Defending the Truth

hevusa · 08-19-2006, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

If the cross clearly favors one religion, then the city had no business annexxing the land in the first place. Again, the cross existed before governmental control. Obviously then, the cross should be allowed to remain and governmental control should be removed. This was the goal of the city that was then disallowed by the court, that is what is showing hostility to a religion.

dmk

No hostiliy. A cross does not represent all citizens of this country and our government cannot favor one religion over another. All that has to be done is spend money fairly by displaying a neutral object purchased with taxpayer money.

Jaxian · 08-20-2006, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

Okay. Let's tell everyone who won an election because they got the most votes that they are not entitled to hold their office because a minority of people who did not vote for them say it's unfair because they won the election. That is your reasoning.

No, that isn't quite right. The specific act of election is not unfair to anyone: election alone has no real specific effect. Let's say James is elected president. This is not inherently unfair to anyone.

However, James's actions might be unfair. James might ban the Islam religion. That would be unfair to Muslims. James might make all black people slaves. That would be unfair to black people. James might put up a cross on public property. That would be unfair to those whose beliefs do not include the cross.

You see, James getting elected has no effect in itself. James's actions, however, do affect people, and they therefore might be unfair.

Electing politicians has nothing to do with being "fair". It is neither fair nor unfair. Elections exist because we hope they will result in a fair politician being chosen, not because elections are inherently "fair". It's better than other methods, such as hereditary rule.

When we are voting on an issue instead of a politician, whether that vote is fair or unfair depends on the outcome of the vote. What the majority votes for is not always fair or good: the majority will usually treat the minority unfairly. This is why we have a representative democracy instead of a pure democracy. Pure democracies are usually unfair to minorities.

alias · 08-20-2006, 06:39 PM

If the people of Boise vote to keep the Ten Commandments display, that sure seems fair to me. If someone doesn't like it, then move. It's a big country and that's what I always did when I didn't like where I was living. There are lots of cities I would not choose to live in for lots of various reasons. Liberals claim they are for freedom and rights, but when it comes right down to it they're not. Liberals love to tell people what to say and think and what to do. That is not freedom, that is totalitarianism and that is what liberals really are. Liberals want to be the boss and decide what is good and what is not good for the masses. The people of Boise will decide the issue and if someone doesn't like it then they can just live somewhere else. I would not move into a Catholic neighborhood in a big city and demand they take down their religious symbols. They'd tell me to get the hell out and don't come back. What gives you or anyone else the right to demand free people to bend to your will. Nothing gives you that right.

I had a liberal moderator on this site tell me that I could not use the word "homo" but saw nothing wrong with the word "hetero". Then this liberal moderator told me to not use "NewsMax" any more. So first he attacks my freedom of speech and then he attacks the freedom of the press. He saw nothing wrong in that. That is how liberals work. Liberals want to tell people what to say, what to read, and what to believe. They can kiss my red, white, and blue ass.

Katczinsky · 08-23-2006, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

If the people of Boise vote to keep the Ten Commandments display, that sure seems fair to me. If someone doesn't like it, then move. It's a big country and that's what I always did when I didn't like where I was living. There are lots of cities I would not choose to live in for lots of various reasons. Liberals claim they are for freedom and rights, but when it comes right down to it they're not. Liberals love to tell people what to say and think and what to do. That is not freedom, that is totalitarianism and that is what liberals really are. Liberals want to be the boss and decide what is good and what is not good for the masses. The people of Boise will decide the issue and if someone doesn't like it then they can just live somewhere else. I would not move into a Catholic neighborhood in a big city and demand they take down their religious symbols. They'd tell me to get the hell out and don't come back. What gives you or anyone else the right to demand free people to bend to your will. Nothing gives you that right.

Liberals want freedom and rights so long as such freedom doesn't infringe onto others' rights. The act of putting up a ten commandments statue in a court house is a freedom, but its certainly not a right, and it infringes onto others' rights. The Constitution separates religion and state so the people can keep their own religion without having to pay homage to another. And people have a right to be able to live where they want in this country free of tyranny. They have a right to stay where they are and not feel oppressed by the majority. This is why we have a constitutional republic with democratic tradition; not an unregulated democracy. Popular doesn't always mean right, and you should know that.

