Tracking a cultural shift: Analysts examine rising support for legalizing same-sex marriage

Jun 26, 2013 by Colleen Walsh
“Over the years, our surveys have shown a pretty high percentage of millennials, 18- to 29-year-olds, are comfortable with same-sex relationships … Some of the hesitation that you hear sometimes from younger voters with wanting to embrace the Republican Party is this particular issue. It’s not abortion … this is one where there’s a clear break,” said Trey Grayson (left), director of Harvard’s Institute of Politics. Also offering insight on the shift in support of same-sex marriage were Harvard’s Professor Theda Skocpol, (center) and Carr Center program director Timothy McCarthy. Credit: (from left) by Katherine Taylor; Kristyn Ulanday; Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photograper

No matter how the U.S. Supreme Court rules on two historic same-sex marriage cases, it's clear the court of public opinion is shifting on the issue.

Four years ago, polls suggested that about 40 percent of the American public favored . Today, those figures are above 50 percent. According to a Pew Research Center poll conducted last month, 72 percent of Americans viewed of same-sex as "inevitable." A recent New York Times/NBC survey found that 56 percent of Americans supported the equal treatment of same-sex couples already married.

The same survey said 60 percent favored letting the decision to legalize gay marriage rest with the states, not the federal government. Increasingly, states are accepting same-sex marriage. In the few months since the high court heard oral arguments in these cases, three more states have legalized it, bringing the total to 12 plus the District of Columbia. Marriage equality is also gaining ground internationally. Since March, Uruguay, New Zealand, and France have joined 11 other countries that support it.

The political shift

Many experts say the is changing to reflect the national trend. While few Republicans have openly supported gay marriage, there has been notable movement in the U.S. Senate. Three GOP senators have voiced their support in recent months, including Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio, who reversed his position on the issue after his son came out to him.

Earlier this year, more than 100 prominent Republicans signed a legal brief backing gay marriage, in support of a lawsuit before the court that aims to strike down Proposition 8, California's ban on same-sex marriage.

According to Trey Grayson, director of Harvard's Institute of Politics, the Republican Party recognizes it has to do a better job of attracting younger and more diverse members. A possible shift on its gay marriage stance—despite the Republican National Committee's recent vote to affirm its commitment to defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman—may be part of the solution.

"Over the years, our surveys have shown a pretty high percentage of millennials, 18- to 29-year-olds, are comfortable with same-sex relationships … Some of the hesitation that you hear sometimes from younger voters with wanting to embrace the Republican Party is this particular issue. It's not abortion … this is one where there's a clear break," said Grayson.

In addition to younger voters, the libertarian element in the Republican Party, which typically favors "letting individuals do what they want," is also in play, said Grayson, as is the attitude of major Republican donors and consultants who tend to look more favorably on gay marriage.

"Republicans, in order to win more elections in the future, have to be more open," Grayson said. "This strikes me as having an inexorable march," he added. "I think it will, over time, change."

But perhaps a bigger change in opinion has played out on the Democratic side of the aisle. President Obama, a longtime supporter of civil unions, said his position "evolved" over time. Last year he declared his support for same-sex marriage, and in his 2013 inaugural address made a historic reference to gay rights. "Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law," Obama said then. "For if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."

Harvard's Theda Skocpol, the Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology, said the reasons behind Obama's change of mind were likely both personal and political.

"He knew someone personally is what he said, but he was also pointing to a reason that surely his pollsters told him was driving a lot of change of opinion in the larger population," said Skocpol, adding that Obama's backing has likely meant more support on the issue within the Democratic ranks. "The Democrats in Congress all say they are evolving. I think some of them were planning to evolve for several years, but since Obama moved, they've evolved in just a few months."

The argument that same-sex marriage weakens marriage as a vehicle for raising children doesn't hold true for Skocpol, who pointed to both the large number of gay couples eager to start families and the decline in marriage more generally as contrasts.

"The horse has been out of the barn on the weakening of marriage since the '70s. People get divorces … people are even getting divorced into old age. Not all married people have children, and in fact large numbers of women have children without marriage.

"There is a sort of arc in American history, that in some ways has gotten stronger in the last half century, towards saying 'Each person should be able to pursue happiness in their own way.' I remember seeing a woman carrying a sign at the Supreme Court saying 'Gays should have the right to be as miserable in their marriage as I am.'"

The history of the debate

While marriage equality has become a central component of the modern gay rights agenda, debates about marriage and families date back to the founding of the gay liberation movement in the late 1960s and '70s, according to Harvard's Timothy McCarthy.

"For many years, the idea of the viability of this as a political movement was something that was a pipedream—for even the people who really wanted it," said McCarthy, a lecturer on history, literature, and public policy.

Over the years, other issues took precedence in the movement, including employment nondiscrimination and the drive to increase funding and support for AIDS research, prevention, and health care. When President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law in 1996, the movement was inspired by to develop a different political strategy, with marriage equality as one of its central goals.

"I like to tell people Bill Clinton loved us and left us, and Barack Obama wanted to date us a little while longer before making a commitment," said McCarthy. "And I think that has played out politically. When it comes to gay rights, Obama has been much better, not only than Clinton, but than any other president in the history of the country. So that has opened up, I think, an interesting space."

Much of that space has been filled by an increasing number of heterosexual allies. McCarthy called that kind of support, when viewed alongside other major American social movements, "remarkable." During the crucible of the Civil Rights Movement, the majority of "white people didn't come out in support of rights for African-Americans," he said. "Likewise, men didn't back women in any significant numbers during the women's movement, and capitalists never really favored union rights during the height of the labor movement.

"This is a really interesting and I think largely unique moment in American history, where you have a social movement that is on the march and on the move, that is drawing into its ranks an army of straight allies who are willing to be out there, at least insofar as their support for marriage equality is concerned."

And while he agrees that much of the support has to do with the fact that more and more people know someone, either a family member or close friend, who is gay, it has just as much to do with something of a perfect cultural storm: the repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy addressing gays in the military, the increased awareness of bullying and ensuing anti-bullying campaigns, and the marriage equality movement.

"It's about children, the military, and marriage," said McCarthy, who is also a program director at the Harvard Kenney School's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. "We value all three, and we have been able to insert ourselves into these three arenas, and have then invited straight allies to be with us. By demanding our right to fight in the military, get married, and protect our children, we have become more legible to straight people who otherwise would not necessarily be on board with our struggle."

Explore further: Society bloomed with gentler personalities and more feminine faces

Related Stories

Gay marriage ruling unlikely to cause anti-gay backlash

Jun 19, 2013

Concerns that a U.S. Supreme Court ruling favorable to gay marriage might produce a backlash that would impede efforts to achieve equality are unfounded, according to a study by researchers at University of California campuses ...

Supreme Court to decide the fate of same-sex marriage

Mar 14, 2013

The Supreme Court will hear arguments later this month in two separate cases that could pave the way for federal recognition of same-sex marriages, while also overturning state restrictions that deny same-sex ...

Recommended for you

Soccer's key role in helping migrants to adjust

18 hours ago

New research from the University of Adelaide has for the first time detailed the important role the sport of soccer has played in helping migrants to adjust to their new lives in Australia.

Congressional rift over environment influences public

Jul 31, 2014

American citizens are increasingly divided over the issue of environmental protection and seem to be taking their cue primarily from Congress, finds new research led by a Michigan State University scholar.

User comments : 427

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

dogbert
1.5 / 5 (17) Jun 26, 2013
Always left out of these liberal articles is that the issue is not about single gender unions and not even about single gender marriage, it is about gaining licensure and benefits for single gender unions.

Societies traditionally do not reward aberrant behavior. Those societies which do embrace aberrant behaviors seldom survive for long.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (15) Jun 26, 2013
If a majority vote to define marriage as one man/one woman or 1 man/4 women or .....
then let it be that.
But when homosexual activists push marriage as a civil rights issue and use courts to force the change, then they must expect Mormons and Muslims will demand polygamy. And they have a better legal basis based on the first amendment.
Do 'liberals' want to be out bred by Mormons and Muslims? (They probably won't mind Muslims, until they impose Sharia.)
djr
3.8 / 5 (10) Jun 26, 2013
dogbert: "Those societies which do embrace aberrant behaviors seldom survive for long."

I think you are suggesting that the right wing judeo christian mega fundy church dominant culture of the U.S.A. is headed for the dustbin of history. Do you think that is a bad thing?

Here is a taste - http://www.youtub...fL6IVWCE
kochevnik
2 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
Gayness is condoned in your bye-bull, dogbert
geokstr
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
dogbert: "Those societies which do embrace aberrant behaviors seldom survive for long."

I think you are suggesting that the right wing judeo christian mega fundy church dominant culture of the U.S.A. is headed for the dustbin of history. Do you think that is a bad thing?

Here is a taste - http://www.youtub...fL6IVWCE

I dare you to say that to a Muslim, Dogbert. They have no gays in Iran because they hang them, along with the atheists.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 26, 2013
Those societies which do embrace aberrant behaviors seldom survive for long
It is abherrant to bear children into overcrowded tribes.

'Everything is beautiful in its own time' says your book. Humans have been living with chronic overpopulation ever since they became able to hunt those animals which were keeping their numbers in check. Can we assume that during this time humans have been selected for physiological states which can serve to reduce pop growth rather than maintain it?

Gaydom directly affects the growth rate of a group. It is its predominant effect. We can surmise that this is the reason it exists.

Overpop is most critical in cities like Sodom and we would expect to find the practice of non-procreative sex there.

Religions are designed to maximize growth. They give believers the illusion that they live on the frontier where maximum growth IS preferred biologically. Pioneers of course find non-procreative sex offensive. The holy books all make this an imperative.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 26, 2013
Those societies which do embrace aberrant behaviors seldom survive for long.
Traditionally those societies with critical population problems were on the verge of collapse anyway. In prehistory gaydom would serve to moderate growth along with infanticide and war.

In our history, religion has forbidden the first 2, leaving only war as the alternative to starvation and collapse. The institution of prenatal infanticide has been made necessary in order to counter the effects of religion-mandated growth, as spontaneous war has become far too dangerous to tolerate.

Of course there IS always plague. But on the whole it would be prudent to begin ending the ruinous effect that religion has on the world, and we can observe all the many ways which this is in fact being accomplished.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
If a majority vote to define marriage as one man/one woman or 1 man/4 women or .....
then let it be that
You forgot 1 woman/4 men. The office of marriage was critically compromised when people began attaching things to it like insurance benefits, retirement, etc. These had ALREADY redefined marriage as primarily a legal relationship and not a biological one.

As gaydom most likely arose to limit growth, and since a convincing argument can be made that children do not fare well in such families, then it seems reasonable to put restrictions on children as part of these relationships. They are not configured to procreate are they?
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (13) Jun 26, 2013
It's another symptom of a selfish, narcissistic society.
The only purpose for a govt to grant privilege for marriage is to protect women and children's property rights.
Brigham Young had 28 wives, most were widows who lost their husbands on the journey to UT.
I wonder how eager homosexuals would be to be 'married' if their were no govt privilege.
VendicarE
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 26, 2013
"Always left out of these liberal articles is that ..." - DogFart

I agree with DogFart. Heterosexual Couples only marry for money, just like Gay couples do.

VendicarE
2.7 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2013
"Do 'liberals' want to be out bred by Mormons and Muslims?" - RyggTard

Who is "breeding" is not on my list of concerns. It does appear to be a very important issue to Skinhead Republicans, Klan Republicans, Patriot movement Republicans, Teabagger Republicans, and Libertarians and Randites like RyggTard.

VendicarE
3.3 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2013
"I wonder how eager homosexuals would be to be 'married' if their were no govt privilege." - RyggTard

The U.S. supreme court made RyggTard a loser again today, in their ruling against the Defense of Marriage Act.

Poor RyggTard. the Libertarian paradise of Somalia must be looking better and better to you every day.

You should emigrate.

Do it now. What is stopping you?

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 26, 2013
It's another symptom of a selfish, narcissistic society.
So is forcing women to bear more children than they can support, and until it kills them.
Brigham Young had 28 wives
Yes well his bizarre religion was Concocted for the sole Purpose of filling up that region with mineworkers. It just goes to show the sort of nonsense that people are willing to believe. Like the trinity and immaculate conce
most were widows who lost their husbands on the journey to UT
-and the rest may well have lost theirs in the civil war. Retasked and reassigned to fill up the world as the bible says. Applied demographics.

The world is again full as it has been many times in the past. There is a time to embrace and a time to embrace to no ill effect, which is now. It is again legal and encouraged and preferred that people expend their energies in less prolific pursuits. Again, applied demographics.

See, this is not so difficult to understand. The flock has Shepherds.
nowhere
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2013
it is about gaining licensure and benefits for single gender unions.

So you would rather they don't fairly receive the same benefits as traditional marriages?
nowhere
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2013
But when homosexual activists push marriage as a civil rights issue and use courts to force the change, then they must expect Mormons and Muslims will demand polygamy. And they have a better legal basis based on the first amendment.
Do 'liberals' want to be out bred by Mormons and Muslims?

Slippry slope. While same sex marriage is equally moral to traditional marriage, polygamy is extremely hard to practice without causing at least one persons suffering. It is thus not moral, as we are jealous beings after all. Your association is therefore flawed.
djr
5 / 5 (3) Jun 26, 2013
geokstr: "I dare you to say that to a Muslim, Dogbert. They have no gays in Iran because they hang them, along with the atheists."

Was there a point in there geokstr?
dtxx
2.1 / 5 (7) Jun 26, 2013
I love it that Dog and Ryg can't see gays' desire for marriage as anything other than a way to deny the republicans their godright. After all, if we didn't have assholes posting on this board to stand up for god, who would do it? Certainly not omipotent god. No, he needs a bunch of self-righteous trolls or he will get his unending power and influence completely insubstantiated because two men or two women get the same legal rights as a straight couple that bears no children.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 26, 2013
Why is there this culture shift? Tyranny. Hezbollah Progressives control the main stream media, who will destroy anyone who speaks out against gay marriage. Hezbollah Progressives own the school system, if you speak out against Homosexual Marriage you will be fired or if you are a student humiliated by teachers and staff. It is the Hezbollah Progressives who control the government and if speak out, you will be fired. It is the Hezbollah Progressives in government agencies like the DOJ, DOE, IRS, etc. who use their power to hinder any groups or individuals against gay marriage.

freethinking
1.6 / 5 (14) Jun 26, 2013
So here is a question. Since the homosexual lifestyle is well known to be an extremely unhealthy lifestyle could the government be sued by homosexuals for promoting it? It is like the government promoting smoking by forcing people to say smoking is healthy, prosecuting those who are against smoking, encouraging smoking at schools, forcing companies to allow smoking.

Since government is well aware of the dangers of the homosexual lifestyle, should they not be held liable by those who participate in the lifestyle?

Information about the homosexual lifestyle can be found in the link below.

http://www.americ...tm#_edn6
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
Currently 1/3 of all child sexual assaults are committed by homosexuals who make up only 1% of the population. Given that the government in now promoting homosexuals as a normal, and since homosexual literature and culture, encourages, promotes, and idolizes adult/child sexual contact, most likely will be more child sexual assaults; can a child sue the government as government is encouraging and promoting homosexuality?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 26, 2013
If there was a true cultural shift, why did 5 judges have to overrule a bipartisan majority in Congress and the voters of California?
That's is not democracy.
But for 'progressives', democracy only matters iff it advances the destruction of the Constitution.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
In the United States, the top 6 male serial killers were all homosexuals. Remember homosexuals make up only 1% of the population.

Given that violence is so prevalent in the homosexual community, can someone who is attacked by a homosexual sue the government? Should not the government which actively promotes such a known dangerous and violent lifestyle bear responsibility when a homosexual attacks a person?
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 26, 2013
For heterosexuals Marriage is generally means one man exclusive to one woman.

However for homosexuals studies show most homosexual exchange occurs between strangers, 70 percent admitting that they had had sex only once with over half of their partners. Homosexuals average somewhere between 20 and 106 different partners per year. The average homosexual has had 300 to 500 partners during a lifetime. Twenty-eight percent of homosexuals have had sodomy with 1000 or more partners, 70 percent with 50 or more partners, and only 2 percent have had what could be described as monogamous or semi-monogamous relationships. Of these monogamous relationships, however, still 5 percent drank urine, 7 percent incorporated fisting, 33 percent ingested feces, 53 percent swallowed semen, and 59 percent received sperm up their rectum during the previous month of study, Still other studies indicate that "monogamy" for homosexuals lasts between 9 and 60 months.

ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 26, 2013
Child abuse.
" The "pregnant man" may soon be a male single mother.

Thomas Beatie, a transgender man who bore three children, is filing for divorce from his wife Nancy, WPTV reported.

But a judge is questioning whether their marriage was legally valid in the first place. Beatie is hoping it is, even though it'd be cheaper for him if it wasn't.

He was born as a woman in Hawaii and had a sex change before getting married in 2003, though he still has female reproductive organs.

Read more: http://www.nydail...XNHsldm0
freethinking
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 26, 2013
For everyone's information, in Canada giving facts and speaking the truth about homosexuality in Canada can and has led people to be charge with a hate crime. Speaking the truth is no defense against a hate crime.

Gay Marriage is not about gaining rights (a homosexual can marry anyone a heterosexual can marry), it is about homosexuals gaining special rights, and the removal of religious, free speech, and parental rights. In other word gay marriage is nothing but Progressive Tyranny.
kochevnik
1.9 / 5 (13) Jun 26, 2013
In the United States, the top 6 male serial killers were all homosexuals. Remember homosexuals make up only 1% of the population.
And your homophobia proves you're one of the 1%. Congratulations, you are on top
djr
3 / 5 (6) Jun 26, 2013
"Why is there this culture shift?"

Great question - I think it is about progress. As we become a more educated and informed society - we recognize the harm that intollerance does - and become a more open and advanced society. Polls in the U.S. show young people to be much less concerned abut issues of race, and sexual orientation etc - and therefore we evolve to a more open and accepting culture. The bigots go in the dustbin of history (no names mentioned).
Shootist
2.1 / 5 (13) Jun 26, 2013
Frankly, combining 40 years of propagandizing egalitarianism and 'social justice; with 150 channels on TV, the Internet, and social media, all mewling for the same outcome; people have just gotten tired of the whining.
alfie_null
3.3 / 5 (7) Jun 27, 2013
The usual rants from the usual players, rhetoric, FUD, cherry-picked and perhaps synthesized stats, etc. Makes me wonder to whom will they turn when the Republicans abandon them? Things aren't well set up in the United States to support a third party. Even if they were, it's hard to imagine these homophobic views ever gaining popular support. Hopefully these guys can find someplace more receptive to their views to which they can emigrate. Otherwise just remain here, uncompromising and unhappy.

Freethinking, in particular, is a little scary. Obsessed. Were he in charge, I can easily imagine internment camps, "shower" facilities, etc.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Where is the cultural shift?
It can't be much of a cultural shift if 5 judges choose the culture.
The CA amendment to define marriage as one man and one woman was supported overwhelmingly by blacks and Hispanics.
If the 'progressives' get their way and allow illegals to be US citizens, will they be as supportive of this shift?
It's interesting the socialist French are not very supportive of Homosexual marriage.
nowhere
3.8 / 5 (10) Jun 27, 2013
Since the homosexual lifestyle is well known to be an extremely unhealthy lifestyle could the government be sued by homosexuals for promoting it?

1. Your opinion of unhealthy is your own.
2. The government isn't promoting homosexuality, they are promoting equal rights for people who are homosexual. People don't choose to be this way, they are born it.
3. Only in countries like America can you sue an entity after you accept their offer of an unhealthy lifestyle (McDonald's? ). The rest of us accept the responsibility of our own decisions.
4. smoking causes cancer. What does homosexuality cause? Gay sex? How does that kill people?
djr
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 27, 2013
It can't be much of a cultural shift

Oh but it is Ryggy - no matter how loud you scream. Check out this poll http://www.theatl.../259039/

A scary quote for you from the poll - "Fifty-three percent say homosexuality is now morally acceptable, up from 38 percent in 2002."

Here is another quote from a different poll for you

"Millennials are a racially and ethnically diverse generation. Only 59% of Millennials are white non-Hispanic. They are well acquainted with changing face of America and overwhelmingly think these changes are good for the country."

http://www.people...ction-3/

Off to the dustbin Ryggy.

freethinking
1.3 / 5 (15) Jun 27, 2013
Progressives are the ones that look down on Homosexuals and are the homophobes. They believe they are too sensitive to be told the truth, they are too sensitive to have anyone disprove of their lifestyle.

I believe Homosexuals deserve to be told the truth about their lifestyle. Their lifestyle is a dangerous and unhealthy one. IF they choose to participate in it, that is there choice. I don't care what they do in the bedroom, ( 5 percent of homosexuals drink urine, 7 percent incorporated fisting, and 33 percent ingest feces). Just don't ask me to accept what you do is normal and healthy, just don't teach school children what you do is normal and healthy, just don't ask the government to persecute those that don't agree with you.

You are no more born a homosexual than you are born a smoker, or a alcoholic, There is NO scientific evidence that someone is born a homosexual.
kochevnik
2.5 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Closet cases like freethinking are Hezbollah homophobe homosexuals
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (13) Jun 27, 2013
forcing companies to allow smoking
Nobody is forcing you to be an imbecile ft. Maybe you were just born an imbecile like gays are born gay?

Science suggests that monogamy was rare among pre-human primates but was selected for in tribes as it is advantageous in maintaining harmony and trust. Gaydom also aids in tribal harmony by reducing competition for reproductive rights, and by reducing population pressure when necessary.

Humans were selected for intelligence in the form of communication, cooperation, planning, and tech use, as these too contributed to the success of tribes. Our brains grew in size and complexity as a result, with a corresponding disparity of intellect.

Religions favor people with reduced ability to think and reason. But they enabled cohesiveness to be extended over ever larger groups. This is another unfortunate result of the very unnatural human condition, and an adequate explanation of the stunted mental capabilities of believers such as yourself.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
Should not the government which actively promotes such a known dangerous and violent lifestyle bear responsibility when a homosexual attacks a person?
Yes slapfights make me uncomfortable as well.

In order to be fair ft you should cite all the violence done over the cause of reproductive rights. Domestic violence is especially severe in religion-dominated cultures.

"While it is generally outlawed in the Western World, this is not the case in many developing countries. For instance, in 2010, the United Arab Emirates's Supreme Court ruled that a man has the right to physically discipline his wife and children as long as he does not leave physical marks."

-Monogamy is difficult to enforce as it is distinctly unnatural. Women covet the ability to choose the very best mate for each and every child they wish to bear. But then men will seek to impregnate as many women as they can.

While NATURAL these tendencies weaken tribal cohesion. Religion serves in part to mitigate this.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (14) Jun 27, 2013
There is NO scientific evidence that someone is born a homosexual
Again, your religion makes you think it is proper to make things up rather than look them up.

"We know, from many twin and adoption studies, that sexual preference has a genetic component.

"A gay man is more likely than a straight man to have a (biological) gay brother; lesbians are more likely than straight women to have gay sisters.

"In 1993, a study published in the journal Science showed that families with two homosexual brothers were very likely to have certain genetic markers on a region of the X chromosome known as Xq28. This led to media headlines about the possibility of the existence of a "gay gene" and discussions about the ethics of aborting a "gay" fetus."

-Certainly, natural behavior can be unnaturally altered. Religions seek to maximize growth by enlisting everyone in the effort. But for pragmatic reasons they provided nunneries and monasteries for those who could not conform.
djr
4 / 5 (8) Jun 27, 2013
Freethinker (not) "You are no more born a homosexual than you are born a smoker, or a alcoholic,"

Wow - it is hard for me to believe that someone could be so ignorant - and then to read a science site like physorg - Freethinker must experience overwhelming cognitive dissonance. There is nothing more to be said. I would suggest googling alcoholism and twin studies - or any number of approaches to look at the genetics of addiction - but Freethinker is clearly not aware of google.
djr
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
" for pragmatic reasons they provided nunneries and monasteries for those who could not conform."

Perhaps the convents and monasteries were actually for people who could conform - they just conformed to a different calling - and what went on behind those walls - stayed behind those walls!
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 27, 2013
Freethinker is correct, djr. Behaviors are always choices.
JohnGee
2.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
Freethinker is correct, djr. Behaviors are always choices.

Obviously, one's behavior isn't what makes him gay. Desires aren't controlled by choice.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (13) Jun 27, 2013
Desires aren't controlled by choice.

Response to desires can be controlled.
Or, at one time, controlling one's animal instincts were considered noble.
Today, 'progressives' laugh at the concept.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 27, 2013
Or, at one time, controlling one's animal instincts were considered noble.

Ryggy wants to go back to the Victorian era - sex is just for procreating - nasty dirty stuff that good people don't like to do. I am glad we have progressed - recognize the fun of sex, and are working to leave those old Victorian ways of thinking behind. Poor ryggy.
djr
3.7 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
Freethinker is correct, djr. Behaviors are always choices.

So what? If someone is gay - and wants to have a partner - and enjoy a physical relationship with that partner - it does not hurt me one bit - so the only reason I would want to interfere with that relationship - is if I am not a true conservative - believing that another person's business is another person's business.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
djr,
What do you mean 'So what?' You chided freethinker for noting you have choices. Then I pointed out that behaviors are always choices.

Of course you may choose badly -- but it is a choice.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Freethinker is correct, djr. Behaviors are always choices
Ever hear of pavlovs dog? Ever hear of evolutionary psychology?

Our behaviors are a product of our evolution and the necessities of survival and reproduction. We have surprisingly little choice in how we act or what we feel. Surprising at any rate to those who still feel that there is some merit to the 70s tabula rasa bullshit. Almost as surprising as the fact that these people havent learned anything new in 40 years.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (13) Jun 27, 2013
Or, at one time, controlling one's animal instincts were considered noble.

Ryggy wants to go back to the Victorian era - sex is just for procreating - nasty dirty stuff that good people don't like to do. I am glad we have progressed - recognize the fun of sex, and are working to leave those old Victorian ways of thinking behind. Poor ryggy.


So let everyone have sex where ever whenever, kill their babies if they don't want them, kill anyone who pisses them off (Aron Hernandez).... Let's promote everyone living like animals with no discipline, no thought for a better future.
That's the 'progressive' way. Schools teach kids how to put condoms on a banana but not how to read and do maths.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
and what went on behind those walls - stayed behind those walls!
Well - not always...

"We have been informed to our great horror that many monks are addicted to debauchery and all sorts of vile abominations, even to unnatural sins. We forbid all such practices and command the monks to cease wandering over the country." -Charlemagne

"...friars openly roamed the streets with women on their arms. Many of the priests were ignorant and tyrannical, ... and who were apt to abuse the confessional." Henry Bamford Parkes
http://www.sdadef...bacy.htm

-Its interesting just how obvious the homosexual nature of the church actually is. We have a longhaired, robe-wearing, soft-spoken lovegod who traveled about with his all-male entourage and a token harlot...and his mum, who by the way was able to give birth without having been sullied by the touch of a man.
cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Let us ask ourselves just what segment of the population would these images most inspire? And who could be expected to form a loyal cadre committed to defending the institution which gave them shelter, and to keeping its secrets safe?

One factor in maximizing population growth is the removal of all disruptive elements. The church gave incorrigible homosexuals somewhere to go, safe from harassment, where they could be themselves.

And celibacy was introduced to unburden them of having to pretend while discouraging heteros at the same time.

This arrangement was not original. We find in precursor religions the presence of vestal virgins, eunuchs, and such. The church was only using a time-tested formula to staff its clergy.

It is amazing just how obvious this all is when described. It indicates how little we have let ourselves think about these religions and their institutions.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
So let everyone have sex where ever whenever, kill their babies if they don't want them, kill anyone who pisses them off (Aron Hernandez).... Let's promote everyone living like animals with no discipline, no thought for a better future
What galls me about you religionists is you think that morality comes from some nonexistent being. How could it? Morality is innate.

Oh and your book condones all these behaviors when god says its ok (Dzhokhar Tsarnaev).
That's the 'progressive' way. Schools teach kids how to put condoms on a banana but not how to read and do maths
-Apparently you didnt learn much maths yourself. Try to grasp this:
http://en.wikiped...l_growth

-And then appreciate the danger your religion-derived morals pose to the species.
djr
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 27, 2013
Dogbert - "What do you mean 'So what?' You chided freethinker for noting you have choices"

No - I chided freethinker for being so ignorant as to not know that it is understood that there is a genetic component to addiction.

It is like this Dogbert. I may be born straight - but it is a choice I make to have a partner - have a family - etc. See the difference?
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
I don't disagree that you have a choice. That is precisely what I said.

You can choose badly or well but it is always a choice.
djr
3.5 / 5 (8) Jun 27, 2013
Ryggy: "So let everyone have sex where ever whenever, kill their babies if they don't want them, kill anyone who pisses them off (Aron Hernandez).... Let's promote everyone living like animals with no discipline, no thought for a better future.
That's the 'progressive' way."

You really go off the deep a lot don't you? I would rather advocate for a healthy society. There is a strong correlation between a positive body image, and good outcomes in terms of things like healthy relationships. So rather than Victorian repression - such as you advocate - that leads to a lot of psychological problems - let's have people who feel good about themselves - and understand about happy, healthy relationships - that oh god forbid - involve having sex with each other. You really are a mess Ryggy.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
religion-derived morals pose to the species.


"An ancient diet has become one of the hottest new food trends.

A growing number of supermarket shoppers are going kosher — not for religious reasons, but because they are convinced the foods are safer and better for health."

Nearly all influenza viruses originate in poultry, mutate to swine and then to humans in China where they all practically live together.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Ha. I got one for ya

"A two-week old boy died recently at Maimonides Hospital in Brooklyn, New York, after undergoing a rarely-practiced, and highly controversial, Jewish circumcision ritual known as metzitzah b'peh. According to the New York Daily News (NYDN), the unidentified young boy contracted herpes simplex virus Type 1 from the Rockland County rabbi that performed the ritual on him, and died shortly thereafter.

"The practice, which involves a rabbi literally sucking the blood from the circumcised boy's "wound" with his mouth after the circumcision has been performed, has long been considered by many, including those in the public health sector, as extremely high risk -- some even attribute it to child abuse."

Oh well gods will eh? Idiot religionists.
freethinking
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 27, 2013
Progressives believe people are stupid animals. I know people who have a family history of alcoholism so they avoid alcohol. I know people who are alcoholics who choose not to drink. When I have a function I do not serve alcohol even though I myself drink so as not to hinder/tempt them or anyone who has a problem with alcohol.

Homosexuality is the same way, you choose your actions, you choose who you have sex with. Anyone who say differently is calling Homosexuals nothing but an animal. Homosexual activists want to tempt and promote homosexuality. Government is now actively promoting homosexuality in schools, in it's agencies, in the military saying it is normal and equivalent (and some cases superior) to heterosexuality.

By the same progressive reasoning, government should promote and normalize alcoholism, smoking, and drug addiction.

FYI, smoking and moderate alcoholism is less dangerous than the homosexual lifestyle.

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
Sorry ft xians who know a lot more about this than you do, have abandoned the idea that it can be 'fixed'.

"An "ex-gay" Christian ministry that spearheaded the largest national movement to cure homosexuality is shutting its doors for good one year after renouncing its controversial therapies.

Exodus International announced its groundbreaking decision Wednesday before offering an apology for all the harm and pain it has caused the gay community over the last 37 years.

"For quite some time we've been imprisoned in a worldview that's neither honoring toward our fellow human beings, nor biblical," said ministry President Alan Chambers, who has struggled with his own same-sex attractions, on Thursday.

"Up until last year, it had asserted that homosexuality could be overcome by therapy and prayer..."

By the way alcoholism is a disease which you also do not understand. Not drinking has nothing to do with temptation.

Again you would rather make things up than actually learn. Sad.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 27, 2013
This is apropos:
" God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form. And these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away, then, with quacks and organizers! A way with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificial systems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their free credit, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations!

And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works. "
"The Law"
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 27, 2013
Progressives believe people are stupid animals.

Muslims agree. This must be why Obama is simpatico with Islam.
The reason women must be covered is so they won't tempt men.
Islam accepts men are weak and will submit to their base instincts. Therefore temptation must be eliminated: women must be covered, and must do nothing to temp men to sin.
Maybe this why Islam requires prayer 5 times a day. The regimentation keeps them in line.
Conversely, Jesus, a human, was tempted by Satan and did not succumb. Resisting and overcoming temptation is a goal for Christians.
"ANAN: There can be no peace. Don't you see? We've admitted it to ourselves. We're a killer species. It's instinctive. It's the same with you. Your General Order Twenty Four.
KIRK: All right. It's instinctive. But the instinct can be fought. We're human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it. We can admit that we're killers, but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes
nowhere
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
Homosexuality is the same way, you choose your actions, you choose who you have sex with.

From this comment we can determine that ft is at least bisexual. If I view a woman naked I will get aroused, I may now choose to have sex or not, but were I to view a man naked I would not get aroused. No matter my choice, I could not have sex with the man due to physically being unable(flaccid). Since ft poses anyone could make either choice, from his experience he must experience arousal in both those circumstances. It is understandable now why ft hates homosexuals so much. This is because he is one and has sacrificed his desires where others embrace theirs. You see ft, I dont hate homosexuals because if I cannot desire a man as they do,how can I force them to desire a woman as I do?
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2013
"Resisting and overcoming temptation is a goal for Christians."

It is really nice being an atheist - you don't have to speak for a whole group of people, you just answer for yourself - kind of a libertarian ideal in there. There are certainly some commonalities, and humanists do have a defined set of values - basically be a good person - and don't hurt others (that includes puppy dogs). Language like "overcoming temptation" just does not come in to play for me. I think more in terms of living thoughtfully, and not hurting others. I don't evaluate things from a simplistic moral basis - ie. am I following the rule book? - more from a humanist perspective - ie. does that hurt others? I see science as more that way too - more free to go where the facts take it. I understand why Ryggy and I clash so much - I am threatening Ryggy's whole world view by advocating science - Ryggy has to do everything possible to hold back change - or Ryggy's world view is destroyed - interesting!
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
you don't have to speak for a whole group of people,

Personal discipline is not only a Christian goal, it is also a goal of many Asian cultures and a few European ones as well.
. I understand why Ryggy and I clash so much -

No, you don't.
Language like "overcoming temptation" just does not come in to play for me. I think more in terms of living thoughtfully, and not hurting others.

What does 'thoughtfully' mean? If you don't respect others, are you hurting them? If you don't respect yourself, are you hurting others?
more from a humanist perspective - ie. does that hurt others?

If true then you couldn't be the socialist that you are.
Being an atheist, with no rules, you can disregard little things like the individual's inherent right to life, liberty and property.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2013
"Personal discipline is not only a Christian goal, it is also a goal of many Asian cultures and a few European ones as well."

Oh - so you speak for Christians, Asians, and Europeans! I like just being responsible for myself - much more manageable.

"No, you don't."

I think I do - why don't you go ahead and explain it if you think I don't.

"If true then you couldn't be the socialist that you are."

I am not a socialist - been round that one a million times with you.

"Being an atheist, with no rules, you can disregard little things like the individual's inherent right to life, liberty and property."

Really? How easy it is for you to make stuff up - and then apply it to other people. If you are so big on the inherent right to liberty - how come you want to take liberty away from gay people - who want the liberty to live life their way?

ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
- how come you want to take liberty away from gay people

I don't.
Homosexuals used have the same marriage rights as anyone: one single man over a certain age can marry one women who is not closely related over a certain age.
Govts recognized and grant privilege for marriage to encourage, support and protect children and their mothers.
Homosexuals can obtain the same govt recognition called civil unions, and homosexuals are at liberty to live together as married just as heterosexuals can.
But, that is not the objective of homosexuals. They want to force society to acknowledge homosexual marriage and proceeded down a legal path.
That path will soon be followed by Muslims and Mormons demanding the govt recognize polygamy. There can be no logical objection if courts can arbitrarily change the definition of 'marriage'.
The only libertarian solution is for govts to not grant privilege or recognize marriage.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
I am not a socialist - been round that one a million times with you.

Define a 'good' person.
Define 'living thoughtfully'.
Do you accept that human individuals have an inherent right to life, liberty and property?
Should teachers, or anyone, be forced to pay union dues?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
"Progressives believe people are stupid animals"

-Well the people who wrote your book agree

"18 I also said to myself, "As for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. 19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath[c]; humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless. 20 All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. 21 Who knows if the human spirit rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?"" -ecc3

-Ecclesiastes was written for priests aka shepherds, the philosophy being that the flock needs to be domesticated as with any other barnyard animal.

The sentiment is expressed throughout the bible; wheat from chaff, killing the non-compliant, the emphasis on mating rules (Aaron spears both Israelite and his Canaanite gf), staff to herd/rod to discipline is 'comforting', etc.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
"let's promote everyone living like animals with no discipline"

-Let's address the myth that morality originates in the bookgods. We've been here before eh rygg? Your religious despots are every bit as efficient and vicious as any other whereas we should expect just the opposite. The overwhelming majority of people in the prison system claim to be religious.

Priests seem to be especially suited for abusing children in their charge; evangelists have a reputation for being philanderers, thieves, and drug addicts; and people like mother Teresa will minister to the poor and sick while condemning the use of condoms which prevent disease and unwanted pregnancy, the main CAUSE of poverty.

Gods moral code has conspicuous gaps and is predicated upon believing in a non-existent god. The book says unbelievers CANNOT be moral as they are evil.

Secular society can and has done better. It's laws are more comprehensive, more just, and more humane.
freethinking
1 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
It's funny that when speaking facts to Progressives about homosexuality they either slur you and try to say your either homosexual or bisexual, (thereby showing that they are really the homophobes) or say that you have homophobia.

If two very good same sex friends who are heterosexual want to get married so that they can look after each other, but do not want sex with each other want to get married. Why cant they? It's not gay marriage its friends marriage, they plan to have girl friends, they are not romantically attracted to each other. Why can't they have all the benefits?

Why cant an elderly widowed mother marry her spinster daughter? Why shouldn't they have the benefit of marriage? (I know one widowed mother/daughter couple, the widow lost benefits when her husband died, if she would marry her daughter they could get more benefits, they live together, they take care of each other) . Or is marriage only about 2 people who want sex together?
JohnGee
1 / 5 (6) Jun 28, 2013
"From this comment we can determine that ft is at least bisexual. If I view a woman naked I will get aroused, I may now choose to have sex or not, but were I to view a man naked I would not get aroused. No matter my choice, I could not have sex with the man due to physically being unable(flaccid). Since ft poses anyone could make either choice, from his experience he must experience arousal in both those circumstances. It is understandable now why ft hates homosexuals so much. This is because he is one and has sacrificed his desires where others embrace theirs. You see ft, I dont hate homosexuals because if I cannot desire a man as they do,how can I force them to desire a woman as I do?"
- Nowhere

It's funny that when speaking facts to Progressives about homosexuality they either slur you and try to say your either homosexual or bisexual, (thereby showing that they are really the homophobes) or say that you have homophobia.
Actually, you have both The Gay and homophobia.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"Define a 'good' person." Someone who lives their life in a way that leaves the world better than when they arrived here. Someone who is careful, and thoughtful, and above all tries to do no harm. - simple right?

"Define 'living thoughtfully'." That is self explanatory - do you not know what the word 'thoughtful' means? Another word I would use is attentive. Have you never heard the quote 'the unconsidered life is not worth living? do you not understand it?

"Do you accept that human individuals have an inherent right to life, liberty and property?"

No I don't. I think that the rights we have are negotiated Slaves do not have these rights - because other more thoughtless individuals are willing to oppress some people - to enrich themselves. That is why a framework of legal rights is important. When you use the word 'inherent', it sounds like something that is automatic, or universal - I think it is negotiated. Liberty can never be total - it must be tempered.

JohnGee
2 / 5 (8) Jun 28, 2013
Or is marriage only about 2 people who want sex together?
Well the hyper-religious like yourself claim it's about raising children, correct? Where do you think children come from, the stork?

I don't give a damn. If a mother and daughter want to get married for tax purposes whatever. Maybe a civil union would actually be appropriate in that circumstance? You want a 1 man on 4 woman marriage? We got one for ya Mohammed. The the entire board of directors of Bain wants to get freaky? Come on down Mitt!

I actually agree with Ryggesogn here to a large degree. I think the government should just not recognize marriage and not bestow any benefits on similar institutions. The only problem I foresee here is who is considered family in medical emergencies. You don't really need marriage for this though. You could just fill out a simple form at the court house or DMV or wherever.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"Should teachers, or anyone, be forced to pay union dues?"

No. That one was easy.

I have one for you - should children be encouraged to reason - and to think freely, or do you agree with Dr Joyce Meyers - that reasoning leads to confusion - and should be discouraged?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
Oh hey just checked the news

"An Italian spy, a Vatican official and banker have been arrested on suspicion of corruption and fraud involving an alleged plot to bring 20 million euros in cash into Italy from Switzerland aboard a government plane.

The arrests come just two days after Pope Francis appointed a special commission to oversee the Vatican's scandal-plagued bank, which is known officially as the Institute for Religious Works.

Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, 61, was arrested after allegedly trying to bring 20 million euros in cash into Italy from Switzerland aboard an Italian government plane, in an attempt to circumvent laws on importing cash."

Huh. Wonder what happened to that 'god and mammon' stuff -? 'Aw that's only for the sheep' says the monsignor. 'Institute for Religious Works' ahaahaaahaahaha
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
No I don't. I think that the rights we have are negotiated Slaves do not have these rights - because other more thoughtless individuals are willing to oppress some people - to enrich themselves. That is why a framework of legal rights is important. When you use the word 'inherent', it sounds like something that is automatic, or universal - I think it is negotiated. Liberty can never be total - it must be tempered.


Then you are a socialist.
Inherent DOES mean universal if you believe that the right of human life must be subject to some govt, then you are a socialist. You believe the state can,and must, control private property, your life.
Why don't slaves have an inherent right to their lives?
An anti-socialist accepts the each human being has an inherent right to life, liberty and property and the only function of the state is to protect those rights from the state and from other humans, like dj, who want to infringe upon those rights.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2013
Why don't slaves have an inherent right to their lives?
Hmmm I dont know. Lets check the bible:

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way." (Leviticus 25:44-46)

-Ah. Because god says so.
An anti-socialist accepts the each human being has an inherent right to life, liberty and property
-Except if he believes in the holy book, which says that the chosen people have every right to take property and freedom and lives from unbelievers. Because they have the moral obligation to do so.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2013
Now atheists use the Bible to justify socialism.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
Now atheists use the Bible to justify socialism.
The bible was written by socialists. Jesus ministered to the poor dont you know it?

"Christian socialism is a form of religious socialism based on the teachings of Jesus. Many Christian socialists believe capitalism to be idolatrous and rooted in greed, which some Christian denominations consider a mortal sin. Christian socialists identify the cause of inequality to be associated with the greed that they associate with capitalism."
http://en.wikiped...ocialism

-Ask the monsignor with 20 million euros in his luggage.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"Then you are a socialist."

I wonder why it is so important to you to label other people - instead of letting them define themselves. Political philosophy is very complex. Here- read a page from wiki that talks about socialism. http://en.wikiped...ocialist . You are not the final authority on what different labels mean. Let me define myself - and you define yourself - that is the libertarian part of me talking. It says that I am responsible for me - you are not responsible for me. I think your need to throw around labels indicates a highly insecure and troubled individual - who is very afraid of losing control of the world. Maybe you could find a good therapist - and learn that it is OK if Ryggy - or Jesus for that matter - gives up control of the universe. Letting others take responsibility for themselves is very freeing - it may free up your mind to consider some radical possibilities......
djr
3.3 / 5 (3) Jun 28, 2013
and the only function of the state is to protect those rights from the state and from other humans,

But Ryggy - you have previously expressed that you do not believe in the legalization of drugs. Surely this is contradictory.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
I wonder why it is so important to you to label other people - instead of letting them define themselves.

I think it is important for people to understand what socialism really is, an evil that destroys people. But some, like dj, doesn't understand, or refuses to understand what a govt truly is, force. Socialists seem to think if only THEY, who only want to do good, had control of that force, they could save the world. (Sounds like Lord of the Rings.)
You are not the final authority on what different labels mean

I am the final authority defining what other people do, or want to do to me. Socialists, 'progressives', 'liberals', communists, fascists, ... all want to control my life, my liberty and my property.
I can't imagine dj is a libertarian like other libertarians I know, as he does not seem too concerned about how the socialists are taking his liberty.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
How many homosexual marriage supporters support this?

"Anita Wagner Illig, a leading polygamy activist as head of the group Practical Polyamory, told U.S. News & World Report that gay-rights campaigners had set a welcome precedent.

'We polyamorists are grateful to our brothers and sisters for blazing the marriage equality trail,' she said.

'I would absolutely want to seek multi-partner marriage - it would eliminate a common challenge polyamorists face when two [people] are legally married and others in their group relationships aren't part of that marriage.'

Read more: http://www.dailym...XXyBdnj7
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

If you are logically consistent, you must.

Since most polygamists are Mormons or Muslims, the population of Mormons and Muslims will grow while 'liberals' won't.
djr
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"I think it is important for people to understand what socialism really is"

I think that it is more important to understand what religion really is - an evil that is keeping the human race shackled in ignorance, violence, poverty, and self destruction. Fortunately for me - - history seems to be on our side. Young people today are more and more turning away from the ignorance of religion - and embracing secularism, and atheism. So - keep tilting at windmills - oh slayer of all that is 'socialist', and history will pass you by..

I noticed that you ignored the part where I called you out on your total hypocrisy.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2013
ou have previously expressed that you do not believe in the legalization of drugs.

I don't support the legalization of drugs. I support decriminalization of drugs. I don't think the govt should profit by the sale of drugs.
Let me define myself

You can define your self as a 1 meter tall blue bunny. And I can bring a calibrated meter stick and prove you are not 1 meter tall. I can use a spectrometer to show you are not blue and run a genetics test to show you are not a bunny.
That is how science and language work. There are standards.
And the standard defined in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..." is opposite the socialist that asserts rights are from the state, which dj apparently believes.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
RyggTard is ignoring Otto. Otto's case is too iron clad, and his position to impossible to challenge.

TardidBoy's only way to cope is to ignore the grand evidence of his intellectual and moral failure and hope that it goes away, and no one notices.

Moron.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
What is it with Republicans, nazi flags, rampant Racism, and Hate for Obama?

STRATFORD, Conn. (AP) — A man's decision to fly a Nazi flag outside his Connecticut home has prompted a visit from police.

Sincavage, who flew a Confederate flag in the same spot several months ago, said flying the flag is his way of protesting the policies of President Obama. He said he has no plans to take it down.

http://www.myfoxn...XUZjDzu9
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
"I support decriminalization of drugs. I don't think the govt should profit by the sale of drugs."

I agree totally - not sure why you had to give me shit when I talked about wanting the freedom to smoke a joint without gvt interference before - but I accept your revision.

djr
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"You can define your self as a 1 meter tall blue bunny. And I can bring a calibrated meter stick and prove you are not 1 meter tall."

So you have no concept of the complexity of a social science such a poli sci? Language is not black and white in the social sciences. If you had read the wiki page about socialism - you would see how many different flavors of philosophy can be represented under the umbrella of socialism. Words change over time - and are dependent on where the user is from (the word liberal has a very different meaning in Europe than it does in the U.S.) But if it makes you feel good to bully others around with your childish need to define others - rather than having the respect of letting people define themselves - that seems pretty consistent with your overall approach to discourse. Just FYI - I reject your childish need to define me....
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
Language is not black and white in the social sciences.

Why not? Then it's not much of a science if you can't have a standard.
But then socialists need to keep hiding their intentions by changing their name to 'progressive', then it was 'liberal'.
Homosexuals did the same, hijacking the term 'gay'.
Orwell gave great examples in 1984.
letting people define themselves

Not very logical or scientific, which you claim to support. Sounds like 'doublethink'.
http://www.newspe...ict.html

"I support decriminalization of drugs. I don't think the govt should profit by the sale of drugs."

I agree totally - not sure why you had to give me shit when I talked about wanting the freedom to smoke a joint without gvt interference before - but I accept your revision.


Never did.
But it is against the law, and why do you want to risk arrest and contribute to murders in Mexico?
A pothead? That explains much. But I won't excuse it.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
"Marijuana and pain medication were found in the blood of the crane operator at the site of a deadly building collapse, a source at Philadelphia's City Hall with direct knowledge of the investigation told CNN on Friday.

Six people died and another 13 were injured when a four-story wall of a vacant building being demolished collapsed onto a Salvation Army thrift store in Philadelphia on Wednesday."
http://www.cnn.co...collapse
But marijuana is safe.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
"Why not? Then it's not much of a science if you can't have a standard."

You don't understand how language is very culturally dependent? You don't understand that the term liberal has a very different meaning in Europe than it does in the U.S. You are truly uneducated.

"A pothead? That explains much. But I won't excuse it."

You wont excuse what? My libertarian desire to control my own body - as opposed to the government interfering? It has been manyn years since I have smoked a dooby - due to my interest in remaining out of jail. My life is not for you to excuse - I keep trying to teach you about the construct of self responsibility - it is a waste of time.


ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 28, 2013
You don't understand how language is very culturally dependent?

It's not culturally dependent it's politically dependent.
Social scientists nuance so often, it's neo- this and neo- that because they really don't want to have any objective standard to pin them down. (sounds like dj, "the world is soooo complex...")
And this is why dictionaries exist. To define the term and good dictionary will show the origin of the word and its meaning.
Liberal is from the Latin liberalis, befitting a free man, and liber, free.
"Indeed, what in Europe is or used to be called 'liberal' is in the USA today with some justification called 'conservative'; while in recent times the term 'liberal' has been used there to describe what in Europe would be called socialism."
http://www.angelf...tro.html
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
"Marijuana and pain medication were found in the blood of the crane operator at the site of a deadly building collapse"

When mary jane is finally legalized - I will make a point of not operating a crane while under the influence. Did you hear about the train operator who was texting - and caused a deadly train crash. I thought libertarians understood that guns don't kill people - people kill people. My reasoning process is probably a little to complex for you here Ryggy.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
Why do you want drugs legalized? Why do you want to pay taxes to the govt?
Decriminalization means the govt has no law for or against and could not tax it.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
"Why do you want to pay taxes to the govt?"

I am a responsible citizen - I am willing to pay my share for the operation of the government. I would like to see a drastically scaled back government - and a very simple and minimal tax system - but I am willing to pay my part - I do recognize a role for the government - and understand that it needs to be funded.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 28, 2013
"Indeed, what in Europe is or used to be called 'liberal' is in the USA today with some justification called 'conservative'; while in recent times the term 'liberal' has been used there to describe what in Europe would be called socialism."

Oh look - Ryggy has just demonstrated that different terms can take on different meanings - dependent on where the user of the term is from - and also at what time in history the term is being used. This is the exact point I have been stipulating - and Ryggy has been arguing with me that words have clearly defined meanings. What a rube.....
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 28, 2013
At least one person from OK understands:
""Well I think, we should ask ourselves what tyranny would look like in the United States of America," he continued. "An executive branch that picks and chooses which laws it wants to enforce. A judicial branch that would allow to do so on grounds of the executive branch did not defend the laws in the court. The legislative branch would have very limited power because they turned it all over the president and the people would feel like they had no representation."

He concluded by circling back to answer his own question. "The president told us he was going to fundamentally transform America, and I think that is exactly what he is doing. I yield back.""
http://www.thebla...-around/
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 28, 2013
dependent on where the user of the term is from -

Not where he is from, but where he is coming from. How he wants to hijack the term to mean something it's not. Newspeak.
'Progressive' was hijacked over 100 years ago to mean socialism. 'Liberal' was hijacked by FDR to mean MORE socialist than the 'progressive' Hoover.
'Liberal' today means tyranny where its original meaning is the opposite.
Science can't exist without objective standards. The definition of 2: there are 2 'x's: x x. If someone else defined 2 as this many 'x's: x x x; then real progress in science could not occur.
To convey ideas precisely requires precise use of language with words that are defined.
You are free, at liberty, to 'Define yourself', but don't expect everyone to agree and accept your subjective definition. (This sounds exactly like the self-esteem promotion govt run schools have been promoting for decades.)
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
Here Ryggy - I will recopy what you yourself posted.

"Indeed, what in Europe is or used to be called 'liberal' is in the USA today with some justification called 'conservative'; while in recent times the term 'liberal' has been used there to describe what in Europe would be called socialism."

Now read that again - and if you don't understand how it contradicts what you are now trying to say - too bad....
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 28, 2013
"To convey ideas precisely requires precise use of language with words that are defined."

OK Ryggy - please give me a precise definition of the term 'socialist'
ckid
1 / 5 (4) Jun 29, 2013
I'm quite suprised that nobody on this physics/science website has commented on the article from a Darwinism viewpoint.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2013
"To convey ideas precisely requires precise use of language with words that are defined."

OK Ryggy - please give me a precise definition of the term 'socialist'


Ok, I will do this, AGAIN.
Socialism is state control of private property and a socialist supports state control of private property. A more detailed description is in MIses' Socialism and Bastiat discusses socialism in The Law.

That some will twist meanings words to mean the opposite of the original meaning, Newspeak, doesn't change the origins and meaning of the word.
DPRK is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. North Korea is not democratic or a republic. Socialist tyrannies like to hijack language to make their tyranny sound more pleasant.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (8) Jun 29, 2013
I'm quite suprised that nobody on this physics/science website has commented on the article from a Darwinism viewpoint.

There is some inserting research that suggests homosexual males are genetically predisposed due antibody buildup in the mother. If true, then there may be a prenatal, and a post-natal treatment.
This research will likely be attacked and made illegal, or strongly discouraged just as racial genetic research is discouraged.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2013
Socialism is state control of private property and a socialist supports state control of private property. A more detailed description is in blah
This def of yours implies total control of property. And how could this property be private if it is publicly controlled?

Socialism can never be, and is never, absolute. Infinite variation. But you always use it to mean forced redistribution of wealth. In which case there is no difference between it and capitalism which always seeks to exact the maximum profit with minimum effort.
If true, then there may be a prenatal, and a post-natal treatment
Yeah as well as a prenatal cause which by every indication is natural. And we can assume that this a direct response to perceived population pressure because that is its most significant effect on social structure.

And we can also understand why it is so vigorously promoted along with ALL other non-procreative sex, and family planning. Because you religionists have crammed the earth FULL.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (10) Jun 29, 2013
Here you go ryggy this should warm your cockles
https://www.youtu...ed#at=79

'Our flag was still there' ahaahaaa
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (9) Jun 29, 2013


"Scientists may have found a biological basis for homosexuality. That could be bad news for gay rights."
http://www.slate....ion.html
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 29, 2013
This def of yours implies total control of property. And how could this property be private if it is publicly controlled?


No, it does not imply TOTAL control.
Do you own a car, a house, a toilet, light bulbs?
The Regulatory Socialist State has regulations controlling this property and hundreds of other items.
The govt controls your medical care so it even controls your life.
But you always use it to mean forced redistribution of wealth.

Forced redistribution of wealth IS one method of state control of your property.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 29, 2013
More examples of socialism:
"These regulations are leading to excessive costs and tremendous uncertainty, paralyzing expansionary activity.

In the 90-day period leading up to the November 2012 elections, federal agencies published over 6,000 new regulations, an average of over 68 per day. According to the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center, there are over 281,000 full-time government employees whose job it is to draft and enforce regulations. "
https://www.openf...-growth/
"Decades of regulations have left the U.S. with an expensive, complicated compliance load, and manufacturers worry the problem is getting worse."
http://www.indust...industry

Small Business Owners Speak Out Against Job-Stifling Government Regulations - See more at: http://www.speake...Xuvyi.dp
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 29, 2013
" President Obama has taken the United States one more giant step toward socialism by ramming through the Senate his financial regulation bill.

The bill authorizes the secretary of the treasury -- a political appointee -- to seize any financial company (bank or non-bank) simply because, in his opinion, it is too big to fail and in danger of insolvency. This power can be used for political retribution, pressure for campaign funding or any other abuse that bureaucratic whim or partisan politics can conceive. It is a power Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez would love to have! "
http://townhall.c...ocialism
And the state controls the value of the money controlling just about every thing.
djr
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 29, 2013
"Socialism is state control of private property "

Cool - thanks for that very specific definition.

Now some follow up questions. Does that make Rand Paul a socialist - being that he gets paid by the U.S. government? Also note that despite declaring that he would not take pork barrel - he then reneged on his promise - and voted for pork barrel projects that benefit his state.

Based on your definition - could you show me any state in the world that is not socialist? Could you show me any person in the world who is not a socialist?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 29, 2013
Based on your definition - could you show me any state in the world that is not socialist?

Nope.
As you see from Index of Economic Freedom, states that protect private property rights the best are usually the most prosperous. It's not a coincidence.
Could you show me any person in the world who is not a socialist?

Yes.
The defenders of socialism say the alternative is anarchy, implying chaos. But that is not the definition of anarchy. The world exists in anarchy. There is no world govt, therefore the world exist in anarchy, which is what anarchy means, no govt.
djr
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 29, 2013
Nope.

So your childish taunts at everyone about how they are socialists are quite ridiculous. What is the point of insulting people by calling them socialists - when you now admit that every country in the world is socialist. So you want to have a big argument about who is a socialist and who is not - and it is all stupid and theoretical - because you cannot point to one example of a non socialist state. In other words - you have no idea if the opposite of socialism could possibly work.

In you theoretical little non socialist world - how would crime be handled? If you have prisons - will that not require taxation - and therefore socialism?
djr
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 29, 2013
Could you show me any person in the world who is not a socialist?

Yes.

Who?
djr
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 29, 2013
"As you see from Index of Economic Freedom, states that protect private property rights the best are usually the most prosperous. It's not a coincidence."

I have no problem with that conclusion. I have no problem with property rights. I own a house, 2 cars, a motorcycle etc. The point is not whether countries that protect property rights are more or less prosperous - the point is about your childish need to insult people by calling them socialist - when by your own admission - every country in the world is socialist - so the insult is just meaningless.

Another point about your use of the term socialist - and your assertion that language is precise. If every country in the world is socialist - and yet there are many variations on the specifics of the democracies around the world, - your term socialist is very imprecise - in that it encompasses every country in the world. Do you see your nonsense?
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 29, 2013
"Do you see your nonsense?" - dir

it is pretty clear that RyggTard lives in his own little Whack Tard bubble universe, where reality is distorted to be whatever he says it is in order to support his own crazy ideology.

Like all Libertarians and Randites, he just invents his own new definitions for words. The dishonest redefinition of common words is well known and is called Libertarian Newspeak.

RyggTards Personal redefinition of "socialism" is a case in point. The definition is so broad that by necessity all societies must be socialist, since all societies must restrict and control the use of private property.

Restricting the use of guns to murder your neighbors is a restriction of private property, so is laws that prevent the torture of pets which are also considered property, and on and on it goes.

Mindless Libertarianism. It is a brain disease.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 29, 2013
"RyggTards Personal redefinition of "socialism" is a case in point.."

You are right Vendi. What I am waiting for now is an explanation of how Rygg's non socialist utopia (which Ryggy admits does not exist) - actually runs itself. What do they do about crime? Do they have courts, a police force, or a military, or a parliament of some kind? If so - surely that would require taxation - which Ryggy says is socialism. Seems like Ryggy is caught in a blind alley here. What is pissing me of on Physorg - is the constant attacking of Obama - calling him a socialist. But by Ryggy's definition - Rand Paul is a flaming socialist too. So what is the point? Other than to keep repeating stupid meaningless shit. sigh.....
Don_Norris
2.3 / 5 (6) Jun 30, 2013


I am the final authority defining what other people do, or want to do to me. Socialists, 'progressives', 'liberals', communists, fascists, ... all want to control my life, my liberty and my property.


You may wish you were the final authority, but that doesn't make it so.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Rygg's non socialist utopia

Utopia is the creation of a socialist.
so the insult is just meaningless.

It's a statement of fact. If you take it as an insult, that's your problem.
your term socialist is very imprecise

It's quite precise: State control of private property. It doesn't matter how the state is formed, dictator, democracy, royalty, ...
is the constant attacking of Obama - calling him a socialist.

But he is. Why does that bother you so? dj claims to follow science where it leads him. Data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother.
You may wish you were the final authority, but that doesn't make it so

I am the final authority determining my perception of other people.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
What do they do about crime? Do they have courts, a police force,

I have said, MANY TIMES, the sole purpose of the govt is to protect private property.
Police and courts ARE one part of a govt that protects private property IF the the laws are written to protect property, not plunder property.
But a formal state is not required for an effective justice system. Somalia, with and without a formal govt has such a system called Xeer. Look it up if you care.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
"The ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu, sometimes called the first libertarian thinker, said, "The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished. ... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." He complained that there were "laws and regulations more numerous than the hairs of an ox." What would he have thought of our world?"
"It is precisely because society is unfathomably complex that laws must be kept simple. No legislature can possibly prescribe rules for the complex network of uncountable transactions and acts of cooperation that take place every day."

Read more: http://www.realcl...XhQFzAMT
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
And dj wants to 'complexify', not simplify.
JohnGee
1 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2013
I am the final authority determining my perception of other people.

That's quite the superpower you got there.

Data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother.

I know the NSA is listening [chuckle], but can you at least put an 'O' at the beginning of his name? It's hard to tell who you are even talking about.

Data demonstrates you are a sophist.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 30, 2013
I know the NSA is listening [chuckle], but can you at least put an 'O' at the beginning of his name? It's hard to tell who you are even talking about.


However you care to spell his name, Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist.
JohnGee
2.1 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist.
I'm getting the vibe this is supposed to be some act of defiance.

"Mamba" is also thinly veiled racism. A lot of the names aren't except in their motivation. "Mamba" is basically calling him "darkie" or something similar.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
I'm getting the vibe this is supposed to be some act of defiance.

Just a statement of fact.
Obama is a socialist.
"The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor and determine for yourself if any ring some recent bells:

Advocated wealth redistribution from (in his words) greedy "corporations" to "health insurance" and "public works projects";
Favored taxpayer funding of universal health care;
Supported government stimulus and trumpeted the public sector over the private sector;
Dismissed traditional notions of American exceptionalism and framed the U.S. not as selflessly serving the post-World War II planet but instead as selfishly flaunting its so-called "mountainous ego" and "racist-imperialist-colonialist" ambitions;
Sought political support from the "social justice"-oriented Religious Left;
Viewed the Catholic Church as an obstacle to his vision for the state;"
http://www.thebla...s-mentor
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
" Vilified the "tentacles of big business," bankers, big oil, "excess profits," corporate fat cats and their "fat contracts," "millionaires," "rich men," and the wealthy;
Attacked "GOP" tax cuts that "spare the rich" and benefit "millionaires" only;
Singled out the "corporate executive" for not paying his "fair share";
Used slogans such as "change" and "forward."

Check out this video summary of The Communist, which explains the main points regarding who Davis was and, more importantly, who he was to Obama:"
http://www.thebla...-mentor/
Many who post here agree with Davis along with the journalists who refused to fully vet Obama.
If socialism is so great, why won't the socialists stand up an be proud? Why must Obama lie about his intentions? Why do socialists NEED to use force to implement their agenda?
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother."

Good - we finally peel off the layers of the onion. You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'- than to draw attention to his race. My parents politics are irrelevant to who I am.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2013
One socialist faction is fighting the other:
"You know I seem to remember a recent village idiot president who got everything he wanted, when he wanted it regardless which party had what majority. If his decisions made some corporate entity shitwads of money, it got done.

And Obama? Those same entities making even bigger shitwads of cash than even Village idiot.

Follow the money, that's the answer to every question you have about politics and the US government."
http://www.dailyk...G-FRAUD#

You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'-


How typical.
First, Obama's father was Marxist from Africa and is mother was a socialist from the US. What does race have to do with this?
Second, I did not type 'mamba': I mistyped Obama and spell-check made the substitution. I need to pay more attention to spell check results.
No defense of Obama's socialism?
djr
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 30, 2013
"Just a statement of fact.
Obama is a socialist."

And by your definition - so is Romney, Bush, Rand Paul, and every other politician in America. Do you run around saying 'Paul is a socialist?' Of course not. So your statement of fact is not an argument of any kind - just a personal attack. Just more example of your racism - your need to attack President Obama - with a meaningless statement - so then we understand what the true motivation is.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"First, Obama's father was Marxist from Africa and is mother was a socialist from the US. What does race have to do with this?"

If race had nothing to do with it - you would not need to mention the fact that his father was from Africa - it is meaningless. If race had nothing to do with it - you would not need to use the term 'biological mother and father'. You are drawing attention to the fact that his father is from Africa - and that is irrelevant - and there can be no other motivation beyond being a hateful racist.

ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
"data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother."

Good - we finally peel off the layers of the onion. You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'- than to draw attention to his race. My parents politics are irrelevant to who I am.

dj asserts he is not a 'liberal'/socialist yet he falls in lock step with their tactics. A fellow traveler.
Why is it racist to judge leaders on the content of their character?
his father is from Africa - and that is irrelevant

No, it's not. His father was NOT a US citizen and his father was a Marxist.
But Obama and his admin ARE racist in their enforcement of law. They have so stated.
http://www.washin...-racism/
axemaster
5 / 5 (1) Jun 30, 2013
There is a sort of arc in American history, that in some ways has gotten stronger in the last half century, towards saying 'Each person should be able to pursue happiness in their own way.

I find it frankly astounding that this isn't the default position.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
Like dj says, by your def, all members of congress are socialists because they support things like income tax and social security.

The way you call Obama a socialist reveals that you do in fact consider it as meaning total govt ownership of all property. Which is absurd.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
ryggesogn2,

djr, like his political brothers, will always use race and bigotry as a weapon when they are unable to support their socialism with anything other than innuendo.

Racists think about race all the time. People who are not racists don't even think about it and only use the term when necessary to point out how the left use racism as a weapon.

How many times has djr used the race card on this thread alone?

You can't really argue with a racist who calls you a racist for pointing out his racism.

Continue to discuss Obama's politics but be aware that you will be called racist for daring to point out that he is a socialist.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
djr, like his political brothers, will always use race and bigotry as a weapon when they are unable to support their socialism with anything other than innuendo.


dj claims to believe he is libertarian and supports limited govt. Yet he gets so upset when confronted with the socialism staring him in the face.
So he lies to himself, or lies to us or is very confused.
Continue to discuss Obama's politics but be aware that you will be called racist for daring to point out that he is a socialist.


Of course.
Why aren't socialists racist when they attack Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams and Herman Cain or anti-women when they attack Thatcher, Rand and Palin?
Because socialists can't provide rational arguments that support their totalitarian positions.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
all members of congress are socialists because they support things like income tax and social security.

Not all members of Congress support the ponzi scheme known as social security, the income tax or Federal Reserve and there are millions of citizens who do not support SS, the income tax or the Federal Reserve.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
"Swain, who is black, is a professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt University. She is an expert on white supremacists, having written a book on the subject, "The New White Nationalism in America: Its Challenge to Integration," which was published in 2002 by Cambridge University Press and drew plaudits from scholars both liberal (Harvard's William Julius Wilson) and conservative (Princeton's Robert P. George)."
http://online.wsj...022.html

"Swain explains why she is no longer a Democrat -"
http://www.youtub...z_0CoZtI
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"No, it's not. His father was NOT a US citizen and his father was a Marxist."

And that has nothing to do with anything. You are a sick racist - there would be no need to raise the fact that his father was from Kenya - unless you want to be a racist. President Obama met all the criteria for being President. That has been demonstrated over and over. Carnival barkers like you and Trump want to make an issue that does not exist - it bothers you that someone of African descent is in the White House.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"How many times has djr used the race card on this thread alone?"

Do you have an answer to that question Dogbert - or are you just asking a meaningless question?

Rygg is the one raising the issue of race - he points out that President Obama's 'biological father is a marxist from Kenya'. There is only explanation for the need to raise that issue - and that is racism.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
djr,

Why does it bother you so much that Obama's father was from Kenya?
His mother was an American. I note you do not mention her.
You are only interested in heritage if it allows you to make racist comments.

Obama is the President of the United States. He is a socialist. His race is irrelevant. He chooses to identify as Black -- which is his right. You should not be concerned about his race.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"Why does it bother you so much that Obama's father was from Kenya? "

It does not matter to me in the least. I did not raise the issue - Ryggy did. Why did Ryggy need to raise that issue? It is not relevant to anything. The only explanation is that Ryggy has a problem with a President of African descent.

His mother was an American. I note you do not mention her.

I did not mention his father - Ryggy did. This is not hard - I did not call Ryggy a racist for calling President Obama a socialist - I called Ryggy a racist for needing to raise the issue of the race of the President's father - that is racist - no matter how hard you try to double think your way out of it.
djr
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 30, 2013
"Obama is the President of the United States. He is a socialist."

And by Ryggy's own definition - so is every other President of the U.S. - and every other country in the world (Ryggy was forced to make that assessment - from Ryggy's own definition). So - what could be the purpose in making the statement 'Obama is a socialist?' Surely if every other President (including people like President Bush, and Reagan) were also socialists - that is a meaningless statement. Why don't you say 'President Reagan was a socialist?' Obviously there is actually some other connotation to the word socialist that you are trying to pin on President Obama. I read it this way - 'we do not like President Obama - (I believe there is a significant racial component for that dislike for many people) - therefore we will throw dirty words at him like socialist.'
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Here is a scenario which shows the dangers of the Government promoting Homosexuality.
A boy 13-14 has a spontaneous erection in the showers after a gym class, and is made fun of by his class mates.
Spontaneous erections for anyone who is not a male, or Progressive Anti-intellectual, is NORMAL, can happen anytime, does NOT indicate the willingness or the desire for sex.

How would djr, or other Progressive Pro-homosexual handle this? He would be told, he is homosexual, he should embrace his homosexuality. he would be asked to join PFLAG, his parents would be notified that their homosexual son was teased, his Progressive family would rejoice that they have a victim de jure, the boy now believes he is homosexual because his parents remind him he played dressup when he was 3, played dr. when he was 8, he then embraces the homosexual life style because he is told and reinforced he is homosexual, he catches AIDS, has is bowls ruptured, and dies at a young age.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 30, 2013
"How would djr, or other Progressive Pro-homosexual handle this? "

If I were in some way having to be involved in this situation - like if I was the teacher - or the parent of the boy - I would tell them to ignore the other immature children for making fun of them - that it is natural for children to be uncomfortable with issues of sexuality - but that a spontaneous erection is totally normal - nothing to spend any time worrying about. If the other children were really making a big deal about it - I would probably ask them to be a little more mature - and stop trying to make other people feel bad about things that are totally natural.

"Spontaneous erections for anyone who is not a male, or Progressive Anti-intellectual, is NORMAL, can happen anytime, does NOT indicate the willingness or the desire for sex."

Your sentence makes no sense to me. I agree that spontaneous erections are normal - and do not indicate a desire for sex.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
djr,
'we do not like President Obama - (I believe there is a significant racial component for that dislike for many people) - therefore we will throw dirty words at him like socialist.'


As I noted before, racists use racism as a weapon.

I don't like our President because he is destroying our country with his socialist agenda. I don't care at all about his race. You apparently do care a lot about his race.
freethinking
1.6 / 5 (13) Jun 30, 2013
How would I handle it? I would tell him the medical fact that erections happen all the time and does not mean he is wanting sex or is attracted to the other boys. I would tell the other boys the same thing and I would tell them that I do not tolerate teasing or bullying. I would remind the other boys this could happen to them and to treat others the way they want to be treated. I would let the parents know what happened again telling them it is normal and I handled the teasing. When the parents ask if I'm sure he isn't homosexual because when he was 3 he played dressup in girls clothes and when he was 8 he was caught playing dr. with another boy. I would reassure them that boys play dressup and it doesn't mean a thing and that while playing dr. is inappropriate it is also normal and not a big deal.

The boy reassured he is normal puts the embarrassment behind him, grows up to be a healthy man, marries a woman and has children (much to ghosts dismay)
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Also with immigration now being allowed for homosexual partners, and since homosexual partners generally allow and condone multiple partners, what's to stop a homosexual from bringing in multiple partners?
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
djr, didn't you accuse me of being a homosexual or bi-sexual because I simply stated that a man chooses who to have sex with, and a man can choose to have sex with a man or woman if he chooses? So If you were in the showers and got a spontaneous erection, that would make you a homosexual, according to your definition.

djr
4 / 5 (4) Jun 30, 2013
I don't like our President because he is destroying our country with his socialist agenda. I don't care at all about his race. You apparently do care a lot about his race.

How many ways can I say the same thing? I did not bring up the issue of President Obama's father's nationality - Ryggy did.

Here is what I see happening. Ryggy says something racist. Djr points out that what Ryggy said was racist. Dogbert says - look drj is racist. See how stupid your are?

On the issue of constantly calling President Obama a socialist. Based on Ryggy's own definition of socialist - President Bush was also a socialist (can you say tarp 1 - just for example). Did you run around calling President Bush a socialist? I suspect the answer is no - and that there is a major dog whistle going on with the need to throw dirty words at President Obama. Of course I cannot speak for you - i don't know you - but it is very clear that for many people - there is a racial component to the hatred expressed.
freethinking
1 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
The dangers of Homosexuality is that it destroys the very fabric of society. If you notice, most men no longer have a good/best friend. A big part of this is because people are afraid of being called Homosexual, they are afraid of having things taken the wrong way.
Also homosexuals pervert normal childhood experiences, kids can no longer be kids. A boy playing dressup in girls clothes when they are 2-10, people who fear their son is homosexual will over react, those that want their son to be homosexual rejoice (I've read in magazines how to stop a boy from being a homosexual, to how can I help him accept himself, for playing dressup). Same goes with playing doctor for young kids, instead of it being a lesson in appropriate behavior, it's turned into something it's not.
Even men mentoring younger men/boys is extremely difficult, there is the fear of how it appears in the back of the mind.
Even Sesame Street Bert and Erny, are being asked by homosexuals to come out.
dogbert
1 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
djr,
there is a racial component to the hatred expressed.


ryggesogn2 did not say that, neither did I. You, however, have said it twice.

Your obsession with hatred and racism is tiresome.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
djr, The vast majority of men do NOT want to have sex with a man. Since there are people who have gotten married then come out as homosexuals, how come they were able to have sex with a woman? Or are homosexual's special.... they are the only ones that can have sex with both men and women?

So do you still want to hold to your position that a man cannot have sex with whom he wants whether male or female?

Homosexuality is a behavior. Behaviors can be controlled if one wants.
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
A white man is not racist if he disagrees with a black skinned man. A black skinned man (or anyone) IS racist if he thinks that white men must agree with him (the black man) in order for the white man not to be considered a racists.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
And that has nothing to do with anything.

If Obama's father has nothing to do with Obama, why did Obama write a book about his father entitled "Dreams From My Father"?
His father was a socialist and that has nothing to do with BHO's socialism?

GWB's socialist side is much smaller than BHOs. GWBs socialist faults were TARP, Medicare drugs and NCLB and "compassionate conservative".
But GWB supported CUTTING taxes. BHO has demanded MORE govt spending, MORE govt taxes.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
His mother was an American. I note you do not mention her.

Yes, I did. I said she was a socialist in same sentence where Obama's name was misspelled.
Later I said she was from the US, but she didn't seem to like being in the US.

"Obama believes every person has a "right" to health care. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's part of their platforms."
{Did GWB support this? Clinton did.}
"Obama believes labor unions should be allowed to organize workers without approval being subject to secret ballots. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's part of their platforms."
"Obama has radically reduced the size and power of the U.S. military. The Communist Party and Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's in their platforms."
"Obama has steadfastly promoted a "steeply graduated" income tax. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's in their platforms."
http://www.wnd.co...ly-show/
dogbert
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
ryggesogn2,
His mother was an American. I note you do not mention her.


I said that to djr in pointing out that he is only concerned with Obama's heritage from his father so that he could use racism as a weapon. He never mentioned Obama's mother. You did.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
ryggesogn2 did not say that, neither did I. You, however, have said it twice.

Correct - I accused Ryggy of being a racist. Ryggys's comment was racist. There is no reason to raise the issue of President Obama's father's nationality. It has nothing to do with anything. It is a clear demonstration of Ryggy's racism. You can double speak it as much as you want - I did not accuse you of racism. I said that there is a great deal of hatred towards President Obama - and I believe there is a component of racism in that hatred. That opinion comes from conversations I have had - and much that I have read on the web. Take a look at these pictures if you want some support. https://www.googl...;bih=727

I notice you are ignoring the question about why you attack President Obama as a socialist - but do not use the same language for others such as President Bush,
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"Or are homosexual's special.... they are the only ones that can have sex with both men and women?"

You and I are both free to have sex with whoever we choose, male, female, gay or straight - as long as they are of age, and the relationship is consensual - no one is asking for special treatment.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
djr, why did you use homosexuality as a slur towards me when I made the comment that a man chooses whom to have sex with? Why do you use homosexuality as a slur when you purportedly are for additional homosexual rights? Do you use the homosexual slur just like you use the racist slur because you yourself are both a racist and homophobic? Do you want additional rights for homosexuals only because it infringes on religious, free speech, and parental rights, and that you are actually are homophobic?
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
I notice you are ignoring the question about why you attack President Obama as a socialist - but do not use the same language for others such as President Bush,


From above:

""Obama believes every person has a "right" to health care. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's part of their platforms."
{Did GWB support this? Clinton did.}
"Obama believes labor unions should be allowed to organize workers without approval being subject to secret ballots. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's part of their platforms."
"Obama has radically reduced the size and power of the U.S. military. The Communist Party and Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's in their platforms."
"Obama has steadfastly promoted a "steeply graduated" income tax. The Communist Party and the Socialist Party agree. In fact, it's in their platforms."
http://www.wnd.co...ly-show/"

Has Obama supported cuts in spending and taxes?
kochevnik
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
Freethinking you have pushed the gaydar detector into the stratosphere. Just an observation from someone who mainly comments when wildly imbalanced claims appear
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Who is making this an issue of race?

"The Obama administration is suing Dollar General and a BMW facility in South Carolina for the alleged unfair use of criminal background checks for job applicants, months after warning companies about how such screenings can discriminate against African Americas."
http://www.reagan...ral.html
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
Is Herman Cain racist?
"But even that wasn't enough for Obama, who last week announced that he plans to issue executive orders that will essentially end traditional coal-fired energy in this country. Now businesses will have to pay more for energy and have a harder time getting it – on top of everything else Obama has done to war against their success and prosperity.

The economy is not growing because we have a president who is hostile to business, and doesn't know the first thing about how it works, what makes it succeed or what it needs to remain successful over the long term."
http://www.caintv...se-obama
djr
3.4 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"Who is making this an issue of race?"

You did - I just pointed out your racism.
djr
5 / 5 (3) Jun 30, 2013
djr, why did you use homosexuality as a slur towards me when I made the comment that a man chooses whom to have sex with?

I don't believe that I used homosexuality as a slur towards you. I have just re-read the whole thread - and I don't see anywhere that I used homosexuality as a slur towards you. Were your referring to this post - "Wow - it is hard for me to believe that someone could be so ignorant"? Please reference the quote so that I can address your accusation.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"I notice you are ignoring the question about why you attack President Obama as a socialist - but do not use the same language for others such as President Bush,"

"From above:"

You still do not address the question being asked. President Obama, and President Bush are both socialists by your own definition of the term socialist. You persist in throwing the term at President Obama - but do not do so for President Bush. Yet - by your own definition - they are both Socialists. This suggests to me that there is more going on here than just wanting to make a statement about socialism. It suggests to me that there is some code word/dog whistle stuff going on here. That the point is not that President Obama is a socialist - as much as it is that you don't like President Obama - and want to throw dirty words at him to satiate that hatred (I know - a bit pop psychologyish - but you continually fail to offer a different explanation).
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
"Who is making this an issue of race?"

You did - I just pointed out your racism.

Is Herman Cain racist for being critical of Obama?

Is Jan Schakowsky (D) racist for attacking Dr. Ben Carson?

"But the problem to the socialist Schakowsky is that Carson, by talking in broad terms against socialized medicine, high taxes, the debt and attacking political correctness, also attacked the "religion" of liberalism and their false Messiah, Obama."
http://maroonedin...ays.html

"Barack Obama, at the National Prayer Breakfast, had invoked his faith and the Bible on behalf of healthcare reform — much like he has done on behalf of gay marriage and a litany of other liberal agenda items."
http://spectator....n-carson
Why doesn't this bother 'liberal' atheists? Because they know 'liberals' must lie to obtain their objective.
djr
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2013
"Is Herman Cain racist?"

I don't know - why do you ask? He is a misogynist.
djr
3.9 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2013
"Is Herman Cain racist for being critical of Obama?"

The point is very simple here Ryggy. I am not calling you a racist for being critical of President Obama. I am calling you a racist for raising the issue of President Obama's father's nationality - when it had no bearing on anything.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2013
"Catholic Priest Beheaded in Syria by Al-Qaeda-Linked Rebels as Men and Children Take Pictures and Cheer"
http://www.thebla...d-cheer/
Is this why Obama wants to arm the Syrian rebels and why dj likes Obama?

it had no bearing on anything.

Yes, his father was NOT a US citizen AND was a socialist. And, Obama spent several years in an Indonesian Muslim school. By Muslim law, the children of any Muslim is considered a Muslim. Obama can define himself anyway he wants, but his actions, supporting Muslim uprisings in Libya, Egypt and Syria suggest something else.
Evidence is suggests the ambassador in Libya was killed while arranging for weapons to secretly smuggled to the Muslim Syrian rebels.
Atheist dj supports Obama's aid to Syrian Muslims and their execution of Christians?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
You persist in throwing the term at President Obama - but do not do so for President Bush. Yet - by your own definition - they are both Socialists.


The socialist Bush demonstrated his socialism was limited and that he could be persuaded to be less socialist.
Obama's socialism is unlimited and he won't be persuaded to be less socialist.
There are some who claim to be libertarian yet support socialism either out of ignorance or out of deceit.
Over 100 years of socialist indoctrination in govt run schools will require some time to change.
kochevnik
2.3 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2013
"Catholic Priest Beheaded in Syria by Al-Qaeda-Linked Rebels as Men and Children Take Pictures and Cheer"
Those fundamentalist rebels are your guys, ryggie. In case you wonder why USA is often despised
djr
4 / 5 (8) Jun 30, 2013
"Yes, his father was NOT a US citizen AND was a socialist."

Irrelevant - keep talking Ryggy - it does not change the fact that we peeled back the onion - and found what was inside - a racist.
JohnGee
2.2 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2013
Wow, I can't believe ryggesogn blamed the "mamba" comment on his spell checker. Racists are so conscious these days.

Freethinking's gym class scenario speaks volumes about his latent homosexuality. Freethinking, of course getting a boner in the showers after gym doesn't make one gay. Getting the boner because you're attracted to the other guys does.

You said homosexuality is a behavior which is patently false. The attraction is what makes the person homosexual. No matter how many guys you pass up, you are still gay if you are attracted to them.

Dogbert, take your reverse-racism crybaby-BS somewhere else.
sennekuyl
3 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
If a majority vote to define marriage as one man/one woman or 1 man/4 women or .....
then let it be that.
But when homosexual activists push marriage as a civil rights issue and use courts to force the change, then they must expect Mormons and Muslims will demand polygamy. And they have a better legal basis based on the first amendment.
Do 'liberals' want to be out bred by Mormons and Muslims? (They probably won't mind Muslims, until they impose Sharia.)

I don't care if they do demand polygamy. It is puzzling the opposition to polygamy or homosexuality as though one causes the other. If people can make a stable relationship and have multiple partners good luck to them. When one party is disadvantaged with no recourse then there's a moral problem.

Considering most of the opposition to homosexuality comes from religious backgrounds that only gave up polygamy relatively recently it quite laugh worthy of the "reasonings" they go to to demonise either self-identified category.
sennekuyl
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
Desires aren't controlled by choice.

Response to desires can be controlled.
Or, at one time, controlling one's animal instincts were considered noble.
Today, 'progressives' laugh at the concept.

Mostly because the animal instinct to laugh has not been shown to be adverse generally. Much like the attraction to same genders.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (13) Jul 01, 2013
JohnGee,
Dogbert, take your reverse-racism crybaby-BS somewhere else.


djr has consistently expressed a racist attitude in this forum. Now you join him in that endeavor. Lets see, you call ryggesogn2 a racist, freethinking a homosexual and you call me a cry-baby. Is innuendo all you have? Of course it is. So why don't you take your racist homosexual innuendo somewhere else?

nowhere
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
Homosexuality is a behavior. Behaviors can be controlled if one wants.

Behaviours can be controlled but desires cannot. It is desire that defines one as homosexual or not. Sexuality is naure not nuture (except in a few exceptional circumstances).
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (12) Jul 01, 2013
Homosexuality is a behavior. Behaviors can be controlled if one wants.


Behaviours can be controlled but desires cannot. It is desire that defines one as homosexual or not. Sexuality is naure [sic] not nuture (except in a few exceptional circumstances).


Desires are malleable too. Behaviors define us and all behaviors are choices.
nowhere
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
Homosexuality is a behavior. Behaviors can be controlled if one wants.


Behaviours can be controlled but desires cannot. It is desire that defines one as homosexual or not. Sexuality is naure [sic] not nuture (except in a few exceptional circumstances).


Desires are malleable too. Behaviors define us and all behaviors are choices.

I'm interested on how you propose an individual modify his own desire. How do you make a gay man straight or a straight man gay? Also, if a person is born with a desire whose pursuit hurts no one, why should they adjust their desire?
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
"Yes, his father was NOT a US citizen AND was a socialist."

Irrelevant - keep talking Ryggy - it does not change the fact that we peeled back the onion - and found what was inside - a racist.
\
Obama was raised mostly outside the USA by socialist parents and attended Ivy League schools likely on affirmative action programs.
While BHO was attending Muslim school in Indonesia, McCain was at the Naval Academy and in Hanoi Hilton.
BHO's father was an socialist from Kenya. McCain's father retired an Navy Admiral.
While I don't care for much of what McCain proposes, campaign finance reform, immigration, he has demonstrated his service to the USA and I trust him not to sell the USA down the socialist river.
I can't say that about Obama and his associates who attacked and bombed the USA.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
It is puzzling the opposition to polygamy or homosexuality as though one causes the other.

Court ordered and defined homosexual marriage must lead to court ordered polygamy.
Homosexual marriage supports say no, but that must be the logical conclusion if courts define marriage.
nowhere
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
It is puzzling the opposition to polygamy or homosexuality as though one causes the other.

Court ordered and defined homosexual marriage must lead to court ordered polygamy.
Homosexual marriage supports say no, but that must be the logical conclusion if courts define marriage.

Slippery slope. Homosexual marriage shares none of the problems posed by polygamy. To equate the two is bad reasoning.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
"djr has consistently expressed a racist attitude in this forum"

That is a lie. You do not understand the terms that you are using. Pointing out that something t someone said is racist - is not racist in itself. You are either very stupid - or a liar. Either way - I have not expressed racist attitudes on this forum. I have pointed out what Ryggy did (draw attention to President Obama's father's nationality) was racist. Learn the difference.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
"BHO's father was an socialist from Kenya. "

All irrelevant to the basic fact - raising the issue of President Obama's fathers nationality when it is not relevant to the conversation - is racist. Keep talking Ryggy - it does not change reality.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Court ordered and defined homosexual marriage " - RyggTard

Who has the court ordered into a homosexual marriage, TardieBoy?

You are living on Planet Paranoid.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Obama was raised mostly outside the USA by socialist parents and attended Ivy League schools likely on affirmative action programs." - RyggTard

And Americans have elected him twice as their president after he saved America from entering into a decades long Grand Economic Depression created by his Republican Predecessor - War Criminal George Bush.

Well done Obama.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"While BHO was attending Muslim school in Indonesia, McCain was at the Naval Academy and in Hanoi Hilton." - RyggTard

So while Obama was learning about God, McCain was trying to Murder innocent Asians and got caught.

Personally I think McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for his VP was a stroke of Genius for the Democrats and showed nicely how Republicans lack the competence to be president.

Don't you agree, TardidBoy?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"While I don't care for much of what McCain proposes, campaign finance reform, immigration, he has demonstrated his service to the USA.." - RyggTard

Why RyggTard... You filthy little Statist you.

VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Desires are malleable too." - DogBerTard

So, in other words, if required, you would become a gay man and adjust your desires accordingly.

Hmmmmmmmm....
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Desires are malleable too." - DogBerTard

So, in other words, if required, you would become a gay man and adjust your desires accordingly.

Hmmmmmmmm....
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Desires are malleable too." - DogBerTard

So, in other words, if required, you would become a gay man and adjust your desires accordingly.

Hmmmmmmmm....
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"The socialist Bush demonstrated his socialism was limited" - RyggTard

Bubble Boy.... Why did Republicans and Libertarians vote overwhelmingly for "Socialist Bush" in his two presidential elections.

Are you all brain dead?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Yes, his father was NOT a US citizen AND was a socialist." - RyggTard

And your mother was the Whore of Alabama.

