Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
neocon- When liberals say it the word is a put down to people with conservative Republican ideas. But I take it as a compliment.
Neocon is a word that lacks a precisely fixed definition, but if any had meant Conservative, they would have simply said Conservative. As those on the right themselves point out with great regularity, these neocons are not Conservative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wzippler
Bible thumping- a way liberals say they don't tolerate Christians who actually believe in the Bible
Believe away, I say. And the same to the Muslims with the Quran and to every other religion and its sacred texts. But don't be Bible-thumping your way over to my house with any of that crap, and don't start telling me how to live my life or blowing up any of my buildings. The same rights you have, I have, and you are as obligated to respect mine as I am to respect yours. You all are really not very good at this last part at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wzippler
Wing nut- Some one who is crazy. If sanity means killing unborn babies, and letting mass murders live I am proud to be "crazy".
A wing-nut is one who clings to beliefs that quite apparently lie outside the bounds of established fact, usually on the basis of some form of bias.
Example: unborn babies
There is no such thing as an unborn baby. Just as there is no such thing as an undead corpse. Wing-nuts are not troubled by such facts.
There is no such thing as an unborn baby. Just as there is no such thing as an undead corpse.
Shhhh don't tell the CDC or the AMA
Possible Health Effects of Radiation Exposure on Unborn Babies
With recent discussion about the possibility of a terrorist attack involving radioactive materials, some people may be concerned about radiation exposure to unborn babies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has prepared this fact sheet to help you understand the possible health effects to your unborn baby from exposure to radiation.
The US food supply is among the safest in the world, but organisms that you can’t see, smell, or taste - bacteria, viruses and tiny parasites - are everywhere in the environment. These microorganisms - called pathogens - can invade food and cause illness, sometimes severe and even life-threatening illness, especially in young children, older adults, and persons with weakened immune systems. In pregnant women, foodborne illness can endanger their unborn babies.
AMA (Infectious Disease) Fight BAC! (http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13769.html - broken link)
Before they are born, humans are fetuses. Right after they are born they are babies. Hence, if I'm understanding saganista correctly, an unborn baby is actually not possible.
As far as these political philosophies, I just don't see the point anymore. Our economy is a house of cards and the future is a stiff breeze. What difference does it make if it's socialist, communist, capitalist, or other? On social issues, the only life you have any say with is your own. So, in my mind, the future of all these philosophies is just a continuation of divisiveness and chaos. Is there any party or philosophy that's unifying? One that will stop the fighting and labeling? That's the one I want.
NV: I think you may have some problems with your poll. You seem to already assume (as your post backs up) that 75% of us are "far left wing extremists" and so instead of putting,
Democrat/Liberal like you put Republican/conservative - you put Dem/Liberal - quasi socialist? Seriously????? And you expect us to take THAT seriously? I would be happy to respond to the poll, but you really need to work on it.
I consider myself to be a bleeding heart liberal. I believe in social programs like education, feeding/clothing/housing the poor (even though I am personally agnostic, I believe it was Jesus who mentioned taking care of the poor over 700 times in the bible and so I wonder why so many, self avowed Christian conservatives reject this idea and why a liberal is looked down upon for wanting to help the poor...), keeping our streets safe, our cops and firemen paid, etc (you know the rest).
However, contrary to popular belief - I also strongly support our military. Actually, I literally support at least one of them as I am the mother of his children and take care of most aspects of his life while he is out under the ocean somewhere half the year.
You ask us not to be coy, but I'm quite sure no one who comes to this board to shoot off their mouths (as I do) is coy by nature. We all seem to have no problem telling it like it is.
I agree that the poll isn't accurate, but in a different way. Ralph Nader is in NO way a Libertarian, so that shouldn't be listed.
BTW, I'm not a Christian but, according to the Bible, Jesus was speaking of privately providing for the poor. He wasn't advocating using the government to forcefully take from others to give to whom you consider "the poor", which you seem to be advocating.
Ha! I won't have to. They already know what you wish to deny. A zygote results from the process of fertilization. A baby results from the process of childbirth. A corpse results from the process of death. Unborn baby is a self-referential contradiction in terms coined by those who know they will lose the argument on fact and hope instead to win it on emotion. Someone mentioned Frank Luntz earlier, and this is a blatant Luntzianism from the get go. There is a term for what you mean to refer to. Here it is...FETUS. Simple word. Sound it out phonetically. You'll get the hang of it pretty quickly.
Otherwise, you'll be stuck in world where unfertilized zygotes become unborn babies and (with luck) ultimately turn into undead corpses, whom I suppose you might then shelter in tracts of unbuilt houses and nourish at first with unlactated milk and later with the milled products of certain unsown cereal crops.
Welcome to the world of neocon newspeak where any and every oxymoron is welcome...
I agree that the poll isn't accurate, but in a different way. Ralph Nader is in NO way a Libertarian, so that shouldn't be listed.
BTW, I'm not a Christian but, according to the Bible, Jesus was speaking of privately providing for the poor. He wasn't advocating using the government to forcefully take from others to give to whom you consider "the poor", which you seem to be advocating.
Both good points, we know it is not out of ignorance that they always seem to breeze over the fact that private enterprise always does a better job than the federal government, and many of us prefer to support those that are more efficient and effective at delivering the given service while actually getting more out of each dollar. In christian circles we call that being good stewards of our money.
I agree that the poll isn't accurate, but in a different way. Ralph Nader is in NO way a Libertarian, so that shouldn't be listed.
BTW, I'm not a Christian but, according to the Bible, Jesus was speaking of privately providing for the poor. He wasn't advocating using the government to forcefully take from others to give to whom you consider "the poor", which you seem to be advocating.
I wasn't about to try to explain the difference between Nader and the Libertarian party to this guy - it would take too long. You are right though.
I'm not a Christian either, but I don't seem to remember those references being about "private" contributions. Where did he say the government shouldn't help and if you are willing to pay extra taxes so that the kid down the block from you can eat then how is that not my "private" contribution.
Unfortunately, there are countries that don't have a safety net set up to help poor children, the elderly, etc - Take a look at the shanty towns in South American countries where this is the case. Families are rummaging through garbage dumps to find FOOD and other essentials. India has one of the highest populations and a growing economy yet still so many people live hand to mouth in hovels wth sewage running outside their doors in the streets. I don't think these countries lack compassion. I'm sure some people in those countries give aid to charitable organizations, but that doesn't seem to have helped. Do you think if we got rid of welfare, food stamps, heating help, etc that poverty would disappear or get worse? Do you think if people weren't paying for these things in taxes they would all be willing to take care of families in need?
maybe you are right, but I just don't have that same faith. Obviously, if we had been adequately taking care of the poor, infirm, and elderly in our country then these programs and social securty wouldn't have come into being.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