Jaxian · 08-23-2006, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

If the people of Boise vote to keep the Ten Commandments display, that sure seems fair to me. If someone doesn't like it, then move. It's a big country and that's what I always did when I didn't like where I was living. There are lots of cities I would not choose to live in for lots of various reasons.

When you, "If you don't like it, then move out", it seems like you aren't concerned with freedom and equality at all. You're only concerned with the majority getting its way, and if someone's rights are trampled on, then they'll have to hope someone else will treat them better.

Please, try to care about other people. Don't say, "If you don't like it, then leave." Say, "If you don't like it, I will try my best to change things to help you." Say, "I want to respect your beliefs as much as my own, and I'll do the best I can." Say, "I will do everything I can to treat you equally, and preserve your freedom." Please don't say, "I don't care about you, and if you don't like it, then move out."

Can you truly call yourself a good person if you don't care about people different than yourself?

Quote:

Liberals claim they are for freedom and rights, but when it comes right down to it they're not. Liberals love to tell people what to say and think and what to do. That is not freedom, that is totalitarianism and that is what liberals really are. Liberals want to be the boss and decide what is good and what is not good for the masses.

Not true. Which liberal wants to deny your freedom of speech? Which liberal wants to deny your freedom to believe as you see fit? I will tell you right now that I think you should be able to say whatever you want, whenever you want, and you should be able to believe whatever you want, whenever you want.

Furthermore, I think you should be able to marry the person you love, regardless of what others say. I think you should be allowed to burn the flag if you so desire. And I think the government should treat all religions equally.

You want to deny freedom of marriage. You want to deny freedom to use property as you see fit. You want to deny equality of religion.

So I have named times you have spoken against freedom and equality, while I have supported it. Can you name a any times I have spoken against freedom or equality, while you have supported it?

Quote:

The people of Boise will decide the issue

No they will not. The majority will decide it, at the expense of the minority.

Quote:

I would not move into a Catholic neighborhood in a big city and demand they take down their religious symbols. They'd tell me to get the hell out and don't come back.

And with good reason. You have no right to tell other people how to use their own property, and neither do I.

Quote:

What gives you or anyone else the right to demand free people to bend to your will. Nothing gives you that right.

I absolutely agree. Only the government must treat all religions equally. A person should be allowed to put up all the religious symbols he wants.

And again, reread your quote and apply it to gay marriage and flag burning. What gives you the right to demand free people marry who you tell them to marry, or use their property in the fashion you demand? Nothing gives you the right to force others to bend to your will.

Quote:

I had a liberal moderator on this site tell me that I could not use the word "homo" but saw nothing wrong with the word "hetero". Then this liberal moderator told me to not use "NewsMax" any more. So first he attacks my freedom of speech and then he attacks the freedom of the press.

I do not totally agree with this moderator. But remember that this moderator was not suggesting that we vote against your free speech in the next election. This moderator wasn't saying that we vote against NewsMax in the next election. This moderator was instead saying that while you're on his forums, you'll have to do what he says.

He wasn't using the government against you; he was using only his moderator powers. And maybe that's where conservatives sometimes differ from liberals. Often if a liberal doesn't like your beliefs, he'll try to convince you you're wrong. Often if a conservative doesn't like your beliefs, he'll use the law to ban your freedoms, and tell you that if you want freedoms, you can move somewhere else. Too often conservatives don't care about helping you or changing your mind, instead caring only about punishing you for trying to be free.

alias · 08-23-2006, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katczinsky

Liberals want freedom and rights so long as such freedom doesn't infringe onto others' rights. The act of putting up a ten commandments statue in a court house is a freedom, but its certainly not a right, and it infringes onto others' rights. The Constitution separates religion and state so the people can keep their own religion without having to pay homage to another. And people have a right to be able to live where they want in this country free of tyranny. They have a right to stay where they are and not feel oppressed by the majority. This is why we have a constitutional republic with democratic tradition; not an unregulated democracy. Popular doesn't always mean right, and you should know that.

There is a sculpture of Moses holding the 10 commandments on the US Supreme Court building. When are you going to remove it?

alias · 08-23-2006, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaxian

When you, "If you don't like it, then move out", it seems like you aren't concerned with freedom and equality at all. You're only concerned with the majority getting its way, and if someone's rights are trampled on, then they'll have to hope someone else will treat them better.