What does that say about you?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Is Herman Cain racist for being critical of Obama?" - RyggTard

No. He is just another pathetic, Republican, fool.

Too bad he had a long history of sexually harassing his female employees, isn't it?

VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"Syrian Catholic priest Francois Murad killed last weekend by jihadi fighters was beheaded, according to a report by Catholic Online which is linking to video purportedly showing the brutal murder." - RyggTard

Can you remind us again Tardie Boy , yhy was Ronald Reagan was funneling hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to the Taliban during the 80's,. and why George Bush gave them 40 million just 2 months before the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan?

bahahahahahah..... filth.
freethinking
1 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
OK sockpuppet master VD,

Do you agree with medical doctors that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy and dangerous?
Do you agree it is good for the government to promote unhealthy lifestyles?
Do you agree it is good for the government to persecute those against this unhealthy lifestyle?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 01, 2013
"Catholic Priest Beheaded in Syria by Al-Qaeda-Linked Rebels as Men and Children Take Pictures and Cheer"
http://www.thebla...d-cheer/
Is this why Obama wants to arm the Syrian rebels and why dj likes Obama?
I think that obama is against all religion-perpetrated violence such as

"28th of August 2011, as Birom (Berom) Christians were recorded in these videos, eating Muslims they had killed and roasted.

"The event occurred when Christians surrounded Muslims observing their Eid annual holy devotion. Due to a miscommunication with the police, there was no usual requested security at the venue, a necessity in polar Jos. Christian youth surrounded the praying Muslims, burned their cars, pelted them and then killed, roasted and ate some."
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 01, 2013
Do you agree with medical doctors that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy and dangerous?
Do you agree it is good for the government to promote unhealthy lifestyles?
Do you agree it is good for the government to persecute those against this unhealthy lifestyle?
Do you agree with medical doctors that forcing women to reproduce until it kills them, endangers their health? Do you agree that bearing children in overcrowded cultures results in starvation and also violence which also endangers health?

Do you also agree with doctors that teaching people that condom use is more evil than HIV, endangers health?
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
"Do you agree with medical doctors that the homosexual lifestyle is unhealthy and dangerous?" - FreeTard

I think that all intimate relationships are unhealthy and dangerous since they all expose the second party to the ecosystem of infection that the first party has experienced and is carrying.

"Do you agree it is good for the government to promote unhealthy lifestyles?" - FreeTard

Nope. Which is why Government should criminalize the sale of Tobacco. Don't you agree?

"Do you agree it is good for the government to persecute those against this unhealthy lifestyle?" - FreeTard

You will have to explain to me how you come to the conclusion that Marriage promotes homosexuality any more than it promotes heterosexuality.

As usual. The FreeTard is very Foncused and isn't thinking clearly.

TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 01, 2013
I am sure ft thinks that inoculating girls against hpv endangers their health by encouraging them to have sex.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 01, 2013
Homosexual marriage shares none of the problems posed by polygamy. To equate the two is bad reasoning.


Doesn't matter. Courts did not address any problems with homosexual marriage only 'rights' issues.
Muslims and Mormons have a religious rights issue as well as an individual rights issue to pursue polygamy.
If courts make the decision, polygamy must be allowed.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 01, 2013
SPM (Sock Puppet Master) VD can you tell me why Obama is CURRENTLY supporting Hezbollah, and other Muslim groups who are CURRENTLY beheading, raping, Christians and burning their churches?

Can you tell me why Obama blamed Benghazi on a Christian making a video that no one saw?

SPM VD, are you AGAINST OBAMA currently giving weapons to these evil people?
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 01, 2013
SPM VD, Now I know why you are so crazy. You are against all sex, and think all sex is unhealthy.

SPM VD, Since smoking is unhealthy, then smoking should be promoted, there should be smokers rights, people can't discriminate against smokers, if a printer doesn't like printing pro-smoking materials they should be forced to do so by law, schools should teach tolerance for smokers and taught that smoking is just another lifestyle no better or worse than not smoking, anyone who speaks out against smoking should be brought before the human rights tribunals, we need to have smoking pride days, government offices should have smoking safe zones, smokers rights flag should be raised right along the gay rights flag, the media should start demonizing and ridiculing those against smoking.

SMOKERS HAVE RIGHTS

SPM VD, your not a Progressive Hypocrite are you?

Mr Anderson
2.8 / 5 (9) Jul 01, 2013
SMOKERS HAVE RIGHTS


That right can be revoked - as can any other right. But on the plus side, new rights are being granted by society all the time. Such as the right of gays to enter into marriage. So just be thankful of the rights you have been given and stop whining.
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (12) Jul 01, 2013
Mr. Anderson, The Jews had their rights revoked, while Nazi Party members gained rights in Nazi Germany.The Jews shouldn't have complained about loosing their rights or that Nazi's gained rights should they Mr. Anderson?

The United States was based on the rule of law and the supreme law of the land WAS the constitution. In the constitution is the right of free speech, right of free press, and the right of religion. Obama and Progressives in General have a disdain for the constitution and have trashed it.

Progressives are such Hypocrites.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 01, 2013
If courts make the decision, polygamy must be allowed
Uh no because polygamy increases the birthrate. Reducing growth is the primary reason for the support of gaydom and all such non-procreative sexual activities.
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (12) Jul 01, 2013
Otto, why not just ban heterosexual sex. How about sterilizing all people who vote for democrats? If Obama proposed this, all of his supporters would go out and sterilize themselves. This would help the economy as those that make poor decisions vote overwhelmingly for democrats.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
thankful of the rights you have been given and stop whining.

From the Almighty State?
The Declaration of Independence whose anniversary is on 4 JUL, states quite clearly the source of rights.
The govt created by the Constitution does not grant rights. It is designed only to protect the inherent rights of all humans.
The question of marriage is do humans have an inherent right to marry, AND should the state protect that right for all, and if so, should the state have the obligation to define marriage? Then HOW should the state define marriage?
The socialists want to conflate society with state. They must be separate for a well functioning society.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (11) Jul 01, 2013
" What we see today in the success of gay marriage is not really freedom run amok, but the result of turning the power to define morality over to the state, or to the dominant group representing it."
http://www.theame...freedom/
A state powerful enough to give you what you want is powerful enough to take everything you have.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"SPM (Sock Puppet Master) VD can you tell me why Obama is CURRENTLY supporting Hezbollah," - FreeTard

Oh, that is simple. He isn't.

But I have no doubt in the self imposed, paranoid, alternate universe you have invented for yourself through "free thinking", he is.

That is your failure, not Obama's.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"Can you tell me why Obama blamed Benghazi on a Christian making a video that no one saw?" - FreeTard

Oh, that is simple as well. It was the apparent motivation of the protesters who were complaining about the video that they saw and which you dishonestly claim was not seen.

Since no one can read minds and hence no one can establish motivation through mind reading, your insistence that motivations for a crime be known immediately after a crime is committed, are not reasonable.

But then Free Thinkers, I have seen, seldom engage in reason.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 01, 2013
" What we see today in the success of gay marriage is not really freedom run amok, but the result of turning the power to define morality over to the state, or to the dominant group representing it."
What is moral in regard to reproduction has to do entirely on the number of people vs the ability of the region to support them; ie overpopulation.

It is IMMORAL to produce more people than the region can support. Humans will always tend to produce more people than the region they live in can support. Therefore measures HAVE to be introduced to reduce the birthrate.

Homosexuality may be a natural response to this dilemma. It makes little biological sense otherwise. But it is obviously not enough by itself to counter the effects of cultures designed to maximize their growth.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"SPM VD, are you AGAINST OBAMA currently giving weapons to these evil people?" - FreeTard

You mean, they aren't "The Moral Equivalent of America's Founding Fathers", as Ronald Reagan claimed?

Was he wrong when he gave them hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. weaponry?
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"The Jews had their rights revoked," - FreeTard

By Fundamentalist Christian Conservatives.

VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
What we see today in the success of heterosexual marriage is not really freedom run amok, but the result of turning the power to define morality over to the state, or to the dominant group representing it.

There, RyggTard... I fixed it for you.

VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
From RyggTard's KookFart Link...

"Gay marriage signifies the final triumph of the Sexual Revolution and the dethroning of Christianity because it denies the core concept of Christian anthropology."

"Christian anthropology"

Nut-Case Republicans.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (9) Jul 01, 2013
" What we see today in the success of gay marriage is not really freedom run amok, but the result of turning the power to define morality over to the state, or to the dominant group representing it."
Religionists regard the bible as some immutable expression of timeless moral standards. But we know that the bible includes, and REQUIRES, moral actions that society has deemed unfit and immoral.

We no longer keep slaves even though the bible condones it. We no longer stone insolent children or adulterous women or apostates. We no longer condone the rape of conquered females. We now consider people of other religions as equals even though the bible tells us this is WRONG.

We can look back at history and realize that the progress of civilization parallels the progressive REJECTION of religious morality as described in the books. We have PROGRESSED because we have decided as a society to REJECT religious dogma, opting instead to decide collectively what is moral.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
"why not just ban heterosexual sex." - FreeTardo

Because banning what people do in the privacy of their own bedroom is something that Republicans and Conservatives do, not Liberals.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"The United States was based on the rule of law..." - FreeTardo

This would be the laws that permitted slavery and the mass murder of over 8 million native Americans.

No moral person respects those laws.

Why do you?
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"We no longer keep slaves even though the bible condones it. We no longer stone insolent children or adulterous women or apostates. We no longer condone the rape of conquered females. We now consider people of other religions as equals even though the bible tells us this is WRONG." - Otto

I think that RyggTard feels that all of the above are moral acts demanded by his Gawad.

I have seen no evidence to the contrary.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 01, 2013
Religionists reserve the right to decide which parts of their books to ignore. I dont know, this seems to be rather arrogant to me. Why is it ok not to keep slaves NOW even though the book still says it is kosher? Why is it not ok to stone insolent children and adulterous women even though the book still REQUIRES these things?

Who makes these decisions? And why do they vary from sect to sect? Working on the sabbath is still a capital crime in the eyes of god but walmart is open on sundays.

I am not being facetious. There IS no religious moral code. It has always been open to interpretation and modification and the ONLY people who still follow it as the books exactly as the books say, are considered CRIMINALS in nearly every jurisdiction.

Our legal system is much better at maintaining a reliable and rational method of meting justice.

Say vd just curious, what kind of illicit drugs you on anyways?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (8) Jul 01, 2013
"We no longer keep slaves even though the bible condones it. We no longer stone insolent children or adulterous women or apostates. We no longer condone the rape of conquered females. We now consider people of other religions as equals even though the bible tells us this is WRONG." - Otto

I think that RyggTard feels that all of the above are moral acts demanded by his Gawad.

I have seen no evidence to the contrary.
Naw I really dont believe that but I dont think he can provide an adequate explanation for why not. Can you ryggy?
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
Freethining.... A random series of thoughts disconnected from reality and from any logical connection with each other.

Incoherent, Illogical, and Irrelevant to anything but an imaginary world.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
The simple fact of the matter is that Republicans don't support Gay marriage because of ther own personal moral opposition to homosexuality,.

Conservatives reject the idea of personal liberty, equality under the law, as well as the separation of church and state.

Filth...
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
SPM VD, Even though I disagree vehemently with Otto, I'm on the same page with Otto on this one. SPM VD, what drugs are you using, or what medication have you forgotten to take?
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 01, 2013
Otto, you don't understand the bible. If you did you could easily find out what the bible says about a subject. When I study a different religion or philosophy, I research their own sites, I read their books, etc. Your failure to at least ask intelligent questions is that you only read from the Jesus Seminars (which are a joke even to secularists) and from atheists sites. As I've said many times, my 11 year old asks deeper questions and questions that are harder to answer than any of yours.

Slavery:
http://www.gotque...ery.html
http://www.compel...ent.html

Rape:
http://www.gotque...ape.html
(a lot different viewpoint than Muslims.)

Stoning Children
http://www.gotque...ren.html
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 01, 2013
OK SPM VD, can you please find where in the constitution the phrase separation of church and state?

There is the phrase Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...... Progressives want to limit and remove this. Forcing people to do things against their religion....

But then again, answering SPM VD who is either a drug addict, a delusional Progressive or just a plain lunatic not taking their meds is probably not a good idea.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 01, 2013
"There is the phrase Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." - FreeTard

It is logically self evident that the very passage you quote establishes the very separation that you deny.

Legal and Constitutional Scholars have long recognized this as being the case,

The denial by a FreeTard Republican Denialist doesn't surprise anyone. The real world just isn't your bag.
djr
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 01, 2013
Freethinking - did you forget that you accused me of using homosexuality as a slur towards you - which I did not do. I asked you to support your assertion.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 01, 2013
Freethining.... A random series of thoughts disconnected from reality and from any logical connection with each other.

Incoherent, Illogical, and Irrelevant to anything but an imaginary world.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2013
you don't understand the bible
Of COURSE I do. Because I read what it SAYS rather than what its SUPPOSED to say.
If you did you could easily find out what the bible says about a subject
In rebuttal you post links to salesmen and apologists who decided long ago what the bible was supposed to say, and set about twisting and turning and retranslating, and lying, in order to make it so.

They have had centuries to perfect their art, and when lying was inadequate, they simply edited.

For instance the bible says 'stone insolent children.' The salesman says:

"The Old Testament Law is not in force today"

-But if you ask him about the 10 commandments, especially the phrase 'no other gods before me', what do you think he would say?

You want to know what the bible says? READ IT.

"...and there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12)

-Ready to make the ultimate sacrifice ft?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2013
-Of course 'matthew', or the forger who called himself matthew, didnt actually mean that literally did he? I mean come on, god wouldnt want you to EMASCULATE yourself just to prove a point would he??

But then idiots throughout the centuries HAVE been doing just this, because the book TELLS them to.
http://www.transc...org/book

-And who are you to judge? Who are you to judge whether or not parents should try to pray away a burst appendix in their toddler?
http://news.disco...0424.htm

-Because this is what the book SAYS.

"And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up." James 5:15

(Even though critics including martin luther have declared the epistle a FORGERY... but who cares? It SOUNDS right, yes? Good enough to bet your kids life on anyway-)
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 02, 2013
Otto, when you come up with an original question that takes some thinking, I'll answer them. You should be ashamed that my 11 year old, and a person who hasn't read the bible have asked me more in depth questions that takes more research to find answers. Your questions are so easy to answer (partly because your questions come from the discredited Jesus Seminars and other atheists sites.) that they have been answered numerous times by very educated historians.

But here is a question for you. Where did everything we see come from? According to atheists, either everything always existed, or it came from nothing. So what do you believe, everything always existed, or it came from nothing?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2013
the discredited Jesus Seminars and other atheists sites.) that they have been answered numerous times by very educated historians
Nope never heard of them until you brought them up. I follow ehrman, dawkins, hitchens, harris, tyson, krauss, and others; and have confidence that when they say that science has discredited something, then it is probably true.
So what do you believe, everything always existed, or it came from nothing?
Thats the kind of phony, unanswerable question that religionists and philos love to ask. It is an invalid question. Its a question posed by flim flam artists to wow the rubes and take their money.

To prove it - Your answer is always 'The god of my book.' Well, evidence tells us that THAT god doesnt EXIST. So you need to come up with a better answer, or understand that your question is just as worthless as that answer of yours.
ValeriaT
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2013
Should two homosexual brothers or mother with her daughter be allowed for marriage? The common genetic risk of incest apparently plays no role in such case. So if not, why not? If we break such a legal barrier for once, would some barrier exist there at all? That is to say, I'm rather conservative in this point. For me the marriage is a established legal denomination for certain kind of social partnership and every OTHER relation should get a different name. A second Nobel prize will never be an original Nobel prize - despite its proponents would probably want to call it so...
ValeriaT
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 02, 2013
BTW If we would allow the same-sex marriage, why we shouldn't allow polygamy once and ever for example? I'm pretty sure, many people would welcome it too and the free will of group of three or four people will definitely have stronger rights, than just a two ones;-) Such a proposal is based on the same principle of freely expandable freedom and human rights. No animals will be harmed during this - so where the actual problem is?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (8) Jul 02, 2013
Should two homosexual brothers or mother with her daughter be allowed for marriage? The common genetic risk of incest apparently plays no role in such case. So if not, why not? If we break such a legal barrier for once, would some barrier exist there at all?
This is not an original question.
http://aristophre...-be-wed/

-I didnt read it as I dont care. I suppose its another question for the supreme court.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 02, 2013
"Why has evil been such a hard concept for many on the left to accept? The basic agenda of the left is to change external conditions. But what if the problem is internal? What if the real problem is the cussedness of human beings?

Rousseau denied this in the 18th century and the left has been denying it ever since. Why? Self preservation.

If the things that the left wants to control -- institutions and government policy -- are not the most important factors in the world's problems, then what role is there for the left?
What happened when old-fashioned ideas about sex were replaced in the 1960s by the bright new ideas of the left that were introduced into the schools as "sex education" that was supposed to reduce teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases?

Both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases had been going down for years. But that trend suddenly reversed in the 1960s and hit new highs.

http://www.realcl...ndset_of
djr
3 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"Why has evil been such a hard concept for many on the left to accept?"

What a stupid question - especially coming from an overt racist. I don't know anyone who does not believe that Hitler was evil. What do your friends on the left say about Hitler ryggy? Do they think he was a nice man? All my friends on the left agree he was evil.

Maybe you should read the old native american story of the two wolves. You have been feeding the racist one Ryggy.
djr
3 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
freethought - "Otto, when you come up with an original question that takes some thinking, I'll answer "

Otto's questions seemed pretty original to me. But so what if he borrowed them from some place else? You are just unwilling to answer them. I especially like the point about all the rules in the old testament that are now dismissed - due to 'oh that is from the old testament - we don't have to follow that law any more' except when it comes to the 10 commandments. Interesting point!
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 02, 2013
"When teenage thugs are called "troubled youth" by people on the political left, that tells us more about the mindset of the left than about these young hoodlums.

Seldom is there a speck of evidence that the thugs are troubled, and often there is ample evidence that they are in fact enjoying themselves, as they create trouble and dangers for others.

Why then the built-in excuse, when juvenile hoodlums are called "troubled youth" and mass murderers are just assumed to be "insane"?

At least as far back as the 18th century, the left has struggled to avoid facing the plain fact of evil -- that some people simply choose to do things that they know to be wrong when they do them. Every kind of excuse, from poverty to an unhappy childhood, is used by the left to explain and excuse evil."

Read more: http://www.realcl...XvZGL4Pw
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 02, 2013
"When teenage thugs are called "troubled youth" by people on the political left, that tells us more about the mindset of the left than about these young hoodlums
The difference is that when these teenage thugs are your own kids, you say 'boys will be boys' and blame their victims for causing the trouble.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (6) Jul 02, 2013
Heres an example of a legitimate question:

"The late John Paul II will be made a saint by the end of the year, after a commission of Catholic cardinals approved a second miracle attributed to him.

"The Vatican has yet to release details of the second miracle, but it is understood to concern the healing of a severely ill woman from Costa Rica on the very day that John Paul II was beatified.

"She and her family had prayed to the late pope for his intercession.

"The exact details of the miracle would "amaze the world", according to Vatican insiders."

-OK when medical science figures out the reason (and it will) for this ladys recovery (assuming it doesnt already know), does the dead (relatively) pope then get unsanctified?

Why not? Why is the fakir padre pio still a saint when hes been proven an idiot liar?

As usual this question is not unique
http://forums.cat...t=111550

-And the answer is no, the pope is STILL infallible.
dtxx
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 02, 2013
One socialist faction is fighting the other:
"You know I seem to remember a recent village idiot president who got everything he wanted, when he wanted it regardless which party had what majority. If his decisions made some corporate entity shitwads of money, it got done.

And Obama? Those same entities making even bigger shitwads of cash than even Village idiot.

Follow the money, that's the answer to every question you have about politics and the US government."
http://www.dailyk...G-FRAUD#

You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'-


How typical.
Obama and spell-check made the substitution. I need to pay more attention to spell check results.


You lying sack of shit racist. Your spell checker would not have capitalized it.
dogbert
1.6 / 5 (13) Jul 02, 2013
dtxx,

You lying sack of shit racist. Your spell checker would not have capitalized it.


My spell checker capitalizes the replacement word if the original error word was capitalized.

And again we see how the socialist uses race as a weapon. It is easier to accuse someone of racism than to actually argue the issues.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (10) Jul 02, 2013
dtxx,

You lying sack of shit racist. Your spell checker would not have capitalized it.


My spell checker capitalizes the replacement word if the original error word was capitalized.

And again we see how the socialist uses race as a weapon. It is easier to accuse someone of racism than to actually argue the issues.

'Liberals' are quick to use vulgarity. Is it because 'liberals' don't accept objective standards of behavior?
dogbert
1.4 / 5 (11) Jul 02, 2013
'Liberals' are quick to use vulgarity. Is it because 'liberals' don't accept objective standards of behavior?


I have never completely understood the propensity for the left to spout vulgarity. Perhaps it is because it is easier to express hatred with vulgarity?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"Is it because 'liberals' don't accept objective standards of behavior?" - RyggTard

Naa.. It is because you are a low life moron who is incapable of learning, and incapable of honesty.

Liberals don't like congenital liars. Hence they don't like LiberPublicans like you.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 02, 2013
"And again we see how the socialist uses race as a weapon." - DogBerTard

And once again DogBerTard implies that outing a racist as a racist is a racist act.

What a moron.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"When teenage thugs are called "troubled youth" by people on the political left, that tells us more about the mindset of the left than about these young hoodlums.' - Thomas Sowell

Uncle Tom

A person of color, especially a black person who acts in a way so as to come across as trying to please or gain approval of the white-dominated establishment. Example of folks in the recent past accused of "Uncle Tom" behavior are CindaSleeza Rice, Herman Cain, Allen West, Artur Davis, Angela McGlowan, Michelle Malkin (née Maglalang)
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"Seldom is there a speck of evidence that the thugs are troubled," - Uncle Thomas Sowell

Perhaps the fact that they are involved in crime indicates that they are troubled.

Poor Sowell. He Just ain't very bright. That is why he is so useful to the Republican Deceit machine.

VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"The irony of all this is that Bush has not been shown to have lied about anything." - Uncle Thomas Sowell

I have never encountered a Republican who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar.

Uncle Thomas Sowell is a fine example of such a Republican.
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 02, 2013
"Both teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases had been going down for years." - Uncle Thomas Sowell

And are highest in the Republican States.

