Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 22nd, 2009, 07:17 PM   #41
Rattler
Home Sweet Homicide
 
Rattler's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-06
Location: Bei City
Posts: 3,648
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

I have no problems fighting a war. I just think that we fight it with an arm tied behind our back. We do not use what we have to its potential.
Rattler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2009, 08:56 PM   #42
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Ok, and here we go again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
So why is it Bushes fault for the miss information recieved and approved by congress. It is the fault of all who voted to go to war.
Congress did not accumulate and present the evidence. Bush and his advisers cherry picked intelligence and used conjecture. Congress was presented the evidence Bush wanted them to see and voted according to that information. The reasons for invading Iraq, presented by the Bush Administration have been debunked.



Quote:
terrorists or freedom fighters flooded Iraq to fight the americans. We have done good at getting them out and defeating them in Iraq.
Yes, they came to Iraq to fight the Americans. But, along with killing many of them we also invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation. That invasion has been used as a rallying cry for more martyrs and terrorists.

Quote:
The terrorists are now in Afaganistan and Pakistan, that is were we are now.
Troops went to Afghanistan first. For very good reason. A direct link to the 9/11 attacks on US soil. But then Cheney and Bush got distracted and went after Hussein.

Quote:
we should continue the fight with them as long as the continue to fight us. Or give up and come home.
No, we should not stop fighting them. We should attack terrorists anywhere and everywhere they are. That is still the plan. But invading foreign nations without concrete proof that they are a terrorist state is not the answer. Don't forget, the US is Johnny come lately to the anti terrorism party.

Quote:
They would love that, it would be spread across the muslim nations that the americans are a paper tiger nothing to fear and when the going gets tough we will turn tail and run.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the US is already looked at in that way by many around the world. Ineffective. Still the cowboy
but not shooting straight.


Quote:
So then we have another problem with coming home is that they will then attack us here on our ground. Do you think that there will be no american civilain casulties.
We may have attacks here regardless of what our military is doing and where. And yes, there will be casualties if attacks take place. ANd you are a fool if you think the Obama administration and law enforcement in this country are going to sit idly by and let it happen. That idea is propaganda from the right to make you afraid. We are no more or less safe now as we were during Bush's years. In fact, with a little more international cooperation we may eventually be better off.

Quote:
I believe there are terrorist cells sleeping in this country now and only waiting to be woke up and told to get to work.
I have no doubt there are terrorists in this country just waiting. Our borders have been too porous for too long. Law enforcement can continue to track them down, without throwing the Constitution out the window.


Quote:
And if you think we are safe and have nothing to worry about then when we get our wake up call remember how you think this is a wrong war.
We are not safe. We all know that. Wrong war? What wrong war?
The war on terrorism? A needed war that needs to be fought on all fronts. But not just with conventional warfare because terrorism is not an enemy like a nation is.
The war in Afghanistan? Totally justified, but not executed well. A near forgotten action for many years. Obama promised to re focus on Afghanistan and is doing just that.
The Iraq war? Well, yes, that is the one I do not agree with. As I said before, every reason for invaded has been debunked. And all of the evidence presented to Congress is at best, suspect.


Quote:
The terrorists will not stop until we as the infidel are dead or convert to Islam.
Those are 2 of, what I believe, are 3 possibilities. The third is finding a way where people will not want to join the radical cause with the radical arm of the Muslim faith. That way will not be found through violence.

p.s. Most religions that I have encountered in my life have called for its followers to go forth and convert others. Christians included.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2009, 09:19 PM   #43
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Ok, and here we go again.




Congress did not accumulate and present the evidence. Bush and his advisers cherry picked intelligence and used conjecture. Congress was presented the evidence Bush wanted them to see and voted according to that information. The reasons for invading Iraq, presented by the Bush Administration have been debunked.





Yes, they came to Iraq to fight the Americans. But, along with killing many of them we also invaded and destroyed a sovereign nation. That invasion has been used as a rallying cry for more martyrs and terrorists.



Troops went to Afghanistan first. For very good reason. A direct link to the 9/11 attacks on US soil. But then Cheney and Bush got distracted and went after Hussein.



No, we should not stop fighting them. We should attack terrorists anywhere and everywhere they are. That is still the plan. But invading foreign nations without concrete proof that they are a terrorist state is not the answer. Don't forget, the US is Johnny come lately to the anti terrorism party.



Sorry to burst your bubble, but the US is already looked at in that way by many around the world. Ineffective. Still the cowboy
but not shooting straight.




We may have attacks here regardless of what our military is doing and where. And yes, there will be casualties if attacks take place. ANd you are a fool if you think the Obama administration and law enforcement in this country are going to sit idly by and let it happen. That idea is propaganda from the right to make you afraid. We are no more or less safe now as we were during Bush's years. In fact, with a little more international cooperation we may eventually be better off.



I have no doubt there are terrorists in this country just waiting. Our borders have been too porous for too long. Law enforcement can continue to track them down, without throwing the Constitution out the window.




We are not safe. We all know that. Wrong war? What wrong war?
The war on terrorism? A needed war that needs to be fought on all fronts. But not just with conventional warfare because terrorism is not an enemy like a nation is.
The war in Afghanistan? Totally justified, but not executed well. A near forgotten action for many years. Obama promised to re focus on Afghanistan and is doing just that.
The Iraq war? Well, yes, that is the one I do not agree with. As I said before, every reason for invaded has been debunked. And all of the evidence presented to Congress is at best, suspect.




Those are 2 of, what I believe, are 3 possibilities. The third is finding a way where people will not want to join the radical cause with the radical arm of the Muslim faith. That way will not be found through violence.

p.s. Most religions that I have encountered in my life have called for its followers to go forth and convert others. Christians included.
So the way to win this war with Islam is to convert them to Christianity and we are by the millions in the mid east.
The difference between muslims is they convert by the sword and Christians convert through the Holy Spirit from the heart.
Which way would you be converted if given the choice?
We did invade Iraq but it was not a sovergn nation, it was a nation ruled by a cruel and rithless dictator that killed his own people.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22nd, 2009, 09:29 PM   #44
Stan
I got a gold chain
 
Stan's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Shelby Twp.
Posts: 15,655
iTrader: (7)
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
So the way to win this war with Islam is to convert them to Christianity and we are by the millions in the mid east.
The difference between muslims is they convert by the sword and Christians convert through the Holy Spirit from the heart.
Which way would you be converted if given the choice?
We did invade Iraq but it was not a sovergn nation, it was a nation ruled by a cruel and rithless dictator that killed his own people.
Inb4crusadecomments.
Stan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2009, 09:17 AM   #45
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
So the way to win this war with Islam is to convert them to Christianity and we are by the millions in the mid east.
The difference between muslims is they convert by the sword and Christians convert through the Holy Spirit from the heart.
Which way would you be converted if given the choice?
We did invade Iraq but it was not a sovergn nation, it was a nation ruled by a cruel and rithless dictator that killed his own people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan View Post
Inb4crusadecomments.
Oh come on Stan, the Crusades never happened, did they?

There are some that interpret the Koran as saying the sword should be used when non believers do not convert, but there are also many (seems like the majority) that do not believe that is the intent of the Koran and the Prophet in this time.
The Bible also has passages that would, if interpreted a certain way, incite violence against non believers.
And, in practice, there are plenty of people that call themselves Christians that use violence against those that do not believe as they do. Look at the abortion clinic bombings as an example. Or other sins, look at the cases of pedophiles wearing the collar. And the protection, by the church, of those sinners.
Christians are not above embarrassment. They are not above reproach. And they are certainly not, as a whole, better than all others.

Iraq was not a sovereign nation? What world do you live in?

The definition of a sovereign nation is not based on what kind of government runs it.

Hussein was evil, I did not shed a tear when he was executed. But the United States had no right to invade Iraq and depose him simply because of his leadership style. If that were a valid reason why have we not invaded Iran, or Libya, or China, or Russia back in the day.

But, by your own definition, other nations considered Bush to be a war criminal, did that give them the right to invade the U.S. and overthrow him?
China could have done it, Russia in the old days stood a chance.

Not saying any nation would be foolish enough to try a ground war with the U.S. but if they felt Bush was evil did they have any less right to invade than Bush had in regards to Hussein and Iraq?

Iraq not a sovereign nation? Get real.

Sorry, but that is one of the most ignorant things I have read on this website for a while. If you really believe this, then you are truly ignorant of what sovereign nation means.

Try this:

The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.

The U.S. chooses a democratic society, the British choose a Parliamentary society, Iraq chooses Hussein. All are still sovereign nations.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2009, 11:42 AM   #46
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

This a thread on HATE CRIMES. This bill has been voted on and has passed, now on to Obama to sign it into law in this country.
I have heard that this bill is also called the homosexual protection bill. This means that trans gendered, homosexuals will now have and be treated special when it comes to protection from people in general. This also includes pedofiles. Which the were sure to include in the bill. Republicans wanted to exclude them but was refused by Democrats.
Watch this bill in the future and how it will affect free speech.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2009, 11:51 AM   #47
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Oh come on Stan, the Crusades never happened, did they?

There are some that interpret the Koran as saying the sword should be used when non believers do not convert, but there are also many (seems like the majority) that do not believe that is the intent of the Koran and the Prophet in this time.
The Bible also has passages that would, if interpreted a certain way, incite violence against non believers.
And, in practice, there are plenty of people that call themselves Christians that use violence against those that do not believe as they do. Look at the abortion clinic bombings as an example. Or other sins, look at the cases of pedophiles wearing the collar. And the protection, by the church, of those sinners.
Christians are not above embarrassment. They are not above reproach. And they are certainly not, as a whole, better than all others.

Iraq was not a sovereign nation? What world do you live in?

The definition of a sovereign nation is not based on what kind of government runs it.

Hussein was evil, I did not shed a tear when he was executed. But the United States had no right to invade Iraq and depose him simply because of his leadership style. If that were a valid reason why have we not invaded Iran, or Libya, or China, or Russia back in the day.

But, by your own definition, other nations considered Bush to be a war criminal, did that give them the right to invade the U.S. and overthrow him?
China could have done it, Russia in the old days stood a chance.

Not saying any nation would be foolish enough to try a ground war with the U.S. but if they felt Bush was evil did they have any less right to invade than Bush had in regards to Hussein and Iraq?

Iraq not a sovereign nation? Get real.

Sorry, but that is one of the most ignorant things I have read on this website for a while. If you really believe this, then you are truly ignorant of what sovereign nation means.

Try this:

The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.

The U.S. chooses a democratic society, the British choose a Parliamentary society, Iraq chooses Hussein. All are still sovereign nations.
Iraq did not choose Saddam, you fool. Saddam choose Iraq to dictate. It is amazing the with all your stupidity that you are still alive to spew your rethoric. I can see how you like Obama, your rethoric sounds the same.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2009, 11:56 AM   #48
disorder xj
Happy,happy,joy,joy
 
Join Date: 08-13-06
Location: Mio MI.
Posts: 2,899
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
Iraq did not choose Saddam, you fool. Saddam choose Iraq to dictate. It is amazing the with all your stupidity that you are still alive to spew your rethoric. I can see how you like Obama, your rethoric sounds the same.
your bull never seems to stop so why should his ?
disorder xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2009, 09:39 PM   #49
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
Oh come on Stan, the Crusades never happened, did they?

There are some that interpret the Koran as saying the sword should be used when non believers do not convert, but there are also many (seems like the majority) that do not believe that is the intent of the Koran and the Prophet in this time.
The Bible also has passages that would, if interpreted a certain way, incite violence against non believers.
And, in practice, there are plenty of people that call themselves Christians that use violence against those that do not believe as they do. Look at the abortion clinic bombings as an example. Or other sins, look at the cases of pedophiles wearing the collar. And the protection, by the church, of those sinners.
Christians are not above embarrassment. They are not above reproach. And they are certainly not, as a whole, better than all others.

Iraq was not a sovereign nation? What world do you live in?

The definition of a sovereign nation is not based on what kind of government runs it.

Hussein was evil, I did not shed a tear when he was executed. But the United States had no right to invade Iraq and depose him simply because of his leadership style. If that were a valid reason why have we not invaded Iran, or Libya, or China, or Russia back in the day.

But, by your own definition, other nations considered Bush to be a war criminal, did that give them the right to invade the U.S. and overthrow him?
China could have done it, Russia in the old days stood a chance.

Not saying any nation would be foolish enough to try a ground war with the U.S. but if they felt Bush was evil did they have any less right to invade than Bush had in regards to Hussein and Iraq?

Iraq not a sovereign nation? Get real.

Sorry, but that is one of the most ignorant things I have read on this website for a while. If you really believe this, then you are truly ignorant of what sovereign nation means.

Try this:

The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.

The U.S. chooses a democratic society, the British choose a Parliamentary society, Iraq chooses Hussein. All are still sovereign nations.
You are correct with your statment about the peace loving muslims, it is the radical ones that use the sword as persuasion to accept allah.
Maybe you could tell me where in the bible it says to promote violence against non-believers? because that is BS.
There may be a few radical persons that will engage in that type of activity that call themselves Christians, but you will also hear that the majority of Christians denouce that behaviour because that is not what Christianity is about.
Yes the cathoilc church was wrong in what they did, if you were to look you find that type of behavior in the muslim world also, and outside of religious places even more.
Christians are not above anybody we are sinners, as you and everybody on the planet, none are perfect. We are as filthy rags in Gods sight, no matter how good we think we are or how much we think we have done to help others.
As to the definion of sovereign, they are, but the country ruled by saddam in his dictator ship without the freedoms of the people I could not call the country a true soverign nation.
We invade Iraq and to this day I believe we are a safer world without saddam.
Again Iraq did not choose saddam, saddam choose Iraq
Soverign yes.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 06:44 AM   #50
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
This a thread on HATE CRIMES. This bill has been voted on and has passed, now on to Obama to sign it into law in this country.
I have heard that this bill is also called the homosexual protection bill. This means that trans gendered, homosexuals will now have and be treated special when it comes to protection from people in general. This also includes pedofiles. Which the were sure to include in the bill. Republicans wanted to exclude them but was refused by Democrats.
Watch this bill in the future and how it will affect free speech.

It was called the homosexual protection bill by those that opposed it.

Pedophiles protected? WRONG.

This is about protection, yes. Protection against those that would do physical harm simply because of a person sexual preference. Just like the law protects black people form KKK types.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 07:32 AM   #51
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

This is sad, yet fun at the same time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
Iraq did not choose Saddam, you fool. Saddam choose Iraq to dictate. It is amazing the with all your stupidity that you are still alive to spew your rethoric. I can see how you like Obama, your rethoric sounds the same.

I'm sorry, am I getting under your skin? Stupidity? Spew? Rhetoric?

Yep, pointing out that that Iraq was a sovereign nation is somehow stupid rhetoric to be spewed. Where do you get your ideas from?

You really do not pay attention to what you read, do you? I am not sad that Hussein is gone. I do not shed a tear when evil dictators are overthrown. I do point out again though, that the United States had no legal authority to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq regardless of how evil Hussein was. Unless he was a direct threat the the US and it's interests. Which at the tie, he was not.

As far as "liking" Obama? I am a social liberal in my political views. I know you will not fully understand what that is, but suffice it to say I realize that this nation is not stronger than the weakest segment of its population. I am also a fiscal conservative, but moderate on both counts as well. In other words, help strengthen the country by helping build it from within, yet do it in a responsible way fiscally. Come down hard on fraud and abuse. Level the tax field (shame when I pay my full percentage because I don't have enough to take advantage of all the loop holes the rich can). Help those that can not help themselves. And for those able bodies people, help them to become a contributing member of society.
I like some of the ideals Obama has. I like his political views much more than I like that of many conservative in this country.
This does not mean I will not criticize him if I feel it is warranted. This does not mean I am a blind follower and will agree with everything he says and does.
He was hired by the American people to do a job. He is still going down the path he established while running for election and the majority of the voting public chose that path.
Do I like him ? No more or less than any other President this far into his term of office. In fact, other than the questions that arose from the election in 2000, I had about the same feelings about G.W. Bush at this point, in fact, I think he did well after 9/11. Although he always seems a bit out of touch when he spoke, but that is just me personal opinion. I did not begine to really disagree with him until he invaded Iraq.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
You are correct with your statment about the peace loving muslims, it is the radical ones that use the sword as persuasion to accept allah.
Yet, you continue to to lump all Muslims in with the radical ones.

[quote]Maybe you could tell me where in the bible it says to promote violence against non-believers? because that is BS./quote]

Psalm 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
Psalm 2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Psalm 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Just a few. What is really sickening is that doing this little bit of research I was reminded of just how violent and intolerant the bible actually is.

Quote:
There may be a few radical persons that will engage in that type of activity that call themselves Christians, but you will also hear that the majority of Christians denouce that behaviour because that is not what Christianity is about.
There are a great many Muslims that denounce radical behaviour, yet you do not seem to hear their voices.

Quote:
Yes the cathoilc church was wrong in what they did, if you were to look you find that type of behavior in the muslim world also, and outside of religious places even more.
No argument here. Only thing I have to say is that one can not put themselves above another. Should we denounce the Muslim faith because of the actions of a few? If so, we must also denounce the Christian faith for the actions of a few. (Crusades, Inquisition, pedophile priests)

Quote:
Christians are not above anybody we are sinners, as you and everybody on the planet, none are perfect. We are as filthy rags in Gods sight, no matter how good we think we are or how much we think we have done to help others.
I know my short comings. I do not use the crutch of religion to find forgiveness.


Quote:
As to the definion of sovereign, they are, but the country ruled by saddam in his dictator ship without the freedoms of the people I could not call the country a true soverign nation.
You may not call the "true sovereign" but that is not your call. Iraq was a nation, Hussein was in power. Simple. Sovereign.

Quote:
We invade Iraq and to this day I believe we are a safer world without saddam.
In some ways we may be, in some ways not. He is no longer a threat, but his death has become a rallying point for many in the Arab world. He is a Martyr to the radicals.

Quote:
Again Iraq did not choose saddam, saddam choose Iraq
Soverign yes.
Hussein came to power through a coup, overthrowing the existing government. This happens all over the world. Sometimes wth good results, sometimes with bad results. Either way, Iraq was a sovereign nation.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 07:36 AM   #52
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteC View Post
It was called the homosexual protection bill by those that opposed it.

Pedophiles protected? WRONG.

This is about protection, yes. Protection against those that would do physical harm simply because of a person sexual preference. Just like the law protects black people form KKK types.
See what I don't understand is we already have laws in place to protect the public from criminals. Why is it necessary to creat another law to give special preference to gays, transgendered and pedofiles, because that is what this bill is about special treatment. What makes them special or better than Christians, white people, black people, or criminals for that matter? I can see this type of law, down the road affecting free speech and thought.
I also heard that the wanted to insert a clause into the bill to exclude sexual preditors and pedofiles but was defeated by the .
This bill is about special treatment for gays period.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 07:42 AM   #53
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuggets View Post
I would say we as law abiding citizens can do more to stop hate crimes than any law. By not allowing this kind of behaviour in our social groups, this will detour the aggressor's actions more effectively. In other words, if a buddy talks about beating up the flamer down the street, you need to confront him about his actions. I personally dislike MOST homosexuals along with most rednecks, liberals, door to door meat salesmen, and city politicians. I do however respect their right to their views in this country as long is it doesn't place myself or my family in direct harm.

Beating a person up because of their sexual orientation, handicap, skin color, or political veiws is a sign of cowardice. Most the the "hate crime" reports that I've seen involve multiple attackers on a single victom. Again a sign of cowardice by the attackers.

I'm not saying embrace people you don't like. I'm just saying be a good American citizen and allow people to live a life different than yours. If you really wish to participate in hate acts and smack around people that don't think exactly like you, move to the middle east and become a Muslum.

You are a wise man with a good head on his shoulders.

You are correct that we should all do this in our social groups. I have done so and lost friends in the process. It is not always easy.

But, if you look at many of these social group you will see that objecting and confronting will not always get the point across. That is when a law comes into play.

Some will equate this law to a way for minorities to take advantage, like killing someone in the middle of a party store robbery will become a hate crime. It takes more than that to be a hate crime. Yes, there may be abuses, as there is with any law, but that is not enough reason to not acknowledge that there is a problem.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 07:51 AM   #54
PeteC
Get Up and Go
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Oak Park, Michigan
Posts: 2,556
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
See what I don't understand is we already have laws in place to protect the public from criminals. Why is it necessary to creat another law to give special preference to gays, transgendered and pedofiles, because that is what this bill is about special treatment. What makes them special or better than Christians, white people, black people, or criminals for that matter? I can see this type of law, down the road affecting free speech and thought.
For a crime to be a hate crime, it has to be proven that the crime (usually a physical assault) was perpetrated simply and only because of a person being a minority, or gay, or Muslim, or white (yes, white people can be victims as well). It is not that easy to bring these charges. It is there to deter this kind of hate filed violence.


Quote:
I also heard that the wanted to insert a clause into the bill to exclude sexual preditors and pedofiles but was defeated by the .
{edit: I miss read this a little. But why should an exclusion be put into the bill when pedophiles and predators are already committing crimes. This is a political tactic, if it even happened.}

You keep bringing up this ludicrous idea that the left wanted to protect pedophiles and sexual predators. This is utter bull shit. Where did you get this gem of information from. I call BS at the highest level. No law maker in this country will support the idea of protecting pedophiles.

Prove this is true or STFU.

It is crap like this that starts rumors. It is crap like this that the uninformed and less educated among us latch on to and believe. It is crap like that that promotes violent protest against things that do not exist. It is tactics like that that ave been used a lot lately to rally the "base".

The only organizations that protects pedophiles in this country are NAMBLA (a disgusting group) and that Catholic church.




Quote:
This bill is about special treatment for gays period.
This legislation is about adding protection of sexual preferences to the list of those already protected against hate crimes. In a sense, you are correct. I still don't see a problem with it.

Maybe it will stop the Phelps crew from spreading their "Gad Hates Fags" rhetoric.

Last edited by PeteC; October 24th, 2009 at 07:54 AM.
PeteC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 08:54 AM   #55
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,755
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
Default

The problem, Pete, is that simpletons like aber, Toes, LC4X, etc. is that they can't see the difference between being gay and being a pedophile. They think that they are equally evil. It's insane, I know, but you have to remember this when talking about it with them. It's so weird for me how people can claim that and still have a straight face...
mikesova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2009, 09:44 AM   #56
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

[quote=PeteC;1916551]This is sad, yet fun at the same time.





I'm sorry, am I getting under your skin? Stupidity? Spew? Rhetoric?

Yep, pointing out that that Iraq was a sovereign nation is somehow stupid rhetoric to be spewed. Where do you get your ideas from?

You really do not pay attention to what you read, do you? I am not sad that Hussein is gone. I do not shed a tear when evil dictators are overthrown. I do point out again though, that the United States had no legal authority to invade the sovereign nation of Iraq regardless of how evil Hussein was. Unless he was a direct threat the the US and it's interests. Which at the tie, he was not.

As far as "liking" Obama? I am a social liberal in my political views. I know you will not fully understand what that is, but suffice it to say I realize that this nation is not stronger than the weakest segment of its population. I am also a fiscal conservative, but moderate on both counts as well. In other words, help strengthen the country by helping build it from within, yet do it in a responsible way fiscally. Come down hard on fraud and abuse. Level the tax field (shame when I pay my full percentage because I don't have enough to take advantage of all the loop holes the rich can). Help those that can not help themselves. And for those able bodies people, help them to become a contributing member of society.
I like some of the ideals Obama has. I like his political views much more than I like that of many conservative in this country.
This does not mean I will not criticize him if I feel it is warranted. This does not mean I am a blind follower and will agree with everything he says and does.
He was hired by the American people to do a job. He is still going down the path he established while running for election and the majority of the voting public chose that path.
Do I like him ? No more or less than any other President this far into his term of office. In fact, other than the questions that arose from the election in 2000, I had about the same feelings about G.W. Bush at this point, in fact, I think he did well after 9/11. Although he always seems a bit out of touch when he spoke, but that is just me personal opinion. I did not begine to really disagree with him until he invaded Iraq.



Yet, you continue to to lump all Muslims in with the radical ones.

Quote:
Maybe you could tell me where in the bible it says to promote violence against non-believers? because that is BS./quote]

Psalm 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
Psalm 2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Psalm 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Just a few. What is really sickening is that doing this little bit of research I was reminded of just how violent and intolerant the bible actually is.



There are a great many Muslims that denounce radical behaviour, yet you do not seem to hear their voices.



No argument here. Only thing I have to say is that one can not put themselves above another. Should we denounce the Muslim faith because of the actions of a few? If so, we must also denounce the Christian faith for the actions of a few. (Crusades, Inquisition, pedophile priests)



I know my short comings. I do not use the crutch of religion to find forgiveness.




You may not call the "true sovereign" but that is not your call. Iraq was a nation, Hussein was in power. Simple. Sovereign.



In some ways we may be, in some ways not. He is no longer a threat, but his death has become a rallying point for many in the Arab world. He is a Martyr to the radicals.



Hussein came to power through a coup, overthrowing the existing government. This happens all over the world. Sometimes wth good results, sometimes with bad results. Either way, Iraq was a sovereign nation.
No need to apologize. I should for the name calling, sorry.
It is your lack of understanding, to put it bluntly.
I do suppose that Iraq is and was a soverign nation, but under the rule of an evil man killing his own people to test his weapons (mustard gas)WMD.
According to the world and congress we had the right and authority to take him out.
Social, liberal, fiscal, conservative and moderate. I am sorry to see that you see your self as so mixed up and confused. Do you take your lead from Obama so as to look good to everybody? Welll at least you have all your bases covered.
The government does need to step up and do what it was put in place to do. Which is not to create programs to grow government even larger.
Loop holes. The rich in this country pay roughly 90% of the taxes, if you want to pay more in taxes just wait it's coming.
As far as enjoying the ranks of the liberal left you go for it Pete. Because all I see is trillions of $$ of debt being dumped on this generation and the next 3 or 4. The government is over spending way to much as the last admin also was spending too much and growing way to big.
Yes Bush did seem to stumble over his words. He was not a smooth talker as Obama is and that is why he got elected. He is a good salesman.
Did you not read what I posted? a majority of muslims are peace loving muslims. There are still a large % of them that agree with what Bin Ladin is doing. According to polls its like 1 or 2 % but with the millions of muslims in the world, it is still staggering the amount the are radical. If you were to do a poll about Christians and their view about bombing abortion clinics the numbers would not even get on the screen, the percentage would be nil.
Im the Psalms you bring up are from David asking God for help(Prayers) and yes there is violence in the bible and a lot of it. Christ came to divide and as you can see this world is divided on every issue.
It is good that you know your short coming, and you should not use religion as a crutch to find forgiveness. The only One that can forgive you is Jesus Christ.
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2009, 08:33 AM   #57
C.K.
Dont Feed the Cyco
 
C.K.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 48386
Posts: 17,301
iTrader: (21)
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Default

Why do we need a new law for hate crimes? Beating someone is already a crime. Killing someone is already a crime. It IS for special treatment. Blacks rob and kill whites and there is rarely a call for racism or a hate crime. When it happens they other way they want to burn down the whites house and put the whole family in jail.

There is no reason for a special treatment law. You can pretend it isn't all you want, but we have laws in place that cover the same thing.
C.K. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2009, 08:56 AM   #58
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattler View Post
I have no problems fighting a war. I just think that we fight it with an arm tied behind our back. We do not use what we have to its potential.
x2 we could do a lot more damage but it is all politics and being political correct
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2009, 09:08 AM   #59
aber61
Senior Member
 
aber61's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-08
Location: Commerce Twp. Michigan
Posts: 6,073
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by C.K. View Post
Why do we need a new law for hate crimes? Beating someone is already a crime. Killing someone is already a crime. It IS for special treatment. Blacks rob and kill whites and there is rarely a call for racism or a hate crime. When it happens they other way they want to burn down the whites house and put the whole family in jail.

There is no reason for a special treatment law. You can pretend it isn't all you want, but we have laws in place that cover the same thing.
You said it CK. That is all this is, is a special treatment law.
To protect gays, pedofiles and transgendered people.
This new law will have spin offs in other directions as far as speech and thought. The begining of controling the masses.
Canada has this type of law on thier books and pastors have been jailed because of what they say about what the bible says about homosexuallality. They are reading from a book!
It also happens in Europe with their hate crime laws.
It will happen here, even though PeteC says its not the same law. But then again Pete believes that the government is our friend.
How is it that the ones in the minority have the loudest voice?
aber61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2009, 10:10 AM   #60
Rattler
Home Sweet Homicide
 
Rattler's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-17-06
Location: Bei City
Posts: 3,648
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aber61 View Post
How is it that the ones in the minority have the loudest voice?
They usually do in public.

Seriously, will us honkies get "protection" laws when we are the minority? Reports say it should only be 2015 or something.
Rattler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:27 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.48770 seconds with 50 queries