I was reading the Open Thread forum and Dee Bunk has inspired me to write this thread. I wish there were more conservatives like her and Candance.
I like the fact conservatives want to protect our country from people that want to destroy us. Unlike liberals, conseratives do not want to coddle terrorists and will do what it takes to make this great country safe and defend our Freedom.
Freedom however is the key word. Many conservatives want to take away our rights that do nobody any harm except for ourselves.
ie
: civil unions
: euthanasia
: adult entertainment
: To a point drug use
: prostitution
When I have voiced my opinions, I have heard many different comments. No one would care if you stuck a gun in your own mouth shawn, are you gay shawn? Or my personal favorite, this shawn guy is obessed with porn.
I am not obessed with porn, I am obsessed with free speech even when it has to do with things I do not agree with. There was a huge commotion about a month back about a writer on NB going on another site trashing somebodys religion. I do not agree with what that writer said, but I will crawl on broken glass for that writers point of view to be heard.
Another poster has stated a point that all laws are based on some sort of morality and I agree with that to point but one persons morality might be different that another persons. The supreme court ruled many years ago that apparently it is moral to destry a fetus in a womans womb. Does everybody agree with that?
If one wants to drink, smoke or watch provocative tv or decide to end ones life with dignity, I do not believe it is up to anybody else to dictate to that individual what he/she cannot do.
Now before someone brings up the liberals, the fairness doctrine or derail this thread talking about the evil Democrats. This is not about the Democrats, this is about individual freedom.
Comments Policy
dee bunk
January 19, 2008 - 12:46 ET by shawn228I really like your point of view on many things. If there was a republian candidate that thought more along the lines as you, they would have my vote in second.
Romney time machine
Shawn - there are a lot of conservatives like me
January 19, 2008 - 13:03 ET by Dee BunkFred Thompson is and most of the people on Newsbusters are with the exception of my immigration position which is more like President Bush's.
Fred Thompson gets a little gruff sometimes and so do a lot of people on here (including myself) but I have no doubt that he is not homophobic or racist and neither are most conservatives. Just because someone speaks softly and is attractive like Obama doesn't mean they are better for the country. I truly believe his policies have the effect of holding minorities and other poor people down and are also harmful to women. His foreign policy is Naive at best and probably just pandering.
Mit Romney is the most articulate and soft spoken of the group and that is the only reason I like him because I think the press would have a harder time demonizing if he wins the Presidency. I don't know if I can trust him but he's definitely more trustworthy than Clinton and has a better record than Obama.
Dee, I like Fred
January 19, 2008 - 19:11 ET by shawn228Dee,
I like Fred Thompson, but I truly believe that he is done. If he makes a miraculus comeback, I will be happy and there would be very good chance I would vote for him.
Yes, I have talked to quite a few open minded conservatives like yourself, most of them however are Libertarians. The more hard core Christians on this site seem to let their faith get in the way of rational thinking. They forget that people came to this country over a hundred years ago to escape religious prosecution.
Christians have the right to go to church, watch the 700 club and pretty much do whatever they please for their faith, but they are more concerned about "saving other people" and forcing their values and beliefs on everybody else.
How does Romney stop the applause?
Romney shows his compassion
Many conservatives want to
February 23, 2008 - 15:02 ET by botgMany conservatives want to take away our rights that do nobody any harm except for ourselves.
Where are any of the issues in your list clearly enumerated in the Constitution? Unless you first have something it can not be taken away.
Look in my garage -- no Lamborgini -- someone must have taken it.
No Poofdas
botg
February 23, 2008 - 15:06 ET by shawn228I really don't want to talk about the constitution, it can be interpreted in so many differant ways.
Why is it anybody elses business what people watch or do behind closed doors. It is a simple question without having to involve the constitution
Real Freedom
shawn
February 23, 2008 - 15:15 ET by botgyou talk about taking away rights, as far as i know for US citizens, the Constitution is the agreement by which our society defines which rights we have.
It's like doing math without those pesky equations.
No Poofdas
again botg
February 23, 2008 - 15:23 ET by shawn228I really don't want to get into talking about the constitution. If you want to tell me why people want to impose their will will on everybody else that is fine, but no constitution debates from me today.
Real Freedom
again Shawn
February 23, 2008 - 15:38 ET by botgit is central to the theme of your forum so iguess we are stuck with:
Bruce: Well Shawn why would you want to impose your will on society?
