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.
Taxing money out of the private sector economy and putting a fraction of it back in will magically grow the economy.
Confiscating more of a business's capital will cause the owner to expand the business and hire more people.
Every private sector industry is owned and run by inherently evil people while those who run the government are caring and compassionate and will always put the people's needs first.
It's okay to steal if the person you're stealing from has more money than you.
The government is better at spending your money than you are.
Health insurance companies are evil, diabolical people who would rather have people dying out in the streets than part with a nickel.
When a private sector company profits from providing a product or a service people need, it's theft/wealth redistribution, yet when the government confiscates wealth/private property from individuals (in return for nothing), it's compassion.
If you steal money from a rich person and give it to a poor person, you've done a good deed.
Slavery is okay as long as the government runs the plantations.
Banks are evil for giving mortgages to people who couldn't pay them back, even though the government mandated they be given mortgages.
Every dollar not taxed out of your paycheck is a generous gift from the government.
Government bureaucrats are better suited at making health care decisions for you than you and your doctor are.
People who work in the private sector should eat dog food, while government union workers are entitled to paychecks that are disproportionately large to the work they do, long vacations, gold-plated retirement benefits, full health benefits, and can continually demand more and more.
Printing money and putting it in the economy will cause the economy to grow.
Failure to redistribute wealth fast enough will result in the Earth's climate changing.
If we outlaw guns, criminals won't use them.
Sentencing a criminal to death is cruel and unusual while killing a baby who hasn't yet even had a chance to experience the world is compassionate.
Islam is a religion of peace, while Christianity is a religion of violence.
Tolerance is trying to silence anyone who disagrees with you.
Appeasing our enemies will make them like us.
(Insert name of private sector industry) is now making RECORD profits.
French fries are hazardous to your health, yet snorting heroin is good for you.
Marriage is wrong unless it's two men, two women, transsexuals, man and animal, etc.
Global warming is happening because Al Gore says so.
Teaching children about the bible is bad, yet teaching them how to put a condom on a cucumber is good.
80 year old white nuns and white babies are more likely to hijack an airplane than middle-aged Arab men.
The same policies that were utterly destructive under Bush are okay when they're continued by Obama.
Women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, Jews are all too stupid to know what's best for themselves, so they best shut up and vote Democrat.
Throwing more money at a problem will always fix it.
It's okay to break the same laws you advocate for everyone else.
When your side wins, elections are fair, when you lose, it's because elections are rigged.
It's okay to use the public treasury as your own personal piggy bank.
It's okay to ignore the Constitution when it doesn't support your agenda.
If a Palestinian fires rockets at Israeli schoolchildren it's okay, yet if an Israeli flings a rubber band at a Palestinian it's attempted murder.
It's okay for taxpayer-funded organizations (e.g. NPR, PP, etc) to use taxpayer money to lobby for more taxpayer money.
Misappropriation of funds by the government is compassionate.
Republicans are out to kill everyone who isn't a rich, white, heterosexual Christian male.
Yikes that nearly sounds like a Republican list. Amazing how close our two political parties are.
And the Establishment Clause does apply to the states due to the 14th Amendment
if the Establishment Clause applies to the states then there is no logical argument that can be made that separates it from the "free exercise" part
here's the text explain the separation
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Quote:
The Soviets didn't recognize freedom of religion of any sort.
houses of worship allowed in the FSU, other important things like religious education for kids, practicing circumcision, not working on religious holy days ext. weren't
Yikes that nearly sounds like a Republican list. Amazing how close our two political parties are.
At their extremes, there is little difference. Oh sure, there are ideological differences, but who among them is actually adhering to those ideals?
IMO, typically speaking, if I am a wealthy Democrat or an equally wealthy Republican, I have the same interest. That is to protect my assets. I guess we'd have to consult Goldman Sachs, a non-partisan player, on how to do that.
I'm delighted. As I said before, as long as the definition of progress involves picking the pockets of taxpayers, you'll count on nothing but divisiveness.
Now if your motivation is harmonious discourse, let's talk about how to remove the state from making decisions in every corner of public life.
My Glock is in my boot. Seems safer. Or should I say, "Is that a glock under there or are you just happy to see me?"
if the Establishment Clause applies to the states then there is no logical argument that can be made that separates it from the "free exercise" part
Which means that if circumcision was banned there would have to be religious exemptions for Muslims and Jews.
But at the same time there should be religious exemptions for smoking marijuana.
Quote:
houses of worship allowed in the FSU, other important things like religious education for kids, practicing circumcision, not working on religious holy days ext. weren't
So the USSR was actually more permissive than Franco's Spain? While both were evil dictatorships I'd always been under the impression the Soviet Union was worse. (Until the late 1960s Spanish law banned non-Catholic houses of worship except for those attached to embassies, this did not apply in Spanish Morocco)
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.
Or should I say, "Is that a glock under there or are you just happy to see me?"
Referring to the Liberal List
