Discussion of religion in the context of LGBTQ+ rights is only allowed in the LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion Thread
.
Discussion of religion in any other context is off topic in all of the "LGBTQ+ rights..." threads.
Attempting to bait others into bringing up religion is also not allowed.
Edited by Mrph1 on Dec 1st 2023 at 6:53:59 PM
Pious Liberals... you mean like people who read TheGuardian?
edited 16th Apr '13 8:41:54 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
British Newspapers are dreadful. Seriously, I'd take the Enquirer ahead of the Sun, Star, or the Mirror.
Schild und Schwert der Partei
Well, the answer to this and to some of your earlier questions are the obvious "the U.S. is a constitutional republic" business. Hope I'm not dealing in the over-obvious, but if you want someone with certain views out of office, you vote for some other candidate, or you lobby/exercise your speech rights to persuade other voters or advance the fortunes of other candidates.
Hope I wasn't misinterpreting a question that you meant to be rhetorical.
![]()
You misunderstood me. I don't want people with certain beliefs out of office, (except for bigots) just for having those beliefs. I just don't want them to mandate purely religious beliefs that not everyone shares by law. I'd like a time when that is considered bad form.
edited 16th Apr '13 9:56:43 AM by Wildcard
![]()
This,
This is actually one of the biggest flaws in places like missouri. St Louis and Kansas City are quite progressive minded places and hold quite a lot of the state population.
But they're a grand totals of 2 voting districts. Meaning all the other parts of the state with small towns and rural voters outnumber them in the state legislature a million to one.
When your only liberal places are 2 major cities and a few of the more upscale college towns (like Warrensburg, Columbia, and Springfield), you end up with one part of the populace that happens to simply have more, if less populous districts controlling the state conversation.
edited 16th Apr '13 9:54:21 AM by Midgetsnowman
I doubt it. I find that in my hometown, of the people who can afford reliable internet, they're more likely to just seek out pages that confirm their ideas.
And thats supposing they can get reliable internet. Which in the rural parts of the state is a bit more of a tossup than it is in the city. And by a bit I mean a lot.
Unlike most of the developed world, the US internet infrastructure is kind of terrible.
edited 16th Apr '13 10:01:25 AM by Midgetsnowman
Internet is expensive in Arkansas. I have it through my cell phone or I go to a friend's house. But what Midget says goes here too, if not worse because of your ability to filter the internet. At least with television you may get a commercial here and there or at least see something when flipping through, but internet? No such luck.
Also people here are poorly educated on both sides of the political spectrum so many people that would be more open to using the internet don't have the skill set to navigate it.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - AszurPut a kid in front of a computer and see how long it takes them to find /b/; not that long. The thing is, children learn to use tech quite easily, as long as the interface is simple enough and tinkering doesn't lead to catastrophic results.
But I'm really surprised: whenever I post anything of anything, US readers usually outnumber those every other nation combined, and by a fair margin. I've grown to believe that the USA are the most wired country in the universe.
edited 16th Apr '13 10:58:01 AM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.I don't think FP would shrink to that. He would probably say we should outlaw that too and he says God hates everyone who disagrees with him.
I object! The actual stereotype is Christians were born into it and choose to stay from parental guilt.
Ship you and I agree on a lot but this isn't one of those things. The gay rights focus isn't about Christians or Republicans or humiliating them at all. The only reason some have resorted to that tactic is because they have been a roadblock against this social change for so long when they could have stayed out of it with no negative repercussion for them. Just as Christianity has sometimes been twisted by others, (you have said many are not real Christians) to mean "I want people who disagree with me to burn in hell" doesn't mean the focus is on it, it just means some people are using it wrong.
It would also help if a lot of the conservatives something we could agree on. Most of the arguments have been to "The Bible is against gay marriage" when many do not believe in God. Even Bill O Riley admitted that. If they had some more arguments than just that than maybe there would be something to understand.
edited 16th Apr '13 11:51:11 AM by Wildcard
They're fighting to be right. Not for what's right, but to be right. You do get a fair number of people on the left who define themselves as 'left' by putting themselves in opposition of what they see as the 'right'. It's the same blindness that you see on the Right, people who are not interested in doing what is right, simply in proving that they are right.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

@midgetsnowman: Especially as some in the GOP are against teaching critical thinking.
"And as long as a sack of shit is not a good thing to be, chivalry will never die."