Shawn: If you want to tell me why people want to impose their will will on everybody else that is fine.
---repeat ad infinitum---
No Poofdas
botg
February 23, 2008 - 15:45 ET by shawn228I am not imposing my will on anybody...far from it. If I believe somebody should be able to die with dignity and it is their wish, I would give it my blessing. I am against the government telling that individual they have to suffer just because euthanasia is illegal. If a certain doctor is uncomfortable with it, i'm sure another doctor could be found.
I used to love listening to Howard, now he is off terrestial radio, much to the delight of the moral police. I hate suppression of free speech and there are not many topics I am quite as passionate above.
I believe it is disgusting to hang a noose or burn the American Flag, but I support somebodys free speech to do those despicable acts. That is what free speech is about, allowing something you cannot stand if it does not affect you or any other individual
Shawn
February 23, 2008 - 15:55 ET by botgOf course you are imposing your will!!!!
You are telling me and all NB what behavior should be allowed in public places in our society. Can your definition of 'freedom' exclude bestiality on NBC? No, not if you are consistent. The argument is not should we have lines which define acceptable behavior in society but where should the lines be drawn.
Why not film a documentary on this guy with additional volunteers, so they can get live footage? After all they both agree and aren't hurting anyone.
No Poofdas
Of course there should be
February 23, 2008 - 16:01 ET by shawn228Of course there should be lines drawn in the sand botg. No I do not believe beastiality should be shown on tv. Porn should not be shown either. There should be set guidelines on exactly when the family viewing time should be and when adults get to enjoy their programing.
I believe we can have it both ways. I am extra careful not to let my child see things she should not see and when she gets older, I will use the v -chip technology.
so admit it Shawn
February 23, 2008 - 16:05 ET by botgif you are advocating a line you are attempting to impose your will!! So it's just a different placement of the line.
No Poofdas
botg
February 23, 2008 - 16:09 ET by shawn228If you say so botg, imo you are taking the situation to the max to make me look like a hypocrite. How about you as a Christian? You believe everyone should live by God's laws.
If that was the case, can people be jailed for fornication? Death penalty for prostituion? Fined for covetting someone elses possesions?
informed
February 23, 2008 - 17:10 ET by botgmy politics are informed by my Judeo-Christian Worldview. IMO if all were to live by Godly principles, for there own good, this would be better world. It is precisely because i am against 'mandate by judicial fiat' that i support constructionists to the SCOTUS, so much for imposing my will eh?
Shawn, personally i believe you to be a fair-minded individual. If you truly think about the logic you will change your mind when shown an inconsistancy in your position.
--well, lunch break--
--okay back to work--
Shawn isn't it the very tolerance of the Judeo-Christian worldview which has allowed the malignent growth known as neo-liberalism to take root in the USA?
When a conservative says tolerance they mean you are free to disagree (after all you only tolerate things you disagree with) when a lib preaches tolerance they mean agree or get out.
No Poofdas
Ok botg,....time in!!
February 23, 2008 - 21:45 ET by shawn228Wow, I must be getting old. I can't remember the last time I enjoyed a afternoon nap as much as today.
"When a conservative says tolerance they mean you are free to disagree
(after all you only tolerate things you disagree with) when a lib
preaches tolerance they mean agree or get out."
I would not put it that way botg, imo there is no room for disagreements with many conservatives on
: raising taxes
: invading Iraq was wrong
: abortion
: univeral healthcare
:beleiving in global warming
I am not saying I believe in any the things I mentioned it only as an example of listening to a different pov or lack of.
Again, you can say I am guilty of imposing my will, but I truly believe if the government did not interfere in things that did not directly effect them, not only would they save 10s of billions of dollars in government money, ie war on drugs, and busting prositution rings.
It's like deja vu all over again
February 23, 2008 - 21:53 ET by Free StinkerShawn,
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
freestinker
February 23, 2008 - 21:54 ET by shawn228Did you read anywhere, that I support any of those postions? The only one I agree with out of those is universal healthcare and to a point invading Iraq.
I am in the middle on abortion and I know diddly squat about global warming.
Being a conservative
February 23, 2008 - 21:57 ET by Free StinkerBeing a conservative myself, I just thought you might want a nice little list of how we see these things.
I thought it might explain why we seem so "inflexible" on the issues.
Pledge to not support RINOs ever again!
Conservatives inflexible to issues.
February 24, 2008 - 22:33 ET by shawn228I am trying to keep this thread about individual freedoms, but people keep wanting to make this about something else, What the heck, if you can't beat them, join them.
Freestinker, you along with many conservatives feel very strongly about topics I understand. Abortion is a strong issue, and I understand why you would be very comparsionate about it. The left does not feel the fetus is a actually baby, and most women according to statistics feel very sad after an abortion, I would say the majority of women feel very distraught and abortion was not a easy decision for them.
You constantly perceive my questions as hostility, You know me, I am always willing to listen to somebodys pov and I have been known to change my mind. I just find your argument sort of like not believing man was ever on the moon. The government tells you we went there, but I have lots of links..umm I mean articles that say the contrary.
I mean take our converstation about the Iraq war, you are so convinced on your position that Invading Iraq was the right thing to do, you can't even answer one question.
Yes I realize hat you say, you addressed it before, but do you have anything ?, anything at alll better than "I don't know" about why the Secretary of State said we did not find the weapons we were looking for. It is not a unreasonable question.
Universal Healthcare, Yes I like it and I have experienced it. It is not as good as here if you have a great health plan, you are correct, but is is not half bad either, no one I know has died because of it. And certainly no one I know has lost all their money because of it.
Global Warming...I feign ignorance
So in conclusion, there inflexibility on both sides free
Ad nauseum, yet again
February 25, 2008 - 07:48 ET by UnsaneIt is not as good as here if you have a great health plan, you are correct, but is is not half bad either, as we ALL know, shooting for total mediocrity is the American way!!! (Don't forget that just ONE Houston area hospital spends more on life-saving medical research than ALL of Canada!)
no one I know has died because of it. The High Court of Quebec disagrees.
And certainly no one I know has lost all their money because of it. never mind that in order to inoculate themselves from that disease called Life, Canadians are poorer than Americans by an average of C$8100. I haven't known anyone who has gone broke at the doctor's office, either...unless their financial management skills sucked to begin with. And I REFUSE to coddle those losers.
By the way, since you support every American stealing from each other to pay for free doctors, does that also mean, because of your desire to see society become more like the Dutch, that our tax dollars should pay for someone who has medical issues due to drug use? Or should pay for care for a disease they acquire from promiscuity with prosititutes?
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
: raising taxes : invading
February 23, 2008 - 22:12 ET by botg: raising taxes
: invading Iraq was wrong
: abortion
: univeral healthcare
:beleiving in global warming
and in any of these issues where are the examples of intolerance on the part of conservatives?
No Poofdas
fs and botg
February 23, 2008 - 22:17 ET by shawn228Many of the left consider these topics as tolerant you consider them not to be. The people on the lefts convictions are every bit as deep as yours.
Again FS, I am not debating any of those issues with saying I support those positions either, way I am saying liberals feelings are very strong about those topics as well.
Shawn, so conviction can
February 23, 2008 - 22:35 ET by botgexist on both sides, that just further reinforces my point that BOTH sides (and everybody) are attempting to implement their agenda. So when you ask:
If you want to tell me why people want to impose their will will on everybody else that is fine
i will answer look to your heart and why do you do that? See it's what we are all doing Shawn, the manner you j'accuse makes it seem as though only one side is doing so.
No Poofdas
botg
February 23, 2008 - 22:43 ET by shawn228That is absoloutly not true botg. I made it clear that both sides of the isle are equally passionate about their beliefs and both thumb their nose at each others positions.
I get in trouble with my conservative friends when I tell them that the President truly thought we had wmd and remind them that the Dems authorized the war in Iraq as well.They get upset at me as well and I hear their flames.
I was simply disputing your point about conservatives being more tolerant in their opinions, and go off on another topic k? Just like my Media Scapegoat thread all of a sudden got changed to the Katrina thread.
Shawn
February 23, 2008 - 22:55 ET by botgi thought that this forum was about freedoms and 'taking away rights' and that the specific issues were incidental to the main theme. Thus i brought up two points:
1) rights are defined in the constitution (if they are not there they can't be taken away)
2) both sides attempt to implement their agenda thus to state; Many conservatives want to take away our rights that do nobody any harm except for ourselves. is an attempt to appear neutral while advocating for your side! (in other words trying to implement your agenda while taking my money to do so!)
No Poofdas
Botg has a valid point. . .
February 23, 2008 - 23:15 ET by tracheostomy. . .and I'm having a real hard time trying to figure out where you're standing on this Shawn.*
I'll keep checking back.
-PJ
*Or even what "this" is all about for that matter.
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I disagree Shawn - it's liberals who take away our rights
February 23, 2008 - 15:28 ET by Dee Bunkconstantly from seat belt laws to no smoking laws to taking away our property (Kelo vs New London) or our right to gun ownership, or the right to raise our children with values and ideas that we think are appropriate.
As far as drug laws and prostitution laws even your most liberal candidate (Obama) isn't advocating getting rid of those.
In fact, please list the laws that the far right have sponsored and have been enacted that limit personal freedoms that harm no one but ourselves. Even when we had control of both the House, Senate and Presidency, none of this nonsense happened.
Most laws that impede on our freedoms come from liberals. You need to wake up to that fact.
Dee Bunk
February 23, 2008 - 15:38 ET by shawn228Read the last paragraph of my thread. Liberals tend to take away our freedoms when it comes to what we want to eat, whose feelings we can hurt, why we should not smoke cigarettes. I get that!
Religious right.Conservatives are the morality police and they want to impose their morality views on everyone else. This certainly does not pertain to all conservatives especially many of the libertarians on this site. I have heard more than once about morals from some members on this site and I would like their input on why they can dictate what I am allowed to do, even if it does not effect anybody else except for me
Shawn - my point is that there is a morality police now
February 23, 2008 - 16:31 ET by Dee Bunkand it's from the left not the right. You don't think laws about hurting someone's feelings and smoking are morality laws? Hate crimes aren't morality laws? Banning of religious symbols aren't morality laws? Saying - I"m taking your property for the good of the community isn't a morality law? Banning torture isn't a morality law?
There are no laws even close to passing that would deny anyone the ability sleep with any other consenting adult they wanted to when it doesn't involve money and the exploitation of someone else. Liberals and conservatives (from the center) agree on that and most on the far right would not outlaw any additional sexual activity.
When it comes to drugs, again, most on the center appose legalizing drugs. It's not a far right issue.
The only thing the far right harp on and try to change is the constant images children are exposed to. Public airwaves are different. They aren't out their trying to outlaw movies and DVDs.
Some on the far right appose civil unions but so do many center Democrats. I support civil unions but not supporting them doesn't take anyone's rights away.
Shawn: Religious
February 23, 2008 - 17:03 ET by tracheostomyShawn: Religious right.Conservatives are the morality police and they want to impose their morality views on everyone else.
Which morality in particular? There are quite a few conservatives that are members of the "religious right" who are at odds with each other over this very issue. You have to be on the inside to see it though. A social gospel is not the gospel. You can't even rationalize it as some sort of a proto-gospel. This was where Debra and I were frequently at odds.
Shawn: I have heard more than once about morals from some members on this site and I would like their input on why they can dictate what I am allowed to do, even if it does not effect anybody else except for me
Dee makes an excellent point. I think when you look at everything in a pile though, the libs are the ones really winning on controlling behavior.
Shawn, I think your problem is with certain individuals, either on TV or in your personal life. When you complain and generalize at the same time, you tend to stir everything and everyone in the same bowl, and you lose track of who's doing what to who.
One starts with, "Man, I hate right-wingers. . ."
Later on, it's amended to, "Man, I hate Religious right Conservatives. . ."
Then gradually, you get to, "Man I can't stand it when Religious right Conservatives do thus and such. . ."
Then eventually you're down to, "Man I can't understand the policy of this religious organization led by this individual. . ." <--- That's right where you wanna be, then work upward from there.
Just like libs, there are very few conservatives out there that are aware of everything going on within their "ism" --especially the pet topics.
"Are you pro-family?"
"Sure."
"Wanna help promote my new book on your TV show?"
"Duh, sure. You're pro-family."
It makes no sense, but it happens all the time.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach
February 23, 2008 - 21:52 ET by shawn228Your right I am generalizing. I do not mean everybody on the religious right. Candance, who is one of my favorite people on this site believes in God and has like yourself taught me alot about the good book and how to pave a way to Salvation, for which I am grateful.
The difference between a person like her or Truthmonger and to a point botg is that she has a live and let live attitude. She does not like filth and disapproves, but at the same time she does not want to tell anyone else if they can watch porn either.
TM believes something like porn is no worse than child porn, which I find a ridiculus comparision. Now I can many peoples pov when it is in your face all time the time ie ...big billboards with hot women or lingerie. Especially if it is near a school. That I understand.
Shawn,
February 23, 2008 - 23:09 ET by tracheostomyDo you think there should be no moral laws at all then?
If not, then what exactly would your ideal world look like? What laws would be in place where?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
you find me ridiculous,
February 25, 2008 - 12:24 ET by TruthMongeryou find me ridiculous, yes - and that's the whole point - that's your morality - just different from mine - I find yours ridiculous as well
porn, gambling, homosexuality, abortion - all used to be culturally un-acceptable
but ultra-progressive libertarians have been working very hard on it
and now it's much more acceptable
I am forced to live with this morality against my religion - and even actively support most of it - PC company policies require it by state and federal law now
of course ped-porn, legalized pot, prostitution is still culturally un-acceptable - for now
but ultra-progressive libertarians are working very hard on that...
it's the slippery slope in progress
when a butterfly flaps it's wings it affects us all, and people may comprimise, but the laws of the universe never do, and those that forget the past are condemned to repeat it - Rome was once moral and prosperous too
civilization requires all of us to live with restrictions
truthmonger
February 25, 2008 - 23:35 ET by shawn228First of all, i did not call you ridiculous, I called your comparision ridiculus.
Just to reassure you TM, if there was ever a vote on a ballad to support CP, I will vote no okay ? :-)
oh, my comparison is
February 27, 2008 - 16:23 ET by TruthMongeroh, my comparison is ridiculous, not me - thanks for that absolutely vital clarification - clears up alot - really, wow, fantastic....
and yeah, I was really afraid you might support CP - great to know you're against it:)
CP is so much more degrading and abusive then good old healthy no-big-deal "regular" porn - after all adults don't have feelings, self-esteem, or dignity do they...
so party on dude
maybe the local pervs can catch a video of your nearest and dearest online sometime soon!
Ok Botg
February 23, 2008 - 23:00 ET by shawn228I want to know that I am not the sharpest knive if the drawer, but I understand things if they told me enough ok?
I get it, you want to bring up the constitution and technical side of it, sort of like Clintons perception of the word "is". No ....really I get it.
Can we get off than tangent? and focus on why one should be able to tell another how to live their lives.
well sure Shawn
February 23, 2008 - 23:02 ET by botgtell me why you should be allowed to tell me how i should live.
No Poofdas
you first. I have
February 23, 2008 - 23:13 ET by shawn228you first. I have been waiting very patiently to get this out of you. I wll respond to your question to trach.
two options Shawn
February 24, 2008 - 00:11 ET by botgwe have laws
we don't have laws
--pick one--
No Poofdas
See botg
February 24, 2008 - 00:15 ET by shawn228sigh, fine botg, I guess I will never get a straight answer out of you and don't even think about now knowing what i am talking about because you do.
kind of disappointed, was actually wanting you hear your opinion instead of definititon of laws.
my opinion on issues
February 24, 2008 - 00:39 ET by botgthat's a different story entirely, i was more looking at how do you reach the conclusions. The opinions are easy. Yeah i have friends who tell me i 'talk in riddles' but is it not better for you understand the reasoning behind the telling? See my opinion is that your criteria is biased and therefore your output will be skewed.
Euthanasia: any devaluation of any life devalues us all not a road i wish to start down. (abortion--same thing)
adult entertainment: most of it devalues and dehumanizes women which in turn corrupts individuals in the society. As a member of society i want it to be healthy
drug use: not only does it degrade the individual user but also their families, friends and society as a whole. Not the kind of place i want you to have to raise your children!!!
No Poofdas
botg
February 24, 2008 - 01:27 ET by shawn228thanks botg, that was hard work getting that out of you ;-)
No one is asking you to devalue life, just stay out of the way
If you feel it is your opinion it devalues and dehumanizing woman that is fine, but don't forget the woman that pose nude and do porn. In most cases, people are not forcing them to do these things and it is by their free will.
I see our pov on drug use, but I believe money on rehab is better than the money spent on losing the war on drugs.
No one is asking you to
February 24, 2008 - 01:44 ET by botgNo one is asking you to devalue life, just stay out of the way
While it's done to the society i am part of? Who's forcing their morals now?!
No Poofdas
great logic isn't it? do
February 27, 2008 - 16:26 ET by TruthMongergreat logic isn't it?
do as i say, not as i do:)
Shawn: No one is asking
February 24, 2008 - 01:48 ET by tracheostomyShawn: No one is asking you to devalue life, just stay out of the way
"Stay out of the way," what?
Do you believe a life is only as good as the "quality of life" that others judge it to have?
Shawn: If you feel it is your opinion it devalues and dehumanizing woman that is fine, but don't forget the woman that pose nude and do porn. In most cases, people are not forcing them to do these things and it is by their free will.
Not completely. You forget the money/fame/coercion factor. If we are truly talking "most cases" as you say.
Shawn: I see our pov on drug use, but I believe money on rehab is better than the money spent on losing the war on drugs.
. . .
Would this be some kind of govt. rehab progam you would be supporting then?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach and botg
February 24, 2008 - 01:57 ET by shawn228Again I do not say how euthanasia I am forcing my opinion on anyone. Unlike abortion the only life they are taking are their own. Why is it any of your business.
Also, yes there is the lure of fame, money and coersion factor, but who are you to tell them what methods they use to try to get famous. and no I am not advocating anything illegal
Yes I am talking about a government program, I believe it will be much less expensive than the government sponsored war on drugs progam.
Shawn, you are proposing a
February 24, 2008 - 02:03 ET by botgShawn, you are proposing a change in the status quo. The society has operated under an agreed system where killing people is not allowed. You need to provide justification for the change and protection from unintended consequences after the change. All i am saying is leave our agreement as is.
No Poofdas
I told you botg
February 23, 2008 - 23:15 ET by shawn228I am not very sharp. I even spelt knife wrong
Trach
February 24, 2008 - 00:07 ET by shawn228I would totally chg up how the airways go. I would have certain television stations that you don't have to extra for like Showtime or HBO
These would be regular channels that offer more graphic scenes. I don't just mean nudity, but can you imagine 24 even more violent? Greys Anatomy to have nudity? CSI with more graphic scense and course language? I would like to have that choice. I would like to have the strongest password protection, so kids do not watch it.
On certain stations, they would not be allowed to show any smut and only respect good old fashioned familiy oriented programs like the Brady bunch.
As far as prostitution and drugs go, I would like to have a every city allowed to have sort of like a red light district much like they do in Amsterdam.
I would like gays to be more excepted in society.
I would hope they allow euthanisa as well.
That is my perfect scenario on that topic Trach.
Let's see how far down the
February 24, 2008 - 00:21 ET by tracheostomyLet's see how far down the rabbit hole goes. . .
Shawn: These would be regular channels that offer more graphic scenes. I don't just mean nudity, but can you imagine 24 even more violent? Greys Anatomy to have nudity? CSI with more graphic scense and course language?
I dunno. How much more graphic do you wanna get? I have to live that crap every day, so I don't have much time to watch and I can't make a fair (reverse) comparison, really. When I do watch it, I get too emotionally attached to the minor characters. In drama, it's a bit part. But in life it's not.
Shawn: I would like to have that choice. I would like to have the strongest password protection, so kids do not watch it.
You really believe that's an effective solution? You really believe it's possible to "kid proof" the world and have adult-only access to it at the same time?
Shawn: As far as prostitution and drugs go, I would like to have a every city allowed to have sort of like a red light district much like they do in Amsterdam.
You know they've been cutting that stuff back over there, right?
Shawn: I would like gays to be more excepted in society.
How are they not accepted in society now? How does society currently oppress them?
Shawn: I would hope they allow euthanisa as well.
In what form?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
You really believe that's
February 24, 2008 - 00:27 ET by balboaYou really believe that's an effective solution? You really believe it's possible to "kid proof" the world and have adult-only access to it at the same time?
It's supposed to work with gun ownership, so why not TV?
Ho-ho! Balboa gets the
February 24, 2008 - 00:42 ET by tracheostomyHo-ho! Balboa gets the zinger in!
I think of gun locks/safes the same way. I'd also prefer raising the child around the gun like it was a household poison.
"This is not candy"
"This is not a toy."
But then I'm not a parent, I have no idea how to make the threat of punishment stick. All I know is I was raised around them all and did just as I was told.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
So then will it work for TV
February 24, 2008 - 00:45 ET by balboaSo then will it work for TV or not?
Bal.
February 24, 2008 - 00:55 ET by tracheostomyI say no.
Shawn appears to say yes.
And you appear to imply "no" as well.
Correct?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
I say in both it's up to the
February 24, 2008 - 01:02 ET by balboaI say in both it's up to the parents to make sure it works. If the parents do their job, then you're all set.
This is where we come to
February 24, 2008 - 01:13 ET by tracheostomyThis is where we come to the impasse, and that is whether or not most Americans value personal responsiblity or not.
And I have no authority in that area either. I'm not a parent, but I merely feel that most parents today don't care about what their children are exposed to.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
[gasp] You FEEL? I thought
February 24, 2008 - 01:18 ET by balboa[gasp]
You FEEL? I thought conservatives only dealt in logic! I'm so disappointed...
Seriously, though, I don't think many parents take responsibility for their kids. I honestly believe there is a faction of parents that just want to be friends with their kids in the hopes that the kids don't open fire on a crowded classroom one day.
But if we're going to expect kids to coexist with guns in the house, I think we can expect them to coexist with cable TV.
Bal
February 24, 2008 - 01:25 ET by botgW's advisory team may surprise you but they left off T'Pol : (
No Poofdas
you can't lock up immorality
February 27, 2008 - 16:29 ET by TruthMongeryou can't lock up immorality in case, like a gun
Geez, cut me some slack Bal!
February 24, 2008 - 01:36 ET by tracheostomyBal: [gasp] You FEEL? I thought conservatives only dealt in logic! I'm so disappointed...
I worded it very carefully and posted the disclaimer. Really, my statement holds no real merit whatsoever.
Bal: Seriously, though, I don't think many parents take responsibility for their kids. I honestly believe there is a faction of parents that just want to be friends with their kids in the hopes that the kids don't open fire on a crowded classroom one day.
Wow, I agree completely. Well, then what do we do about it? We can't simply legislate parental responsibility, can we?
Bal: But if we're going to expect kids to coexist with guns in the house, I think we can expect them to coexist with cable TV.
That comparison can go only so far. For one thing, the TV was used far more than the guns in my house.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
bal, If you wish to put
February 24, 2008 - 01:27 ET by R D Helmbal,
If you wish to put your life, along with the lives of those you care about, in the hands of the government for protection, that is your choice.
All I ask is that you respect the decisions those of us who have made a different choice.
Proud member of the "Rough Republican Attack Machine."
? I'm confused. Isn't that
February 24, 2008 - 01:36 ET by balboa?
I'm confused. Isn't that what we do with the American military? Or are you talking about personal everyday protection? Do you not count on the police?
I respect anyone's decision to own a gun. That's fine. As I stated, if we expect to keep kids from guns, there should be a reasonable expectation that we can do the same with TV we don't want them to watch.
"I dunno. How much more
February 24, 2008 - 00:30 ET by shawn228"I dunno. How much more graphic do you wanna get? I have to live that
crap every day, so I don't have much time to watch and I can't make a
fair (reverse) comparison, really. When I do watch it, I get too
emotionally attached to the minor characters. In drama, it's a bit
part. But in life it's not. "
I don't get it Trach, what do you live every day? Do have hot nurses hitting on you because you are a doctor, are you a secret agent for the counter terrorist unit? I you are afraid of getting emotionally attached, so be it. Don't tell me I can't watch it.
"You really believe that's an effective solution? You really believe
it's possible to "kid proof" the world and have adult-only access to it
at the same time? "
Well there is flat out pornography on comcast and sattelite right now. the only thing that stops a child from watching it is a password right. That is much worse.
"You know they've been cutting that stuff back over there, right? "
Absolutely trach, I think it is a shame too. You want to know why? Because of far right Christians and conservative Muslims. Both religions have problems with so called filth.
Shawn: I don't get it
February 24, 2008 - 00:52 ET by tracheostomyShawn: I don't get it Trach, what do you live every day? Do have hot nurses hitting on you because you are a doctor, are you a secret agent for the counter terrorist unit?
I thought they were all part of a team. Has Hollywood blinded you that much?
Shawn: I you are afraid of getting emotionally attached, so be it. Don't tell me I can't watch it.
I didn't say that. I was just free-associating. I don't understand why graphic violence seems to take priority over the story.
