What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The upcoming election

I would be interested to see what all of you consider the “hot button” issues for the coming election and the presidential election in two years.

In alphabetical order;
-Afghanistan war
-Abortionrights
-Big government
-Civil rights
-Constitutional rights
-Economy
-Environment
-Gay rights
-Gun control
-Illegal immigration
-Iraq war
-Oil prices
-Taxes
-What the rest of the world thinks of us
-War on terror
Did I miss any that you think are important?

One more question.  What do you consider the most important attribute of a good president.
 
My answers, in order, using your topic list. This doesn't indicate my stances on these issues, just what I think is important in this particular election.

-Iraq war
-Constitutional rights
-Civil rights (-Gay rights, same thing)
-What the rest of the world thinks of us
-War on terror
-Afghanistan war
-Environment
-Oil prices
-medical procedure rights
-Economy
-Gun control
-Big government
-Taxes
-Illegal immigration

My most important attribute of a good President is "good judgment".

Max
 
I'm looking for opposition to the imperial presidency.  That means restoring the proper checks & balances among the branches of government, complying with international laws, reigning in secrecy run amok.  Basically, aborting fascism while it's still embryonic.

I used to think the most important attribute of a president is to be decisive and that the second most important attribute is for the decisions to be good.  I've been proven wrong.
 
My answers, in no particular order, are:

-abortionrights (Why do they censor the AB word?)
-Civil rights
-Constitutional rights
-Gay rights
-Illegal immigration (I say let 'em all in)
-Marijuana legalization

Most important attribute? Secular open-mindedness.
 
Here we go, you forgot to yell "Fire in the hole !!". But seriously in alphabetical order.

-Afghanistan war
-Abortionrights
-Big government
-Civil rights
-Constitutional rights
-Economy
-Environment
-Gay rights
-Gun control
-Illegal immigration
-Iraq war
-Oil prices
-Taxes
-What the rest of the world thinks of us
-War on terror

You listed all the main points that are of interest to myself and family. In a nutshell IMHO if the Big Govt. issue somehow gets addressed the others would fall in line.

Now seems like a good time to start the discussion though.

smile.gif
 
I am deviating slightly from your list, but these are the issues important to me.

-Constitutional rights (We must protect our rights while we still can)
-Peaceful Foreign policy
-Civil rights
-What the rest of the world thinks of the US.
-Affordable healthcare for everyone.
-A fair, workable, peace in the middle east.

As for the best attribute of a president is respect and consideration of other view points.
 
1) Middle-class work force crisis
2) Economy
3) Health care
4) New, clean, independent energy
5) War on terror

6) Securing the borders:
-If you want to be an American citizen, or come to America do it legally. We should not be supporting illegals who break the law, abuse our medical services and allow our employers to pay them for cheap labor.

7) Abortionrights:
-Abort!ons = killing innocent life. I can see extreme circumstances (like the possibility of the death of the mother) where they could be considered. But otherwise you should not be allowed to abort merely because you were not responsible. It's simple, if you don't want to get pregnant, practice abstinence until you get married. If you want to fool around use birth control and gamble with the dice. If you are unable (for whatever reasons) to support for the soon to be child, have the child and put them up for adoption. Atleast then they will have a chance at life and you will get the chance to be more responsible.

8) Environment:
-This kind of goes together with new fuel sources. Why are we so addicted to petroleum? It's time we move on to more advanced, cleaner, renewable, resources.

9) Gay rights:
-The definition of marriage has always been one man one woman. I have nothing but love for homosexuals and feel deeply for them but they have no right to use the Godly institution of marriage for their relationships. If they want to be gay, that is their choice, but that doesn't mean they have the right to marriage. I'm also strongly against gays adopting and believe that they should not be allowed to in the interests of the child. Also the premise that to be gay is as normal as being heterosexual is false. As much as the media, MTV, and Hollywood would like us to believe, homosexuality is not normal.

10) What the rest of the world thinks of us:
Actually I could careless what the world thinks of us. They don't care about our interests, nor the problems right next to them. To whoever wanted secularism, look at what secularism and liberalism did to the EU. It's not pretty over there right now. All members of gov't should care about the U.S. and it's citizens and forget what the world thinks.
 
Fight it Clint.. fight it fight it fight it....

Aaaaaaahhh!

I've thought and thought and the only thing I can say which won't result in being banned is : I'm sorry that you think you are better than me. Really, you say you "love" us, but love is treating others like equals and understanding. You have shown a lack of understanding by saying we chose to be gay. That's a bunch of crap. You didn't choose to be straight and I didn't choose to be gay; it just worked out that way. Who in their right mind would WANT to choose a HARDER way to live?! You.. Oh my god seriously I have to stop before I say something I'll regret. As far as being normal goes, sorry. We are a minority. I guess blacks and native american's are abnormal too, huh? Native americans must be REALLY abnormal because there are so few of them.

