Ireland vote for Marriage equality.

[Noir]

Marriage equality was put to the public vote in Ireland yesterday, and in what looks increasingly like a landslide, the Yes campaign have been declared victorious.

Some polling stations are reporting 4:1 votes in favour of equality.

In a country were making jokes about jesus on tv tends to get more groans than laughs, this is somewhat remarkable.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Marriage equality was put to the public vote in Ireland yesterday, and in what looks increasingly like a landslide, the Yes campaign have been declared victorious.

Some polling stations are reporting 4:1 votes in favour of equality.

In a country were making jokes about jesus on tv tends to get more groans than laughs, this is somewhat remarkable.
Really?
Just what is the hell is "marriage equality"?????
One thing I hate to break to you is this--in no marriage is "equality", the goal or the savior. -Tyr

[Noir]

Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin is calling for a 'reality check' within the Catholic Church as Ireland ratifies same-sex marriage by a landslide vote.

Speaking to RTÉ, he agreed that the referendum was a 'social revolution', and said the Church has a long road ahead if it is to reconnect with the youth.

“I think it’s a social revolution. It’s a social revolution that didn’t begin today, it’s a social revolution that’s been going on, and perhaps people in the church have not been clear in their understanding of what that involves.

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/referendum/reality-check-needed-for-church-to-connect-with-youth-31247826.html

Watching a hitherto fundamental institution crumble in Ireland is a joy.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/referendum/reality-check-needed-for-church-to-connect-with-youth-31247826.html

Watching a hitherto fundamental institution crumble in Ireland is a joy.
Yep, thought it was that ass packing agenda again.. :bluegun:

Dumbasses over there must be idiots that ate not enough potatoes , for them to stupidly vote in that perverted insanity..
I'll have to remember to start laughing at the fools now.

Drunk on whiskey and coddling up to butt packers is no way to go thru life.. -Tyr

[Jeff]

Or maybe they all like to play hide the salami over there.

[Max R.]

Yep, thought it was that ass packing agenda again.. :bluegun:

Dumbasses over there must be idiots that ate not enough potatoes , for them to stupidly vote in that perverted insanity..
I'll have to remember to start laughing at the fools now.

Drunk on whiskey and coddling up to butt packers is no way to go thru life.. -Tyr
Sorry, Tyr, but a slight disagreement. It's not a matter of crawling into bed with gays. (<--see what I did there?) It's a matter of rights. While I don't know much about Irish law, I certainly understand and support our own Constitution where we have the same problem; how can we chip away at the rights of others without doing the same to ourselves?

Nazis are some of the most disgusting dumb f**ks on the planet and if the news came out tomorrow that they all died of some horrible, extremely painful disease, I wouldn't shed a tear. OTOH, when they wanted to march in Skokie, IL, it wasn't a matter of supporting or being disgusted by dumbass Nazis, but about supporting and defending our Constitution. Something I've taken an oath to do, as many others here have done so too.

"gay marriage", IMO, is a 14th Amendment issue. It's not about approving of gays, but about approving of American rights. Chip away at the rights of others and it's the same as sawing off a branch while we're sitting on it. In the end, we'll only hurt ourselves, our children and our fellow Americans.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Sorry, Tyr, but a slight disagreement. It's not a matter of crawling into bed with gays. (<--see what I did there?) It's a matter of rights. While I don't know much about Irish law, I certainly understand and support our own Constitution where we have the same problem; how can we chip away at the rights of others without doing the same to ourselves?

Nazis are some of the most disgusting dumb f**ks on the planet and if the news came out tomorrow that they all died of some horrible, extremely painful disease, I wouldn't shed a tear. OTOH, when they wanted to march in Skokie, IL, it wasn't a matter of supporting or being disgusted by dumbass Nazis, but about supporting and defending our Constitution. Something I've taken an oath to do, as many others here have done so too.

"gay marriage", IMO, is a 14th Amendment issue. It's not about approving of gays, but about approving of American rights. Chip away at the rights of others and it's the same as sawing off a branch while we're sitting on it. In the end, we'll only hurt ourselves, our children and our fellow Americans.

Government has no right to be in the marriage business in any way to start with . I'd go as far as saying if its made a state issue to be decided state by state I'd not oppose it even though I personally find it reprehensible..
However, that legality issue doesn't have to be termed marriage--as marriage is between a man and a woman.
Feds can give same coverage without corrupting the sanctity and definition of marriage.

[LongTermGuy]

~ "It's not about approving of gays, but about approving of American rights." ~

....I dont know Max....Approving "all" "American rights" can lead to some bad MoJo stuff....I dont have to mention them...but you get my point....There is just Common sense on what is right and wrong....But then again..with politics....both sides of the spectrum will feel... They know what is good for us...which leads us back to "common sense"...Then that will be debated.....:laugh:

[Jeff]

Sorry, Tyr, but a slight disagreement. It's not a matter of crawling into bed with gays. (<--see what I did there?) It's a matter of rights. While I don't know much about Irish law, I certainly understand and support our own Constitution where we have the same problem; how can we chip away at the rights of others without doing the same to ourselves?

Nazis are some of the most disgusting dumb f**ks on the planet and if the news came out tomorrow that they all died of some horrible, extremely painful disease, I wouldn't shed a tear. OTOH, when they wanted to march in Skokie, IL, it wasn't a matter of supporting or being disgusted by dumbass Nazis, but about supporting and defending our Constitution. Something I've taken an oath to do, as many others here have done so too.

"gay marriage", IMO, is a 14th Amendment issue. It's not about approving of gays, but about approving of American rights. Chip away at the rights of others and it's the same as sawing off a branch while we're sitting on it. In the end, we'll only hurt ourselves, our children and our fellow Americans.

I agree with you, but within reason. Look at nature, gay sex isn't natural and although I believe we can't let the Government to be taking rights from us I do believe you have to use some common sense as well, and if the people aren't smart enough to use common sense then yes the Government should step in. I know we all have heard ( some laughed some believe ) once this gay sex thing is legal and excepted whats next, the poor pedophile was born that way as well ? They are already saying they are born that way, so what is going to stop that from being the next step.

