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!

Ron Paul 2008 Revolution

  • Thread starter zappafan
  • Start date
  • #141
because they favor your lifestyle?

My lifestyle is making sure that everyone around me can put a smile on in the morning. In other words, trying to make the world a Nash Equilibrium. You have to accept that if gays get married, it will in no way affect your life. So just let them get married, or provide a real genuine reason to not let them.
 
  • #142
And yes, political correctness is BS. I fully agree with that.

Now I'm going to watch some movies. Might come back for a late night post, might not.
 
Last edited:
  • #143
Who cares if someone wants a holiday tree, or a chanukkah bush, or a kwanzaa whatever they have. People are different, and as long as it doesn't infringe on your rights, let them go! I'm so conservative I make O'reilly look like a lib....but I couldn't care LESS about what gays want to do. I know this sounds like I'm repeating myself, but this is a political NON ISSUE. Outsiders, you and I aren't gay. If people that are gay get married, even your neighbors, it won't effect you at all. I don't want to see 2 gay persons making out on the street, but I don't want to see that from 2 straight persons. PDA = nasty in my book, regardless of gender or whatever.

This topic got started about politics, and was really interesting for a couple pages. Then, it turned into people trying to push their personal views on people that will never change. You have your way of life, other people have theirs. Now lets shut up, get along, and talk about something that ACTUALLY has to do with public policy, like the awful economy, or us turning into a police state, etc.
 
  • #144
Then why isn't it intolerant to remove the "one man and one woman" from the definition of marriage? This is exactly the same kind of bogus.

actually its not the same thing.........your referring to marriage in the catholic religious context.........the rest of us are referring to it in the LEGAL context.........i dont care about what marriage is religiously between two gay ppl.......i do care about what it means legally. legally all marriage is, is a piece of paper stating that you get to make legal decisions for you partner, be it man or woman, when they cant and similar. as far as marriage being between a man and a woman.........thats based on religious beliefs and nothing else, which got written into law. religiously marriage is different things to different ppl, legally there is only one definition. if you feel better calling a gay marriage a civil union go ahead....i dont care. if a gay person wants to call it marriage......i dont care........i just care that they get the legal benefits and responsibilities of telling the state that, hey we are together.
 
  • #145
I was raised by a man and a woman. My family is VERY matriarchal. My mom is really the man in the relationship. Not that she's butch or anything, but she's just a very strong woman. Today, some families are matriarchal, some patriarchal, and some are an even split. My MOM gives my DAD an "allowance" to buy his toys with. This isn't the 50's where the mom stays home and cooks and cleans all day, and the man goes out and works, plays catch with his kid when he gets home, and then enjoys a scotch and a cigar.

I wouldn't mind having gold and silver coins as real money if Ron Paul were to be President. How cool would that be?
 
  • #146
LOL! Who's Ron Paul? I thought it was Guiliani, Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Thompon for the Republicans and Clinton, Obama, and Edwards for the Democrats.
 
  • #147
I wouldn't mind having gold and silver coins as real money if Ron Paul were to be President. How cool would that be?

that would be one of the issues i have with Ron Paul.......there is not enough gold and silver in the world to do that, let alone what is in the US.........also its not the greatest thing for a currancy in the modern world........think about it, in the last 6 years the price of gold has about doubled which is great if its what your money is based on but whats going to happen when it drops again? all the suddeen you need twice as much to pay for something you got for x amount a year ago......while a gold standard is good in theory it will not work in practice. not that i believe our current system is the greatest but a gold/silver currancy for everyday use isnt possible
 
  • #148
LOL! Who's Ron Paul? I thought it was Guiliani, Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Thompon for the Republicans and Clinton, Obama, and Edwards for the Democrats.


while currently running for the republican nomination, Ron Paul is more of a constitutionalist.....he is also gaining considerable grass roots support. look him up alot of what he has to say makes sence......few things like the gold standard for money and his foriegn policy dont......but he is an interesting candidate
 
  • #149
I have only skimmed over this but I have something I would like to toss in on the whole "gay marriage" thing.

Wrap you minds around this one, I know a person who is clinically schizophrenic. He holds a job as a dishwasher and is able to support himself. He rents and apartment, pays his bills and is an upstanding guy (if a little odd.) He is legally married (I have seen the documents) to a mannequin.

Now explain to me, in simple terms, why it is perfectly legitimate and legal from the governments point of view for this man to be married to a piece of plastic and wood and yet it is totally unreasonable for two people of the same sex to want the same thing.

The only reason people are against same sex marriage is because they are against same sex relationships. The are just too cowardly to come right out and say it but there it is.
 
  • #150
What doesn't make sense?

What doesn't make sense about his foreign policy view?
 
  • #151
Man discovers after 7 years of marriage that wife is actually a rare type of yucca plant.
 
  • #152
What doesn't make sense about his foreign policy view?


you cant take an isolationist stance in the world as we know it. it wont work. i do not believe we need to be the worlds police force but with drawing into our borders and hoping all is well is a bad idea, especially given how many of our goods are made in Asia and the current war with terrorism. our current place in Iraq isnt good....not as bad as the media makes it out to be but isnt a good idea and now that we are there we cant say f'it and leave it as is. we stepped into the dog crap that is the middle east, now we have got to clean up the boot not just throw it in the garbage. i say we get Iraq on its feet and than get out of the region. but withdrawing right now isnt an option.
 
  • #153
We could get out as easy as we got in, if we wanted. But there is too much money to be made in war, plain and simple. He doesn't want to completely isolate us, just not police the world as you said. Does this not make sense?
 
  • #154
you cant take an isolationist stance in the world as we know it. it wont work. i do not believe we need to be the worlds police force but with drawing into our borders and hoping all is well is a bad idea, especially given how many of our goods are made in Asia and the current war with terrorism. our current place in Iraq isnt good....not as bad as the media makes it out to be but isnt a good idea and now that we are there we cant say f'it and leave it as is. we stepped into the dog crap that is the middle east, now we have got to clean up the boot not just throw it in the garbage. i say we get Iraq on its feet and than get out of the region. but withdrawing right now isnt an option.

I agree. If we leave now, the nutjobs will overrun the place. Iraq was never really a threat to us before but if we leave now it sure as hell will be then. I dont want the insurgents who bomb marketplaces in charge of their government.
 
  • #155
The only reason people are against same sex marriage is because they are against same sex relationships. The are just too cowardly to come right out and say it but there it is.

I'm not against same-sex relationships, everyone has the free will to do as they please. I'm against a union between two men or two women being called a marriage, because it is not a marriage. Marriage is defined between one man and one woman. Once again we have the terms homosexual and heterosexual, they are two different things and we don't hear gays wanting to be called heterosexual do we? It's the same with marriage and civil unions, they are two different things. Despite there differences, both unions DESERVE the same legal rights under the law. I think the true cowards in this thread are the ones who are ignorant enough to claim that I hate gays.
 
  • #157
I'm against a union between two men or two women being called a marriage, because it is not a marriage. Marriage is defined between one man and one woman.

So because because the mannequin is a female that is what makes it perfectly fine for him to be married to her. Never mind the fact that she is not a flesh and blood human. At least we are clear. Marriage = Man + Woman even if it is real (but schizophrenic) man and fake, plastic woman. That has to be the most asinine argument I have heard.

I think the true cowards in this thread are the ones who are ignorant enough to claim that I hate gays.

For the record I never claimed you "hate gays." In fact I never said anything like that. Granted, I made mention to people who are "against same sex relationships" and yes, I admit I would put you under that umbrella. But saying someone is "against same sex relationships" is a world away from saying someone "hates gays" and it is sheer ignorance to try and equate the two as being the same.
 
  • #158
So because because the mannequin is a female that is what makes it perfectly fine for him to be married to her. Never mind the fact that she is not a flesh and blood human.

I don't honestly believe this story you told. Papers can be faked. If anything a mock-wedding was probably given along with mock papers to appease the mentally disabled man.

At least we are clear. Marriage = Man + Woman even if it is real (but schizophrenic) man and fake, plastic woman. That has to be the most asinine argument I have heard.

You're the only one arguing for being married to a piece of plastic, I never said anything about it, in fact I laughed because that's the most bogus thing I've ever heard.

Granted, I made mention to people who are "against same sex relationships" and yes, I admit I would put you under that umbrella.

I admit that you fail at comprehension, please re-read my last post. It really isn't surprising however since you believe there's a man who has a legit marriage to a doll. How naive can we be?

But saying someone is "against same sex relationships" is a world away from saying someone "hates gays" and it is sheer ignorance to try and equate the two as being the same.

What kind of ignorance is it when I tell you I have no problems with same-sex relationships, and then you turn around and claim that I do?
 
  • #160
I'm against a union between two men or two women being called a marriage, because it is not a marriage. Marriage is defined between one man and one woman.

My definition of marriage does include same-sex couples. Your argument then evaporates because, according to you, the definition is what denotes whether it is moral or not.

So, why should we prefer your definition to mine? Mine has just as much, if not more historical validity (same sex unions have been recognized by thousands of ancient cultures, and same-sex marriages were performed by the Church until the 10th century).

Why should I live under your definition, rather than you under mine? Isn't this a free country?

I hate to tell you, but the price of living your life the way you want is that you have to tolerate other living their lives the way they want.

Mokele
 
Back
Top