Page 28 of 41 [ 642 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 41  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,753
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Jun 2016, 11:44 am

auntblabby wrote:
and if he were to return, the very same toxic legalistic types that turned him to the wolves would do it all over again.


Absolutely. The Pharisees were the fundies of their day.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,205
Location: Houston, Texas

11 Jun 2016, 11:56 am

Secular Republican. Nuff said.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


AnonymousAnonymous
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 72,852
Location: Portland, Oregon

07 Jul 2016, 7:37 pm

Political "third parties" should not be taken for granted.


_________________
Silly NTs, I have Aspergers, and having Aspergers is gr-r-reat!


CryingTears15
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 341

08 Jul 2016, 7:48 am

Gender is not a social construct.



TheSpectrum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,121
Location: Hampshire

08 Jul 2016, 9:24 am

CryingTears15 wrote:
Gender is not a social construct.

Woohoo!


_________________
Yours sincerely, some dude.


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

08 Jul 2016, 9:18 pm

people need to be able to pee and poo in peace, no matter who they are.



Dataunit
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 152

09 Jul 2016, 10:44 am

IQ is hereditary and some children perform better than others at school due to superior genetics.


_________________
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- Epicurus


dcj123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,796

10 Jul 2016, 12:55 am

* inhales deep breathe *

* Stating rant *

I am against gay marriage but not against homosexuality when private and unspoken of and basically out of my face in a nutshell. The reason I don't agree with gay marriage is because of its effect on religion, I don't make the rules but all of the text in these religions say homosexuality is a sin. I don't take that to mean its more or less of a sin then anything else and as such I believe that gay people should be treated with love and respect but I feel it would be a greater crime to say that lifestyle is perfectly socially accepted. Marriage is a religious act, why should homosexuals care if they are married. Isn't being a couple enough? What does having a official status grant you if the religion that you are basing the marriage on says its not a legit status anyway? If I was gay, I would be happy with just being in a relationship with someone. In fact why even come out of the closet at all? I think sexuality is best keep private and I don't really care whats going on in peoples bedroom to be frank. I don't walk up to people and announce my sexuality which is technically bisexual, or falls between bisexual and just flat out asexual, so you can't saying I am being hateful here. Also I have heard the argument that gay people lose benefits for their partners if they are not married. I have a solution to that too, create another legally binding union between gay partners but don't call it marriage.

(sigh)

I bet I am going to stir the pot with this one but you can actually have it both ways, you can protect religious views and still have a very free and open society. We just need to not complicate things and leave each group alone, its when we mix cultures that we divide which is actually a really deep topic because that goes back to the way the United States was originally set up before the civil war. See we would not be so divided if everybody lived with the laws that they wanted in small communities. Now we have cluster f that is the federal government shoving its law down every bodies throat and its not a one size fits all for a united people to remain united.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Jul 2016, 3:43 am

do away with electoral college, institute direct democracy digitally.



mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

10 Jul 2016, 6:07 am

dcj123 wrote:
* inhales deep breathe *

* Stating rant *

I am against gay marriage but not against homosexuality when private and unspoken of and basically out of my face in a nutshell. The reason I don't agree with gay marriage is because of its effect on religion, I don't make the rules but all of the text in these religions say homosexuality is a sin. I don't take that to mean its more or less of a sin then anything else and as such I believe that gay people should be treated with love and respect but I feel it would be a greater crime to say that lifestyle is perfectly socially accepted. Marriage is a religious act, why should homosexuals care if they are married. Isn't being a couple enough? What does having a official status grant you if the religion that you are basing the marriage on says its not a legit status anyway? If I was gay, I would be happy with just being in a relationship with someone. In fact why even come out of the closet at all? I think sexuality is best keep private and I don't really care whats going on in peoples bedroom to be frank. I don't walk up to people and announce my sexuality which is technically bisexual, or falls between bisexual and just flat out asexual, so you can't saying I am being hateful here. Also I have heard the argument that gay people lose benefits for their partners if they are not married. I have a solution to that too, create another legally binding union between gay partners but don't call it marriage.

(sigh)

I bet I am going to stir the pot with this one but you can actually have it both ways, you can protect religious views and still have a very free and open society. We just need to not complicate things and leave each group alone, its when we mix cultures that we divide which is actually a really deep topic because that goes back to the way the United States was originally set up before the civil war. See we would not be so divided if everybody lived with the laws that they wanted in small communities. Now we have cluster f that is the federal government shoving its law down every bodies throat and its not a one size fits all for a united people to remain united.

I just think marriage is pointless outside of a religious context. It's legal and financial bondage otherwise, and I don't exactly see why people would be willing to submit to it.

auntblabby wrote:
do away with electoral college, institute direct democracy digitally.

YES.


_________________
Every day is exactly the same...


dcj123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,796

10 Jul 2016, 12:49 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
I just think marriage is pointless outside of a religious context. It's legal and financial bondage otherwise, and I don't exactly see why people would be willing to submit to it.


I find it humorous that this is basically what I was trying to say but kinda went on a rant with it. Maybe I am the one that is making it complicated lol

Well I doubt my communication level is high enough for the political forum anyway, I should probably leave before I offend someone but this sub forum as a whole is almost as bad as /pol and I can read posts in here for hours and get lol.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Jul 2016, 3:20 pm

convert all bathrooms to unisex individual locking stalls.



gingerpickles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 515
Location: USA

10 Jul 2016, 8:53 pm

auntblabby wrote:
convert all bathrooms to unisex individual locking stalls.

Like a majority of hospitals and finer restaurants have. Or small offices and QLube .

It is big enough for wheel chair or mom with kids, it is private so don't matter who is in there, they go in -they go out. It means no more ez p for guys because no urinals. But it means no need to prefer one to other. Just hope they wiped the seat? Or at least have those clorox wipes dispenser thingys. A longer wait tho like women's facilities have. It will be less bathrooms since the space of stalls and walls will be cut near in half. But means handicapped really can actually go in.

Schools will probably complain the most... after Walmart and other big box stores


_________________
FFFFF Captchas.


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Jul 2016, 8:57 pm

gingerpickles wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
convert all bathrooms to unisex individual locking stalls.

Like a majority of hospitals and finer restaurants have. Or small offices and QLube .

It is big enough for wheel chair or mom with kids, it is private so don't matter who is in there, they go in -they go out. It means no more ez p for guys because no urinals. But it means no need to prefer one to other. Just hope they wiped the seat? Or at least have those clorox wipes dispenser thingys. A longer wait tho like women's facilities have. It will be less bathrooms since the space of stalls and walls will be cut near in half. But means handicapped really can actually go in.

Schools will probably complain the most... after Walmart and other big box stores

it might be cheaper if they just made a third intersex bathroom with locking door.



mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

10 Jul 2016, 8:59 pm

dcj123 wrote:
mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
I just think marriage is pointless outside of a religious context. It's legal and financial bondage otherwise, and I don't exactly see why people would be willing to submit to it.


I find it humorous that this is basically what I was trying to say but kinda went on a rant with it. Maybe I am the one that is making it complicated lol

Well I doubt my communication level is high enough for the political forum anyway, I should probably leave before I offend someone but this sub forum as a whole is almost as bad as /pol and I can read posts in here for hours and get lol.

It's fine. :P To be honest, sometimes I actually worry that I'm not saying enough to get my point across.

But yeah, I didn't really want to say that marriage is entirely pointless; I see it that way, but I know that there are religious and cultural reasons behind it, and I feel people should be free to practice those. But being someone who isn't big on religious tradition, I see marriage as being something unnecessarily binding that causes more problems than it solves. I'm not opposed to gay marriage, but I don't see the point of it either.


_________________
Every day is exactly the same...


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,635
Location: the island of defective toy santas

10 Jul 2016, 9:09 pm

I think it was our wonderful American curmudgeon h.l. Mencken who said "marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to be in an institution?"