I'm not going to reply to this thread after this message, so say what you want. I know this is OT but it REALLY got to me. Please don't delete this, mods. I really want to post this to give me peace of mind. I'm absolutely fuming over here.
 
You forgot one big one: Education. Thomas Jefferson himself once said "A nation which expects to be ignorant and free expects what never has and never will be."

Mokele
 
  • #10
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]You forgot one big one: Education. Thomas Jefferson himself once said "A nation which expects to be ignorant and free expects what never has and never will be."

Uhhh, last I checked, it was spelled "ejucajun." Where did you go to school?


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Fight it Clint.. fight it fight it fight it....

Fight it, bro. Fight it. Not worth getting in trouble or arguing over something that is so deeply seated that there's nothing you can do here. I feel for ya, I've been in a similar place (albeit on a different topic.) I may not be gay, but I got much love for ya; fight for what you think is right, but be careful not to cross the line (like I know you know.)

(Note: The latter half of this message is the serious half.)
 
  • #11
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]The definition of marriage has always been one man one woman

Factually incorrect. The Christian church performed gay marriages as a matter of course until the 11th century. Numerous other cultures and religions also have no such rules.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]but they have no right to use the Godly institution of marriage for their relationships

If it's a Godly institution, it should not be part of US civil law. The US is home to many people, of any faiths, and attempting to make one faith's rules the law of the land is not only a clear violation of the 1st Ammendment, but antithetical to the very idea of freedom.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ] If they want to be gay, that is their choice

Once again, factually inaccurate. All evidence points to innate orientation determined by a mix of environmental and genetic factors long before puberty, possibly entirely in utero.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I'm also strongly against gays adopting and believe that they should not be allowed to in the interests of the child.

And the broken, worthless foster system that bounces kids from home to home with no semblance of stability or family is somehow better?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Also the premise that to be gay is as normal as being heterosexual is false. As much as the media, MTV, and Hollywood would like us to believe, homosexuality is not normal.

Define "normal"? Statistically, it is not the majority, instead comprising roughly 5-6% of the populace according to the most effective research done. However, frequency of occurence does not denote moral or value judgement.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Actually I could careless what the world thinks of us. They don't care about our interests, nor the problems right next to them.

You are aware that the US economy is now so completely globalized that a dip in the Nikei can affect the Dow within hours, right? And that a large part of any international relationship, trade or otherwise, is diplomacy, right?

Like it or not, for better or worse, we are part of the global community. Who you piss off today might impose restrictive tarrifs on imports from us tommorrow, cutting trade and costing thousands of jobs.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]To whoever wanted secularism, look at what secularism and liberalism did to the EU. It's not pretty over there right now.

Yeah, they're really suffering with their free healthcare, excellent public education, and diplomacy.

This is a total logical falacy. Correlation does not equal causation, and, more importantly, you can't even get a correlation from two points. There are plenty of conservative, religious countries who are doing terribly (Sudan), while others are doing well. Ditto for liberal, secular countries.

And, maybe it's just me, but I like living in a country where I can not be a part of the state religion and not be executed for heresy as a result. That's what non-secular countries are.


The right to live according to your beliefs comes at the cost of allowing others to live their lives according to their beliefs.

Mokele
 
  • #12
I know I said I wouldn't post, oh well.

I want to thank you guys for backing me up. That really means a lot to me.

Mokele, you are forgetting one thing; facts and evidence don't matter to people like this. Their blind conviction clouds their common sense.
 
  • #13
Wow.  I just noticed the google ads at the top & bottom of this page are about gay activists, gay marriage and so on, unlike the plant ads at the bottom of the 1st page.  I wonder if a right-wing pinhead forum gets gay ads too when they start tossing the word around.  No wonder they're so paranoid.
 
  • #14
Now they're replaced by the same plant ads. Didn't I use the g-word often enough to keep that going? How do google ads work?
 
  • #15
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Now they're replaced by the same plant ads. Didn't I use the g-word often enough to keep that going? How do google ads work?

As I understand it, they search the page for certain key words, and display ads accordingly. I can't see them here, but on another forum I'm a mod on, you can usually see a few dozen google search bots scouring the site at any one time.

Mokele
 
  • #16
[b said:
Quote[/b] (JustLikeAPill @ Oct. 25 2006,7:50)]I know I said I wouldn't post, oh well.

I want to thank you guys for backing me up. That really means a lot to me.