[jimnyc]

Drop a few MOABS along the San Andreas, use a couple thousand tug boats and disconnect California. Push her to Ireland. Reconnect. We just helped Ireland expand and gave them more territory. They should be grateful. :)

[John V]

I don’t know, where does it all end? So you’ve got mass immigration, legalise drugs, men ‘marrying’ each other . . . what comes next? You can have gay rights without it turning into equality. Maybe I’m just from an older generation then, but I’m amazed a staunchly Catholic country like Ireland voted ‘yes’. :(

[jimnyc]

I don’t know, where does it all end? So you’ve got mass immigration, legalise drugs, men ‘marrying’ each other . . . what comes next? You can have gay rights without it turning into equality. Maybe I’m just from an older generation then, but I’m amazed a staunchly Catholic country like Ireland voted ‘yes’. :(



I said way back when that bigamy would be next, and many arguments from some of them have already started. Hell, I've seen arguments starting that if gay marriage is going through, that there is then no reason to deny marriages within the family, of cousins and such. In different parts of the world, I've seen several 'marriages' already to a goat and other animals. In other words, the MOCKERY and destruction of marriage has long started.

At this point, I say give it to them. Change the name of the REAL, original and traditional joining of one man and one woman. This time make it in a manner where ONLY those terms fit for this joining to occur. Leave the scummy government out and make it so that the deviants around the world will never be able to take over and claim 'equality' in order to change what 'one man and one woman' created.

And if the others don't like it? Tough shit, let them go off and create their own little whatever, and let them keep out us weird heteros if they like.

[darin]

They voted for special rights for a tiny segment of their population. I love it! Its a great lesson for the USA. In most cases states vote the other way and the vote is over turned. If i was a citizen there i'd start campaigning for other special allowances like allowing brothers and sisters, and unlimited numbers of people to marry.

[Max R.]

Government has no right to be in the marriage business in any way to start with . I'd go as far as saying if its made a state issue to be decided state by state I'd not oppose it even though I personally find it reprehensible..
However, that legality issue doesn't have to be termed marriage--as marriage is between a man and a woman.
Feds can give same coverage without corrupting the sanctity and definition of marriage.
While I agree to a large extent, it's more complicated than simply saying "it's a local issue". It used to be divorce was very difficult to obtain, which is why couples would either go to Nevada or Mexico for a "quicky divorce". Where they still married when they returned to their home state? No due to interstate and international agreements. So, if a state does not allow gay marriage, will two gays who were married elsewhere still be married if they move to such a state?

Secondly, while I will readily agree that the Feds have too many fingers in too many pies (or up too many asses!) and they certainly shouldn't be in the marriage game, certain laws do apply such as parentage of children and survivorship. What happens if a rich spouse runs off with an illicit lover and has a child with said lover then dies. Will the deserted spouse and their children collect anything from the estate or does it all go to the bastard child and lover?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

While I agree to a large extent, it's more complicated than simply saying "it's a local issue". It used to be divorce was very difficult to obtain, which is why couples would either go to Nevada or Mexico for a "quicky divorce". Where they still married when they returned to their home state? No due to interstate and international agreements. So, if a state does not allow gay marriage, will two gays who were married elsewhere still be married if they move to such a state?

Secondly, while I will readily agree that the Feds have too many fingers in too many pies (or up too many asses!) and they certainly shouldn't be in the marriage game, certain laws do apply such as parentage of children and survivorship. What happens if a rich spouse runs off with an illicit lover and has a child with said lover then dies. Will the deserted spouse and their children collect anything from the estate or does it all go to the bastard child and lover?

Your point of the complexity stands as noted and correct. However that could be worked out and still allow marriage to exist in its age old traditional form.
This attack launched at the term and its morality is the agenda of the gay militants and they are likely less than 1% of the U.S. population.
Are we to bow to the damn tyranny of the minority even down the the nth lowest level?
I personally vow to bow to no such tyranny myself.
Gays can go to hell, they will never get an ounce of respect from me because I know what they truly are.
I'll not deny reality and truth for any reason or to appease any group of PC following idiots...
They can all ESAD.....-Tyr

[John V]

I said way back when that bigamy would be next, and many arguments from some of them have already started. Hell, I've seen arguments starting that if gay marriage is going through, that there is then no reason to deny marriages within the family, of cousins and such. In different parts of the world, I've seen several 'marriages' already to a goat and other animals. In other words, the MOCKERY and destruction of marriage has long started.

At this point, I say give it to them. Change the name of the REAL, original and traditional joining of one man and one woman. This time make it in a manner where ONLY those terms fit for this joining to occur. Leave the scummy government out and make it so that the deviants around the world will never be able to take over and claim 'equality' in order to change what 'one man and one woman' created.

And if the others don't like it? Tough shit, let them go off and create their own little whatever, and let them keep out us weird heteros if they like.

For years I’ve reiterated that the west is sliding towards progressivism and that what is happening now is the dumbing down period leading to that. Equality, human rights, cultural Marxism . . . but what’s more important is that having got all that, has it produced a better society? Legalised drugs, mass welfare and sodomy isn’t what made America great and if you remove the traditions and values that did, what you’re left with is what you have now. I don’t think it’s the kind of freedom your Founding Fathers had in mind.

[Perianne]

As we oldtimers die out, the country will become more and more leftist. They have nearly all the platforms to push their agenda. I raised my daughter as a good conservative, but she is a more liberal conservative than what I am, just as I am a more liberal conservative than my mother was.

Here is wisdom: the left will win because they never give up.

[LongTermGuy]

As we oldtimers die out, the country will become more and more leftist. They have nearly all the platforms to push their agenda. I raised my daughter as a good conservative, but she is a more liberal conservative than what I am, just as I am a more liberal conservative than my mother was.

Here is wisdom: the left will win because they never give up.


`Understand....Stay focused and positive.....giving up is not an option.....

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

As we oldtimers die out, the country will become more and more leftist. They have nearly all the platforms to push their agenda. I raised my daughter as a good conservative, but she is a more liberal conservative than what I am, just as I am a more liberal conservative than my mother was.

Here is wisdom: the left will win because they never give up.

Not while I am alive!!!!
Because I never give up, to die fighting is an honorable death IMHO..
I'd rather go that way than to go peacefully in my sleep.
A just cause,a sharp blade and the courage to cut evil and its allies suits me just fine.....
My Native American and Viking blood calls out for a fight and lord knows the bastards deserve to be cut all to hell and back as they destroy the future of our children and grandchildren..
They can ALL= ESAD....-Tyr

[Perianne]

Not while I am alive!!!!
Because I never give up, to die fighting is an honorable death IMHO..
I'd rather go that way than to go peacefully in my sleep.
A just cause,a sharp blade and the courage to cut evil and its allies suits me just fine.....
My Native American and Viking blood calls out for a fight and lord knows the bastards deserve to be cut all to hell and back as they destroy the future of our children and grandchildren..
They can ALL= ESAD....-Tyr

Of course you and I would rather die. But my point was that we oldtimers will eventually die out. And then what?

[LongTermGuy]

Not while I am alive!!!!
Because I never give up, to die fighting is an honorable death IMHO..
I'd rather go that way than to go peacefully in my sleep.
A just cause,a sharp blade and the courage to cut evil and its allies suits me just fine.....
My Native American and Viking blood calls out for a fight and lord knows the bastards deserve to be cut all to hell and back as they destroy the future of our children and grandchildren..
They can ALL= ESAD....-Tyr



Thank You........:cool:

[John V]

Right you Americans, a challenge. Let's see if you can beat Europeans for liberal stupidity. This won the Eurovision song contest in 2014. The media were gushing all over it and so you must too. What can you produce to match this.(click on image to enlarge).

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Of course you and I would rather die. But my point was that we oldtimers will eventually die out. And then what?

Then we trust that the good Lord helps those we leave behind.
Thats the best we can do for the dead- must have ,

Faith In God

The dead have no power to play,
may moan but have no say
Await the final judgment on that day
when God will say aye or nay

Never fear to stand up to tell
faith is the honor we never sell
Keep faith that good will prevail
against the forces deep in hell

Lord protects those left far behind
as your faith he replies in kind

Robert J. Lindley. 05-24-2015

[LongTermGuy]

Of course you and I would rather die. But my point was that we oldtimers will eventually die out. And then what?


`Wise Old-timers will always pass the Blood on......

[Noir]

Right you Americans, a challenge. Let's see if you can beat Europeans for liberal stupidity. This won the Eurovision song contest in 2014. The media were gushing all over it and so you must too. What can you produce to match this.(click on image to enlarge).

So much hatred that you refer to another human as "this" for no reason other than to look down on them. Tis a pitiful way to act.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

`Wise Old-timers will always pass the Blood on......


And the fiery blade as well. I have began in earnest to teach my son how to shoot like the very best of them.
I want him completely taught how to defend himself and his family after I am gone--same way my dad did for all his sons...
Its a Southern thang my friend.... we teach shooting like others teach the ABC'S.
I even taught my daughter(now grown), trust me - she shoots better than most guys -even Southern guys, " raised on ole shotguns", (tribute to Hank Jr. ). ;)-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So much hatred that you refer to another human as "this" for no reason other than to look down on them. Tis a pitiful way to act.
At least he was polite enough to not type in the word--"scum'...
Me, I deal in the cold , hard and brutal truth so I type it and have no qualms about it..
Honor demands truth in ALL things...maybe you've heard that before? Or have you?--Tyr

[Perianne]

So much hatred that you refer to another human as "this" for no reason other than to look down on them. Tis a pitiful way to act.

Perhaps he was referring to "this" act, performance, etc. But a leftie always looks for the worst in conservatives.

[Noir]

Perhaps he was referring to "this" act, performance, etc. But a leftie always looks for the worst in conservatives.

I wonder why that is...


At least he was polite enough to not type in the word--"scum'...
Me, I deal in the cold , hard and brutal truth so I type it and have no qualms about it..
Honor demands truth in ALL things...maybe you've heard that before? Or have you?--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I wonder why that is...

thanks, honored that you used my comments to illustrate your failure in morality, truth and logic....
So nice to be so clearly vindicated in my judgment of a person...-Tyr

[John V]

So much hatred that you refer to another human as "this" for no reason other than to look down on them. Tis a pitiful way to act.

It was done on purpose. I could have said 'human', but I refuse to join in the stupidity Noir. This person is mentally ill and treatment is available. To encourage and promote this kind of behaviour is itself a form of abuse. Not 'hated', just a recognition of stupidity.

[Perianne]

It was done on purpose. I could have said 'human', but I refuse to join in the stupidity Noir. This person is mentally ill and treatment is available. To encourage and promote this kind of behaviour is itself a form of abuse. Not 'hated', just a recognition of stupidity.

John, there has always been disgusting people and disgusting behavior. What has changed is society's acceptance of these freaks... even encouragement.

Death will come to me in a few years and I won't have to see such things. But our children and grandchildren have it all to face.

[Noir]

It was done on purpose. I could have said 'human', but I refuse to join in the stupidity Noir. This person is mentally ill and treatment is available. To encourage and promote this kind of behaviour is itself a form of abuse. Not 'hated', just a recognition of stupidity.

So your thought process was 'I think this person is mentally ill, therefore a will purposefully not refer to them as a human'? Do you do that will all mentally ill people?

Also you can apologise to Perrianne after she gave you the benefit of the doubt of referring to a person as "this".

[Drummond]

For years I’ve reiterated that the west is sliding towards progressivism and that what is happening now is the dumbing down period leading to that. Equality, human rights, cultural Marxism . . . but what’s more important is that having got all that, has it produced a better society? Legalised drugs, mass welfare and sodomy isn’t what made America great and if you remove the traditions and values that did, what you’re left with is what you have now. I don’t think it’s the kind of freedom your Founding Fathers had in mind.

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

Great post, John ... I'm not sure I could have expressed these thoughts quite as well. I 100% agree.

[Drummond]

Right you Americans, a challenge. Let's see if you can beat Europeans for liberal stupidity. This won the Eurovision song contest in 2014. The media were gushing all over it and so you must too. What can you produce to match this.(click on image to enlarge).

Actually, John, it's even worse. I'm assuming you haven't had a chance to see the 2015 Eurovision song contest ? It was held last night, and I watched it all on the BBC. The very same creature was not only praised by the host country yesterday (for those who don't know, the winning country gets to host the following year's contest) ... but played a major part in compering it, too. Apparently, he/she/it has known considerable success in Austria over the last 12 months.

The UK entry badly lost, by the way .. I think we only got 2 votes. Three countries did worse than us, I think two of those received zero votes. Austria was right there with them. [Sweden won it]

[Drummond]

So your thought process was 'I think this person is mentally ill, therefore a will purposefully not refer to them as a human'? Do you do that will all mentally ill people?

Also you can apologise to Perrianne after she gave you the benefit of the doubt of referring to a person as "this".

I'm a little tempted to go back to my old 'terrorists' debate. Some might argue that terrorists are mentallly ill. But I've no difficulty whatever in classifying a terrorist as nonhuman. Whether 'mentally ill', or worse, is a subject for another debate (- possibly -).

[Drummond]

Actually, John, it's even worse. I'm assuming you haven't had a chance to see the 2015 Eurovision song contest ? It was held last night, and I watched it all on the BBC. The very same creature was not only praised by the host country yesterday (for those who don't know, the winning country gets to host the following year's contest) ... but played a major part in compering it, too. Apparently, he/she/it has known considerable success in Austria over the last 12 months.

The UK entry badly lost, by the way .. I think we only got 2 votes. Three countries did worse than us, I think two of those received zero votes. Austria was right there with them. [Sweden won it]

'Postscript' addition, for anyone interested.

I've absolutely no idea why it was allowed ... but, for the first time ever, AUSTRALIA was given a chance to compete in this contest !! Last time I checked, Australia wasn't a European country. Nonetheless, there they were.

If Australia can be admitted into their circle of participants, I fail to see why America won't be invited as well sometime. If/when that happens, the US will get extra exposure to European excesses ... such as .... 'Lordi', a previous winning band from Finland ...

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7236&stc=1

[Max R.]

Of course you and I would rather die. But my point was that we oldtimers will eventually die out. And then what?

"A liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet"

Have faith that most people will outgrow their pie-in-the-sky ideals as they mature. Remember those Wall Street Occupiers? Many will change their tune when it's them working on Wall Street or middle and senior managers of a corporation with a mortgage on a $750K home and two kids headed for college.

It's one thing to preach "free love" and wanting to walk around naked in public, but it's another thing to be a parent and kids who are either just entering kindergarten or puberty.

People mature. They grow up. Not all, but most.

[Drummond]

"A liberal is a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet"

Have faith that most people will outgrow their pie-in-the-sky ideals as they mature. Remember those Wall Street Occupiers? Many will change their tune when it's them working on Wall Street or middle and senior managers of a corporation with a mortgage on a $750K home and two kids headed for college.

It's one thing to preach "free love" and wanting to walk around naked in public, but it's another thing to be a parent and kids who are either just entering kindergarten or puberty.

People mature. They grow up. Not all, but most.

I'd like to think you're right. Maybe America is different enough for a different reality to take hold. But it begs the question as to how European countries have clung on to their own Leftism, complete with warped 'ideals', for as long as they have, with no sign of them disappearing.

Personally, I see no room for complacency. There's ideological perversity out there, and its practitioners would be delighted to extend it equally across the planet. Their efforts won't easily subside.

[Max R.]

I'd like to think you're right. Maybe America is different enough for a different reality to take hold. But it begs the question as to how European countries have clung on to their own Leftism, complete with warped 'ideals', for as long as they have, with no sign of them disappearing.

Personally, I see no room for complacency. There's ideological perversity out there, and its practitioners would be delighted to extend it equally across the planet. Their efforts won't easily subside.
What do you consider "ideological perversity" and "Leftism"? Giving blacks equal rights? Allowing women to vote? Abolishing "sodomy" laws that prevented a man and woman from having mutually consensual oral sex?

[Drummond]

I wonder why that is...

So do I, Noir.

Tyr's reply to you included this ...


Honor demands truth in ALL things

Ah, if only the Left could live up to that. Lefties are too busy enslaving themselves to propaganda and their own preferred worldview to permit anything to challenge any of it. If reality intrudes .. the Left have to reject it, if any disparity exists.

[Noir]

So do I, Noir.

Tyr's reply to you included this ...



Ah, if only the Left could live up to that. Lefties are too busy enslaving themselves to propaganda and their own preferred worldview to permit anything to challenge any of it. If reality intrudes .. the Left have to reject it, if any disparity exists.

And it's not propaganda to try and label a group of humans as 'scum' 'non-human' and 'inferiors' yes?

[tailfins]

I'm a little tempted to go back to my old 'terrorists' debate. Some might argue that terrorists are mentallly ill. But I've no difficulty whatever in classifying a terrorist as nonhuman. Whether 'mentally ill', or worse, is a subject for another debate (- possibly -).

Your position on terrorists is anti-Biblical:


2 Peter 3:9<small style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);">Viewing the King James Version. Click to switch to 1611 King James Version of 2 Peter 3:9 (http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_2-Peter-3-9/).</small>


The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

[tailfins]

John, there has always been disgusting people and disgusting behavior. What has changed is society's acceptance of these freaks... even encouragement.

Death will come to me in a few years and I won't have to see such things. But our children and grandchildren have it all to face.

We can be thankful that homosexual marriage is STILL not recognized in Northern Ireland. God bless the D.U.P. and long live the memory of the Reverend and Right Honourable Ian Paisley!

[Noir]

We can be thankful that homosexual marriage is STILL not recognized in Northern Ireland. God bless the D.U.P. and long live the memory of the Reverend and Right Honourable Ian Paisley!

Despite the will of the people.
The DUP will change their position on this, or they will fall off the political radar over the next generation.
The only reason the vote failed to pass at the most recent vote was because 3 Alliance party member chose to abstain, and the motion was defeated by 2 votes.

[Drummond]

And it's not propaganda to try and label a group of humans as 'scum' 'non-human' and 'inferiors' yes?

Your question can't be answered by an automatic 'yes' or 'no', Noir. It depends very much on context.

For example, the Nazis called Jews 'Untermensch', or 'under-humans', meaning non-human. In the context of Nazi labelling, theirs was propaganda fuelled by race hate.

A terrorist, by total contrast, doesn't even belong to one particular race. Even so, the sheer subhumanity of the terrorist acts perpetrated speaks to the TRUTH of assigning such a description to a terrorist.

Truth is not propaganda, Noir, truth is truth.

I understand the Left wing difficulty in not immediately perceiving differences between them.

[Drummond]

Actually, John, it's even worse. I'm assuming you haven't had a chance to see the 2015 Eurovision song contest ? It was held last night, and I watched it all on the BBC. The very same creature was not only praised by the host country yesterday (for those who don't know, the winning country gets to host the following year's contest) ... but played a major part in compering it, too. Apparently, he/she/it has known considerable success in Austria over the last 12 months.

The UK entry badly lost, by the way .. I think we only got 2 votes. Three countries did worse than us, I think two of those received zero votes. Austria was right there with them. [Sweden won it]

Quick apology to John. I just checked my recording (.. yes, there are people out there sad enough to record the Eurovision contests ...).

I incorrectly said the UK had two votes. It turns out we got five. Three countries behind us, France, Austria, Germany. Austria and Germany both got zeros.

I miss Terry Wogan. Graham Norton doesn't do quite as good a job, in my view ...

[Drummond]

What do you consider "ideological perversity" and "Leftism"? Giving blacks equal rights? Allowing women to vote? Abolishing "sodomy" laws that prevented a man and woman from having mutually consensual oral sex?

On each of the three examples you list .. I'd answer, in order, 'NO', 'NO', and 'NO' (although the oral sex one is something I've only just understood to qualify as 'sodomy' ... call it ignorance on my part).

'Ideological perversity'. Well now, my answer might be too simplistic to do the point justice. How about .. ideological perversity is in adopting, or otherwise twisting, an ideology in such a way that its acceptance and/or application could or would lead to human beings suffering needless suffering or other disadvantage to human life and existence through its preferential adoption. Taking it in theological terms, you could expand it to say that any twisting of Christian values qualifies.

On 'Leftism' ... that's a different debate to this one. I dealt with it long ago on this forum. Happy to discuss elsewhere if you so choose.

Mind you ... Leftism, it seems to me, itself qualifies as perversity, since it actually defies human nature. Applications of it never meet the promises made for it, due in very large part to that being true. The more extreme the application of it, so, the worse the outcome incurred.

Note how I sign my posts, with .. 'Socialism is a reputability deficiency disease'. I assert that to be true ....

[Drummond]

Your position on terrorists is anti-Biblical:

Your Bible extract refers to 'man', setting appropriate context.

A man is a human being. Your quote from it therefore applies specifically to human beings.

Terrorists don't qualify. A terrorist may be 'male', but I wouldn't dream of recognising one as a 'man'.

[Drummond]

Despite the will of the people.
The DUP will change their position on this, or they will fall off the political radar over the next generation.
The only reason the vote failed to pass at the most recent vote was because 3 Alliance party member chose to abstain, and the motion was defeated by 2 votes.

The march towards smashing standards and morals to smithereens (to be reshaped according to Leftie preference, then dictated to the masses as an inviolable thought-process to obey) is an 'irresistible' one, eh, Noir ?

[Max R.]

On each of the three examples you list .. I'd answer, in order, 'NO', 'NO', and 'NO' (although the oral sex one is something I've only just understood to qualify as 'sodomy' ... call it ignorance on my part).

'Ideological perversity'. Well now, my answer might be too simplistic to do the point justice. How about .. ideological perversity is in adopting, or otherwise twisting, an ideology in such a way that its acceptance and/or application could or would lead to human beings suffering needless suffering or other disadvantage to human life and existence through its preferential adoption. Taking it in theological terms, you could expand it to say that any twisting of Christian values qualifies.

On 'Leftism' ... that's a different debate to this one. I dealt with it long ago on this forum. Happy to discuss elsewhere if you so choose.

Mind you ... Leftism, it seems to me, itself qualifies as perversity, since it actually defies human nature. Applications of it never meet the promises made for it, due in very large part to that being true. The more extreme the application of it, so, the worse the outcome incurred.

Note how I sign my posts, with .. 'Socialism is a reputability deficiency disease'. I assert that to be true ....

While I completely agree Lefties have twisted the ideology of Liberalism into something it is not, Righties have done the same in the name of Conservatism. In the US, Barry Goldwater was known as "Mr. Conservative", but he, as well as Ronald Reagan, would be labeled RINOs in today's heated, highly emotional and theocratically-oriented environment.

[Drummond]

While I completely agree Lefties have twisted the ideology of Liberalism into something it is not, Righties have done the same in the name of Conservatism. In the US, Barry Goldwater was known as "Mr. Conservative", but he, as well as Ronald Reagan, would be labeled RINOs in today's heated, highly emotional and theocratically-oriented environment.

Interesting.

I'm in some small difficulty here, because I'm not an American, but British. Precisely what qualifies as 'Conservative' in American terms probably significantly varies from the British understanding of it.

Basing this on my understanding on the American 'true version' of Conservatism, it's my understanding that American Conservatism must have a theological component to it. Isn't it true to say that America was founded on Judeo-Christian values ?

Since - surely ! - American Conservatism would consider itself grounded in the finest of American values and traditions, it must follow that the theological side to this needs to be indivisibly associated with that theological grounding. The more you depart from that, so you skew the balance nearer to a liberal, or at least Left-leaning, version of it ?

Consider its polar opposite, Leftism. Leftism is rooted in the opposite, preferring a secular basis for society, this taken to such an extreme that all religions lose all authority, therefore they all become mere talking-points. Enter Leftism as a 'substitute god', trying to govern every standard citizens are 'required' to adhere to as articles of 'faith'.

This is part of the poison of Socialism ... it seeks to separate people from adherence to religious grounding. The increasing degradation of long-accepted standards of decency is the result.

I see strongly 'theocratically-charged' Conservatism as no bad thing, not least because it's a particularly potent antidote to Socialist poison. I'd much rather see the staunchest of Conservative candidates win out instead of a 'weaker' one because American society, in my view, badly needs to undergo the counterbalancing effect that would follow.

[That said .. this process needs to be done in stages, the first being to make sure that the Dems are thrown out of power. Abstaining from voting GOP, on principle, as a protest against RINO'S, would just translate into a stronger voting base for the Democrats]

British Conservatism is different, since in my society, any politician going all-out to identify as devoutly Christian would be committing political suicide (whereas in America, it can be an asset). Indeed, that was true of Tony Blair, the one-time LABOUR leader. It ultimately turned out that he was strongly Christian. But he never admitted to it while in Office .. he even had his spin-doctor, Alistair Campbell, once memorably tell the Press that 'Tony doesn't do God'.

An outgoing Conservative leader, Michael Howard, gave a 30 minute resignation speech on TV. God didn't even get a mention in it until 27 minutes had elapsed.

Any politician identifying with any real emphasis as Christian would face the suspicion that he might be some form of nutter. Conversely, in today's ultra-PC climate, I believe that any Muslim doing the same with his/her declaration of Islamic belief would probably be tolerated a lot better, because PC imperatives, courtesy of our Left wingers, would demand it.

Britain has had several decades of Socialism pervading it. You have not. Hence the great differences today. To which I'd say, be grateful that your theological base can still thrive in political life. The more power Socialists can obtain, the more they'll work to turn America into a clone of us.

At that point ... goodbye America, in terms of all that makes you what you have sought to be.

[Max R.]

Interesting.

I'm in some small difficulty here, because I'm not an American, but British. Precisely what qualifies as 'Conservative' in American terms probably significantly varies from the British understanding of it.

Basing this on my understanding on the American 'true version' of Conservatism, it's my understanding that American Conservatism must have a theological component to it. Isn't it true to say that America was founded on Judeo-Christian values?....

Yes. We were Brits and, for those who read history, wanted to stay Brits but King George was f**king asshole and treated our people like servents, not British citizens, so there was a violent disagreement about the matter.

In those days, "conservatives" were Tories, "liberals" were revolutionaries. We have a lot of Tories today too; those who want to stick with the status quo. What we lack are true liberals, those seeking freedom for all. Modern American Liberals are more interested in imposing their views upon others rather than expanding a citizen's right to choose. Modern American politics is dominated by Tories, authoritarians, not Freedom Fighters.

[Drummond]

Yes. We were Brits and, for those who read history, wanted to stay Brits but King George was f**king asshole and treated our people like servents, not British citizens, so there was a violent disagreement about the matter.

In those days, "conservatives" were Tories, "liberals" were revolutionaries. We have a lot of Tories today too; those who want to stick with the status quo. What we lack are true liberals, those seeking freedom for all. Modern American Liberals are more interested in imposing their views upon others rather than expanding a citizen's right to choose. Modern American politics is dominated by Tories, authoritarians, not Freedom Fighters.

In the UK, 'Tories' still 'exist' as such, though specifically as Conservatives who are being abused by the use of that term by Socialists. I believe a translation of 'Tory' is 'Irish Brigand', which certainly explains why their opposition use the term so much.

Your description explains the interchangeability in American terms between 'liberal' and 'leftist'. I use 'liberal' in the American sense, here, in deference to American usage -- though to the British, Liberals are 'middle of the road' politicians who at their most militant might be called 'soft Left'. I think that our common usage has more in common with its origins.

'Freedom Fighters' will have a different meaning, according to context, to the British. We have Trade Unions .. rooted in our Left wing. What their memberships always say they're fighting for are freedoms which are invariably indistinguishable from many of those expressed by Libertarians. In that way, Libertarians are identifiable here as Left wing.

Left wing politics, in truth, has precious little to do with individual freedoms. However, IT PROFESSES TO, and fights its corner accordingly (according to propaganda offensives). But the result doesn't lead to that ... it leads to social engineering and a LOSS of freedoms.

There's only one source of true freedom, and that's through Conservative politics and standards.

[Max R.]

As President Reagan once reiterated, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

People can claim all sorts of crap. They can claim to be expanding one's freedom and they can claim to protecting heartfelt ideals. What they can't do is hide their actions.

Anyone who spreads hate or seeks to deprive citizens of their rights isn't a "freedom fighter". They are not for liberty, freedom or peace. They are seeking to dominate and impress their ideals upon others either by law or by force.

The question is, which one are we? Which one are you and which one is me? I favor freedom. As another maxim goes, "I don't give a shit what you do, but don't do it in my yard or make me pay for it".

[John V]

As we oldtimers die out, the country will become more and more leftist. They have nearly all the platforms to push their agenda. I raised my daughter as a good conservative, but she is a more liberal conservative than what I am, just as I am a more liberal conservative than my mother was.

Here is wisdom: the left will win because they never give up.

That’s spot on Perianne – don’t worry, it will all be OK tomorrow and the country will see sense again. No, it won’t, this is the new generation and just as ours did in the 60s it’s trying to change the world, a prerogative of youth. I always include the eleven point cultural Marxist agenda because it allows people to see first-hand what’s happening. One by one they don’t matter so much, but put together it’s what destroys societies.
https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/

(https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/)

This is quite good as well.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america)

[John V]

So your thought process was 'I think this person is mentally ill, therefore a will purposefully not refer to them as a human'? Do you do that will all mentally ill people?

Also you can apologise to Perrianne after she gave you the benefit of the doubt of referring to a person as "this".

I apologise for the term ‘this’ – figure of speech, but you do keep going on about it a lot more than you do about the instance itself. You do except that this behaviour is mental illness then and that's a start.


I don’t know if you’re familiar with the fable of the Emperor with no clothes? It goes something like this.
Once upon a time there was a King who asked a tailor to make him a new set of clothes. The tailor presented him with invisible clothes that were so beautiful that only a fool couldn’t see that. The king, not wishing to appear a fool pretended to put them on.
He stood before the crowds who gasped with horror at the King with no clothes, but were reminded that only fools couldn’t see they were beautiful clothes. The crowds cheered and not wishing to be seen as fools, agreed. It took a small boy to shout, ‘The King has no clothes’ to make people realise they’d been duped.
That’s where society is at now.
Future historians will no doubt look back on this period and wonder what on earth made it choose the path it’s on.

[Max R.]

I apologise for the term ‘this’ – figure of speech, but you do keep going on about it a lot more than you do about the instance itself. You do except that this behaviour is mental illness then and that's a start.


I don’t know if you’re familiar with the fable of the Emperor with no clothes? It goes something like this.
Once upon a time there was a King who asked a tailor to make him a new set of clothes. The tailor presented him with invisible clothes that were so beautiful that only a fool couldn’t see that. The king, not wishing to appear a fool pretended to put them on.
He stood before the crowds who gasped with horror at the King with no clothes, but were reminded that only fools couldn’t see they were beautiful clothes. The crowds cheered and not wishing to be seen as fools, agreed. It took a small boy to shout, ‘The King has no clothes’ to make people realise they’d been duped.
That’s where society is at now.
Future historians will no doubt look back on this period and wonder what on earth made it choose the path it’s on.


Isn't that the common thing? Why didn't people treat other races as equal human beings? Why didn't the Brits treat the Colonialists as rightful British citizens? Why did the US let over 58,000 Americans die in Vietnam?

[Perianne]

That’s spot on Perianne – don’t worry, it will all be OK tomorrow and the country will see sense again. No, it won’t, this is the new generation and just as ours did in the 60s it’s trying to change the world, a prerogative of youth. I always include the eleven point cultural Marxist agenda because it allows people to see first-hand what’s happening. One by one they don’t matter so much, but put together it’s what destroys societies.
https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/

(https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/)

This is quite good as well.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america)


Wonderful links. Thanks.

[John V]

Wonderful links. Thanks.

Hey Perianne, go and take a look at my profile album they're already talking about me as the new Justin Beiber, Bleiber or whatever his name is - as you say in America, 'total awesome dude', or something like that. (My hair isn't grey, it's a distinguished silver).

:rofl1:

[tailfins]

Interesting.

I'm in some small difficulty here, because I'm not an American, but British. Precisely what qualifies as 'Conservative' in American terms probably significantly varies from the British understanding of it.