So too is the consumption of alcohol and pornography.

What is wrong with them dirty Republicans?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 02, 2013
"At least as far back as the 18th century, the left has struggled to avoid facing the plain fact of evil" - Uncle Thomas Sowell

Meanwhile George Bush's Republican grandfather was funding the NAZI Party in Germany.

"The former president, Herbert Hoover, had become the Republican Party's chief spokesman in foreign affairs, and when Germany seized Moravia and Bohemia, Hoover declared that no clear and present danger existed and that Britain, France and others in Europe would be able to defend themselves should there be war. Hoover spoke of Roosevelt's "dangerous adventures" and argued that Roosevelt was trying to divert people's attention from his failure to end the depression."

Odd how the Republican party failed to recognize the evil of Nazism, and in many instances supported the Right Wing Movement.

Now what was Uncle Thomas Sowell saying about evil?
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 02, 2013
"It is easier to accuse someone of racism than to actually argue the issues."

When someone says something racist - that is the issue. Just because you deny that issue, and try to turn things around off the person who was racists - that does not change the facts... Keep trying - I will keep redirecting your dishonesty....
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 03, 2013
"'Liberals' are quick to use vulgarity. Is it because 'liberals' don't accept objective standards of behavior?"

Vulgar language does not bother me. Racism bothers me a lot more than a few bad words. Lying also bothers me. Like when freethought accused me of using a homosexual slurr - but then goes quiet when asked to support the accusation. Or when Dogbert tries to accuse me of racism - with not justification. That is cowardly as well as hateful. I find hateful behavior much more disturbing than a few bad words. I also don't like group insults - you know - like saying that all liberals are such and such. That immature and lazy thinking bothers me much more than a few bad words.
nowhere
3 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013

Doesn't matter. Courts did not address any problems with homosexual marriage only 'rights' issues.

Exactly, because there are no problems.


Muslims and Mormons have a religious rights issue as well as an individual rights issue to pursue polygamy.

No they don't, as polygamy infringes on the rights of one sex in the relationship, that being the women.


If courts make the decision, polygamy must be allowed.

Courts don't make decisions that infringe on a groups rights, hence homosexual marriage must be legal and polygamy illegal.
dogbert
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
djr,

When someone says something racist - that is the issue.


Particularly when someone like yourself makes every post about race. You should really try to engage in conversation without bigotry. Who knows, you might have something to say.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 03, 2013
After reading Thomas Sowell's piece reference above, why do 'liberals' focus on external features like skin color and sex? Because it's easy and they can.
What is more difficult to understand in character.
Judging by the content of character is more difficult than the color of the skin.
Which says volumes about of the lack of character content of a 'liberal'.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 03, 2013
infringes on the rights of one sex in the relationship, that being the women.

How?
If an adult women wants to be the 2nd or 3rd wife or... and all the wives agree, you are infringing upon their rights and insulting them as needed to be protected by the govt.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2013
"Particularly when someone like yourself makes every post about race. You should really try to engage in conversation without bigotry. Who knows, you might have something to say."

I discuss many of the issues on this board. This thread has become about racism - because Ryggy posted a racist comment. It has certainly become a protracted thread - simply because you and Ryggy are trying to play the reverse racist game (he called me a racist - that makes him a racist). It is childish - and intellectually bankrupt. I have not raised the issue of racism on any other threads - therefore your assertion that I make every post about racism - is total nonsense - you and Ryggy show intellectual childishness, and extreme dishonesty.
dogbert
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
Judging by the content of character is more difficult than the color of the skin.
Which says volumes about of the lack of character content of a 'liberal'.


People who are not racist or bigoted seldom even think about race or notice skin color. They do not think of themselves or others as white, black, Asian, etc. They think of themselves and others simply as human beings.

Racists, on the other hand, constantly think about race. The interject race into every conversation and use race as a weapon against those who are not racists. The left constantly uses race as a weapon because it directs away from their own bigotry.

They use hypocrisy, sexism, etc. in the same way. They project their faults onto others.

It is a truism that a dishonest man trusts no one while an honest man expects others to be honest. Those who project hate, bigotry, sexism, etc. are projecting their own inadequacies.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2013
"Racists, on the other hand, constantly think about race"

Good point. Remeber - it was Ryggy who raised the issue of race - without any contributiont to the subject at hand. I called Ryggy out for posting a racist comment. You are the one playing the reverse racism game. He called me a racists - so he is a racist.

"Those who project hate, bigotry, sexism, etc. are projecting their own inadequacies."

Agreed - you are talking about yourself and Ryggy right? I was not projecting racism - I was calling someone out for posting a racist comment. You do understand the difference right?
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
Simply stating Obama's father is from Kenya is now racist.
Crying 'racist' is a ruse to cover the fact Obama's father was a socialist and was not a US citizen or raised in the culture of the USA.
Why do 'liberals' support a candidate that knows nothing of the culture of liberty in the USA?
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 03, 2013
Simply stating Obama's father is from Kenya is now racist.

It certainly is racist - I agree with you. Also your explanation for the Mamba reference does not hold water. Either way - there was no reason for bringing up President Obama's father's nationality - than that you wanted to bring race into the discussion. You are a racist - and had no problem showing that on a science web site. Dance all you want - the facts are there.
nowhere
5 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2013
infringes on the rights of one sex in the relationship, that being the women.

How?
If an adult women wants to be the 2nd or 3rd wife or... and all the wives agree, you are infringing upon their rights and insulting them as needed to be protected by the govt.

If that were the case many educated woman around the world would be petitioning for the right to engage in polygamy, not the other way around. The only people who advocate polygamy are men who wish to engage in polygyny, but how many men opt for polyandry? None. It shows that polygamy is a practice of non equality that preys on uneducated or repressed women.
dogbert
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
djr,

Stating that Obama's father was from Africa is not racist. He actually was from Africa.

ryggesogn2 did not say he was from Kenya, you said that -- which is also true. Noting he was from Kenya does not make you a racist. Calling someone else a racist with every comment shows where your thoughts are.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 03, 2013
Also your explanation for the Mamba reference does not hold water.

Believe what you want.
I did not intentionally type 'mamba' and whoever jumped off the racist deep end is typical of 'liberals'.
From now on I will use BHO for Barack Husein Obama.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 03, 2013
If that were the case many educated woman around the world would be petitioning for the right to engage in polygamy, not the other way around.


Now they will in the US as the precedence has been set, courts can define marriage.
Many women who are married to one man claim many positives.
Islam requires scrupulous equal treatment for each wife.
Others in UT or elsewhere may share a house and chores or each have their own house.

Why do homosexual marriage supporters oppose polygamy? Now all the sudden the traditional role of marriage, protecting women and children, apply?
JohnGee
1 / 5 (5) Jul 03, 2013
Why do homosexual marriage supporters oppose polygamy?
How many men opt for polyandry?

Besides, I thought the government should stay out of marriage? Why do you keep changing your argument?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 03, 2013
Why do homosexual marriage supporters oppose polygamy?
How many men opt for polyandry?

Besides, I thought the government should stay out of marriage? Why do you keep changing your argument?

'no' thinks polygamy should be prohibited by the govt to protect women and the govt imposing homosexual marriage is an equal rights issue.
Polygamists, and anyone else, can and will follow the legal path homosexuals used to redefine marriage to suit them. Do they care?
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 03, 2013
Stating that Obama's father was from Africa is not racist. He actually was from Africa.

Yes it is - there was no need to mention where father is from - it is irrelevant - and therefore racists. Why else would someone point out that his father was from Africa - other than to draw attention to his race?

Physorg spell checker does not do substitutions - it simply underlines misspelled words. How convenient - Ryggy made a mistake - and spelled Obama - Mamba. Give me a break.

"Calling someone else a racist with every comment shows where your thoughts are."

It is totally appropriate to call someone out when they act badly. You had no problem criticizing people for using bad language. What is the difference? Ryggy is a racists - keep dancing Dogbert - it changes nothing.
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 03, 2013
Do they care?
Personally, I don't. I think I've said so before. It's an issue of freedom to me.

I do understand why someone would want to restrict polygamy, but as long as no women are being forced into such an arrangement, I don't really care. I draw the line at sentient beings that can't consent, e.g. children and animals. Drill a hole in a tree for all I care.
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 03, 2013
Among black Americans, 31% think most blacks are racist, while 24% consider most whites racist
Among white adults, 10% think most white Americans are racist; 38% believe most blacks are racist,

Which means, more people black and white consider blacks to be more racists than whites.
freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
Lets see, Progressives lie, cheat, steal, threaten, and intimidate, and threaten rape.

http://www.lifene...s-raped/

Pro-abortionists share the same values as Pro-homosexual activists.
dogbert
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 03, 2013
djr,
Physorg spell checker does not do substitutions -- it simply underlines misspelled words. How convenient -- Ryggy made a mistake -- and spelled Obama - Mamba. Give me a break.


You are wrong. This is an example of how hard you work to find something to call racist. It is your browser, not physorg, which is doing the spell check. According to how the site is accessed, words may be highlighted, not checked at all or substituted. When I use my cell phone and Swype, the word is substituted. Firefox underlines. Internet Explorer doesn't indicate that the word is misspelled.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 03, 2013
Leave it to Progressives to argue spelling. It fits that djr is the grammar Nazi; Nazism and Progressive thinking go hand in hand.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (4) Jul 03, 2013
'Liberals' are quick to use vulgarity. Is it because 'liberals' don't accept objective standards of behavior?


I have never completely understood the propensity for the left to spout vulgarity. Perhaps it is because it is easier to express hatred with vulgarity?
Left or right, we only know that swearing is not a sin, only offensive like nailing people to crosses or stoning impudent kids but not quite as bad. Or beheading people, which is also offensive, or castrating oneself fore christ. Or yanking out an offensive eye, which is pretty offensive.

Offensive is as offensive does.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2013
"Leave it to Progressives to argue spelling. It fits that djr is the grammar Nazi; Nazism and Progressive thinking go hand in hand."

FreeTard forgets that the NAZI's were a conservative movement.

Fascism was a Libertarian movement.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
Why doesn't your link actually support your assertion, FreeTardO?

"Lets see, Progressives lie, cheat, steal, threaten, and intimidate, and threaten rape.
http://www.lifene...s-raped/" - FreeTardO

Couldn't you find one that does?
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2013
Of course, the article says nothing of the kind.

"Among black Americans, 31% think most blacks are racist, while 24% consider most whites racist" - FreeTardO

FreeTardO is just making it up as he goes along. Lying, as Conservatives always do.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (10) Jul 03, 2013
Spell check results:

Omamba => Mamba (first choice)

freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
vd, lying is the primarily your preserve
1. Nazi stands for what? National Socialist Party. Socialists are definitely not conservative.

2. Rasmussen was the one who make the stat, the link is below
http://www.rasmus...ispanics

freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
BTW I thought Obama is loved throughout the world?

http://www.zerohe...-freedom

If the pictures and words were against Bush, wouldn't the media be broadcasting these pictures? But wait, the media is nothing but Progressive Lapdogs, they will not broadcast anything that goes against their agenda of Gay Special rights, Pro killing of Unborn Babies, Pro Union, Pro Obama.

When the Progressive Media does not practice balanced reporting they are in essence lying and are nothing more than a propaganda machine.

freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 03, 2013
More information about the threats Unborn Baby killer supports make.... Very progressive right VD, What did you have on your profile a while back.... something about wishing who dead?????

http://www.nation...woodruff
VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
"Noting he was from Kenya does not make you a racist." - DogBerTard

It isn't the fact that makes him a racist. It is the fact that he felt that such an irrelevancy in any way was relevant to the topic.

Yup. RyggTard has demonstrated himself to be a racist, pure and simple.
VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
Your second link doesn't support your initial accusations either.

"More information about the threats Unborn Baby killer supports make...." - FreeTardO

Why can't you find one?

VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
"BTW I thought Obama is loved throughout the world? " - FreeTardO

You see the difference is that Bush was hated by virtually everyone in the world with the exception of American Republicans who claimed he was the greatest president in U.S. history.

With Obama he is admired and respected by virtually everyone in the world with the exception of American Republicans who hate him because he is black, because he is smarter than they are, and because he isn't a real American.
VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
"When the Progressive Media does not practice balanced reporting" - FreeTardO

I've seen these stories in the main stream media. Why are you lying about these protests not being covered?

FreeTarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrdO
VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
"1. Nazi stands for what? National Socialist Party." - FreeTardO

Yup. But it wasn't a socialist movement. It was a Conservative movement. That is why it continues to appeal to Racist Republican Skinheads, KKK members and other right wing Vermin.

The fact that you have fallen for the same deception as the German National Socialists, shows us how stupid American Conservatives are.

You are not only incapable of learning from your own failures, but incapable of leaning from history as well.

VendicarE
5 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2013
"2. Rasmussen was the one who make the stat, the link is below" - FreeTardO

Scott Rasmussen Tries To Explain Why His 2012 Polling Was So Bad

Rassmussen Reports was among the least accurate pollsters of the 2012 Election Cycle

http://www.outsid...-so-bad/

VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 03, 2013
" I draw the line at sentient beings that can't consent, e.g. children and animals." - JohnGee

Libertarians like RyggTard hold that animals are property and you can do with them what you like since any restriction on the use or abuse or torture of your property is evil socialism.

As to Children, the Libertairan Party Platform states that children need only claim their rights and then must have their human rights respected as the rights of an adult must be respected.

In other words Children have the right to refuse school, drive a car, get married, engage in prostitution or whatever form of commerce they care to, as soon as they assert their rights as adults.

In other words, According to the Libertarian Party Platform there is no legitimate claim of child molestation if the child is willing.

This is why the Libertarian Party is often called the Pedo party.
JohnGee
2.1 / 5 (7) Jul 04, 2013
Unborn Baby

FreepTwink, the term is fetus.

The fact that you have fallen for the same deception as the German National Socialists, shows us how stupid American Conservatives are.
In the US, fascism will come draped in the flag, carrying a Bible (FreepTwink).
djr
5 / 5 (2) Jul 04, 2013
Dogbert "You are wrong."

I acknowledge that I am wrong on this point. I thought the spell check was done through Physorg. My bad.

This does nothing to change the reality that Ryggy raised the issue of Obama's father being from Africa.

As stipulated 100 times - calling someone out on being a racist - does not make one a racist.
nowhere
not rated yet Jul 04, 2013
If that were the case many educated woman around the world would be petitioning for the right to engage in polygamy, not the other way around.

Now they will in the US as the precedence has been set, courts can define marriage.
Many women who are married to one man claim many positives.

Which women? Please give names or affiliated groups.

Islam requires scrupulous equal treatment for each wife.
Others in UT or elsewhere may share a house and chores or each have their own house.

Yes, all of whom are equally less equal than their dominant husband. This is a prime example of inequality, and the immoral nature of polygyny. Are the women allowed to take multiple husbands? No? All humans have the right to equal treatment.

Why do homosexual marriage supporters oppose polygamy? Blah blah

You have yet to give an example of a group that advocates polygamy. This is because it violates basic human rights. Homosexual marriage does not.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2013
You have yet to give an example of a group that advocates polygamy.

No problem.
"Janet Bennion is a professor of anthropology and sociology at Lyndon State College in Lyndonville. Earlier this year, she released a book entitled Polygamy in Primetime: Media, Gender and Politics in Mormon Fundamentalism, outlining her research on the topic and why she supports the idea of a woman or man having two or more spouses."
"She said that she feels that those who oppose polygamous marriages are bigots.

"We need to just step back, get off our high horse, and look at this from a civil liberties perspective. If we're going to pave the way for alternative sexuality, why not provide liberties for those who choose the polygamy form?" Bennion asked. "As a feminist, I say, 'Bring it on; let's legalize it.'""
http://christiann...l-right/
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2013
"The bottom line is simple, if the government redefines marriage once for one group, it will be forced to redefine it again for other groups or be accused of the same discrimination it now accuses traditional marriage supporters of harboring. There is no way around this concrete conclusion. So, the only way to avoid a spiral downward into moral decay that will ultimately bring our society down is to preserve the only true definition of marriage.

The alternative is a word with no meaning and a society with no marriages at all. How is that helpful?"
- See more at: http://engagefami...ils.dpuf
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2013
"The reasons for polygamy are complex. Aisha says that, from her point of view, "Single mums don't have the pick of the bunch . . . [Polygamy] is there so we can still have the benefits of marriage, so we don't have to be left on the shelf, so our children can still have role models, father figures, and so we can still have that emotional stability, financial stability and security.""
"Aisha tells me that her husband saw polygamy as his religious duty. "A lot of people think it's just about sex but . . . sex goes out the window after a while. If you don't want your husband marrying someone else, what would happen to these single mums, then, and these divorcees? Is it fair that they just stay on the shelf? We should be looking after our community. Islam is all about community and society and we should look after our brothers and our sisters equally, otherwise it's every man for themselves.""
http://www.newsta...-husband
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2013
"One important thing to understand about monogamy is a point that Bergner misses. Monogamy is not meant to satisfy the female libido. It would be far-fetched for anyone to argue that, especially when the evidence runs in the opposite direction: Monogamy kills eros. But monogamy is a cultural constraint aimed at protecting the natural result of sex--namely, children. "
"Isabel may have craved better sex with her boyfriend-turned-fiancé, but she ultimately decides that she could live without it. After all, Isabel's relationship with her previous boyfriend Michael, a man ten years older than her, was far more erotic, Bergner tells us. But Isabel broke it off. Why? "The relationship with Michael had ended only because she understood he would never commit to her, never marry her or even live with her.""
http://www.theatl.../277429/
Women may accept polygamy for protecting their children and for security.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2013
" Cicero saw natural law as true law:

"True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting ... . It is a sin to try to alter this law ... and it is impossible to abolish it entirely."

He added that "whoever is disobedient" to the natural law "is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature."

The natural law is profound and has been profoundly rejected by liberals/progressives."

Read more: http://triblive.c...Y5PlsW16
Follow us: @triblive on Twitter | triblive on Facebook

Was Cicero Christian or Jewish? No, yet he acknowledges Natural Law which was stated in the US Declaration of Independence.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."
nowhere
3 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2013
You have yet to give an example of a group that advocates polygamy.

No problem.
"Janet Bennion is a professor of anthropology and sociology at Lyndon State College in Lyndonville. Earlier this year, she released a book entitled Polygamy in Primetime...why not provide liberties for those who choose the polygamy form?" Bennion asked. "As a feminist, I say, 'Bring it on; let's legalize it.'""
http://christiann...l-right/

"Bennion, who said that she does not wish to be a polygamist as she is happily married to one man, outlined that much of her book is based on talks with Mormon women or those involved with the Apostolic United Brethren."

So she is a hypocrite with a book to sell, and her work is based on the Mormon culture which only practices Polygyny, not Polyandry. This is a prime example of the inequality that Polygamy brings, and illustrates my point well.
nowhere
3 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2013
"The bottom line is simple, if the government redefines marriage once for one group, it will be forced to redefine it again for other groups or be accused of the same discrimination it now accuses traditional marriage supporters of harboring.

Incorrect. The government may redefine marriage to rectify human right violations (homosexual marriage), but may not redefine marriage to create human rights violations. So the points your referenced article is trying to make, that "polygamists, polyamorists, and pedophiles" will have marriage redefined to suite them causing human rights violations, is completely irrational fear mongering.
nowhere
3 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2013
"[..] Aisha says that[..], "Single mums don't have the pick of the bunch [..]left on the shelf, so our children can still have role models, father figures, and so we can still have that emotional stability, financial stability and security.""
"Aisha tells me that her husband saw polygamy as his religious duty. "A lot of people think it's just about sex but [..] what would happen to these single mums, then, and these divorcees [..]

" "In late twenties a girl is considered past it, so this arrangement is the best she can get."
If you're divorced, widowed or over 30 and Muslim, finding a husband in this country can be a challenge. Does polygamy, or more specifically polygyny, as sanctioned by the Quran, offer a possible solution?"
Again we see polygyny promoted not polygamy, and in a culture that represses its women. Despite what these women want, they are forced into this situation. Inequality violates basic human rights, and here is a good example of inequality on many levels.
nowhere
3 / 5 (2) Jul 05, 2013
"One important thing to understand about monogamy is a point that Bergner misses. Monogamy is not meant to satisfy the female libido. It would be far-fetched for anyone to argue that, especially when the evidence runs in the opposite direction: Monogamy kills eros. But monogamy is a cultural constraint aimed at protecting the natural result of sex--namely, children. "
http://www.theatl.../277429/
Women may accept polygamy for protecting their children and for security.

Non sequitur. This article talks about Daniel Bergner's book, which explains that while monogamy provides security and protection for children, it does not satisfy the female libido. It asserts that woman's libido would be better satisfied with them having multiple partners. This is in contrast of Isabel's story, where she picks monogamy and the securities it provides over her libido.
nowhere
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 05, 2013
" Cicero saw natural law as true law:
"True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting ... . It is a sin to try to alter this law ... and it is impossible to abolish it entirely."
He added that "whoever is disobedient" to the natural law "is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature."

True.
The natural law is profound and has been profoundly rejected by liberals/progressives."

This is your opinion.
Was Cicero Christian or Jewish? No, yet he acknowledges Natural Law which was stated in the US Declaration of Independence.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ..."

We all agree that all men (and women) are created equally, therefore all men are equally entitled to marry whichever sex they so choose.
dogbert
1 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

It is almost laughable how you talk about natural law, agree it is true, then assert again that equality demands aberrant behavior be recognized and sanctioned -- indeed rewarded.

I say almost laughable because aberrant sexual behavior is never laughable, just sad.
nowhere
5 / 5 (1) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

It is almost laughable how you talk about natural law, agree it is true, then assert again that equality demands aberrant behavior be recognized and sanctioned -- indeed rewarded.


What is laughable is your understanding of natural law.

"Classically, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature—both social and personal—and deduce binding rules of moral behavior from it."

It is a natural law that all humans are treated equally, and therefore have equal right to marriage regardless of their sexual preference.

Further your assertion of which sexual behavior is aberrant is only your opinion since the sexual behavior in question does not violate any human right.
dogbert
1 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,
Further your assertion of which sexual behavior is aberrant is only your opinion since the sexual behavior in question does not violate any human right.


It is not an assertion. It is the meaning of the word aberrant:

ab·er·rant
adjective
1. departing from the right, normal, or usual course.
2. deviating from the ordinary, usual, or normal type; exceptional; abnormal.
noun
3. an aberrant person, thing, group, etc.


