Iowan wrote:
The big one is how he's now prosecuting medical marijuana. I realize that he's being a smart politician when he does stuff like that, but I'd rather he stick to what he believes.

Is this smart politics? Given the number of states that have recently decriminalized marijuana, permitted medical marijuana, Pat Robertson (!), etc and given all the polling data, how is this smart politics?

Zip City wrote:

LuthierJustin wrote:

cortez the killer wrote:Jesus was a Capricorn, he ate organic foods.
He believed in love and peace and never wore no shoes.
Long hair, beard and sandals and a funky bunch of friends.
Reckon they'd just nail him up if He come down again.

When did he talk about taking mony from people who earned it and giving it to people ho didn't?
Just being agnostic I wouldn't know that, but I don't think that's in there, I think his message was to work hard and do for yourself... At least from what I've heard.

yes and no.

on the one hand, there's the whole "teach a man to fish" parable, which is about getting people to support themselves.

on the other, there's the whole fighting for the poor and downtrodden thing

either way, I don't really give a shit what Jesus did/didn't say in relation to politics. people like Santorum think that the Bible trumps the Constitution

Santorum is pretty much an idiot, Anyone who wants a theocracy is. That being said small government does not equal Theocrocy, but big government is a religion to democrats.
Neil Peart put it perfectly, "no, his mind is not for rent, to any God or Government..."

beantownbubba wrote:

Iowan wrote:
The big one is how he's now prosecuting medical marijuana. I realize that he's being a smart politician when he does stuff like that, but I'd rather he stick to what he believes.

Is this smart politics? Given the number of states that have recently decriminalized marijuana, permitted medical marijuana, Pat Robertson (!), etc and given all the polling data, how is this smart politics?

Pandering to moderates/conservatives in an attempt to win votes? I don't agree with it at all, but I think that's what he's shooting for.

Democrats suck at running campaigns (coming from a registered Democrat) and I think its a bad move.

You're right about small government =/= theocracy, LJ. It's hilarious to me when theocrats like Santorum preach small government while wanting the government to pass all sorts of morality laws. I mean a constitutional amendment defining marriage? Can't get much bigger government than that.

As some wise man once said, conservatives want government to be small enough to fit into your bedroom....

Iowan wrote:
Pandering to moderates/conservatives in an attempt to win votes? I don't agree with it at all, but I think that's what he's shooting for.

Democrats suck at running campaigns (coming from a registered Democrat) and I think its a bad move.

I guess what I'm saying is that I can't figure out who he's pandering to w/ this one. It totally confuses me. I suppose it's an attempt to make him look tough on crime or hippies or drugs or some such, but like i said, it runs counter to all the polling data. As I understand it, conservatives are split on med marijuana and moderates are pretty solidly in favor (i mean who voted for all those state laws in the first place?). Pandering is one thing, but pandering badly and stupidly is another. Just look at the mittster.

I agree with you 100% I may agree with SOME of his points but I would never vote for the guy, which is why he won't be the nominee, religion needs to stay out of politics.
Republicans need to stop running on social issues, They will never win telling woman they can't have an abortion or people they can't smoke pot.

"your children will live under communism"- Khrushchev
He wasn't far off

Zip City wrote:

I don't think she is a Facist, I've never seen where she said government should own businesses and they should be run by private managers, which is the definition of Fascism...

LuthierJustin wrote:

Zip City wrote:

I don't think she is a Facist, I've never seen where she said government should own businesses and they should be run by private managers, which is the definition of Fascism...

It's less about her and more about the quote, that if/when the government heads towards a totalitarian state, it will do so by using religion. Religion has historically been used against the masses to sedate them while the powers that be do whatever they want.

Personally I am less worried about religion (Especally Christianity) than I am people who's religion is government. Those people like to persecute Christians especially.

Maybe in 1953

Data from the 2008 census showed 76% Christian of various denominations, 15% non-religious, .6% Muslim, 1.2% Jewish, .9% followed an Eastern religion and 5.2% did not reply or did not know. I probably missed a line in there, but that pretty much follows Zip's pie chart, except the Jewish slice is maybe a little too big. This was adults surveyed, so I guess children are not included in these numbers, if I am reading it correctly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States#Religions_of_American_adults

LuthierJustin wrote:Personally I am less worried about religion (Especally Christianity) than I am people who's religion is government. Those people like to persecute Christians especially.

Maybe in 253.

Seriously, LJ: When's the last time Christians were seriously persecuted in the West? Catholics v. Protestants doesn't count (and even that was pretty much over by the mid/late 1700's except in Ireland).

Christians are mocked and put down for their faith all the time. Tim Tebow for example, had he not been a Christian or open about his faith he wouldnt be mocked, but since he his a Christian people like Bill Mahar feel it's ok to mock him. Yet those same people say we can't judge other cultures like Muslims for supporting terrorism and believing in honor killings. It's a double standard.

Bill Maher is a comedian, who cares what he thinks? He has the freedom to express any opinion he wants, and others have the freedom to tell him he's an asshole. USA!

Until the government starts passing laws that limit people's ability to practice their religion, there is NO oppression. In fact, I'd say that the fact that churches get tax-exempt status means they are getting unfair advantages from the government.

LuthierJustin wrote:Christians are mocked and put down for their faith all the time. Tim Tebow for example, had he not been a Christian or open about his faith he wouldnt be mocked, but since he his a Christian people like Bill Mahar feel it's ok to mock him. Yet those same people say we can't judge other cultures like Muslims for supporting terrorism and believing in honor killings. It's a double standard.

The difference between "mocking" and "persecution" is about as wide as the difference between, say, University of Kentucky basketball and JV high school basketball in Montana.

beantownbubba wrote:

Slipkid42 wrote:Politics is the least productive thing this country ever got good at.

I think you have it backwards, Slip. Politics gave us a country. Politics gave us the Constitution. Politics gave us "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The 1st Amendment. The 14th Amendment. The 19th Amendment. An independent judiciary. The Federalist Papers. Abraham Lincoln. Land grant colleges (i.e. your state university). Compulsory education. The Civil Rights Acts. Social Security.

The problem is that we used to be great at politics. Then we were good at it. Now we suck at it.

BTB I think Slipkid might be right. The problem is that the people who got good at it are probably the people you didn't really want to get good at it.

Personally I don't think the Presidential contest is too much of an issue. You end up with candidates who are pretty much in the centre, rather than the guys on the extremities like Santorum. The problem is in Congress. It's a lot easier for the extremists to hijack the primaries for the Senate and the House and then you end up with people who don't want to compromise their positions (nothing wrong with this but it doesn't help get things done). Even the people who are prepared to compromise don't becasue they're scared of being booted out the next time they have to go through the primary process.

It might be really simplistic but in my view the primary process is the bit that needs fixing and this has got nothing to do with the Constitution. Not sure what you do but if you could get ordinary people more engaged in the whole process you'd probbaly do better at keeping the nutjobs away from Washington, but then the fact that the extremists have got control of this means ordinary people won't touch it with a barge pole.

beantownbubba wrote:

LuthierJustin wrote:Christians are mocked and put down for their faith all the time. Tim Tebow for example, had he not been a Christian or open about his faith he wouldnt be mocked, but since he his a Christian people like Bill Mahar feel it's ok to mock him. Yet those same people say we can't judge other cultures like Muslims for supporting terrorism and believing in honor killings. It's a double standard.

The difference between "mocking" and "persecution" is about as wide as the difference between, say, University of Kentucky basketball and JV high school basketball in Montana.

But it's ok to mock Christians but not other groups?

Legally it's ok to mock anyone you want.

If you're feeling the pressure from various PC lobbies to not mock one group or another, that's your problem not the government's. There is a line between mocking and discrimination and harrassment, where the government does get involved, but mocking as i understand the term is on the correct (not subject to govt action) side of that line.

dogstar wrote:
BTB I think Slipkid might be right. The problem is that the people who got good at it are probably the people you didn't really want to get good at it.

Personally I don't think the Presidential contest is too much of an issue. You end up with candidates who are pretty much in the centre, rather than the guys on the extremities like Santorum. The problem is in Congress. It's a lot easier for the extremists to hijack the primaries for the Senate and the House and then you end up with people who don't want to compromise their positions (nothing wrong with this but it doesn't help get things done). Even the people who are prepared to compromise don't becasue they're scared of being booted out the next time they have to go through the primary process.

It might be really simplistic but in my view the primary process is the bit that needs fixing and this has got nothing to do with the Constitution. Not sure what you do but if you could get ordinary people more engaged in the whole process you'd probbaly do better at keeping the nutjobs away from Washington, but then the fact that the extremists have got control of this means ordinary people won't touch it with a barge pole.

Maybe this is splitting hairs, but i don't think so: The people you're referring to, dogstar, are good at political gamesmanship and working the system for personal advantage. To me that's not "politics." Politics is the art of governing, which implies some proficiency at compromising as well. You know, the kind of people who can create and have adopted the Constitution. The kind of people who can draft the Civil Rights Act and see it become law. The folks you're describing know how to get elected but they can't govern their way out of a paper bag, which to my mind makes them pretty damn lousy at politics.

It maybe legal to mock anyone but not socially acceptable. It's only socially acceptable to mock Christians

LuthierJustin wrote:It maybe legal to mock anyone but not socially acceptable. It's only socially acceptable to mock Christians

Only if they're being assholes. No one is mocking Christians who keep to themselves and don't thrust their beliefs on everyone

Christians expressing their faith are assholes but Muslims blowing up buildings and killing thousands of people aren't assholes?

LuthierJustin wrote:Christians expressing their faith are assholes but Muslims blowing up buildings and killing thousands of people aren't assholes?

Literally no one has ever said that

Like I said its socially acceptable to mock Christians but you can't mock any other faiths, Infact it youre a Christian or conservative and say that Muslims are wrong because they kill innocent people you get "hey dont judge, Jesus says don't judge"

LuthierJustin wrote:Like I said its socially acceptable to mock Christians but you can't mock any other faiths, Infact it youre a Christian or conservative and say that Muslims are wrong because they kill innocent people you get "hey dont judge, Jesus says don't judge"

Only if you're saying that all Muslims are terrorists. Terrorists are terrorists. Muslims are Muslims. Some terrorists are Muslims.

If someone decried all white people because of Timothy McVeigh, then that person would be an asshole too.

BTW, who in government is mocking Christians?

I know this is a video of that absolute worst of the worst, but it's still hilarious/terrifying

Zip City wrote:I know this is a video of that absolute worst of the worst, but it's still hilarious/terrifying

Those people are on both sides I can show you videos of people who voted for Obama who are ignorant