Do you have a political issue you want to discuss? Or something you want clarified?

RCBooba wrote:Hahaha...I know. You guys had your Gestapo moment, but now I'm sure things will be smooth sailing

if we didn't have homosexual references in 10 threads at once, the "Gestapos" wouldn't have had to come out of hiding

but in all seriousness, its nice to see this forum beginning to evolve a little bit

datrain711 wrote:lol, you do love saying that marriage is a tax thing now huh. I bet you are in the 10% minority of people that get married that even know what the tax benefits are.

And yes, if any states would be able to handle gay marriage, they would have to be liberal states. Look at the bible belt, there is no chance of it working there at this point.

And I don't know if you are getting my point about why this situation is different. Over generations, there have been many instances in which hatred and intolerance has occurred, it is all cyclical really. But the ONE thing that has been constant has been that society has ordered itself by creation. If you make that much of a drastic change to how the family unit is built, there will be consequences that I don't think you are anticipating

You're right in that I, nor anyone else, could see the ramifications that may occur with the passing of Gay marriage. I also agree that it has zero shot of working in the bible thumping areas of this country.

My point is the only way society every truly excepts something is when it is forced onto them. I do not equate gay marriage to slavery, but they are comparable (to surpisingly the same area of the country), the south refused to be rid of it and the north thought its abolition was of enough importance to fight over.

Now do i think gay marriage is worth fighting for? No. Infact, that band of people might get defeated with paper cuts when they were applying their make up before battle. But aboloting slavery was a forced issue because it was the right thing to do. IMO, allowing gay marriage is also the right thing to do.

Irregardless of wheather or not the country is ready to except it.

What are everyone's thoughts about the Georgia/Russia conflict??

I'm reviving this thread, baby. It's coming back like a bad shrimp cocktail. You can imagine my regret at having just stumbled upon this thread and being the late guy to the party who missed all of the fun. The death penalty, gay marriage, naked pictures of Booba's mom...all really about good stuff.
Death penalty: My position is that it should be extended to more crimes, but should be used much more sparingly. Some rapists deserve to die. Warren Jeffs should be put down like a sick dog. So should a number of other fundamentalist men that see nothing wrong with marrying and raping little girls. They have zero chance of rehabilitation and are a waste of space.
Georgia and Russia: I don't care. The USSR isn't coming back. It isn't our fight.
Iraq: Also not our fight. No connection to September 11th and no WMDs. I completely agree that Hussein was a horrible man, but if you use that as your reason for invading then you have to think that we should invade a myriad number of other countries. Furthermore, if you truly think that we have a moral obligation to depose murderous, authoritarian rulers, then you must also recognize the decades long American pattern of propping up murderous, authoritarian rulers when it serves our economic interests.
Now I'm getting in to the issue that really pisses me off recently, which is the way that our country is becoming more and more divided. The two parties are nauseatingly hypocritical and have ridiculously selective memories, which has created a landscape of Red vs. Blue warfare. Economic policy continues to increase the divide. Many economists and corporate leaders recognize the horrible dangers of such an income gap, yet we fail to address the problem in any way.

Maybe that will bring back the thread.?

ethan wrote:I'm reviving this thread, baby. It's coming back like a bad shrimp cocktail. You can imagine my regret at having just stumbled upon this thread and being the late guy to the party who missed all of the fun. The death penalty, gay marriage, naked pictures of Booba's mom...all really about good stuff.
Death penalty: My position is that it should be extended to more crimes, but should be used much more sparingly. Some rapists deserve to die. Warren Jeffs should be put down like a sick dog. So should a number of other fundamentalist men that see nothing wrong with marrying and raping little girls. They have zero chance of rehabilitation and are a waste of space.
Georgia and Russia: I don't care. The USSR isn't coming back. It isn't our fight.
Iraq: Also not our fight. No connection to September 11th and no WMDs. I completely agree that Hussein was a horrible man, but if you use that as your reason for invading then you have to think that we should invade a myriad number of other countries. Furthermore, if you truly think that we have a moral obligation to depose murderous, authoritarian rulers, then you must also recognize the decades long American pattern of propping up murderous, authoritarian rulers when it serves our economic interests.
Now I'm getting in to the issue that really pisses me off recently, which is the way that our country is becoming more and more divided. The two parties are nauseatingly hypocritical and have ridiculously selective memories, which has created a landscape of Red vs. Blue warfare. Economic policy continues to increase the divide. Many economists and corporate leaders recognize the horrible dangers of such an income gap, yet we fail to address the problem in any way.

Maybe that will bring back the thread.?

My thing with the death penalty is that maybe we should not impliment it on one crime. There is always the chance we got it wrong and put down an innocent person. As everything, there are cases where it is clear as day.

What I would like to see is repeat offenders, of even nominal crimes; armed robery, fraud, domestic abuse, put to death or at the very least, styrilized.

If you do the same crime 5 to 10 times and keep getting out because of it not being a life or death situation, that person will never be a positive in society. In my opinion, cut ties with them and move on.

