Originally posted by: LEATHERFACE

Originally posted by: crunkmoose

Originally posted by: LEATHERFACE

There's only one real way to solve the current political dilemma, and that is to take issues like religion, gay marriagean and abortion and relegate them entirely to the states. Special interest groups have no place in dictating policy to the entire nation, its too big and diverse. Bachmann has zero capability for the Presidency, and many of her supporters know it, but because she panders to special interests she'll get votes. just sayin', leave it to the states and let people vote with their feet so we can free up our leaders to actually focus on national issues.

Exactly how is gay marriage or abortion things that should be left up to the states? Because there are people who oppose them? So fucking what! There were people who opposed ending slavery and giving blacks equal rights. There were people who opposed ending prohibition. The entire point of civil rights and the reason they are enshrined at the federal level is because there will always be people who in one way or another oppose them, though in reality its none of their fucking business. If people don't like gay marriage or abortion, then they don't have to participate in either... but their opposition to these things that affect the lives of others should not be given the power to determine whether or not others have the right to them... even at the state level. Its not about states rights or special interests.. its about the civil rights of real, actual human beings whose decisions about marriage and reproduction should not be left up to the states to decide.

^thank you for illustrating my point.
I know you want to have the law wrangle people into your paradigm and moral values regardless of their own, so does every other narcissistic blowhard. Right now, it's keeping Washington a shitty place that cannot function, so fuck you.

Its not wrangling people into my moral values regardless of their own. Its about NOT having that done. Its simple.. if you don't like gay marriage or abortion, then don't have either.. but disapproval of either should definitely not preclude others from having either.

How is it a violation of religious right? Nobody in government is forcing these christians and Muslims to perform or get abortions. Its just legal for an individual to do so. That's like saying the manufacturing of beef and pork is taking away religious rights. What the fuck are you talking about? Federal government is here to uphold the federal constitution. Social issues like CIVIL RIGHTS should apply to all Americans. I don't think somebody like you should have a difficult time grasping something so simple.

This Ron Paul-esque stupidity of saying it'll benefit the country to ignore the 14th amendment is really getting fucking old.

Real fucking talk.

A hell of a lot of people are saying all we really have to do is just do things at the state level and that will somehow solve many of our problems. I have to wonder how much involvement these folks have ever actually had in their state level politics... because its not like state level politics is some great cure-all miracle.

For example.. so far gay marriage has been a state level issue, which has resulted in gays in most states being denied the right to marry because of the beliefs of people who would be completely unaffected by their marriages in the first place. Its not a solution to the problem at all because denying people their rights and their equality, especially over religious beliefs is no solution at all.

Originally posted by: Kermit Butts

How is it a violation of religious right? Nobody in government is forcing these christians and Muslims to perform or get abortions. Its just legal for an individual to do so. That's like saying the manufacturing of beef and pork is taking away religious rights. What the fuck are you talking about? Federal government is here to uphold the federal constitution. Social issues like CIVIL RIGHTS should apply to all Americans. I don't think somebody like you should have a difficult time grasping something so simple.

I said 'federally funded' abortions, as in people would have to play a part in it (pay for it) or the IRS sends them to jail. That would be a violation of religious rights, a conflict of interest between faith and government. In other words, a violation of religious freedoms. If a chick wants an abortion I say it's both her choice and her right, but she has no right to have others pay for it. I despise the amount of confirmation bias on these boards, why people insist on being herd animals is beyond my comprehension. States have already begun to act on their own and it isn't causing the end of the world, I haven't seen any lynch mobs roaming the streets and nor have I seen armies of homosexuals destroying the 'foundation of marriage', whatever the fuck that means. Arizona passed ridiculous immigration laws and the immigrants started leaving for friendlier states, they weren't lined up and shot in Phoenix.

I tell you what, maybe one day when I feel like joining a cult or wearing an arm band I'll endorse the ideas of everyone else over my own. Maybe I can wear a little bell around my neck and graze in a pasture as well.

Isn't the fda federally funded? How about military? Both of these agencies provide actions that interfere with religious beliefs. Try again.

Originally posted by: Kermit Butts

Isn't the fda federally funded? How about military? Both of these agencies provide actions that interfere with religious beliefs. Try again.

Just because you shoot heroin and gobble painkillers doesn't mean you need to take up smoking crack. 'Try again', pfft, if it's my ego that you're after then knock yourself out to your heart's content. I've said my piece, no regrets, and I guess people will just have to deal with that.

I have no idea what direction you are going in with all of that, but ok.

civil rights are optional because tax is theft.


the lessons of pahc.

Originally posted by: marksaysno

civil rights are optional because tax is theft.


the lessons of pahc.

Given the multitudes of Libertarian ideas in our political discourse these days, I wonder what the world would actually be like if some of these folks had their way, as it seems a number of them are far more interested in ideology than problem solving.