Single gender sexual behaviors are aberrant. It is sad that people choose aberrant behavior over normal behavior.
nowhere
5 / 5 (1) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,
Further your assertion of which sexual behavior is aberrant is only your opinion since the sexual behavior in question does not violate any human right.


It is not an assertion. It is the meaning of the word aberrant:

ab•er•rant
adjective
1. departing from the right, normal, or usual course.
2. deviating from the ordinary, usual, or normal type; exceptional; abnormal.
noun
3. an aberrant person, thing, group, etc.


No. Aberrant means to "depart from the right course", which implies immorality, and that is what you are asserting. If you mean to say homosexuals "depart from the normal course" use less a derogatory adjective.

Single gender sexual behaviors are aberrant. It is sad that people choose aberrant behavior over normal behavior.

What is sad is how you judge others for their personal choices. That is immoral behaviour.
dogbert
1 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

I am not judging. Aberrant behavior is by definition not normal.

It ifs sad that you promote behaviors which are not normal.
nowhere
5 / 5 (1) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

I am not judging. Aberrant behavior is by definition not normal.

It ifs sad that you promote behaviors which are not normal.

You are judging if you imply the behaviour is not "right" (moral), and persecuting if you oppose them simply for being unusual.

All minorities of all form express behaviours which are not normal, and in nature it is natural that there will be exceptions to the norm. Your statement incudes them all.

I'm not promoting behaviour that is not normal; I am promoting equality for all behaviour that isn't immoral.
dogbert
1 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

You are the only one discussing morality.

Don't accuse me of your activity.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
It is almost laughable how you talk about natural law, agree it is true, then assert again that equality demands aberrant behavior be recognized and sanctioned -- indeed rewarded
It is laughable how you define aberrent in terms of your religion.

Monogany is aberrant in our species as only a little research reveals.

"So, is monogamy normal? Current scientific consensus says no, not really. When it comes to human beings, monogamous pairings have been standard practice in less than 20% of sampled societies."

Women have a great deal more time and effort invested in reproduction than men, and so they naturally desire to choose the best mate for each and every child they wish to bear. They will tend to constantly test the mettle of their current partner by enticing other males to step up.
cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
Conversely, a mans preferred strategy biologically is to impregnate as many females as possible. This leads us to the understanding that the harem is the optimum arrangement for both sexes.

'A woman prefers to have one tenth of a champion rather than all of a mediocre man." oscar wilde

Monogamy benefits the tribe by reducing conflict and fostering trust among men who will be more apt to endanger themselves for one another in battle against other tribes. But it is extremely difficult to enforce, requiring strict taboos and harsh punishment.

We see this most clearly in the fundy sects. Islamists cover their women from head to toe to restrict their ability to entice. They are made fearful of, but at the same time wholly dependent upon, men. And they are restricted to the tasks of making and raising babies.

Variation among both men and women is minimized. Men wear full beards and standard clothes. There is little perceived advantage in trading up.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
But when a man doesnt have the luxury of assembling a harem, as in the aftermath a bloody but victorious tribal war, he will at least welcome the security of monogamy as a womans constant shopping around is supposed to make him uncomfortable.

The predominant situation in the context of endemic tribal conflict, is that those who survive to mate are older and get their pick of young virgins. In sparta for instance the law said that a man could not marry until age 25, assuming that those who survived to that age would father superior warriors.
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 05, 2013
nowhere,

You are the only one discussing morality.

Don't accuse me of your activity.

Dogbert, you are a disgusting, racist, homophobic coward. Probably homosexual too, but there's nothing wrong with that.
dogbert
1 / 5 (8) Jul 05, 2013
JohnGee,

Dogbert, you are a disgusting, racist, homophobic coward. Probably homosexual too, but there's nothing wrong with that.


You bring nothing to this discussion but your racist homosexual innuendo.

I don't know why you are racist or why you hate homosexuals and I don't care. You're hatred and bigotry are not worth anyone's time.

Why don't you go somewhere where your hatred will be appreciated?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (8) Jul 05, 2013
Why don't you go somewhere where your hatred will be appreciated?

It is quite appreciated by many who post here.
JohnGee
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 05, 2013
You bring nothing to this discussion but your racist homosexual innuendo.

I don't know why you are racist or why you hate homosexuals and I don't care. You're hatred and bigotry are not worth anyone's time.

How exactly have I been racist? Crawl back in your hole, troglodyte. You are also clearly a latent homosexual. There is nothing homophobic about pointing that out. Maybe you should disguise your aberrant behavior better?

Why don't you go somewhere where your hatred will be appreciated?
kochevnik
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 05, 2013
Ghost as often the case on religion you are on target. Unfortunately atavist gnats and their sockpuppets swarm the comment ratings, as they are from a time and place when/where aborting their kind was illegal
VendicarE
5 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
Conservatives have lost this issue, just as they are losing every other issue that the Tea-Tards are pushing.

They are incapable of leaning from their own long, long, history of abject failure.
dogbert
1 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
JohnGee,

How exactly have I been racist? Crawl back in your hole, troglodyte. You are also clearly a latent homosexual.


By making such accusations as this. You use racism and hatred of homosexuals as a weapon. Accusing me of racism when I have said nothing racist. Accusing me of homosexuality or hatred of homosexuals when I have said nothing which would indicate I am homosexual or that I dislike anyone who is homosexual.

Are you a sock puppet for nowhere? He makes these hateful racist homosexual comments and when someone calls him out on it, you jump in with more of the same vitriol.
nowhere
5 / 5 (1) Jul 06, 2013

Are you a sock puppet for nowhere? He makes these hateful racist homosexual comments and when someone calls him out on it, you jump in with more of the same vitriol.

I take offence from this comment, as I don't believe I have made any hateful racist homosexual comments and how others choose to comment is their own decision.
dogbert
1 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
nowhere,
Sorry. I meant to indicate djr.
You did accuse me of making a moral judgement when I did not, but you have not been out of line.

You have my apology.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
dog, did you see this?
"I have believed for some time that the left is intellectually bankrupt. I can't think of a single new idea from the left of the political spectrum since the end of the Vietnam War. Just about all the national debates since then have been over proposals that have come from the right. Try watching left-wing talk shows on television. I believe you will find that they spend almost all their time talking about people on the right and their ideas."
"The left has no idea what to do about our failing public schools. It has no solution to the problem of entitlement spending. It has no earthly idea what to do about all the problems in our health care system. There is no coherent proposal on the left to reform the tax system. I think it is no exaggeration to say that the left has no ideas. Period."
http://www.forbes...ankrupt/
dogbert
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
Thanks for the link rygg. Interesting.

I'm never sure if the left is simply bereft of ideas or if they really do want everyone to be equally miserable. I tend to believe that they really want equal misery (except for the ruling class, of course).
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
Capitalism's vice is the unequal sharing of blessings. Socialism's virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Sir Winston.

Socialism is the result of govt enforced envy. "If I can't be rich, you can't be either!". And the socialist 'leaders' take their cut to satisfy that envy.
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
"Sorry. I meant to indicate djr. "

Dogbert - I challenge you to go back through any thread - and quote me making a hateful racist homosexual comment. This is your accusation.

Freethinking recently accused me of using a homosexual slur against him/her. I went back through the entire thread and read each comment carefully. Nothing. Freethinking went totally silent when asked to support the accusation. I suspect we will have the same situation here. Interesting pattern don't you think?
JohnGee
1 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
JohnGee,

How exactly have I been racist? Crawl back in your hole, troglodyte. You are also clearly a latent homosexual.


By making such accusations as this. You use racism and hatred of homosexuals as a weapon. Accusing me of racism when I have said nothing racist. Accusing me of homosexuality or hatred of homosexuals when I have said nothing which would indicate I am homosexual or that I dislike anyone who is homosexual.


You are a pathetic coward and a homophobic homosexual. I have said nothing racist, nor homophobic here. Your made up definition is laughable and only conservative dirt-bags use it.

Are you a sock puppet for nowhere?
Like most reactionary crybaby conservatives, you have a serious paranoia problem. You must be Freethinking, Ryggesogn2, et al. since you rush in to all topics to defend their racist and homophobic comments. I'll be sure to spread the word.
dogbert
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
djr,

"data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother."

Good - we finally peel off the layers of the onion. You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'- than to draw attention to his race. My parents politics are irrelevant to who I am.


I withdraw the hateful homosexual statement. You continually bring up race and accuse of racism when it is pointed out that Obama is a socialist. In reviewing comments, I did not see where you used homosexuality as a weapon. You have my partial apology.

I read it this way - 'we do not like President Obama - (I believe there is a significant racial component for that dislike for many people) - therefore we will throw dirty words at him like socialist.'


Obama is a socialist. The color of his skin is irrelevant to his socialist politics.
JohnGee
1 / 5 (5) Jul 06, 2013
I tend to believe that they really want equal misery (except for the ruling class, of course).
The difference between conservatives and liberals in my experience is that liberals aren't arrogant/deluded enough to think they can read minds. Dogbert accuses liberals of wanting to create a situation conservatives have all ready created. Then, since he is deluded enough to think he can read minds, he is able to divine why liberals would want to do something against conservatives they have all ready done to themselves.

So let's be clear here, I'm accusing him of the same thing he is accusing me of. The difference is, I don't think he believes what he believes because he is evil. I don't deny him his humanity, and I admit his motivations are something I can never truly know, only guess at. Dogbert on the other hand, knows that everybody that disagrees with him on particular issues are bad people bordering on evil/inhuman because he can peer into their soul like Bush with Putin.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"You continually bring up race and accuse of racism when it is pointed out that Obama is a socialist. "

You continue to misrepresent. I do not continually bring up race, and accuse of racism. This is the only thread on which I have accused anyone on racism. I accused Ryggy of racism - because the comment Ryggy made was racist. We have been around and around this one. This is the only time I have accused any one of racism. How is that 'continually bringing up race'

You clearly are very careless with your accusations of others. It seems you are so offended that someone is accurately accused of being a racist - that you accuse me of hateful, homosexual, racist comments.

Clearly I am not the only one noticing the pattern. Read John's post above.

The biggest problem I have with a group of posters here - is that every thread has to be an attack on President Obama. Don't you understand that this is a science board - and has an international audience - it is so childish...

ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
I accused Ryggy of racism

For stating the fact that BHO's biological father and mother were socialists.
The biological reference was made because his mother divorced and married someone else.
BHO claimed to have written a book "Dreams of My Father". BHO noted his father was from Kenya.

Is it in NYC where the police are not allowed to describe a suspect using sex, size or skin color?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
Dogbert accuses liberals of wanting to create a situation conservatives have all ready created.

What did conservatives create that 'liberals' covet?

One does not have to read the mind of a thief holding a gun in your face demanding your money or your life. 'Liberals' are dishonest thieves. They do the same thing as an honest thief, but try to hide it to win votes.
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
What did conservatives create

"equal misery (except for the ruling class, of course)." -Dogbert

One does not have to read the mind of a thief holding a gun in your face demanding your money or your life.
Taxes aren't theft just like pointing out racism isn't racist.
dogbert
1 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
djr,

It is not possible to adequately discuss the issues here without also talking about the forces which let to this point. Obama is a prime mover in the demise of DOMA.

His father was a socialist from Kenya. He spent time in Indonesia learning Islam. He does not come from a traditional American background. He is a socialist and this has much to do with his upbringing. It is appropriate to note where his politics comes from. It is in no sense racial to note these things.

Your insistence that we cannot mention his background because of his race is racial bias.

You need to get over this. He is a bad president because of his politics.
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
You're delusional. He's center-right, center at most. 40 years ago he would have been a moderate Republican. Was Eisenhower a communist?
He does not come from a traditional American background.
Your dogwhistle needs tuned. I think I can hear it.
dogbert
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
JohnGee,

You're delusional. He's center-right, center at most.


Is that why he has put so many more people on Welfare and Disability. Is that why he is trying to nationalized health care? Is that why he is placing another large tax on low income workers to pay for his health care bill? Is that why he is doing everything in his power to harm businesses and stop new business start-ups? Is that why he wants to flood America with illegal immigrants to place on the Welfare rolls? Is that why he wants to shut down much of our electrical generating plants?

Nothing about him rises above the desire to bring America down.

To be fair, he has a lot of help from people like yourself. He could not do it all by himself.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"For stating the fact that BHO's biological father and mother were socialists."

No damn it - for the thousandth time - for stating that his father is from Africa. That has nothing to do with anything - and it is racist. Get over it.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Nothing about him rises above the desire to bring America down. "

I understand that you disaprove of President Obama. That of course is your right. I felt equally strongly about President Bush. I also have a lot of problem with many of President Obama's policies.

Here is the point you seem unwilling to understand. Your disapproval of President Obama does not make it OK to want to turn Physorg into a 'bash and slur President Obama' forum.

Also - in my view - the way you present the information is dishonest - and hateful. For example - you just said that he spent time in Indonesia learning Islam. First of all - so what? secondly that is a dishonest slur - attempting to connect him with Islam. He attended a Catholic school, and then a public school that had not religious affiliation - but had Christians, Budhists, Hindus and Moslems in attendance. Don't you think that diversity is good? His father left him when he was just an infant - and returned to Kenya. cont.
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
Dogwhistle, Obama is not a socialist.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
So - just think about this one issue. His father left him when he (President Obama) was less than a year old. His mother moved to Seattle to go to college. His father only visited him one time when he was in Hawaii at age 10. So clearly his father was in no way involved in his life. Yet you and Ryggy think it is appropriate to just mention the fact that his father is from Africa. As John points out - you are using dog whistles.
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
Dogbert: "He does not come from a traditional American background."

Really - what is a traditional American background? Maybe you have not noticed - but this is a pluralistic country. We have people from all parts of the world - who are good Americans. Perhaps you should visit a big city some time. You will see people from all cultures. You will hear many languages being spoken. The diversity of a city like New York is one of the things that makes it great. So if you were't born in Kansas - and did not attend a Baptist Church - you should not be President.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
"For stating the fact that BHO's biological father and mother were socialists."

No damn it - for the thousandth time - for stating that his father is from Africa. That has nothing to do with anything - and it is racist. Get over it.

NO.
This is what started it, a typo and and accusation from Gee that the typo 'mamba' was veiled racism.
Then dj slapped down his race card based upon the the quote below that BHOs biological father (and mother) were socialists.

4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 30, 2013
"data demonstrates Mamba is socialist, like his biological father and mother."

Good - we finally peel off the layers of the onion. You are a hateful racist. There can be no other reason for using the phrase 'his biological father and mother' or the name 'Mamba'- than to draw attention to his race. My parents politics are irrelevant to who I am.

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...g.html#f
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
We have people from all parts of the world - who are good Americans.

Then why so many of those 'good' Americans continue to vote for socialists who want to destroy the Constitution that created the USA?
Yes there are many immigrants who escaped from socialism that are very worried about those 'good' Americans in cities that keep voting for amateur narcissistic socialists like BHO they buy those votes with wealth plundered from those who earn it.
So clearly his father was in no way involved in his life

So why did BHO write the book about a father that was not involved with his life?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
Dogwhistle, Obama is not a socialist.

Socialism is as socialists do:
Obamacare nationalizing health insurance, using the IRS like the Stasi, spying on news reporters with official govt agents, .....
The list demonstrating BHOs socialism is quite long.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
redacted
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
So why did BHO write the book about a father that was not involved with his life?
I'm getting the impression you think this is some sort of airtight gotcha question. If you had read more than the title of the book, you'd know otherwise.

Obama is not a socialist. Healthcare has not been nationalized. The vast majority of health insurance is from private entities. Comparing the IRS and the Stasi is laughable. The IRS was giving extra scrutiny to groups founded against taxes. I still haven't seen anything about spying on reporters that doesn't make me think it's Newsmax-BS.

So actually the list is about as long as any US politician's.

If it walks like a duck....
So you're a fascist?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
Gee, you like socialism so much why not embrace BHOs socialism?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
""President Barack Obama toasted the founding dictator of post-colonial Tanzania on Monday, who collectivized the nation's low-tech agricultural sector, established a one-party state and left that African nation's economy in ruins.

So what I'd like to do is to propose a toast … to our gracious Tanzanian hosts, to our Tanzanian friends and to wisdom, unity and peace that we all seek in the world. Cheers," he told the invitees at the dinner, which took place in the Tanzanian capital, Dar es Salaam.

Nyerere "led a one-party state that nationalized key industries and created ujamaa, a rural, collective village-based movement of 'African socialism' and 'self reliance,'" according to a 2011 report by the Congressional Research Service.

http://dailycalle...cialist/
JohnGee
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
redacted

LMAO, that one was even too much for you huh?

For the record his post went something like this.

"Obama's father was a black socialist from Kenya, Africa and it's not racist to point this out. [About three more smarmy mentions that Obama is black and a couple "socialists" thrown in for good measure]

If it walks like a duck..."
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"Is that why he has put so many more people on Welfare and Disability." - DogBerTard

How soon Tea-Baggers forget that Bush left office with the U.S. heading for an imminent Grand Economic Depression.

Within less than 2 years of Obama taking over, the U.S. economy was growing again.

U.S. corporations have never been more profitable than today. They just aren't interested in hiring Americans.

Hence the large Unemployment rate.

Apple alone is sitting on a half trillion in tax free (Creative Accounting) cash.
djr
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
He was taught in Muslim schools in Indonesia and his father, from Kenya, Africa, who was black was also a Muslim. Facts.

No - actually lies - as I recently stated - he went to a Catholic school in Indonesia, and then to a public school that had NO RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION, and had students who were Christians, Moslems, Budhists etc.

Ryggy is a liar.

"BHO was mentored in HI by a US black communist."

Now you change the subject - and introduce a whole new issue. Not biting liar. President Obama's biological father left when he (president Obama) was less than a year old. He did only saw his father one more time - when he was 10. The only reason you could have had for raising the issue that his father was from Africa - was racism. Get over it.

Now you want to slap the 'Islamic' label on him. I have a problem with all religions - but I also understand that there are wonderful human beings that are Christian, and also Moslem. You truly are evil - with your vile dog whistles.
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"President Barack Obama toasted the founding dictator of post-colonial Tanzania on Monday, who collectivized the nation's low-tech agricultural sector, established a one-party state and left that African nation's economy in ruins." - RyggTard

Real Economic growth rate Tanzania

1999 4%
2000 5.1%
2001 5%
2002 5.1%
2003 5.1%
2004 5.8%
2005 6.8%
2006 5.8%
2007 7.2%
2008 7.1%
2009 6%
2010 6.4%
2011 6.6%

Poor RyggTard. Caught yet again, telling a bald faced lie.

VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"Ryggy is a liar. " - dir

RyggTard is a perpetual and congenital liar. All Conservatives are.
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
"President Barack Obama toasted the founding dictator of post-colonial Tanzania"

It is what heads of state have to do. Do you want me to start pulling out pictures of President Bush holding hands with the KING of Saudi Arabia, or hugging his best buddy - strongman Putin?

Oh all right I will - http://www.youtub...QFwKWFpA

http://www.google...p;ty=181

VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"Gee, you like socialism so much why not embrace BHOs socialism?" - RyggTard

TardieBoy.... Obama isn't a socialist.

Why do you feel a need to lie about it?
VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (5) Jul 06, 2013
"Then why so many of those 'good' Americans continue to vote for socialists who want to destroy the Constitution that created the USA?" - RyggTard

For the same reason that you haven't stop molesting children., have you?

It is because the assertion implicit in your question is itself a lie.

Lie, Lie, Lie. that is the primary method of reasoning that Conservatives use.

Where are those WMD again, Tardieboy?

djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
June 30th - quote from Ryggy - after being accused of being racist for using the term Mamba. Ryggy claims that was just a typo - fine - we have to accept that - but then comes this post

"First, Obama's father was Marxist from Africa"

President Obama's father left him when he was 6 moths old - and therefore of course was not a parental influence in his life. There can be no other reason for mentioning that his father was from Africa - than to draw attention to his African heritage. What are you saying Ryggy - all Africans are bad? So now Ryggy tries to throw around the label of Moslem. As John said - "if it walks like a duck"
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
Clearly RyggTard is a racist. Most Tea-Baggers are.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
June 30th - quote from Ryggy - after being accused of being racist for using the term Mamba. Ryggy claims that was just a typo - fine - we have to accept that - but then comes this post


And you played the race card BEFORE I said anything about Africa.

As for BHO attending a Muslim school, I redacted that because I had no supporting documentation.
But it is interesting to look at the registration to the Catholic school. He was listed as being Indonesian, not American.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
"Tanzania's historically state-led economy is becoming more market-based but remains hindered by weak property rights, poor infrastructure, and the country's high HIV/AIDS rate. "
"The judicial system is subject to political interference and severely inefficient. Recent reforms have been aimed at establishing a reliable system of transferable property rights, but there is no single comprehensive law covering transactions."
http://www.herita...tanzania
Tanzania's inflation is 7%. Is the 6% growth before or after inflation?
VendicarE
4 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
More bad news for RyggTard

Pill of Goods: International Counterfeit Drug Ring Hit in Massive Sting

http://www.scient...of-goods
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Tanzania's inflation is 7%. Is the 6% growth before or after inflation?" - RyggTard

After.

The chart shows "real" growth.

So RyggTard, why was your Faux News source lying?

And why are you now resorting to quoting from yet another known source of lies - the Heritage Foundation?

Is it your goal to spread as many lies as possible?
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"And you played the race card BEFORE I said anything about Africa."

Correct - because you used the term Mamba - and also made reference to 'his biological parents' It was perfectly appropriate for me to recognize this as racist dog whistle language. You later reinforced my understanding of you racism when YOU raised the issue of his father being from Africa. The only interpretation of that reference was your attempt at bringing attention to his African father - any way you slice it Ryggy - you put out a racist post - get over it.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
Ryggy "He was taught in Muslim schools in Indonesia and his father, from Kenya, Africa, who was black was also a Muslim. Facts."

Ryggy: "I redacted that because I had no supporting documentation."

You only redacted it after I called you a liar. "Oh gosh - my mistake - how could that have happened - I posted a lie about President Obama - how careless of me - just like I made a typo and typed the word Mamba."

Ryggy: "But it is interesting to look at the registration to the Catholic school. He was listed as being Indonesian, not American."

Under U.S. law - a person cannot give up their citizenship until they are of age. Indonesia does not recognize dual citizenship. So what ever that document - that Donald trump probably spent a million dollars to acquire says - President Obama was, and is a U.S. citizen.