I can see your point, and I agree with the sterilization idea. Perhaps death would be a bit harsh for some crimes, even after repeated offenses, but sterilization is completely called for. Clearly that person has nothing positive to pass on to another generation, and with the world already overpopulated it can't hurt.

I'm with both of you on the sterilization point. People in the inner city treat kids as currency. I worked at U.S. bank downtown, and we had a few women that were making 4 grand a month from government checks because of their kids.

Oh yes yes sterilization, what a great idea!! It sounds so familiar though...where the hell have I heard of this before?? Oh yeah.....HITLER. Don't forget to raise your right hands up in the air, kids.

We wouldn't be the first or the last culture to do it, neither would have Hitler. I believe they currently do it in a few countries, don't ask me to find a source because that is pure recolection from a person that only memorizes sports stats.

For what it is worth, this would not be race imposed, only imposed on repeat criminals.

Now i remember, 3 kids in the US were sterylized because of their habitual abuse of this country's laws.

RCBooba wrote:Oh yes yes sterilization, what a great idea!! It sounds so familiar though...where the hell have I heard of this before?? Oh yeah.....HITLER. Don't forget to raise your right hands up in the air, kids.

Yeah let them have 7 kids, who will all be on welfare, and then addicted to drugs, and then put in our jails. Obviously this is something that would never be allowed, but you can't argue that it doesn't have some merit. The simple fact that a lot of these parents are even having kids is Child abuse. It is in the best interests of children right now that we try and stop some specific people in our country from having kids

datrain711 wrote:

RCBooba wrote:Oh yes yes sterilization, what a great idea!! It sounds so familiar though...where the hell have I heard of this before?? Oh yeah.....HITLER. Don't forget to raise your right hands up in the air, kids.

Yeah let them have 7 kids, who will all be on welfare, and then addicted to drugs, and then put in our jails. Obviously this is something that would never be allowed, but you can't argue that it doesn't have some merit. The simple fact that a lot of these parents are even having kids is Child abuse. It is in the best interests of children right now that we try and stop some specific people in our country from having kids

Wow, datrain. You're really running with this Hitler comparison, aren't you? No one should ever impose those practices on any group of people. No one has that right.

I agree that it shouldn't happen. And I also agree that nobody has that right. But I still contend that it would greatly benefit the middle class of society if we could pull it off. We are the ones that bear the burden of irresponsible people. These out of wedlock children are costing each american thousands of dollars a year. Someday the issue of population control will have to be addressed. And sterilization is obviously harsh, but restricting the amount of pregnancies may someday be the solution.

[quote="RCBooba"]

datrain711 wrote:

RCBooba wrote:

Wow, datrain. You're really running with this Hitler comparison, aren't you? No one should ever impose those practices on any group of people. No one has that right.

Its too bad that we are forced to pay for these bad choices. I would rather someone took away the right's of a crackhead single woman to have a kid then to take away my right to retain more of my earned salary.
If someone can have 25 kids and raise them then I'm all for it. But it is absolutely outrageous to me that street scum can get pregnant, and I foot the bill for the pregnancy, for the kid's food, for the kid's education, and for the mother's care.
It isn't the kids fault so we have to make sure that the kid gets taken care of, and nobody feels worse for kids that are born into this situation than I do. The problem is that our current solution to this is to keep dipping into the well to borrow more money to pay for this, and our current attempts to limit these pregnancies have also blown up in our face. In addition, the children born into these situations are too often not even benefiting from the money. It is going to gambling, drugs, and other things not benefiting the children. Milwaukee probably serves as the best example of this in America right now

RCBooba wrote:
Wow, datrain. You're really running with this Hitler comparison, aren't you? No one should ever impose those practices on any group of people. No one has that right.

Don't children have the right not to be born into homes where they will be neglected, abused, malnourished, and unattended to? I guess you don't think so

So... back to the gay marriage subject. Obviously homosexuals and lesbians are who they are, and feel what they feel about their same sex. They feel love for their partners just like heterosexuals do. A lot of gay couples have very stable relationships with their partners, because they are the same sex and have a better understanding of one another because of that. The fact that they are both gay and are pretty much in their own world of people because of the way society segregates them, also connects them at a deeper level of understanding. I am not saying heterosexuals are not capable of reaching a high level of understanding their mates, I am just pointing out the immediate connections gay couples have. Since gay marriage, and being gay in general, is for the most part still frowned upon, wouldn't you think that gay couples would love and cherish what they have in their relationships even more and try to hold onto that? People are people and everyone should be able to do what and who they want to do, unless it is harmful or unwanted by the other person. Two gay people getting married is no different than two straight people getting married. And two gay fathers, or two gay mothers who love each other and their children sound a lot better than some crack head parent that makes money off their child, and doesn't give a crap about them. I think a child raised by gay parents would grow up very open-minded.

What do you guys think about the amount of violence and gore that is shown in movies compared to the amount of sex, and how do you think it is affecting people's mindsets?

lacey wrote:So... back to the gay marriage subject. Obviously homosexuals and lesbians are who they are, and feel what they feel about their same sex. They feel love for their partners just like heterosexuals do. A lot of gay couples have very stable relationships with their partners, because they are the same sex and have a better understanding of one another because of that. The fact that they are both gay and are pretty much in their own world of people because of the way society segregates them, also connects them at a deeper level of understanding. I am not saying heterosexuals are not capable of reaching a high level of understanding their mates, I am just pointing out the immediate connections gay couples have. Since gay marriage, and being gay in general, is for the most part still frowned upon, wouldn't you think that gay couples would love and cherish what they have in their relationships even more and try to hold onto that? People are people and everyone should be able to do what and who they want to do, unless it is harmful or unwanted by the other person. Two gay people getting married is no different than two straight people getting married. And two gay fathers, or two gay mothers who love each other and their children sound a lot better than some crack head parent that makes money off their child, and doesn't give a crap about them. I think a child raised by gay parents would grow up very open-minded.

From the few gay couples i have heard of, the childeren handled school very well and both parents were actively involved in raising them.

I have a pool of two families to pull from...but 2 for 2 isn't bad.

Yes, I too have know 3 gay families and they were very involved with their children, and the children seemed very happy and well adapted to having two mothers or two fathers. Two of the families were actually members of my old church. One was a lesbian couple, and the other was a homosexual couple. They were awesome people, very lively and kind-hearted.

In all honesty I have not met any gay families yet. But I do not see why their family values would be any better, worse, or different than other families that I know.

lacey wrote:What do you guys think about the amount of violence and gore that is shown in movies compared to the amount of sex, and how do you think it is affecting people's mindsets?

I think that the whole "violence in the media creates violence in society" is a crock of s***. All it is is a scapegoat and does not hold up. I also believe it is extremely hypocritical to have loads of violence but then say that sex is bad. If you haven't noticed I am against most forms of any censorship. However things have been loosened a bit based on what I see on tv from time to time. The funny part is it looks like TV shows can show the act of sex, they just can't show any nudity....I don't really understand that???

RCBooba wrote:

lacey wrote:What do you guys think about the amount of violence and gore that is shown in movies compared to the amount of sex, and how do you think it is affecting people's mindsets?

I think that the whole "violence in the media creates violence in society" is a crock of s***. All it is is a scapegoat and does not hold up. I also believe it is extremely hypocritical to have loads of violence but then say that sex is bad. If you haven't noticed I am against most forms of any censorship. However things have been loosened a bit based on what I see on tv from time to time. The funny part is it looks like TV shows can show the act of sex, they just can't show any nudity....I don't really understand that???

Censorship ****ing blows my ****ing ****.

YEP!!!

RCBooba wrote:

lacey wrote:What do you guys think about the amount of violence and gore that is shown in movies compared to the amount of sex, and how do you think it is affecting people's mindsets?

I think that the whole "violence in the media creates violence in society" is a crock of s***. All it is is a scapegoat and does not hold up. I also believe it is extremely hypocritical to have loads of violence but then say that sex is bad. If you haven't noticed I am against most forms of any censorship. However things have been loosened a bit based on what I see on tv from time to time. The funny part is it looks like TV shows can show the act of sex, they just can't show any nudity....I don't really understand that???

I am not necessarily of this frame of mind but Sigmund Freud is under the impression that if you say it, you meant it. I think there is a lot to be said for viewing as well.

Now I am not implying that if ten 14 year olds go and watch Diehard that they will immediately buy a gun and try to blow up a building. What I am saying is that it puts the idea of possibility in their mind. When kids are watching these movies and playing these games on a large scale the chance of coming accross a Sociopath is very high.

These movies do not even have to be the final trigger that puts them over the edge, all it does is put it in their heads as having happened.

Some people don't know what's real and what's not. It makes the dangerous.

If people continue to see something over and over, it gets stuck their brains. For example, advertising... how many songs do you know from commercials, etc? People are so de-sensitized to violence because they have seen so much of it on the news, movies, t.v., even radio. And the whole sex issue is not being treated as it should. They should be showing people in love and enjoying sex that way, not people just doing it to do it like we are friggin dogs or something. And all these stupid "reality" shows promote that even more. Its all about gettin that hoe! Girls dress and act more like prostitutes and guys think that is all women are here for. I mean yeah, I like sex just as much as everyone else, but come on!! Where is the intimacy?

This might jump around a bit, but I am at work and had to type fast!!

lacey wrote:If people continue to see something over and over, it gets stuck their brains. For example, advertising... how many songs do you know from commercials, etc? People are so de-sensitized to violence because they have seen so much of it on the news, movies, t.v., even radio. And the whole sex issue is not being treated as it should. They should be showing people in love and enjoying sex that way, not people just doing it to do it like we are friggin dogs or something. And all these stupid "reality" shows promote that even more. Its all about gettin that hoe! Girls dress and act more like prostitutes and guys think that is all women are here for. I mean yeah, I like sex just as much as everyone else, but come on!! Where is the intimacy?

This might jump around a bit, but I am at work and had to type fast!!

I'll give you intimacy. About 45 seconds of it in the bathroom closet!

45 seconds? come on...don't expect to set any records just because you aren't in college any more.