Would it make it clearer to you, if I said my political and religious views are very similar to the Reverend James Kyle Paisley (1891 - 1973)? James Kyle Paisley was Ian Paisley's father. A militant Baptist would be a proper description.

[Noir]

Would it make it clearer to you, if I said my political and religious views are very similar to the Reverend James Kyle Paisley (1891 - 1973)? James Kyle Paisley was Ian Paisley's father. A militant Baptist would be a proper description.

Ah, good old Ian 'dancing is sinful' Paisley. He definitely wasn't mad.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That’s spot on Perianne – don’t worry, it will all be OK tomorrow and the country will see sense again. No, it won’t, this is the new generation and just as ours did in the 60s it’s trying to change the world, a prerogative of youth. I always include the eleven point cultural Marxist agenda because it allows people to see first-hand what’s happening. One by one they don’t matter so much, but put together it’s what destroys societies.
https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/

(https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/)

This is quite good as well.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america)


First link is excellent. Amazing that I've picked up a lot of that by my reading and studying over the course of these last 30 years but there it is all in a nutshell. Thanks.
Will check the other link you presented tonight as my time is severely limited this morn.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Government has no right to be in the marriage business in any way to start with . I'd go as far as saying if its made a state issue to be decided state by state I'd not oppose it even though I personally find it reprehensible..
However, that legality issue doesn't have to be termed marriage--as marriage is between a man and a woman.
Feds can give same coverage without corrupting the sanctity and definition of marriage.

You're right, the government has no right but they can't give the same coverage without removing "marriage" from all Federal legislation.


They voted for special rights for a tiny segment of their population.

Not really, this has nothing to do with "rights."

[fj1200]

For years I’ve reiterated that the west is sliding towards progressivism and that what is happening now is the dumbing down period leading to that. Equality, human rights, cultural Marxism . . . but what’s more important is that having got all that, has it produced a better society? Legalised drugs, mass welfare and sodomy isn’t what made America great and if you remove the traditions and values that did, what you’re left with is what you have now. I don’t think it’s the kind of freedom your Founding Fathers had in mind.

:confused: Equality and human rights are progressive and bad? But you're right, those things didn't make America great. Limited government and the liberty of its people made America great. Two things which are less and less viable here today.

[revelarts]

Another sad vote for Ireland

[fj1200]

John, there has always been disgusting people and disgusting behavior. What has changed is society's acceptance of these freaks... even encouragement.

Death will come to me in a few years and I won't have to see such things. But our children and grandchildren have it all to face.

As in our kids won't get all worked up over things which don't require getting worked up over.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You're right, the government has no right but they can't give the same coverage without removing "marriage" from all Federal legislation.

Did Hell just freeze over ? --:poke:
Are you sick today?
"You're right", thats a first time you have ever said that to me.. :laugh:
I am now concerned about your health, feeling well are you? --Tyr

[indago]

As in our kids won't get all worked up over things which don't require getting worked up over.

"I do not think about things that I do not think about." — William Jennings Bryan

[fj1200]

Did Hell just freeze over ? --:poke:
Are you sick today?
"You're right", thats a first time you have ever said that to me.. :laugh:
I am now concerned about your health, feeling well are you? --Tyr

That's because you stated something that I've said over and over here. Good on ya'. :)

[Max R.]

They voted for special rights for a tiny segment of their population. I love it! Its a great lesson for the USA. In most cases states vote the other way and the vote is over turned. If i was a citizen there i'd start campaigning for other special allowances like allowing brothers and sisters, and unlimited numbers of people to marry.
I disagree with the concept of "special rights". All Americans should be equal. Giving special rights to anyone makes the rest of us Second Class citizens.

[Abbey Marie]

Actually, John, it's even worse. I'm assuming you haven't had a chance to see the 2015 Eurovision song contest ? It was held last night, and I watched it all on the BBC. The very same creature was not only praised by the host country yesterday (for those who don't know, the winning country gets to host the following year's contest) ... but played a major part in compering it, too. Apparently, he/she/it has known considerable success in Austria over the last 12 months.

The UK entry badly lost, by the way .. I think we only got 2 votes. Three countries did worse than us, I think two of those received zero votes. Austria was right there with them. [Sweden won it]

But, do *its songs sell? That's a better gauge of acceptance, IMO.


* "hateful" pronoun intended for Noir to see.
(OTOH, why is it hateful? Isn't that pejorative view in the eyes of the beholder?)

[Noir]

But, do *its songs sell? That's a better gauge of acceptance, IMO.


* "hateful" pronoun intended for Noir to see.
(OTOH, why is it hateful? Isn't that pejorative view in the eyes of the beholder?)


'Why is describing someone as an "it" hateful' is that the level of discussion we're currently at?
Why do you feel the need to describe someone as "it"?

[Perianne]

'Why is describing someone as an "it" hateful' is that the level of discussion we're currently at?
Why do you feel the need to describe someone as "it"?

It appears to be neither male nor female.

[Noir]

It appears to be neither male nor female.

Male and female relate to biological sex, not gender, we refer to people using gender pronouns he/she/they.

When you describe someone as an "it" you are describing them as an object, not a person.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Male and female relate to biological sex, not gender, we refer to people using gender pronouns he/she/they.

When you describe someone as an "it" you are describing them as an object, not a person.

IT is not a person to me, get back to me when the IT can even identify "its" (:laugh:) self...
Excuse me if my adherence to truth and reality upsets ya.
Some of us reject this "New Age" any damn thing goes when it comes to sexual perversions.
As we know the correctness of seeing some things in black or white. --Tyr

[Noir]

IT is not a person to me, get back to me when the IT can even identify "its" (:laugh:) self... Excuse me if my adherence to truth and reality upsets ya. Some of us reject this "New Age" any damn thing goes when it comes to sexual perversions. As we know the correctness of seeing some things in black or white. --Tyr

Viewing people as sub-human/objects seems to be a lesson we just don't want to learn from history.

[Abbey Marie]

'Why is describing someone as an "it" hateful' is that the level of discussion we're currently at?
Why do you feel the need to describe someone as "it"?

It's quite simple: If it is confused about its gender, then so am I. {shrug}

Btw, people here regularly refer to their cars, the Earth, etc., as "she".

[Jeff]

It's quite simple: If it is confused about its gender, then so am I. {shrug}

Btw, people here regularly refer to their cars, the Earth, etc., as "she".

When folks don't know who they are then no one really does.

[Perianne]

When folks don't know who they are then no one really does.