You carnival barkers are pure evil. You will stop at nothing to slur President Obama. You are truly evil and sickening.
freethinking
1 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
djr a Homophobic Progressives who was made the comment about me being homosexual. I thought it was you, so if it wasn't you I take that back the statement about you accusing of me of being homosexual.
freethinking
1 / 5 (6) Jul 06, 2013
Anyone want to defend these homosexuals beating a man up for disagreeing with there lifestyle?

http://www.komone...861.html

ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
You only redacted it after I called you a liar.

No.
I redacted before I saw any posts by you.
And research shows he was listed as an Indonesian at the school. Not a US citizen.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
"Anyone want to defend these homosexuals beating a man up for disagreeing with there lifestyle?" - FreeTard

FreeTard often just fabricates facts to fit his TeaPublican Agenda.

In this case the facts that he dishonestly fabricates from his own imagination is that the "attackers" were homosexuals.

That "fact" isn't in the article. Yet FreeTard reports it as fact and implies that homosexuals are evil for committing such attacks.

What a Moron.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
"I redacted before I saw any posts by you." - RyggTard

You can't redact what is posted here. Once posted it is posted.

You don't know what the word - redact - means.

You are simply denying that you made the statement after you made it, and after you had been identified as a liar for having made it.

You are a low life, and a Racist, RyggTard. In other words a typical Tea-Bagger.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
Try watching left-wing talk shows on television. I believe you will find that they spend almost all their time talking about people on the right and their ideas."

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp

The data from 'liberals' here supports the hypothesis.

djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"I redacted before I saw any posts by you."

Another fact we will never be able verify one way or another. It does not matter. You keep posting lies, and hate. On this one thread you have put the word Mamba, spread a lie about the President attending a Moslem school, and drawn attention to his father's being from Africa. Each time you are caught - "oh gosh, did I do that - it must have been a mistake - silly me." And Dogbert follows you up by saying "He does not come from a traditional American background." You are evil carnival barkers. The dog whistle here is 'if you are not white, protestant, mid westerners - you don't belong. Such bigotry.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
dj, for someone who claims not to like BHO, you are protesting too much.

never be able verify one way or another. It does not matter.

Not very scientific, (or tolerant), but when it comes to attacking those you disagree with, it does not matter. Yell, scream, call people names is the 'liberal' way.
More data to support the hypothesis that 'liberals' have no ideas of their own.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
Redacted.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Redaction test." - RyggTard

Another failure
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
This sounds like dj and Gee:
"Louis Peitzman, seems to have a desire to maim the careers of three prominent conservative writers: Orson Scott Card, the author of the Enders series; Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert; and the famous playwright David Mamet.

Somehow Peitzman neglects mentioning prominent leftist authors such as Alice Walker, whose vicious anti-Semitism is on display in her new book, The Cushion in the Road, in which she compares Israeli soldiers to Nazis and writes that Israeli Jews have committed "genocide," "ethnic cleansing," "crimes against humanity," and used "cruelty and diabolical torture.""
"Leave it to Buzzfeed to use the cloak of labeling people bigots to silence those who aren't on the correct side of the aisle."
http://www.breitb...s-Bigots
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"dj, for someone who claims not to like BHO, you are protesting too much."

No Ryggy - you are just not used to dealing with someone who can think for themselves. I am not protesting too much - I am calling you out for the Bigot you are. I probably feel as passionately about President Bush as you do about President Obama. I just understand that my disgust with someone's behavior - does not justify me behaving like a little bigot. I also don't think in terms of groups like you do - you know - all liberals are such and such. That is your lazy, simplistic bigoted thinking - probably too complex for you to understand.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
I am calling you out for the Bigot you are.

So amusing.
As I mentioned earlier, I am a fan of Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and I did send money to Herman Cain for Senate campaign a few years ago. I hope Allen West challenges Rubio in a FL primary.
So I am not a racist as dj and Gee asserted.
And yes, I am intolerant of those who want to destroy the Constitution. Those who want to violate my Constitutional rights and everyone's Constitutional rights.
As Bastait noted people have three choices when it comes to The Law:
" This question of legal plunder must be settled once and for all, and there are only three ways to settle it:

1. The few plunder the many.
2. Everybody plunders everybody.
3. Nobody plunders anybody.

We must make our choice among limited plunder, universal plunder, and no plunder. The law can follow only one of these three. "
I am intolerant to those who support, advocate or enable 1 or 2. Are you?
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
And, again, dj adds to the data supporting the hypothesis that 'liberals' have no ideas of their own. All he can do is call me names.
"Try watching left-wing talk shows on television. I believe you will find that they spend almost all their time talking about people on the right and their ideas"
http://www.forbes...ankrupt/
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
Documenting the brain death of American Conservatives.

http://www.youtub...lE#at=41

"Here you are, you're a liberal, probably define peace as the absence of conflict. I define peace as the ability to defend yourself and blow your enemies into smithereens." —Fox News host Sean Hannity (October 2009)
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 06, 2013
dj, is the 'liberal' media bigoted?

"Trayvon Martin's step-mother and attorneys for his family have both said this case is not about race, but the left-wing media keeps insisting it is"
http://www.breitb...out-Race
djr
3 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2013
"and I did send money to Herman Cain for Senate campaign"

Wow - original Ryggy - the old - "see - I am not a racist - I have friends who are black" excuse.

Are you aware of Mr. Cain's misogynistic tendencies? Not a very nice man.

'liberals' have no ideas of their own. All he can do is call me names.

No No - you need to read a little more deeply. I am not just calling you names - I am pointing out the posts that you authored that are racists - then I am calling you a racist.

As usual - you engage in lazy group think - all liberals are such and such - such childish thinking.

VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"and I did send money to Herman Cain for Senate campaign" - RyggTard

I see, so you sent money to a serial sex offender.

Were you duped, or did you knowingly provide the cash?
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Progressives who was made the comment about me being homosexual." - FreeTard

Why did you claim that those involved in that fight you reported on are homosexuals when in fact nothing of the kind was provided in the report?

Were you duped by the false title on the Druge Report and Faux news?

Or did you manufacture the lie yourself?
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
Are you aware of Mr. Cain's misogynistic tendencies?


Since 'liberals' can't accuse a black conservative for being racist they must accuse him of something else. Rememeber how the 'liberals' attacked Clarence Thomas?
But a 'liberal' of any color, Clinton or Jesse Jackson or Mendez can prey on women and get a pass from 'liberals', including women.
"The spectacle surrounding Cain was highly reminiscent of what happened to Jack Ryan, who was accused of having kinky sex, with his wife. It was a non-story; something befitting the rags in the checkout lines of the local convenience stores, but the Chicago "news" media, strong supporters of Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, hounded Ryan about having sex with his wife.

Read more: http://www.americ...YK1vOm6w
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Since 'liberals' can't accuse a black conservative for being racist they must accuse him of something else." - RyggTard

I don't accuse Herman Cain of being a serial sex offender. His own employees do.

So why did you send money to a serial sex offender RyggTard?

Were you duped? Or did you willingly send it?

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
"The latest accuser, Ginger White, is another non-starter, as there seems to be an important aspect missing from her so-called affair: the sex."
"What did the press do with these laughable accusations? Embellished them, double and triple counted them, and reported them endlessly, to the point that no one knew how many accusations or accusers there were. They even mixed in some unfounded rumors of accusations, to just add to the confusion."
"In contrast, did you know that Barack Obama was accused of some shocking behavior? Larry Sinclair, a man, told a story about how in 1999, he shared a limo with Obama, they did some lines of cocaine together, and then Larry orally gratified Obama. Larry outed Obama on YouTube, because no news outlet showed interest in his story."

Read more: http://www.americ...YK2cZJ4x
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
Another example of a 'liberal' accusing someone of racism with NO supporting data:
" The past 30 months have been amazing to watch folks on the left tell all kinds of tales about what the Tea Party is. Yet when you ask them if they've ever been to a Tea Party event, they all say "No."

As Cain observed, Freeman is likely one of the millions of liberals that hate the Tea Party but have never once been to an event sponsored by the organization they so passionately despise.

How ironic that these are the same people who claim to be on the more enlightened, open-minded side of the political aisle.

Read more: http://newsbuster...YK3moYgq
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Another day, Another Herman Cain Sex Scandal." - Conservative Commentator - Glen Beck

http://www.glennb...scandal/

"In one case, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain is now trying to fend off reports that at least two women accused him of sexual harassment in the 1990s when he headed the National Restaurant Association. The allegations were reportedly resolved with payments to the women and agreements of confidentiality." - The Christian Science Monitor

"After Politico broke the story over Herman Cain's alleged inappropriate behavior with multiple women, donations have poured in, as well as poll numbers sharply increasing in his favor concluding he is now neck in neck with Mitt Romney."

Apparently many Repubicans like RyggTard feel that they should elect a sex offender to high office.

VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
Colin Powell's former chief of staff: GOP is 'full of racists'

http://www.washin...racists/

Wilkerson, who is white, said the GOP "unfortunately is the bastion of those people — not all of them, but most of them — who are still basing their decisions on race."

djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
Ryggy: "Clinton or Jesse Jackson or Mendez can prey on women and get a pass from 'liberals', including women."

Neither Clinton or Jesse Jackson get a pass from me Ryggy - I consider their behavior reprehensible - and they did both pay a price for their sleezy actions. That is not to excuse them - sleeze is sleeze in my book. See Rygg - I don't talk in terms of whole groups of people like you do - that is lazy think - you know - all liberals are such and such. That is your level of thinking - pretty sad for someone who likes to wear the libertarian moniker. For me - the most attractive thing about libertarian philosophy is individual responsibility. Too bad you skipped that chapter - too busy saying - all liberals are such and such. Sad really.
djr
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 06, 2013
"Another example of a 'liberal' accusing someone of racism with NO supporting data:"

Who were you referring to here Ryggy? - it is very unclear.

But then you slip in this little gem.

"In contrast, did you know that Barack Obama was accused of some shocking behavior? Larry Sinclair, a man, told a story about how in 1999, he shared a limo with Obama, they did some lines of cocaine together, and then Larry orally gratified Obama.

Any supporting documentation for that little allegation Ryggy? - or are you exhibiting a reprehensible level of double standards here.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 06, 2013
most attractive thing about libertarian philosophy is individual responsibility.


Why won't 'liberals' hold their fellow 'liberals' responsible?

they did both pay a price for their sleezy actions

What price was that? Clinton is a rock star among 'liberals'. Jackson is still a race baiter and Mendez is still in office and is being protected by his fellow 'liberals'.

djr
3 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
Holy crap Ryggy - did you do any checking on this guy Larry Sinclair? Here is a start if you want to take a few minutes. http://www.politi...164.html

I think you really lost it this time Ryggy - publishing nonsense like that really shows you up for who you are.
djr
3 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
"Why won't 'liberals' hold their fellow 'liberals' responsible?" More group think Ryggy. If you want my view on an issue - feel free to ask me. Otherwise - keep sending your lazy group think questions into cyberspace - I just answer for myself - not some imaginary group.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
I don't accuse Herman Cain of being a serial sex offender. His own employees do.

So why did you send money to a serial sex offender RyggTard?

Were you duped? Or did you willingly send it?
VendicarE
3 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2013
A little note on RyggTard's latest source of Republican Faux news concerning Obama.

Public records and court filings reveal that he has a 27-year criminal record, with a specialty in crimes involving deceit. The record includes forgery charges in two states, one of which drew Sinclair a 16-year jail sentence. The Pueblo County, Colo., Sheriff's Office also has an outstanding warrant for Sinclair's arrest for forging an acquaintance's signature and stealing her tax refunds.

So we have RyggTard - a congenital liar, using another Congenital liar as a reference to slander his own president.

That is what Republicans do. That is what Republicans are.

Republicans are deceit.

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 09, 2013
What a racist!
"I was born in Anniston, Alabama, in the 50s and had to fight for my equality most of my life. You see, there were many who thought I should be treated like a second class citizen, drink from a different water fountain, sit in the back of the bus, be counted as three-quarters of a person, go to a different school, eat and sit in the black section of restaurants, use a different bathroom; you know, be separate but equal. Then came Dr. Martin Luther King and all that started to change and praise God! I became a Christian in 1969. Today, I find myself again being put in that same category as a second class citizen, and I am not going to have that same fight.

I did not become a Christian to live the 50s and 60s all over a second time. Muslims have more rights and freedom of religion than I do as a Christian. "
"I think the likes of you (Sharpton) and Jesse Jackson have done more damage to the black race than any white man will ever accomplish. "
http://www.theblaze.com/con
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 09, 2013
One of my mentors, who happens to have black skin, hates the term African American. He is not African American, his children are not African American, he and his children are American. He is disgusted when Progressives want to give him and his children special rights for their skin color.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 09, 2013
"One of my mentors, who happens to have black skin, hates the term African American." - FreeTard

No one cares, and of course, by mentor, you really mean "superior"

VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 09, 2013
"I was born in Anniston, Alabama," - RyggTard

RyggTard's quote apparently comes from his link - which is a video for the movie "Con-Air".

What a moron.
freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 10, 2013
VD a mentor is an adviser, teacher, someone who you should look up to. In the business I was working in, yes this American who happened to have black skin had more knowledge and wisdom was superior to me and I learned much from him.

VD, do you have problems that an American, who happens to have black skin, being superior to you in business, knowledge or wisdom? If you do, I would consider you a racist.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 10, 2013
Here is an example of how to make a 'liberal's' head explode. Dr. Carson is black, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon and a conservative.

"I was asked whether I favor same-sex marriage. I said that I did not think that any group had the right to change the definition of a fundamental pillar of society.

The point of my answer was that once we begin changing essential definitions, it will be difficult to draw a line in the sand that indicates we won't continue to change it beyond that point. My answer was not so much about homosexuals or any of the other groups that were mentioned, but rather about our need to maintain certain behavioral definitions and standards in order to preserve our identity. If we keep redefining our fundamental institutions, how will we or our progeny have a social anchor on which to base our behavior?"
http://www.washin...olitics/
Character content, not skin color, matters.

freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
rygg, was this the link you meant to put in: http://www.thebla...t-again/

It's funny how when an American, who happens to have black skin, goes against Progressive thought, suddenly they are attacked by Progressives.

Progressives like their black skinned people to be submissive to Progressive thought, if these black skinned people don't follow the progressive playbook, you see that Progressives are the true racists.

Then again, Progressives like their women to be submissive to Progressive thought, if women however do not follow the progressive playbook you see Progressives true misogyny in play.

Progressives are nothing but a bunch of Hypocrites.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 10, 2013
free, yes, I ran out of space.
Progressives are the true racists.

'Progressive' eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, supported reducing the number of 'undesirables'.
freethinking
1 / 5 (8) Jul 10, 2013
Hey Rygg, who are the undesirables that Margaret Sanger wanted Planned Parenthood to eliminated from society?

Also Rygg, do you know which groups children is Planned Parenthood killing the most of?
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (9) Jul 10, 2013
African-Americans have a disproportionate number of abortions according to their population in the United States. Planned Parenthood is the number 1 provider of Abortions to African Americans.

African-Americans have a disproportionate number of abortions according to their population in the United States. African-Americans make up 17 percent of live births and they are having 36 percent of abortions in the U.S. With this devastating number of abortions, the result is a 50 percent decrease in overall African-American population in the United States.

Recently PP was exposed in its hatred and racism toward minorities. Lila Rose, exposed the truth about PP through legally recorded calls to facilities in seven states. Clinics in Ohio, Oklahoma, Idaho and New Mexico have all been captured on tape willfully accepting donations from a donor that designated the money be spent to abort a black child.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2013

"African-Americans have a disproportionate number of abortions according to their population in the United States. Planned Parenthood is the number 1 provider of Abortions to African Americans." - FreeTard

Good for them.

In a free society, people need to be free to do such things and provide such services.

I'm sure you agree, don't you, TardieBoy.
VendicarE
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 10, 2013
"'Progressive' eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, supported reducing the number of 'undesirables'". - RyggTard

Isn't that the desire of every rational person? Are you suggesting that the Libertarian/Randite goal is to increase the number of "undesirables."?

What does Randite RyggTard's Hero Ayn Rand have to say about abortion..

"Abortion is a moral right--which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved,' she told an audience of 1,500 people at the Ford Hall Forum, five years before the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973 and in Massachusetts, in which abortion was then illegal. 'An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being,' she declared." - Ayn Rand

Poor TardieBoy. Your Ideological Hero was not only a welfare queen, but strongly Pro-Abortion,as well.

Do you even understand the philosophy you have embraced?

VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2013
"VD a mentor is an adviser, teacher, someone who you should look up to. In the business " - Freetard

Yes, your mentor is your superior. But then even most mental defectives are your superior.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2013
"Here is an example of how to make a 'liberal's' head explode. Dr. Carson is black, a retired pediatric neurosurgeon and a conservative." - Ryggtard

Some doctors smoke too. But like this one, they represent a small minority who suffer from some kind of mental defect.

In the case of smoking the tobacco industry will exploit them for their murderous purposes.
In the case of politics the Republican party will do the same.

You are part of that corruption TardieBoy.

freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
since VD calls people liars, here is the link showing Progressives can donate money to Planned Parenthood to kill black babies: http://www.youtub...v8qEkiFE and http://www.youtub...f0VMW3c4

Oh by the way Sanger's obsession with eugenics and racism was clearly presented in her involvement of planning the First World Population Conference which took place in Geneva in 1926. She was not mentioned on the actual program, but instead worked behind the scenes and initiated the "Negro Project" in 1939. She stated, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." The objective of the "project" was to infiltrate the black community by presenting birth control as a health option for women.
VendicarE
2.3 / 5 (3) Jul 10, 2013
"It's funny how when an American, who happens to have black skin, goes against Progressive thought, suddenly they are attacked by Progressives. " - FreeTardo

Your fixation on black men is quite apparent.

Do you think you are being attacked because you are a black man or because you are a low life moron?
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
VD, have you made your donation to kill a black baby today to Planned Parenthood? Have you helped out at Planned Parenthood's Negro Project?

Could it be that Progressives never do anything to help stop Black on Black murder because they see it as a way to get rid of Undesirable (Progressive word, not mine) Black Skinned people? Could it be that Progressives do everything they can to keep Undesirable (Progressive word, not mine) Black Skinned in poverty to destroy them?
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
VD, Progressives like yourself attack anyone who is a conservative.
VD, Progressives like yourself attack anyone who speaks the truth.
VD, Progressives like yourself attack anyone who stands for honor and integrity.

I don't care one bit about the color of someones skin, but by their character. It is Progressives that care about color of someones skin.
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
If I was a white skinned man, I would not like being called a White American. If I was a Black skinned man, I would not like being called a Black (or African) American. I want to be simple known as an American. I do not want to be judged by the color of my skin, but by my character.
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
Hey I'll give this one to the progressives, A white person supporting Planned Parenthood is a racist! A black skinned person supporting Planned Parenthood is ignorant.
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
YUP, when a woman doesn't tow the Progressive line, then the Progressives show their hatred for women.

http://www.thebla...ws-move/
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 10, 2013
Hey Rygg, who are the undesirables that Margaret Sanger wanted Planned Parenthood to eliminated from society?

Also Rygg, do you know which groups children is Planned Parenthood killing the most of?
You godders stop making them like theres no tomorrow and there will BE no more abortion. Its on YOUR heads.
VD a mentor is an adviser, teacher, someone who you should look up to
Yeah and if they were were white youd just be calling them 'boss'. A little 2 faced eh?
Progressives like their black skinned people to be submissive
Its funny, for somebody who doesnt want to sound like a bigot, you sure do sound like a bigot.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.6 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
initiated the "Negro Project" in 1939. She stated, "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out the idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members
-And if this were 1939 you would be saying exactly the same things because all your friends would be. Thats how all you religionists thought back then yes? Except southern baptists of course.

Sanger was an episcopalian did you know it or just forget it?
African-Americans have a disproportionate number of abortions according to their population in the United States. African-Americans make up 17 percent of live births and they are having 36 percent of abortions in the U.S
Your numbers are lies. Young black women have the highest PER CAPITA fertility rate. What percentage of those pregnancies are aborted and how does this compare with other ethnic groups?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (5) Jul 10, 2013
Here is what religionists were saying about eugenics back then:

"Much has been written, and well, in recent years about this scandalous era, most recently by Edwin Black in his splendid War Against the Weak. In her interesting new history Preaching Eugenics, Christine Rosen focuses instead on the little-known and shameful promotion of eugenics by a surprisingly large number of American ecclesiastics. Take, for example, the Reverend Washington Gladden, a leader in the "Social Gospel" movement, who asserted in 1926 that Christianity "must be a religion less concerned about getting men to heaven than about fitting them for their proper work on earth.

"Christians who agreed - - mostly within mainline Protestantism, as it happens - - found it surprisingly easy to support the eugenics movement's attempt to promote social virtue by controlling procreation as part of their overarching embrace of "progressive" social reform."

-Your 'morality' is only fashion. Thank god for secular law.
freethinking
1 / 5 (7) Jul 10, 2013
Social Gospel leaders were predominantly associated with the liberal wing of the Progressive Movement and most were theologically liberal. When the Church puts Progressivism at their head instead of Christ you get all sorts of bad theology that has nothing to do with biblical belief.

As I'm a follower and disciple of Christ, not of any man or church, I wouldn't have fallen for any of the stupid Progressives of that era. Proof of that statement is that I don't follow any of the many Progressive Churches or ministers of this era who support abortion, special rights for homosexuals, and deny Christ.

Whatever Progressives touch they destroy.
freethinking
1.5 / 5 (8) Jul 10, 2013
BTW Otto, it was secular law pushed by Progressives, that put into place the eugenics laws of the time.

It is the Progressives which practice and promote eugenics today, except today they kill unborn babies that are considered defective or unwanted.
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (9) Jul 10, 2013
t was secular law pushed by Progressives, that put into place the eugenics laws of the time.

Not just 'progressives', eugenics was all the rage among scientists. Scientists thought they found a way to create perfect people for their Utopia.
Brave New World was a warning.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2013
"The Coming Civil War: Producers Vs. Parasites " - Free Republic

"Parasites must perish" - Ayn Rand

http://www.freere...45/posts
JohnGee
1 / 5 (3) Jul 10, 2013
Wasn't the Holocaust Museum shooter a freeper?
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (6) Jul 27, 2013
"Using the same tactics used by "gay" rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals."
"Earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia is a sexual orientation just like homosexuality or heterosexuality."
http://patdollard...sexuals/