call Venezuela a terrorist country (says my brothers...and I think parents) that might ruin my dad's business. I've also heard that he might also cut off Venezula's oil (again, said my brothers). Don't blame me if this isn't true, I don't exactly keep up if political news. Besides, I've been living here all my life so I don't want that to change now.
 
  • #48
truely what bugs me the most about Clinton and Obama are their love for the UN.....personally i would love the US to leave the UN.......course with Bush i hate NAFTA just as much if for no other reason cause it screws over the Canucks and dictates what they can do with THEIR oil.......
 
  • #49
I know we got the graphic slideshow of STD's. It made me afraid to ever have sex again lol. Some of them were so terrible, you couldn't tell the gender. It reminds me of those Valtrex commercials when one person says "I have genital herpes" and the other says 'And I don't." I don't think I could be with someone who has an incurable STD, no matter how much I love them.

Didn't say it wasn't important. Darfur is very important, but it doesn't play a big part in my every day life. The holocaust is important. Tibet is important, HIV and cancer research are important, but they don't play a part of my every day life. I don't feel I have to kneel down and pray. If I want to "talk" to God, hell, I can do it while washing dished and no one would be the wiser. I don't feel I have to say grace, I don't feel I have to do many ritualistic things. To me, ritualism is just tradition. It's the intent behind it that counts, not the actual act. I guess that's why I feel catholics waste so much time with rituals lol. You can even think about it all day, every day if you want, and carry on deep, meaningful "conversations" with God if you want... but you can do that and keep it in private and not stick Jesus fish on your car, and put the ten commandments on your lawn, and ask complete strangers if they'd like to talk about Jesus.

Please elaborate because I'm confused of your first sentence in your last paragraph. Would God want me to go to church and read the bible and all that? Probably. Or, I can be close to him by watching a sunset, or looking at mountains, and sitting on my butt and pondering philosophical issues. IMO, God wants us to be close to him. As far as I'm concerned, how we go about that is personal preference. Or do you think it's not better than nothing at all, and that I MUST conform to the standards of a minority (people who go to church) and do to something I feel uncomfortable? Of course this would go into the new-age liberal hippie christian category, and you may disagree with that, but I don't feel that formality and ritual is necessary.

And this is something that may surprise you. I actually DO listen to one christian "rock" band. I happen to think some stuff by Skillet sounds good.

This isn't meant to be sarcastic or challenging at all, but do you at least comprehend where I and people like myself are coming from on these liberal opinions? I know you disagree with it, profoundly so, but do you understand how we can think these things? Can you comprehend it? I can completely see why conservatives think the way they do. I still think they're ignorant, but I can comprehend how they arrive at their conclusions. Can you at least see our reasoning behind our opinions?
 
  • #50
we get more oil from Venezuela than the middle east, i doubt we will quit buying from them
 
  • #51
Before I start, I just want you to know that I respect you, Outsiders71. You are a participant, you have a point of view, and you argue it in the face of a lot of opposition. A movie critic once said that anything they write about movies is a pale accomplishment compared to the creation of even a bad movie. I appreciate those who are out there doing their thing, and fighting their fight, even if I disagree, over those who sit on the sidelines and do nothing. So please take this in that spirit.

Thanks Capslock and know that I feel the same way towards you and everyone else. There is nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree and I'd rather have that then a cut throat approach.

I'm anti-capital punishment, not because of the sanctity of human life, but because we have an imperfect judicial system, prone to bias, prejudice, and emotion. It puts innocent people on death row, many of whom have been exonerated. See the Innocence Project, which has freed many wrongfully convicted people. I think many people have forfeited their right to live with their actions, but we're just not good enough at discerning who they are.

I understand what you're arguing but the numbers of innocent people who are convicted of heinous crimes and are put to death have to be a very low percentage. Most murder cases are pretty cut and dry with the forensic technology we have today. On the cases that aren't cut and dry and are up in the air then maybe the death sentence isn't appropriate. However what kind of life is living in jail until you die?

Yes. I am not a pacifist. War is necessary sometimes. However, the war in Iraq is the product of a deranged policy led by a mentally disturbed President. Just yesterday, former Press Secretary, Scott McClellan revealed what many of us already knew - Bush invaded Iraq because he wanted the legacy that only a "war President" can have. It was a sick campaign based on outright lies and propaganda. In illegal and immoral war. Yet McCain supports it.

