Conservatives insist the rest of us live by their rules

Post Reply New Topic

The Right (i.e. Republicans) hardly strike me as being in favor of small government.

As far as I can tell, the difference between the Left and the Right is not that one is big government and the other is small government, but that both are big government and only their focus of that big government is in different areas.

If you want small government, you are going to be dissatisfied with both Republicans and Democrats.

^this

Marriage is more than just a religious ceremony; the actual marriage is the legal contract signed at the court house. You may not like that fact, but there it is. Until you can get the law changed, the government still has a right to intercede.
And as far as the churches deciding who can and can not get married is concerned - essentially, they already can. If a church doesn't believe in gay marriage, then they can turn a same sex couple away. It's just that that same church can't dictate whether that couple can marry or not at all somewhere else. After all, there are still bigoted churches that oppose interracial marriage, but no one is forcing them to perform the nuptials for an interracial couple.

People aren't harmless.

yeah that

<insert non-sequitur here>

Nope.

You don't give any explanation for why firearms aren't harmless, and you actually used a false cause fallacy in your implications.

They're inanimate weapons that don't do anything until a person uses them for good (targets, hunting, collecting and defense) or bad (murder).

What you mean is, you think humans are inherently bad and will use a firearm for murder, even though there's more than enough evidence to show that majority of people will never murder someone.

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.

1. yeah because making impossible to vote isn't taking away peoples right to vote right? yeah no its the exact same. if you make it so everyone is locked in a cell but never removed the bill of rights then do you still have rights or is it just a peice of paper. so if they bann all guns and ammo do we have a right to bear arms?

2. NSA, TSA, DHS, read the news lately? we have no privacy anymore.

3. really are your kids forced to learn creatinism at school, nope chrisitans are forced to learn about evolution and sex despite their beliefs. its becoming more and more illegal to be a christian in public.

4.see California. there are cities that have made it illegal to keep anything but a car in your garage, its your house what right do they have to tell you where you can and can't put stuff.

5. see patriot act.

6. where? name a law proposed to congress to do so? they fought the supreme court to not pay for it in insurance this isn't banningit. I heard when that was happening that "they'll trying to ban it" but that was just lies to drive up support.

7. during the last election the left said that rommry or whatever was going remove women's rights if elected. restore it to the 1920s style, fire all women and force them back into slavery int he kitchen. see war on women.

9. what. lol. no the democrats are not right at all. so are you a anarchy type of guy?

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.

you assume the only reason those people killed others is firearms. that if you pick one up it makes you kill people.
reality check they don't. those people would be killed with other stuff. people kill people. always will. they just find another way.

30k out of 300 million. then ad in births that year. really its a smalle tiny speck in the grand scheme. when 100 million people die a year from guns then we can talk about banning them.

no, I can logically infer that if the guns weren't in the situation, less people would be 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.

belief isn't the same as science fyitell that to all the woman who can't afford birth control for what it's meant for or to help with a bunch of other women's health issues[link] that birth control pills can help with.

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.

Also, why does insurance pay for Viagra for men but restricts many things for women???