Conservatives insist the rest of us live by their rules

Page 9 of 21 [ 328 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 21 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

30 Jun 2015, 11:44 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:

You seriously want to ban people in a public street from saying I love Jesus, or I oppose gay marriage or even you are going to hell if your gay? As much as I may not like the message I am grateful to live in in country that allows this. Arrest them if they attack threaten or gang up on people.

Have i suggested any such thing?

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,629
Location: Long Island, New York

01 Jul 2015, 12:00 am

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

Have i suggested any such thing?

You don't want to allow people saying "God Hates Fags" in a public street. What is not so offensive it could be allowed, and too offensive speech to be allowed? I draw that line not at speech but actions.

_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

01 Jul 2015, 12:05 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

Have i suggested any such thing?

When did i say that?

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,629
Location: Long Island, New York

01 Jul 2015, 12:13 am

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

Have i suggested any such thing?

When did i say that?

Quote:

"God Hates Fags" is both a logical fallacy (appeal to the supernatural; purporting to know the mind of God) AND since it contains the word "hate", pretty clearly hate speech.

We are so strident in our efforts to allow free speech that it is not uncommon to see people who claim to follow the teachings of one alleged Jesus of Nazareth holding signs that bear this sloga"

To me you are saying that allowing this particular Free Speech is wrong. Correct me

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

01 Jul 2015, 10:04 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

Have i suggested any such thing?

When did i say that?

Quote:

To me you are saying that allowing this particular Free Speech is wrong. Correct me

I am calling it out for what it is.

People have a right to express it, and i am exercising my right to express what i think about it.

In this country you can say whatever bigoted hateful thing you want to say. And you can live with the consequences of that activity, too.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,971
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Jul 2015, 10:21 am

sly279 wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I think people should have the right to guns...and I'd describe myself as being on the left, I don't see what is so wrong about a government that actually serves its people as in providing social services and attempting to ensure all the citizens have access to things like food, water, medical care, shelter(or at least stop criminalizing the homeless for camping)...but I certainly do not agree with limiting personal freedoms 'for the greater good' I mean where does it end. So IDK I don't think its the whole left that wants guns banned...but this is why I don't support the democratic party, sure they are 'left' but they still have a way of wanting to regulate personal freedom too much, just because they come up with more 'secular' reasons doesn't mean its any better than when the religious conservatives do it.

But yeah if they ban guns, criminals can still get them...illegally, and use them to harm people, it just stops people who would not commit gun crimes buying guns or at least discourages them some might still go the illegal route, but some wouldn't take the risk. I just wish people didn't see the democrats of our two party system as a representation of the entire over-all left. They should leave SSI/SSDI alone, its already low enough...at least SSI, not entirely sure on SSDI.

funding for both run out in 2016. the republicans refuse to fund it. from what I hear they'll either cut the payments in half, or boot half the people off. where did the funding go you ask, well congress for the last 20 years has ben stealing it and putting it in the general fund with an IOU that they now refuse to repay. yay.

Again why do they always cut stuff to help the poor and or disabled as a first resort? maybe they could cut their hefty paychecks before screwing over citizens of this country....but I suppose their wealth is more important than the duty to the people who live here. Cut the payments in half....so people on SSI who much of the time have conditions expected to prevent working indefinitely instead of getting the sad wage of 733$ a month will have less than 400 dollars a month to work with or just throw a bunch of people off of it at random? And they want to do this by next year, that will be a major social issue/crisis.

_________________
We won't go back.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,971
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Jul 2015, 10:23 am

Fugu wrote:

Dillogic wrote:

Fugu wrote:

you must have missed all those numbers I posted on people getting hurt or killed with firearms. if you take the firearm out of that equation, you will logically have less people dead.

Method substitution is your logical answer.

If someone has intent to murder someone else, they'll logically use whatever means they have available to them. If all you have is a knife at hand, that will make do, and considering 99.99999% of murders are domestic, acquaintance and in the act of committing another crime, the added range of a firearm doesn't matter all that much.

true, however knives are pretty messy as you're probably going to end up cutting yourself and leaving dna and such at the scene. having this happen with a gun would require you to stick your flesh into the slide's gap or something. also, you can't really block a bullet with your arm or whatever is handy.