I think we all agree that the Iraq war was a mistake and mishandled and that if the President and Congress had better intel that the war would have never took place. People keep forgetting that Congress authorized the Iraq War:

http://www.factcheck.org/iraq_what_did_congress_know_and_when.html

We have protections against illegal invasions of our privacy for darn good reason. The last President who decided he was above the law used mass surveillance like this to investigate political opponents. No doubt Bush has too, but regardless, he simply violated the Constitution. You can't do that, ever, no matter how right you think you are.

Have you been personally effected? Did you have something to hide? Were you making calls overseas to areas that were being monitored by telecoms? How else were we supposed to gather intelligence?

That's just a preposterous notion. This nation was founded in part to escape the official Church of England and the imposition of religion. We enshrine protection against religious tyranny into the Constitution. This nation was founded on the basis of FREEDOM. Freedom of and from religion. God is NOT in our Constitution, and that's on purpose. Some of the founding fathers, unclear on the concept, argued for the inclusion of God. They lost. Which is good! Having a secular government protects the ability of all of us to choose our religious path, whether atheist or fundamentalist.

Yes but you're missing the point. We have a secular government that got its ideals from the Bible and was created by God believing forefathers. To completely suggest that our forefathers didn't believe in God, or didn't incorporate ideals from the Bible into freedoms in our Constitution is flat out wrong. It's recorded fact in history books. It's printed on our money. It's in our national anthem. You can find it everywhere.

It was illegal on many fronts. First, it was prosecuted based on lies - there was no evidence of WMDs, nor did the administration really care about that issue. Iraq didn't pose any imminent danger to us, was not a participant in 9/11, and didn't support Islamic terrorists. Hell, they were the most secular country in the region, and were the avowed enemy of al Qaeda, who were infuriated with Hussein's lack of Islamic rule. We've killed over 100,000 citizens of Iraq for nothing. The crimes against humanity are staggering in their scope, including using white phosphorous (a WMD) against human targets, another violation of international law that we've signed on to (like the Geneva Conventions that Bush's lackeys referred to as "quaint". McCain supports this invasion and occupation.

I'm going to post this link again for emphasis:
http://www.factcheck.org/iraq_what_did_congress_know_and_when.html

Here's a link to who voted in congress:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&vote=00237&session=2

To sit there and suggest that one man is totally responsible for the Iraq war is wrong. Nobody at the time knew what we know now and if we did we would have never went in there. How would it then be right to abandon Iraq? We created the mess, we owe it to the Iraqi's to stay there until they can stand on their own two feet.
 
  • #52
Passing out wrappers does nothing but give the green light for sexual activity.

It isn't "passing out wrappers." It's educating our children about sexual responsibility. It's a nice twist of propaganda that simply isn't true since nobody is suggesting to give our kids a gross of condoms.

Just because our society and culture deem that having sex as early as possible, as much as possible, with as many people as possible doesn't make it right.

Again, it's education. Even if this was in the realm of truth, it's more important to educate so that if our kids are "having sex as early as possible, as much as possible, with as many people as possible" they are doing it safely. Giving kids condoms doesn't mean they are more likely to have sex! Give the average kid a comb and he or she will think of sex. But oh my god, for the love of god, let's keep our children ignorant of knowledge and education so they don't have the tools to make responsible decisions in case they decide to have sex. It's never good to leave everyone in the dark about important decisions that may alter their life forever.

xvart.
 
  • #54
It's never good to leave everyone in the dark about important decisions that may alter their life forever.
x2

Not teaching kids sex ed for religious reasons, or moral reasons because of religion is one of the stupidest ideas any crackpot has ever come up with. The US is much more religious than Western Europe. Guess who has a higher STD rate? Us. Guess who has a higher teen pregnancy rate? Us. Guess who has a higher abortion rate? Us.

As Hitchens said, "religion poisons everything".
 
  • #55
Yes but you're missing the point. We have a secular government that got its ideals from the Bible and was created by God believing forefathers. To completely suggest that our forefathers didn't believe in God, or didn't incorporate ideals from the Bible into freedoms in our Constitution is flat out wrong. It's recorded fact in history books. It's printed on our money. It's in our national anthem. You can find it everywhere.

Many of the forefathers were not Christian. And, just because ideas in our constitution seem to emulate ideas in the Bible does not mean that they are unique only to the Bible. There are some universal ideas that any civilization or grouping of people would grant, and this would be true if the Bible was never written. Is it so hard to believe that if there was never a Bible or Christian mythology that the forefathers would not have said that killing people is wrong? Based on that, I think it's fair to say that it is not accurate to claim the Bible influenced the forefathers when laying the groundwork for our country. Just because you see a pattern does not mean there is a pattern.

xvart.
 
  • #56
I was watching some program on Daystar yesterday and the dude was talking about this, actually. He was talking about how we got the concept of Democracy from the Jews because it's in the Bible.. completely forgetting the Greeks... Then he proceeded to say you'll have to answer to God one day for not voting for people who will appoint conservative justices. IE: Republicans.

And The word God should not be on our money, and it was added to the pledge of allegiance. It was not originally there. It's unconstitutional to have his name on anything of this nature, and eventually it will be removed.
 
  • #57
It isn't "passing out wrappers." It's educating our children about sexual responsibility. It's a nice twist of propaganda that simply isn't true since nobody is suggesting to give our kids a gross of condoms.

If I show my dog his leash, he wants to go for a walk. If I hand someone keys to a sports car that's parked in a massive parking lot, they're going to try to find it and drive it.

Again, it's education. Even if this was in the realm of truth, it's more important to educate so that if our kids are "having sex as early as possible, as much as possible, with as many people as possible" they are doing it safely. Giving kids condoms doesn't mean they are more likely to have sex! Give the average kid a comb and he or she will think of sex. But oh my god, for the love of god, let's keep our children ignorant of knowledge and education so they don't have the tools to make responsible decisions in case they decide to have sex. It's never good to leave everyone in the dark about important decisions that may alter their life forever.

xvart.

What's the focus at hand? Is it educating kids to be responsible and to hold off on sexual activity due to the consequences at hand? Or are we educating kids that sex is fine as long as your GF is on the pill or you use a condom, which are both not 100% full proof. There are no contraceptives that are 100% full proof. Lastly what is a kid gonna do if he runs out of his/her contraceptive? There's a 50/50, and probably many would argue even greater odds that the activity is going to take place regardless if a contraceptive is available.
 
  • #58
Outsiders71 is right - many of the founding fathers were religious, some though were quite opposed to organized relgion. Regardless, ideas in the Bible ARE used in the founding of our society. But, I need to point out that those ideas are ones with a rational basis that even us atheists share - like not killing or stealing. The specific ideas unique to Christianity dealing with saviors and such are not there, for a reason. The founding fathers wanted to protect Christians, Jews, infidels, everyone equally. But it's absolutely true that ideas in the Bible did influence the founding fathers, and make their way into the Constitution. It's just that they were really good ideas on their own merits, God didn't need to deem them so - they stand on their own!

Capslock
 
  • #59
x2

Not teaching kids sex ed for religious reasons, or moral reasons because of religion is one of the stupidest ideas any crackpot has ever come up with. The US is much more religious than Western Europe. Guess who has a higher STD rate? Us. Guess who has a higher teen pregnancy rate? Us. Guess who has a higher abortion rate? Us.

As Hitchens said, "religion poisons everything".

I'm sorry but could you show me where I said for religious reasons I don't believe condoms should be taught? I never said condoms shouldn't be taught either. Maybe before you partake in discussions on this forum you should remove your blatant hatred to anyone who isn't as Atheist as yourself.

Now lets try to think outside of the box a little here. Tell me how it is beneficial for people who aren't able to support themselves, let alone a baby, to engage in sexual activities that provide the risk of having said baby. Please do also factor in the major possibility of the father not supporting the baby or the mother and the effects it will have on that mother's life. Also take in effect the kind of upbringing that child will have.
 
  • #60
That's what I thought, but I'm still worried.

basically we are Venezuela's number one customer.....we have them over a barrel so to speak......they cant effectively ship it to China, Brazil uses ethanol, Mexico has its own oil.... so we are by far their number one customer.....all we have to do is boycott them for 6 months and we will have ol' Hugo begging for us to buy from him again cause is country will collapse without us buying his oil.....no need to invade Venezuela.....no need to have Hugo assassinated......he can beotch and moan about us all he wants but we are his treasury......
 
Back
Top