I think it is she-it. :)

[Abbey Marie]

When folks don't know who they are then no one really does.

“Feelings are something you have; not something you are.”
― Shannon L. Alder (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1391130.Shannon_L_Alder)

[Jeff]

I think it is she-it. :)

He/She, it, Huh, OK. :laugh:

[Noir]

It's quite simple: If it is confused about its gender, then so am I. {shrug}

Conchita refers to herself using feminine pronoun, consider yourself no longer confused.


Btw, people here regularly refer to their cars, the Earth, etc., as "she".

You justify objectifying people, because people personify objects?

[Perianne]

He/She, it, Huh, OK. :laugh:

Speaking of he/she-it, I have seen my dog produce stuff on her walk that was more attractive AND probably smelled better than he/she-it.

http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/79/590x/conchita-476337.jpg

[Abbey Marie]

Conchita refers to herself using feminine pronoun, consider yourself no longer confused.



You justify objectifying people, because people personify objects?

I've already told you why I refer to it as it. No need to repeat myself, is there?

I can call myself the Queen of England, but that doesn't make it so.
Does it still have a penis?

[Perianne]

Conchita refers to herself using feminine pronoun, consider yourself no longer confused.


Okay everyone. I am now a man. So, that is that. I turned into a man by saying so. Tomorrow I will be a firetruck.

[Jeff]

Okay everyone. I am now a man. So, that is that. I turned into a man by saying so. Tomorrow I will be a firetruck.

Exactly the point, today let gays marry, tomorrow lets pedophiles marry, heck they where all born that way. :rolleyes:

[Balu]

Government has no right to be in the marriage business in any way to start with . I'd go as far as saying if its made a state issue to be decided state by state I'd not oppose it even though I personally find it reprehensible..
However, that legality issue doesn't have to be termed marriage--as marriage is between a man and a woman.
Feds can give same coverage without corrupting the sanctity and definition of marriage.
These "marriage couples" got the right to adopt and raise initially homosexually oriented children. In other words а new generation of a country. And this is very serious problem. IMHO.

[John V]

Okay everyone. I am now a man. So, that is that. I turned into a man by saying so. Tomorrow I will be a firetruck.

You can be a firetruck, but you can’t be the Queen of England, Abbey is already the Queen. I want to be Nancy Pelosi, but a lesbian because I’m not into men. I’m going to put you all on welfare and get rich, which is better than being a firetruck, but not as good as a Queen of England. :laugh:

[fj1200]

I've already told you why I refer to it as it. No need to repeat myself, is there?

But why do you use dehumanizing language?

[Noir]

Okay everyone. I am now a man. So, that is that. I turned into a man by saying so. Tomorrow I will be a firetruck.

Again you are mixing your terms, man relates to biological sex, not gender. The issue of pronouns is one of gender, not sex.

If you're going to try ridicule, you may at least familiarise yourself with the actual meanings and definitions involved, rather than so openly display ignorance, which only serves to ridicule yourself.


Speaking of he/she-it, I have seen my dog produce stuff on her walk that was more attractive AND probably smelled better than he/she-it.

Nastiness for nastiness sake, and I see it's a popular opinion given the thanks on the post. Writing/reading a statement like this, agreeing and thinking 'Yes, I must be on the right side of this discussion' is a sad thought.

[Abbey Marie]

You can be a firetruck, but you can’t be the Queen of England, Abbey is already the Queen. I want to be Nancy Pelosi, but a lesbian because I’m not into men. I’m going to put you all on welfare and get rich, which is better than being a firetruck, but not as good as a Queen of England. :laugh:




:laugh2: "We are pleased"

http://www.lbc.co.uk/mm/photos/2012/05/1728/460x/25577.jpg

[Abbey Marie]

But why do you use dehumanizing language?

Because it is not able to present itself as a he or a she.

And

Because I am not crippled by PC restrictions.

However, I maintain that it is dehumanizing itself, and we are just reflecting that back.

[Caliban]

The entire western world is rapidly cutting loose from its moral and religious traditions. This is not unexpected. We're in uncharted territory now. In the short run this will be very bad. In the long run, who knows? There could be a restoration and revival or some kind of new paradigm could take shape to provide renewed stability. Hard to say at this point.

[Abbey Marie]

The entire western world is rapidly cutting loose from its moral and religious traditions. This is not unexpected. We're in uncharted territory now. In the short run this will be very bad. In the long run, who knows? There could be a restoration and revival or some kind of new paradigm could take shape to provide renewed stability. Hard to say at this point.

That's encouraging, thanks!
:beer:

[fj1200]

Because it is not able to present itself as a he or a she.

And

Because I am not crippled by PC restrictions.

However, I maintain that it is dehumanizing itself, and we are just reflecting that back.

PC maintains the humanization of an individual? You're making the argument for PC more palatable.

[Caliban]

That's encouraging, thanks!
:beer:

I wish i could be more encouraging, but there's little cause for optimism.

[fj1200]

I wish i could be more encouraging, but there's little cause for optimism.

There is little cause for optimism if some keep mandating that only their version of Christ is valid but there is more cause for optimism if the new generation can see beyond that.

[Caliban]

There is little cause for optimism if some keep mandating that only their version of Christ is valid but there is more cause for optimism if the new generation can see beyond that.

I agree. I have to say, i'm no longer a Christian, at least not in any sense most standard Christians would recognize and accept. That's why i'm short on answers and solutions here.

[fj1200]

I agree. I have to say, i'm no longer a Christian, at least not in any sense most standard Christians would recognize and accept. That's why i'm short on answers and solutions here.

As am I but I can only state my opinion that closing off is the first step to dying... organizationally speaking.

[Max R.]

The entire western world is rapidly cutting loose from its moral and religious traditions. This is not unexpected. We're in uncharted territory now. In the short run this will be very bad. In the long run, who knows? There could be a restoration and revival or some kind of new paradigm could take shape to provide renewed stability. Hard to say at this point.

Agreed the western world is moving away from dogmatic, traditional religions, but most people remain believers in God and very spiritual in nature.

http://www.pewresearch.org/topics/religious-affiliation/
http://www.pewforum.org/2008/02/01/u-s-religious-landscape-survey-religious-affiliation/
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2008/02/Chapter-1-1.png

[indago]

From The Associated Press 27 May 2015:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Vatican's secretary of state has called the Irish vote to legalize gay marriage a "defeat for humanity."
--------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_REL_VATICAN_IRELAND?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-27-04-36-46)



http://i57.tinypic.com/4qrc6b.jpg