IDK if someone would end up cutting them self by accident if they know how to use a knife to kill.

_________________
We won't go back.

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

01 Jul 2015, 10:29 am

Sweetleaf wrote:

I am reminded of the state legislators who, every year, try to have their family "live on welfare income, food stamps and such" to prove to their constituents that 1) it is a lot easier that the "complainers" say it is, and 2) the legislator and family are "in tune" with people who live under subsistence standards. I have never learned about a single legislator who could do it for more than a few days. Seriously, THREE DAYS?!? That is your limit, you entitled walking-dead zombie?!? They end up displaying for all the public how much of a loser they are. Try doing it for three months, you rodeo clown, and we can talk. :roll:

_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)

Last edited by AspieUtah on 01 Jul 2015, 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,971
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Jul 2015, 10:31 am

Iamaparakeet wrote:

If it's a matter of eternal life and death, then what is the right thing to do? Let people go to Hell or try to prevent that?

If you want to follow a god that would banish people to an eternity in hell for such things as homosexuality, perhaps you should find a new god if you truly believe that is what he's about. Either way regardless of your personal beliefs that preventing gay marrige would save people from eternal hellfire...your religion does not dictate the laws/policies of this country....thus the government is not obligated to make laws to enforce your religious morals.

That said there are plenty of different branches of Christianity...with different interpretations of scriptures, and some not near as heavy on the 'sinners are gonna burn in hell so we must save them' you can choose what religion/belief you want to follow....people do not choose their sexual orientation, and sure as hell should not be shamed for it.

_________________
We won't go back.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,971
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Jul 2015, 10:37 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

I just think they should have clamped down on it earlier.

Arguments against marriage equality tended to fall into one of two categories.

Firstly, logical fallacy.

And secondly, hate speech.

Barring a constitutional amendment, which isn't gonna happen, like it or not, it is here to stay. Arguments about why are obsolete. Arguments about why not may as well be pissing in the wind.

I can't figure out why that paper is announcing that they won't publish letters on those arguments anymore when they could just, not print them.

I am happy you don't have ability to cause me harm if I say a thing you deem hate speech or incorrect argument style. I am unhappy there are too many with your way of thinking that do have this power. Luckily for them the gay activists did not take the view that the anti sodomy laws were well established laws that had Supreme Court approval, a done deal, therefore talking about repealing them should not have be allowed.

I am confused by the way you brought up violence. I don't know where that came from.

A newspaper declining to print an op-ed or letter to the editor based on it's subject matter is hardly a restriction of speech. The right to expression does not guarantee a venue. Certainly not a privately owned venue.

While people are welcome to try to bring a suit all the way up to the supreme court, i am doubtful that any state will win the right to continue to outlaw same sex marriage. They are welcome to try.

First, though, someone will have to find a leg to stand on. Which is to say, they have to establish locus standi. Someone will have to find a way to assert that they have somehow been harmed by two other people getting married.

And moreover, they will probably have to show that this harm would not have happened if one of them had been a different gender.

Lots of luck.

I need to preface that I am not talking about children who by definition are not mature. As minors 9 year olds have never had full free speech rights.

I'm not arguing against a newspaper being allowed what they want in their paper as it is their right of free speech to do that. I am arguing that their decision was wrong. Interesting you brought up others not being harmed by gay marriage. Instead of saying don't call me fa***t it hurts my feelings the gay rights movement used exactly that positive argument to successfully sway public opinion. Gay marriage was legal in 38 of 50 states before the Supreme Court made it a national law.

Having many people and institutions tell the defeated gay marriage opponents you can't complain because we deem all opposition to the decision hate speech is bullying. Rubbing your victory in defeated opponents face is questionable strategy. It did not work out well after WWI with Germany and after the cold war. It's not working out so well here. You can't say certain hate words but yet hate crimes go up. Successfully silencing your opponent only makes it harder to identify them.

All complaints about gay marriage are not 'hate speech', though certainly petty at the very least. I mean there is the argument it somehow violates rights of non gays...how? Did they rule that heterosexual marriages are illegal? Did they rule everyone has to enter into a same sex marriage? NO, they simply have allowed same sex couples the right to marry...that does not violate anyone's rights to suggest it does is just asinine bullying of the worst kind, its the attention seeking, playing the victim sort. Now I get religious people saying 'I disagree, its against my religion' but how is that a reason to turn back the policy? This is not a theocracy we have religious freedom and freedom not to follow religions.

_________________
We won't go back.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,971
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

01 Jul 2015, 10:42 am

AspieUtah wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

Ha...try doing it for over a year, cutting it would be ridiculous, as is there is some subsidized housing for disability specifically that my 733 is too low to qualify for, I'd have to have like 825 for one place I tried applying. I am kind of hoping to get into some part time work that would still allow me to remain on disability to supplement...if they cut it in half though even getting part time work wouldn't help then I would still get less than I do now with working a little on top.

_________________
We won't go back.

DeepHour
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 84,210
Location: United Kingdom

01 Jul 2015, 10:55 am

AspieUtah wrote:

LOL, my thoughts entirely. Over here we have a guy called Michael Portillo, a posh Old Harrovian smoothie who was a Conservative MP and Government Minister in the 1980s and 1990s.

Many years ago I heard him claiming he knew exactly what it was like for people living 'at the sharp end', because he had worked as a hospital porter for, yes, three days while making a TV documentary on the subject.

It's not just the politicians on the right of the spectrum though, it's all of them. Former Labour Party Prime Minister Tony Blair has six houses in London and a mansion in Buckinghamshire, and protests he's 'only' worth £20,000,000!

:lol:

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

01 Jul 2015, 10:59 am

Sweetleaf wrote:

...there is some subsidized housing for disability specifically that my 733 is too low to qualify for, I'd have to have like 825 for one place I tried applying. I am kind of hoping to get into some part time work that would still allow me to remain on disability to supplement...if they cut it in half though even getting part time work wouldn't help then I would still get less than I do now with working a little on top.

Are you saying that Section 8 housing assistance won't accept SSI recipient applications, or that you couldn't afford the co-payment under your current budget? In my county, Section 8 assistance is currently not accepting applications. I check its web site two or three times a week in hopes that I can apply (the wait list here is about five years, I am told). Your SSI allows for some earned income ($85 a month) without jeopardizing your benefits. Beyond that threshold, you lose $1 in benefits for every $2 you earn. Working a set number of hours each month might help you budget-wise.

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

01 Jul 2015, 11:00 am

DeepHour wrote:

...I heard him claiming he knew exactly what it was like for people living 'at the sharp end', because he had worked as a hospital porter for, yes, three days while making a TV documentary on the subject....

That is the sharp end! :roll:

DeepHour
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 84,210
Location: United Kingdom

01 Jul 2015, 11:07 am

^ Exactly. But turning out to do the job for 8 hours, as part of a cosy deal between the TV company and the hospital management, knowing he couldn't get sacked, going back home in the evening to his London mansion and millionaire lifestyle......how 'sharp' is that?

Then again, he did have to do it for 3 days.....

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,629
Location: Long Island, New York

01 Jul 2015, 12:02 pm

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

blauSamstag wrote:

ASPartOfMe wrote:

Have i suggested any such thing?

When did i say that?

Quote:

To me you are saying that allowing this particular Free Speech is wrong. Correct me

People have a right to express it, and i am exercising my right to express what i think about it.

In this country you can say whatever bigoted hateful thing you want to say. And you can live with the consequences of that activity, too.

Then I have no disagreement with you.

Page 9 of 21 [ 328 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 21 Next

Jump to:

Conservatives insist the rest of us live by their rules Post Reply New Topic

Conservatives insist the rest of us live by their rules