Does the camera zooming in exclusively on the donkey's butthole make the overall donkey more "down-to-earth gritty and realistic"?
Shawn: Well there is flat out pornography on comcast and sattelite right now. the only thing that stops a child from watching it is a password right. That is much worse.
But why a password to begin with? You seem to have a moral code that believes exposing the child to porn is somehow wrong. Where does that come from?
Shawn: Absolutely trach, I think it is a shame too. You want to know why? Because of far right Christians and conservative Muslims. Both religions have problems with so called filth.
C'mon. . .where did you read that? Show your cards.
Here's my source. I've read other articles on it where they note a connection to actual crime. Gee, that's a correlation the right has been trying to make for some time. And the Dutch are just starting to realize it with their grand experiment.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach
February 24, 2008 - 01:11 ET by shawn228Trach here is the article regarding what I was saying
Here are a few highlights
"Today, with an orthodox Christian political party in the government for
the first time, and with immigration anxieties fueling a national
search for identity, the country that has been the world's most
socially liberal political laboratory is rethinking its anything-goes
policies."
"People are saying we should have values; people are asking for more and more rules in society."
" Orthodox Christian members of parliament have introduced a bill that
would allow civil officials with moral objections to refuse to perform
gay marriages. And Dutch authorities are trying to curtail the
activities of an abortion rights group that assists women in
neighboring countries where abortions are illegal
"The Netherlands is going through the same racial, ethnic and religious metamorphosis as the rest of Western Europe:
Large influxes of black, Arab and Muslim immigrants are changing the
social complexion of an overwhelmingly white, Christian nation
struggling with its loss of homogeneity. "
Oky doky then, I believe I showed my cards on that topic. You have to do better in a debate than to talk about a close up of donkey butt with me Trach.
Hollywood has not blinded me, I do not know what you mean by they were a team. Please explain.
Shawn,
February 24, 2008 - 01:28 ET by tracheostomySorry, but first of all, my article actually pre-dates yours. The realization was clear before the orthodox party came to power.
Further, how can your article back your opinion up, when it appears to me that. . .
Quote: "People in high political circles are saying it can't be good to have a society so liberal that everything is allowed,"
. . .they're simply re-thinking the common sense of a "limitless society" here. Are you saying the Dutch conservatives are somehow cheating or imposing their limits arbitrarily? The experiment simply failed Shawn.
Shawn: You have to do better in a debate than to talk about a close up of donkey butt with me Trach.
That was a serious question. I wasn't just being flip. Okay, yeah I was to a certain degree. But it's still a valid question. Please answer it. You can even substitue "donkey" for "victim" if you want to.
Shawn: Hollywood has not blinded me, I do not know what you mean by they were a team. Please explain.
Okay, then Hollywood has blinded you, or I'm totally confused as to your entertainment goals.
1. If you're looking for gritty realism, then CSI and Grey's isn't it.
2. If you're simply looking for "shock value" in entertainment, then why go through the pretense of having writers?
3. All I was saying was that's not the way it is in real life. You appear to disagree with it somehow.
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07
trach
February 24, 2008 - 01:46 ET by shawn228As far as I am concerned, the fact that my article is newer has more clout and it tells of the reasons why Amsterdam is changing.
I also have no interest in seeing a donkey butt in high defination. Let me use one of the most famous cult movies of all time. Scarface. I have seen Scarface numerous times. I know it bugs me every time the F word is replaced by "golly" lol. I want to be able to watch something like that movie on tv and I realize it is not for everybody so that is why I want it on a adult only channel.
You would have the option of watching Pat Robertson and the 700 club 24/7 because I would have Christian station on as well ;-)
then get the DVD and be done
February 24, 2008 - 01:52 ET by botgthen get the DVD and be done with it
No Poofdas
botg
February 24, 2008 - 01:59 ET by shawn228I said programs like it on TV. I did not say Scarface itself.
and i should
February 24, 2008 - 02:09 ET by botghave to adjust my household to enable you? get HBO. Cinemax or any of the pay for porn you want.
No Poofdas
He's got a point there
February 24, 2008 - 02:13 ET by tracheostomyHe's got a point there Shawn. And you just keep waving him off.
Answer us.
How far is "no limits" exactly, again?
And how can you even propose this while advocating a "gun-lock" attitude towards children?
-PJ
"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07