Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-15-2011, 11:43 PM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,856 posts, read 8,179,887 times
Reputation: 4590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by imcurious View Post
P.S. Isn't it ironic that the U.S. was formed to escape religious persecution but in the end it is the U.S. that is so twisted where religion is concerned?

Maybe all of the European"misfits" who immigrated to the U.S. really were not the cream of the crop, intellectually, anyway.

Back to your regular programming . . .
Well, we should actually look at the groups of immigrants that were "escaping" religious persecution. They weren't exactly atheists or even moderates. They were people like the puritans, quakers, and amish. And they would more appropriately be considered religious fanatics.

Basically, the average person settling America was far more religious than most other Europeans at the time. They didn't come to America to escape the trappings of religion. They came to America so they could carve their own section of the country, to make it into their perfect religious world. The puritans sponsored many indentured servants, which as part of their servitude were required to learn and follow the puritan way of life. The modern equivalent of the puritans would be the far right evangelical christians.

Freedom of religion never meant that religion should not guide domestic policy at any level. Freedom of religion was simply put in place to prohibit the federal government from instituting a national religion. At one time Massachusetts and Connecticut both had state-sponsored religion. And most of American history is rooted deeply in Christianity. Those Judeo-Christian values have been the foundations of our government and our civilization.

I'm not saying that religion holding dominion over our government is a good thing, but people seem to misunderstand the true nature of religion and America. Freedom of religion is part of the first amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Basically, the Congress cannot establish a national religion, nor can Congres prevent you from freely exercising your religion of choice. It never prohibits the states from creating state religions, or putting up the ten commandments in court rooms. Nor does it directly protect atheists in any capacity, since they don't actually have a religion to exercise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:10 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua View Post
What about California?
Common misconception... as it was already stated, California is only 44% Dem and around 35-38% Rep (the rest being independents of various beliefs).

People think ALL of California is uber liberal, when you really only see the liberal majority in major coastal cities - primarily LA and SF. Have you ever been to Orange County, Bakersfield, or even San Diego? The conservatives pretty much rule in those areas, along with most central & rural counties. And take a guess where gay marriage ballot measures have passed vs failed, LOL.

Last edited by gizmo980; 01-16-2011 at 12:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:14 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by flordelis View Post
First of all, we are NOT against "gay" marriages, per se, but, rather, same-sex marriages. If two homosexuals want to get married, it is fine with us, as long as they abid by the same rules as hetrosexuals, one of wich is "man and woman".
I know we're not supposed to debate the issue here, but that is one of the silliest "arguments" I've ever read... seriously.

GAY marriage means for gays to marry who they love, which I would assume is another gay person of the same sex. If you disagree with that, just say so, and admit you don't support their equal right to marry who they choose. THAT is the issue, not whether or not they can marry at all. That would be like saying you're not anti-Semitic (or against freedom of religion) if you think synagogues shouldn't exist... since, after all, the Jews can join Christian churches instead.

Last edited by gizmo980; 01-16-2011 at 12:52 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:19 AM
 
11,155 posts, read 15,681,234 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roaddog View Post
Yes but in the end it's only an theory which comes down to an opinion.
The scientific community has proven that homosexuality is not a disease. It's not theory. You're messing with people's lives, encouraging murders and beatings, and teenage suicides by spreading anything but the truth that they have made collective statements based on science asserting that homosexuality is not a disease that can be cured. Please don't encourage such bigotry. Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:21 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
I also don't get the argument that it's a woman's choice. Didn't she require a man to get pregnant? Why then is it not also a man's choice since the man has just as much investment into that child that a woman has?
What if the man ALSO wants the baby to be aborted?

Last edited by gizmo980; 01-16-2011 at 12:40 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:26 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by urza216 View Post
Libertarians also want less regulation of business and want to get rid of things like unemployment insurance and minimum wage. I'm not down with that.
Not all libertarians agree - myself being one who does not, especially since unemployment insurance saved my butt for a few months. And for the record, I not only support a minimum wage, but think it should be raised in high-COL regions.

Again, these issues are not all black & white... I don't assume ALL republicans, democrats, libertarians, etc, believe the same things on every issue. Hence, the reason I think a two-party (with a few weak third parties) system is only dividing rather than conquering.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:35 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioIstheBest View Post
Gay marriage ballots in Maine, California and oregon all failed. This means democrats voted agianst it. Plain and simple. No other way around it.

Democrats say they are for gay marriage when in public, but when it comes down to it they are against it.
Not always true... look at the breakdown by CA counties, and you'll see the liberal-majority areas usually support gay marriage. When Prop 8 was on the ballot, San Francisco & the surrounding counties voted it down (thus supporting the right for gays to marry), as did the north-coast counties which are possibly even more liberal than SF. People around here consider Marin county the MOST liberal, and they shot down Prop 8 by an overwhelming 75% - so your assumptions are pretty much incorrect.

Los Angeles did vote for Prop 8, but only by a narrow margin - and that actually goes along with their voting demographics, since I believe LA county is pretty much split down the middle Rep vs Dem. I often forget they're split (thinking they're more liberal), since I forget the county includes some more conservative inland cities.

Proposition 8 and Proposition 22: A tale of two votes - latimes.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 12:50 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by chattypatty View Post
Republicans are not trying to outlaw abortion. For your information, President Obama himself has stated he does not support gay marriage.
I'd have to dig around for sources to back this up, but I do believe he said it should be up to each state individually... and he doesn't support a federal amendment to ban gay marriages.

Here's one: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n4124256.shtml

From the article - "Obama opposes a federal constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. He opposes the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prevents states from having to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. And he supports activist judges of the sort who find the California court’s reasoning congenial."

Last edited by gizmo980; 01-16-2011 at 01:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 06:14 AM
 
Location: California
11,466 posts, read 19,321,678 times
Reputation: 12713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
The scientific community has proven that homosexuality is not a disease. It's not theory. You're messing with people's lives, encouraging murders and beatings, and teenage suicides by spreading anything but the truth that they have made collective statements based on science asserting that homosexuality is not a disease that can be cured. Please don't encourage such bigotry. Thank you.
I'm not messing with anyone you must be confused, I stated it's theory and theory is just an opinion, science has not proven anything and don't start with the bigotry bs because I haven't said anything against anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2011, 07:37 AM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,833,691 times
Reputation: 23660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roaddog View Post
I'm not messing with anyone you must be confused, I stated it's theory and theory is just an opinion, science has not proven anything and don't start with the bigotry bs because I haven't said anything against anyone.
Theory when based on scientific/academic study and evidence (yes, evidence) is not merely an "opinion" - just as the theories of relativity & evolution aren't just opinions, although some may argue with the latter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:03 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top