Please, try to care about other people. Don't say, "If you don't like it, then leave." Say, "If you don't like it, I will try my best to change things to help you." Say, "I want to respect your beliefs as much as my own, and I'll do the best I can." Say, "I will do everything I can to treat you equally, and preserve your freedom." Please don't say, "I don't care about you, and if you don't like it, then move out."

Can you truly call yourself a good person if you don't care about people different than yourself?

Not true. Which liberal wants to deny your freedom of speech? Which liberal wants to deny your freedom to believe as you see fit? I will tell you right now that I think you should be able to say whatever you want, whenever you want, and you should be able to believe whatever you want, whenever you want.

Furthermore, I think you should be able to marry the person you love, regardless of what others say. I think you should be allowed to burn the flag if you so desire. And I think the government should treat all religions equally.

You want to deny freedom of marriage. You want to deny freedom to use property as you see fit. You want to deny equality of religion.

So I have named times you have spoken against freedom and equality, while I have supported it. Can you name a any times I have spoken against freedom or equality, while you have supported it?

No they will not. The majority will decide it, at the expense of the minority.

And with good reason. You have no right to tell other people how to use their own property, and neither do I.

I absolutely agree. Only the government must treat all religions equally. A person should be allowed to put up all the religious symbols he wants.

And again, reread your quote and apply it to gay marriage and flag burning. What gives you the right to demand free people marry who you tell them to marry, or use their property in the fashion you demand? Nothing gives you the right to force others to bend to your will.

I do not totally agree with this moderator. But remember that this moderator was not suggesting that we vote against your free speech in the next election. This moderator wasn't saying that we vote against NewsMax in the next election. This moderator was instead saying that while you're on his forums, you'll have to do what he says.

He wasn't using the government against you; he was using only his moderator powers. And maybe that's where conservatives sometimes differ from liberals. Often if a liberal doesn't like your beliefs, he'll try to convince you you're wrong. Often if a conservative doesn't like your beliefs, he'll use the law to ban your freedoms, and tell you that if you want freedoms, you can move somewhere else. Too often conservatives don't care about helping you or changing your mind, instead caring only about punishing you for trying to be free.

What about my rights? Conservatives aren't trying to change anyone's mind. It's the liberals who want to ban any signs of religious freedom that are granted in the constitution. "Often" and "too often" are very vague descriptions. Give us specific examples.

foundit66 · 08-23-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

I had a liberal moderator on this site tell me that I could not use the word "homo" but saw nothing wrong with the word "hetero".

"Homo" is a slur.
"Hetero" is not.

Try as you might, the dictionary clearly states it is. Your refusal to acknowledge that, as you yourself use it in ways demonstrating you are using it as a slur, do nothing to prove your point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

There is a sculpture of Moses holding the 10 commandments on the US Supreme Court building. When are you going to remove it?

That display is a secular display regarding law, showing multiple examples of law, including other religions beyond just "Moses".

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

Conservatives aren't trying to change anyone's mind.

There are times that you say things that just boggle the mind. Like you're not even in the same dimension as everybody else.
Conservatives aren't trying to change anyone's mind?

That's a hoot!

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

What about my rights?

Show me any of your rights that are violated...
And before you even try to go there, you DO NOT have a right to mandate religious displays on governmental property anymore than you have a right to mandate religious displays on your neighbor's property.

YOUR property? Go for it. It's YOURS.

alias · 08-23-2006, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

"Homo" is a slur.
"Hetero" is not.

Try as you might, the dictionary clearly states it is. Your refusal to acknowledge that, as you yourself use it in ways demonstrating you are using it as a slur, do nothing to prove your point.

That display is a secular display regarding law, showing multiple examples of law, including other religions beyond just "Moses".

There are times that you say things that just boggle the mind. Like you're not even in the same dimension as everybody else.
Conservatives aren't trying to change anyone's mind?

That's a hoot!

Show me any of your rights that are violated...
And before you even try to go there, you DO NOT have a right to mandate religious displays on governmental property anymore than you have a right to mandate religious displays on your neighbor's property.

YOUR property? Go for it. It's YOURS.

You're right about one thing foundit. I'm not in your dimension and I am very very thankful for that.

jaaaman · 08-23-2006, 12:43 PM

Most conservatives already know it's a lost cause to convert you liberal minded folk to a higher standard... you have been brainwashed into thinking the way you do for years and years...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode