Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Ron Paul: The 5 Million Dollar Man
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19356
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

tommi teardrop wrote:
You cant throw away states because doing so would totally shit on the entire basis for forming our country.


I don't really understand why that matters as a reason for not throwing away states. States were a good idea when we had the pony express. But now I can sit in Austin, Texas and peep the rights they are getting in Massachusetts, and there's no reason why one state should be more equal than another. It's doofy.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:42 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
shambhala



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 6303
Location: the barber of hard truths
 Reply with quote  

tommi teardrop wrote:
While it sounds bullshit and corny, the United States is supposed to be a place where people with different sets of values can live in separate, yet united communities and have their own laws, which are a reflection of those values.


Right. And when my tax dollars stop getting sucked out of my state to pay for massive federal enterprises like wars I didn't vote for and paramilitary training for police departments in the midwest, maybe then I'll believe that particular fairy tale.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:44 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19356
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

Embryo wrote:
MessiahCarey wrote:
Embryo wrote:
The founders were, by and large, deists and atheists. Many of them felt that if there had been a God, he had set things in motion and long been gone, not interested in human affairs or wellbeing. It's important to remember that both rights (invented by liberal thought) and God are social constructions.


While I LOVE the notion that this is true, reading biographies on some of the founders showed me that the "deists", while doubtful, were still involved in the churches of their communities. That would definitely cause the confusion as to whether or not the founders were or weren't operating on "christian principles".



Absolutely -- Church was the backbone of American community, and since its decline nothing has yet replaced it that I can see, in terms of bringing people together and articulating shared ideals. But that's just the thing -- whether or not people knew it, church wasn't really about GOD at all, it was about sharing worship, sharing ideals, sharing reverence of things that even the most devout athiests consider to be important.

And many of the churches they went to were Unitarian. And I think today they would probably still be Unitarians, or possibly members of the United Church of Christ, which is the most liberal protestant faith that still considers itself Christian (i.e., other than Unitarianism, which isn't really Christian anymore). Barack Obama, incidentally, is a member of the United Church of Christ.


Even today most churches in middle america is where the town business is handled. I don't think Jesus would approve honestly. It's very money lenderery these days at church.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:46 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
3flip



Joined: 30 Dec 2003
Posts: 2201
Location: Minneapolis
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
tommi teardrop wrote:
You cant throw away states because doing so would totally shit on the entire basis for forming our country.


I don't really understand why that matters as a reason for not throwing away states. States were a good idea when we had the pony express. But now I can sit in Austin, Texas and peep the rights they are getting in Massachusetts, and there's no reason why one state should be more equal than another. It's doofy.


you trust the national government way too much. historically, the more power a government has, the bigger it gets, the more corrupt it becomes and the less it serves the people.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:46 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
cakes



Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 2586
 Reply with quote  

i was raised a unitarian. i spent the early years quietly confused.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:48 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Embryo



Joined: 31 Dec 2002
Posts: 6359
Location: http://www.myspace.com/pogopark
 Reply with quote  

cakes wrote:
i was raised a unitarian. i spent the early years quietly confused.


me, too. not quite as quietly, though.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:52 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2215
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

shambhala wrote:
tommi teardrop wrote:
While it sounds bullshit and corny, the United States is supposed to be a place where people with different sets of values can live in separate, yet united communities and have their own laws, which are a reflection of those values.


Right. And when my tax dollars stop getting sucked out of my state to pay for massive federal enterprises like wars I didn't vote for and paramilitary training for police departments in the midwest, maybe then I'll believe that particular fairy tale.
You seriously sound like Ron Paul on this one. Maybe you should check out some of his ideas.

Futuristxen, why do you think it is doofy that people should be able to have different views on what is right or wrong, and accordingly, have different laws that reflect those views as long as the laws do not violate the most basic of civil rights? That seems pretty logical to me.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:57 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Dan Shay



Joined: 30 Aug 2003
Posts: 11245
Location: MN
 Reply with quote  

tommi teardrop wrote:

Is "wrap your head around an idea" not the proper idiom? I just googled it, and it looks like something that people say. How is it a linguistic foible?

thecontractor's vocabulary is intense. I sincerely hope that he/she is real.


And the issue with "wrap your head around that idea" is hilarious when you start out with "I cannot believe you can't".

You're in effect saying "I cant wrap my head around the idea that you can't wrap your head around the idea".
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:58 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
shambhala



Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 6303
Location: the barber of hard truths
 Reply with quote  

tommi teardrop wrote:
shambhala wrote:
tommi teardrop wrote:
While it sounds bullshit and corny, the United States is supposed to be a place where people with different sets of values can live in separate, yet united communities and have their own laws, which are a reflection of those values.


Right. And when my tax dollars stop getting sucked out of my state to pay for massive federal enterprises like wars I didn't vote for and paramilitary training for police departments in the midwest, maybe then I'll believe that particular fairy tale.
You seriously sound like Ron Paul on this one. Maybe you should check out some of his ideas.


I like a lot of what he's about. But I'm in the Shay camp. I keep expecting him to put on a red beret and hoist a musket into the air.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
tommi teardrop



Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Posts: 2215
Location: Las Vegas
 Reply with quote  

I figured "wrap your head around," = understand.

And "understand" and "believe" are not the same thing to me. But I see your point. I retract that sentence due to logical redundancy.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:13 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19356
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

3flip wrote:
futuristxen wrote:
tommi teardrop wrote:
You cant throw away states because doing so would totally shit on the entire basis for forming our country.


I don't really understand why that matters as a reason for not throwing away states. States were a good idea when we had the pony express. But now I can sit in Austin, Texas and peep the rights they are getting in Massachusetts, and there's no reason why one state should be more equal than another. It's doofy.


you trust the national government way too much. historically, the more power a government has, the bigger it gets, the more corrupt it becomes and the less it serves the people.


I wouldn't be getting rid of local government. Just state government. States are too big to have the power they do have, which they wield clumsily and ineffectively. Maybe this country was founded on little rinky dink states like Massachusetts that you can drive across in a matter of hours. But everything west of the mississippi is HUGE. And the state government in no way reflects it's people. At least not enough to justify it's existence. Just take Missouri. St. Louis and KC are like super liberal. But the rest of missouri is extremely conservative. At least if it were just local governments, you could drive 30 minutes away and live in a place that didn't discriminate against you. But doing that with states is impractical for the bulk of America.

And it's not that I trust the government, so much as I don't trust people. There's too much hatred, fear, and vitriol out there in people. A government does a good job of deadening it, or on it's best days flying in the face of it.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:19 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
MessiahCarey wrote:
C) There may come a day when the "liberal population centers" will be "conservative population centers". And if I have to choose between two bullshit ideologies, liberalism wins each time.


I'm for whichever one benefits me the most in my lifetime.


ME TOO! That's why I'm saying it's best to not have a one-size-fits-all policy for a country of 300 million people.

Because in your America, if the conservatives are in power...you will have NONE. In the America we have now, you can at least consider the notion of moving out of state (which is FAR more reasonable than leaving the country).
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:51 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Oh Daesu



Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 1848
Location: Vancouver
 Reply with quote  

ecapataz wrote:
thecontractor wrote:
ecapataz wrote:
Law and truth do not have much basis in religion even today.


I dare you, I double dare you, I double dog dare you, I triple double dog dare you, I unequivocally and incontrovertibly defy you to defend this statement in a logical or rational consuetude.



What you are proposing is that truth isn't universal but somehow linked to a particular religion. I don't agree with this at all.

The basic tenants of being a decent human being existed before religion. Religion has been largely used to dismantle these tenants by legitimizing racist and classist doctrine for its believers to enforce. The founding fathers and early political leaders of the US were slave owners after all.


Quit feeding the troll.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:54 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
MessiahCarey



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 10924
 Reply with quote  

futuristxen wrote:
I wouldn't be getting rid of local government. Just state government.


Ummm...who are your local reps? I'll bet you know even less about them than you do about your state reps, huh? That's not to put you on blast...you're just prolly like most people in that you care about federal stuff because it's got all the glamour and glitz. I get that...it's why I get far more interested in national politics, as well.


Quote:

States are too big to have the power they do have, which they wield clumsily and ineffectively.


So your solution to this is to make one LARGER state which will weild its power even MORE clumsily and ineffectively? Heh.


Quote:

Maybe this country was founded on little rinky dink states like Massachusetts that you can drive across in a matter of hours.


The founders actually didn't drive. It took 3 months to get to congress for John Adams, through the winter, and on several occasions he caught pneumonia and nearly died. He went through several assistants who could not make the treacherous voyage.

Believe me...MA seemed to 1800 what Wisconsin seems to 2000 AND THEN SOME.


Quote:

But everything west of the mississippi is HUGE.


And thus will have a different set of needs, which is better facilitated by those who are familiar with the area instead of heads of state thousands of miles away.


Quote:

And the state government in no way reflects it's people.


You're right, there. MOST of these places are full of people that would just kill gays and be done with the whole mess.


Quote:


Just take Missouri. St. Louis and KC are like super liberal. But the rest of missouri is extremely conservative.


And what do the numbers say? Are there MORE conservatives in the rural areas or more progressives in the major cities? Without knowing that, you have a weak argument.


Quote:

At least if it were just local governments, you could drive 30 minutes away and live in a place that didn't discriminate against you. But doing that with states is impractical for the bulk of America.


And IMPOSSIBLE if America was just ONE state.


Quote:

And it's not that I trust the government, so much as I don't trust people. There's too much hatred, fear, and vitriol out there in people. A government does a good job of deadening it, or on it's best days flying in the face of it.


Heh. Hehehehe. Hahahahaha..mahaehdr;luauhsdlktjhalskdjth
Wowee.

You've just made a good argument against your argument. If people have to much hatred, fear and vitriol...then allowing them 1:1 representation in the government of one giant America is probably the singlemost WORST IDEA EVER.


Last edited by MessiahCarey on Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:01 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
futuristxen



Joined: 01 Jul 2002
Posts: 19356
Location: Tighten Your Bible Belt
 Reply with quote  

MessiahCarey wrote:
futuristxen wrote:
MessiahCarey wrote:
C) There may come a day when the "liberal population centers" will be "conservative population centers". And if I have to choose between two bullshit ideologies, liberalism wins each time.


I'm for whichever one benefits me the most in my lifetime.


ME TOO! That's why I'm saying it's best to not have a one-size-fits-all policy for a country of 300 million people.

Because in your America, if the conservatives are in power...you will have NONE. In the America we have now, you can at least consider the notion of moving out of state (which is FAR more reasonable than leaving the country).


Actually my america would be run by liberals. And I was extremely fortunate in my circumstances in terms of being able to move out of state. That's not an option for too many americans to make the system fair.
Post Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:03 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Sat Aug 23, 2014 1:51 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon