44 replies to this topic

[Third King]

 

Good riddance of that bigotted, religious, nutcase.
Off course everyone is entitled to his opinion, but the deeper feeling of those who still believe in fairytails was once again clearly shown.
And to be honest, that same feeling is expressed now here as well.
Why do these people feel threatened by homosexuals?

 

I've come to observe that many heterosexual males (females, I have no idea about) in our society are conditioned to have an aversion to the idea of it. This aversion is of a nonreligious nature. Combine that with half-hearted belief in a book that says it's wrong, and you get a great deal of behavior that people justify with the Bible despite the fact that the behavior contradicts the teachings of said book. So, more or less, people feel a particular way, and use religion as a justification to treat people badly. 

People are free agents and the only way for "religion" to really happen is divine intervention. Short of that, you've just got people reading out of an ancient text who ignore all the context and try to make their lives fit into it, rather than mold their lives around it. I'm afraid that many nominal Christians just believe what mom/dad/preacher dan told them to believe, and not what the Bible has so say on the matter.

So now I'll stop speaking in the third person. I am what I am, and I have a fervent belief in the Bible, and in everything that it says. I've been with the people who just slur and hate for no reason, and I've been with the people who take a moment to consider the situation. My attitude toward the subject may be different from someone who is nonreligious, but the book that I read from doesn't give Christians the right to be assertive toward anyone about sin. Someone who doesn't believe is not condemned for individual deeds, only the lack of belief, and someone who does believe doesn't answer to any person, only God (yeah, I'll capitalize that word). Regardless of what people are really doing out there, the "instruction manual", if you will, says that people who claim Christianity are supposed to persuade people to become Christians also -- not spew demagoguery about why everyone else is wrong. Telling you what you've done wrong and how you need to change is a job that the Bible does not delegate to individuals. So, yes, I am persuaded that being a homosexual does not please God. Doesn't give me the right (or the desire) to hate on people who are. The fact that Christians sin at all after having believed is worse in Biblical terms than most things that someone who has not believed can possibly commit. The point of the religion that Jesus taught was that not one person was clean, and that He came to fix that problem. The last thing a Christian should be doing is spewing hate to drive people away from the very thing that is supposed to help them. Sins don't go away until after conversion. Conversion is the catalyst for a person to stop doing things contrary to what the Bible says. The deeds of a person who does not believe should be of the very least concern to a Christian. Seems like this has been all turned around, but I'll just shut up now...

 

 

tl;dr, not all religious people fear/hate people who disagree with them. In the case of Christians, that's actually the opposite of what Jesus taught them to do.

 

(Please take all this with a grain of salt, I tried to write keeping in mind that the vast majority of you do not believe that there is any kind of veracity to this book called the Bible. I tried to focus on principle, and on how those people who claim to believe in it should be behaving.)

(Disclaimer. I've only seen headlines and whatnot, no idea what the man actually said. Also, if anything I've said has offended anyone, I strive not to do that, so please do let me know.)

(Also, JC, if you happen to read this post, yes, my feelings have changed tremendously since I lashed out at you. And again, I'm sorry.)

 

 

This is a fantastic post, and I agree completely with every single point you've made. A real Christian doesn't condemn anyone for what they do or don't do, nor do they treat anyone with anything other than love and respect. Bravo, sir.

 

In other news, the reason I've seen two or three episodes of that show is because it highlights (read, dramatizes) a very real culture and lifestyle here in America. How the hell do you get rich off of duck calls???

[DarkFox]

Rednecks sounding like rednecks. Huge surprise there.

[Lysistrata]

Rednecks sounding like rednecks. Huge surprise there.

This. It's what A&E wanted in a show... Welcome to the Bible Belt, Hollywood!

[Yates]

Biggest surprise here: he was being interviewed by GQ??!!

[Simternity]

 

 

 

 

Fox News'll throw a newscaster off if he or she is a socialist, I just see this as an example on the other side.

No one has ever been fired for being a Socialist, Progressive, Democrat, Gay, or even an employee of a former President... (that was a joke). Please educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about.

I apologize if I was incorrect, as it was I admit an unfair assumption, and an assumption. However I still believe that it's a fairpoint that FOX News is heavily biased against Liberal policies and viewpoints, given that it was created under the premise of being a Republican News station, and also that it is owned by Rupert Murdoch would help fuel that point. Either way, it's still heavily biased to Conservative viewpoints in its news, as A&E is biased toward Liberal viewpoints and mindsets in its shows, and is an example of a bias for the opposing 'side'. I am sorry if my statement was false, and I'll attempt not to fall into a pit like that again, but my point stands that it is biased toward Republican ideals.

[Yates]

...my point stands that it [FOX News] is biased toward Republican ideals.

As someone who self-identified as a Republican for purposes of elections in Primaries, I would agree to this larger point.

[Simternity]

Biggest surprise here: he was being interviewed by GQ??!!

Missed this post somehow, but I guess GQ is the only winner in this situation. He's pretty popular, though, so maybe they were trying to grab some new readers off the reality show's fanbase. I'm one of the few people I know of who still haven't watched the show, but maybe now I'll have to try an episode. (Considering that I'm now curious about the show, however, makes me wonder if Duck Dynasty is actually capitalizing off this stint somehow.)

[Lysistrata]

 

 

 

 

 

Fox News'll throw a newscaster off if he or she is a socialist, I just see this as an example on the other side.

No one has ever been fired for being a Socialist, Progressive, Democrat, Gay, or even an employee of a former President... (that was a joke). Please educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about.

I apologize if I was incorrect, as it was I admit an unfair assumption, and an assumption. However I still believe that it's a fairpoint that FOX News is heavily biased against Liberal policies and viewpoints, given that it was created under the premise of being a Republican News station, and also that it is owned by Rupert Murdoch would help fuel that point. Either way, it's still heavily biased to Conservative viewpoints in its news, as A&E is biased toward Liberal viewpoints and mindsets in its shows, and is an example of a bias for the opposing 'side'. I am sorry if my statement was false, and I'll attempt not to fall into a pit like that again, but my point stands that it is biased toward Republican ideals.

 

More assumptions on your part. Fox News was created on the fact... yes fact... that all news outlets are run by, and staffed by, Liberals. Rupert Murdoch owns News Corp., which is the parent company of Fox News. He does not run Fox News. Roger Ailes was the creator of Fox News, and is to this very day the brains behind the entire operation, including Fox Business Network.

 

Fox News is the only network where Conservatives have a voice. The only place where they get a fair shake. That's why they are bigger, better, and watched by more people than all the rest combined.

 

The only show that is all Republican, all the time, is Sean Hannity. He has dozens of Liberals that frequent his show every night to debate the issues. It's always a robust debate. Bill O'Reilly is always accused of being a Republican but is actually an Independent. People mistake him as a Republican because he is a devout Catholic, therefore has many Conservative views. There is The Five which is a show designed like The View but with brains. There are always 4 Conservatives and 1 Liberal. These are all opinion shows and cater to the overwhelming Conservative audience that watch Fox.

 

There are Megyn Kelly and Greta Van Sustern. Both are hard news journalists and are both lawyers. Greta came from CNN years ago and works out of Washington DC. She was a Criminal Attorney before TV. Megyn is a true superstar and comes from a Corporate Law background. Out of New York she owns 9pm eastern. These women base their shows first and foremost on the law and it's effects on the political landscape, never from an ideology. Megyn Kelly is one of my favorite Fox people, along with Greg Gutfeld.

 

If you want to bash Fox News for being biased, I will ask you, as opposed to what? Everyone else?

There is no where else for a Conservative to go, and I am a proud card carrying member of the Republican Party.

I said earlier on these pages that I know History and Politics, I didn't think I would be tested on both here.

But if you ever wish to throw a Progressive bomb or use Saul Alinski tactics here, be prepared.

I will call you out and spank you in front of the class. I don't make widgets for a living... Politics is what I do.

[Yates]

I'm one of the few people I know of who still haven't watched the show...

I have never watched that show either. Continue to have no interest or plans to. I would probably watch The Real Housewives of Hackensack before I'd watch this.

[Yates]

I will call you out and spank you in front of the class. I don't make widgets for a living... Politics is what I do.

Woah. Let's take it down a notch. I think Sim intended to make a silly joke but it touched a nerve.

That said, take a look at tonight's Daily Show. There's a series of clips from FOX News that actually makes Sim's point. It makes FOX News look really REALLY silly. And it's hard to take them serious when they embarrass themselves like that.

I feel the same way about our party. I don't even know what the current Republican Party is. They are so out of touch with the world that I find it extremely difficult to identify with them anymore. And every time they kowtow to the Tea Party crazies I feel like another piece of the party dies.

This, however, isn't the point of the thread. I still maintain that the biggest surprise here was GQ interviewing a hillbilly. 

[Lysistrata]

 

I will call you out and spank you in front of the class. I don't make widgets for a living... Politics is what I do.

Woah. Let's take it down a notch. I think Sim intended to make a silly joke but it touched a nerve.

That said, take a look at tonight's Daily Show. There's a series of clips from FOX News that actually makes Sim's point. It makes FOX News look really REALLY silly. And it's hard to take them serious when they embarrass themselves like that.

I feel the same way about our party. I don't even know what the current Republican Party is. They are so out of touch with the world that I find it extremely difficult to identify with them anymore. And every time they kowtow to the Tea Party crazies I feel like another piece of the party dies.

This, however, isn't the point of the thread. I still maintain that the biggest surprise here was GQ interviewing a hillbilly. 

 

I watch Jon Stewart when I want a good laugh. He's good at it. But he has a hard on for Fox and pulls clips that he can take out of context and exploit. It's his schtick and he's welcome to it... you know... freedom of speech? Which is the real thread topic.

 

I would NEVER look to Jon for news... he's a comedian. I'm so sorry to hear this... I'm one of those Tea Party crazies you speak of so sharply. The Tea Party was created for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only. All the rest is what opponents wanted people to believe and are all lies. Reason number 1 is to stop Obamacare... period. Number 2 is to stop the out of control Government spending. That is all... Nothing else. Anything other than that are all Lies. What is so crazy about that?

[Number8]

The Tea Parties agenda is alot more vast than that little list of two things there. They are constitution followers and strive for everyone to follow the rules in which in states. Yes some like Ted Cruz like to have an agenda that at times throws up all over what the Tea Party stands for and at times it looks bad.

Fox News is just as biased for Republicans as MSLSD is for Democrats. Big deal Im a republican and stopped watching them years ago.

This also isint about politics and was souly about Phil Robertson expressing his freedom of speech.

[Lysistrata]

The point was what the Tea Party was created for. The reason for it's exsistance.

The Constitution is the Law and the foundation of the USA. Everyone has to abide by that.

It's a document that is designed to limit Government power over the people.

We use the Constitution to legitimize our exsistance and our direction.

My wife and I were in Washington DC 9/12/09 with Senator Jim DeMint.

The first Tea Party March. I need no one to tell me what we are about.

[Simternity]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fox News'll throw a newscaster off if he or she is a socialist, I just see this as an example on the other side.

No one has ever been fired for being a Socialist, Progressive, Democrat, Gay, or even an employee of a former President... (that was a joke). Please educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about.

I apologize if I was incorrect, as it was I admit an unfair assumption, and an assumption. However I still believe that it's a fairpoint that FOX News is heavily biased against Liberal policies and viewpoints, given that it was created under the premise of being a Republican News station, and also that it is owned by Rupert Murdoch would help fuel that point. Either way, it's still heavily biased to Conservative viewpoints in its news, as A&E is biased toward Liberal viewpoints and mindsets in its shows, and is an example of a bias for the opposing 'side'. I am sorry if my statement was false, and I'll attempt not to fall into a pit like that again, but my point stands that it is biased toward Republican ideals.

 

More assumptions on your part. Fox News was created on the fact... yes fact... that all news outlets are run by, and staffed by, Liberals. Rupert Murdoch owns News Corp., which is the parent company of Fox News. He does not run Fox News. Roger Ailes was the creator of Fox News, and is to this very day the brains behind the entire operation, including Fox Business Network.

 

Fox News is the only network where Conservatives have a voice. The only place where they get a fair shake. That's why they are bigger, better, and watched by more people than all the rest combined.

 

The only show that is all Republican, all the time, is Sean Hannity. He has dozens of Liberals that frequent his show every night to debate the issues. It's always a robust debate. Bill O'Reilly is always accused of being a Republican but is actually an Independent. People mistake him as a Republican because he is a devout Catholic, therefore has many Conservative views. There is The Five which is a show designed like The View but with brains. There are always 4 Conservatives and 1 Liberal. These are all opinion shows and cater to the overwhelming Conservative audience that watch Fox.

 

There are Megyn Kelly and Greta Van Sustern. Both are hard news journalists and are both lawyers. Greta came from CNN years ago and works out of Washington DC. She was a Criminal Attorney before TV. Megyn is a true superstar and comes from a Corporate Law background. Out of New York she owns 9pm eastern. These women base their shows first and foremost on the law and it's effects on the political landscape, never from an ideology. Megyn Kelly is one of my favorite Fox people, along with Greg Gutfeld.

 

If you want to bash Fox News for being biased, I will ask you, as opposed to what? Everyone else?

There is no where else for a Conservative to go, and I am a proud card carrying member of the Republican Party.

I said earlier on these pages that I know History and Politics, I didn't think I would be tested on both here.

But if you ever wish to throw a Progressive bomb or use Saul Alinski tactics here, be prepared.

I will call you out and spank you in front of the class. I don't make widgets for a living... Politics is what I do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fox News'll throw a newscaster off if he or she is a socialist, I just see this as an example on the other side.

No one has ever been fired for being a Socialist, Progressive, Democrat, Gay, or even an employee of a former President... (that was a joke). Please educate yourself before you talk about things you clearly know nothing about.

I apologize if I was incorrect, as it was I admit an unfair assumption, and an assumption. However I still believe that it's a fairpoint that FOX News is heavily biased against Liberal policies and viewpoints, given that it was created under the premise of being a Republican News station, and also that it is owned by Rupert Murdoch would help fuel that point. Either way, it's still heavily biased to Conservative viewpoints in its news, as A&E is biased toward Liberal viewpoints and mindsets in its shows, and is an example of a bias for the opposing 'side'. I am sorry if my statement was false, and I'll attempt not to fall into a pit like that again, but my point stands that it is biased toward Republican ideals.

 

More assumptions on your part. Fox News was created on the fact... yes fact... that all news outlets are run by, and staffed by, Liberals. Rupert Murdoch owns News Corp., which is the parent company of Fox News. He does not run Fox News. Roger Ailes was the creator of Fox News, and is to this very day the brains behind the entire operation, including Fox Business Network.

 

Fox News was created by Murdoch though, and Roger Aisles was handpicked by him to run it, as Rupert can't do everything. All of Fox and Fox News' sister channels are also all in the end owned by Murdoch, and those Murdoch decides to put in charge. He's the man at the top. I never said this was bad, but even if Fox News is the only channel where Republicans 'have a voice', it's still biased. I never intended to bash it, nor did I say anything necessarily negative. I just meant to imply that almost all news or television outlets are biased in some way or to one side. You can't really find news that is entirely unbiased at all.

I'll admit I made an inaccurate statement up front, but I'll retain that Fox News is biased and that Rupert Murdoch is really the man in charge. Sure Roger Aisles is the brains of the operation, but he only is because Murdoch put him there and was happy with his work.

 

From what you've said, you seem very opinionated about this, and if it is alright, could I ask you some questions in PM? I do very much enjoy raking the brains of people who think differently than me, seeing as they force me to compare them to my own. Depending on how good certain arguments are, I'm open to letting my opinion change. I'm not asking if I can debate with you, but rather have a civil private discussion where I might ask you of some political opinions of yours for a little while.

I'm curious about your opinions. That and also I don't want to derail the thread anymore than we already have here.

[Lysistrata]

Absolutely Sir. I would love to share thoughts. I am honored that you would ask.

[Yates]

I would NEVER look to Jon for news... he's a comedian.

Well, political satirist, but mostly yes. I'm not looking at The Daily Show as a news outlet. lol. It was just funny that I was typing in this thread while the show was on and they did a bit on this Duck Dynasty debacle and just happened to cut to about a dozen cut aways from FOX News that were - obviously given the context of the show - hillarious.

 

I'm so sorry to hear this... I'm one of those Tea Party crazies you speak of so sharply.

Awe shit. Now we are in a fight!

 

The Tea Party was created for 2 reasons, and 2 reasons only... Reason number 1 is to stop Obamacare... period. Number 2 is to stop the out of control Government spending.

This is the part of the thread where I embarrass you. I apologize in advance for the spanking you are about to receive but it is unavoidable.

 

Here goes:

You claim you “don’t make widgets’ and that politics is “what you do.” Then why don’t you know your own party?

1. Reason #1 is to stop “Obamacare? “ Well… the Affordable Care Act was introduced by New York State’s 13th District Representative Charles Rangle in 2009.

TeaParty.org was created on: September 2nd, 2004.

Source: Tea Party.org

Between you and me, the roots of the Tea Party actually extend back to the 90’s and Tax Day Protests but what’s a decade between friends?

 

2. There are TWO reasons and TWO reasons only that the Tea Party exists and anything else is a fabrication?

15 Non-negotiable Core Beliefs [of the Tea Party]

1. Illegal aliens are here illegally.
2. Pro-domestic employment is indispensable.
3. A strong military is essential.
4. Special interests must be eliminated.
5. Gun ownership is sacred.
6. Government must be downsized.
7. The national budget must be balanced.
8. Deficit spending must end.
9. Bailout and stimulus plans are illegal.
10. Reducing personal income taxes is a must.
11. Reducing business income taxes is mandatory.
12. Political offices must be available to average citizens.
13. Intrusive government must be stopped.
14. English as our core language is required.
15. Traditional family values are encouraged.

Also from Teaparty.org.  Just click on the about link.  Seems like more than “two” reasons to me.

The problem I have with the Tea Party is that they cut off their nose to spite their face and have been dragging religion in to WAY too much of their political chicanery. Regardless of your own personal relationship with God and/or Jesus Christ, if you are going to be a Constitutionalist you need to leave that stuff at Church and recognize that you are legislating for Jews, Muslims, Atheists, and everything in between. In other words, there’s a REASON our forefathers expressly forbade the creation of laws that would establish a religion or prevent the free exercise thereof. Further, feel free to read about the plight of Roger Williams – some guy that fled the Massachusetts Bay Colony and founded the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations - in regards to the separation of Church and State.

I could break each of these 15 points down line by line but I’d be here all night and it’s almost 02:00 in the morning so I need to get some sleep. The one point I will address is the second point you brought up to “stop out of control government spending.” So, our Country fell into this recession for any number of reasons [don’t get me started on the Glass-Steagall Act repeals]. To anyone that thinks the way to get OUT of a recession is to downsize government and limit government spending, I ask you this;

 

What got America out of the Great Depression?

 

Was it:
A. New Deal Spending
B. Selling goods during WWII
C. All of the Above

If you voted C, you are correct. My point here is that the bigger picture has to do with HOW money is being spent and less on how MUCH is being spent.

Look, you and I want essentially the same thing – a safer, stronger, better America. We just disagree on the steps our Nation needs to take to get us there.  We are behind Canada, Israel, and Japan in terms of education.  We are 105th - yes 105 - in intentional murder.  To give you some perspective, the 5 SAFER nations immediately above us are Laos, Suriname, Georgia, Yemen, and Turkmenistan.  Libya, Iraq, Iran, and Djibouti are all WAY safer in terms of homicide rates.  We rank 34 - lower than CUBA - in infant mortality rate.  These are not fantastic markers.  And I'm going to completely ignore our world image at this point.  Because there's simply no debating that we have a LOT of ground to make up in that regard.  The fact that a Belgian thinks it's okay to take a dump on the US military and our role in the liberation of Belgium should speak volumes to that point.

 

Okay.  I'm starting to ramble.  Tea Party - Bad.  Yates - Good.  More discussion tomorrow.

[Owney]

Shut up, you bunch of bickering faggots.   


Also, tldr, something about a guy from a crappy show making an anti-gay comment, who cares? Freedom of speech, whether you agree or not.


The real question is, is this just a small part of all the things the media keeps us occupied with while the government makes moves behind closed doors? They keep us rambling and debating on silly things constantly....are we all that petty? Or is it to keep the masses woefully unaware of reality? (Real reality, not "reality" TV shows)


Start paying attention to things that actually matter and that will affect generations to come, IMO.

[Lysistrata]

Hello Mr. Yates, I'm a member of the Republican Party.

There is no such thing as a political party called The Tea Party.

Many have tried to claim leadership and some have even tried to run under the label. They are phonies.

It's been tried before, and some even say Ron Paul started it. He didn't.

Snagging a web domain doesn't make you an authority on a movement.

 

The Tea Party of 2009 resulted in names like Marco Rubio, Ron Johnson, Scott Brown, Chris Christie, Mike Lee, Alan West, Rand Paul, and I can go on for quite awhile but I don't need to. They are all Republicans.

 

Even though I agree with every item on your little list... they are not why the Tea Party of 2009 was created.

The Tea Party of 2009 included Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats and Independents. Conservatives each and every one of them.

They were there to stop Obamacare and to unite for fiscal responsibility. Anything else you may have heard is a personal agenda.

 

I don't agree that New Deal spending ended the depression. It made the depression impossible to end. WWII ended the depression by employing everyone. It will be chicken scratch compared to the depression that will happen if we don't get the debt under control.

 

Oh before I go... nobody defines me... including great people I meet on game forums.

[Lysistrata]

I agree with Owney.

[Robert2424]

Yeah, this thread has went off the deep end. I think it should be closed soon. (Not that the original intent was bad, its went too far.) Idk who moderates these parts of the forum, but they might want to take a closer look at this before things get to far out of hand. I'm no longer gonna pay any more attention to the thread as its went to far.