Mokele, you are forgetting one thing; facts and evidence don't matter to people like this. Their blind conviction clouds their common sense.
Clint I'm sorry you were offended by my position/opinions I honestly meant no disrespect towards you. When I said I have compassion I meant that and no you don't really know me. If I interacted with you in real life I would treat you the same way I would treat anyone else, with compassion. Just because I have compassion for you and care about you just like everyone else doesn't mean that I have to share your views and tell you I agree with you.

When you posted your opinions, I could have easily jumped on it and made a scene like you did. Instead I respected your post and posted my opinion/views and what did you do? You jumped all over me because my view is opposite yours. Why can't both views be posted? Why is it OK for you to post your perspective but as soon as I post mine I'm a hypocrite, blind person with no common sense? I'm willing to see both perspectives, maybe you are the blind one?

So they actually found the cause of homosexuality? That's news to me! How do you feel about homosexuals who find Jesus Christ and then turn heterosexual? How did they change their genetics?
 
  • #17
Outsider, you may want to consider that you proposed that JLAP is not fit for parenthood, and shouldn't enjoy the legal and financial benefits of marriage. JLAP has not proposed that you are not fit for parenthood or shouldn't have those things. So it isn't really just "opposite opinions" on something.

Imagine if you had posted what you said, but instead of gay people, it was Jews. Or black people. There were times in our VERY recent past where those actually were widely held positions. But it seems absurd now to say them. Well, for a gay person like JLAP, it's exactly like that today.

I respect the right to differing opinions, but when they are openly advocating discrimination against the poster who is right here, you can't expect it to be received well.

Capslock
 
  • #18
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]If I interacted with you in real life I would treat you the same way I would treat anyone else, with compassion.

Unless those interactions included such basic rights as being able to inherit property, not to be forced to testify against a spouse, not to be evicted from one's home for mere orientation, and a plethora of other examples numbering in excess of 1000.

To claim compassion while at the same time supporting laws treating others as second-class citizens is hypocracy, period. If I'm polite and friendly to you, but work to remove your basic human rights, can you claim my behavior is compassionate? No, no more compassionate than the used-car salesman who smiles and jokes with you as you sign the lease on a car with a transmission made of tinkertoys.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]When you posted your opinions, I could have easily jumped on it and made a scene like you did. Instead I respected your post and posted my opinion/views and what did you do? You jumped all over me because my view is opposite yours. Why can't both views be posted? Why is it OK for you to post your perspective but as soon as I post mine I'm a hypocrite, blind person with no common sense? I'm willing to see both perspectives, maybe you are the blind one?

Our opinions do not materially harm you or infringe upon your rights in any way. In contrast, your opinions actively seek to prevent equality and deny people rights based on nothing more than your views of morality.

Let me give you an insight: a while back, my city (Cincinnati) had a portion in it's city charter, put there by people like you, which made it legal for me to be evicted from my apartment simply because my sexuality. I could be denied loans, hotel lodging, anything. And when this lovely display of "compassion" came up for referrendum, I found myself watching an ad, sponsored by people like you, which said, in as many words, that I do not deserve the same rights as you.

I want you to look me in the metaphorical eye and tell me what aspect of the compasion and tolerance Jesus preached is involved in throwing me out of my home because of who I am.

I'll make it even simpler: Tell me why, in an ostensibly free country, I should be forced to live by *your* moral rules?

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]So they actually found the cause of homosexuality? That's news to me!

Logical fallacy: strawman. We have evidence that there are genetic factors at work (through heritability studies), and we have evidence that other factors (number of older brothers) also affect sexual orientation. However, human behavior is more complex than that of Drosophilia, and the large-scale genomic evaluations necessary to determine the underlying causes have only recently become technologically possible.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]How do you feel about homosexuals who find Jesus Christ and then turn heterosexual? How did they change their genetics?

Factually incorrect: Numerous studies have shown that the reversion rate of those who claim to have "become straight" over long time periods is 100%. You know Exodus International, the leader among such "ex-gay" groups? The founder is currently living in Canada - with his husband.

Every properly performed study done on the phenomenon you describe reveals that the individuals have not changed their orientation, merely supressed it, going "back into the closet", as it were. The psychological damage incurred in such instances can be significant.


If you want a serious debate on this, I'm all for it, but do me a favor and actually research the facts. I've grown bored to repeating the same refutations for the same ridiculous anti-gay propaganda over and over again, as I have so far in this thread.

Mokele
 
  • #19
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Factually incorrect. The Christian church performed gay marriages as a matter of course until the 11th century. Numerous other cultures and religions also have no such rules

References please? If you want to get factual these "Christian" churches were not Christian but one of the many cults that branched off Christianity. Infact there's still a branch today in the U.S. that marries gays. Any church that marries gays and calls themselves "Christian" is not a Christian Church because it goes against the Bible. It's a counter-feit.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
If it's a Godly institution, it should not be part of US civil law. The US is home to many people, of any faiths, and attempting to make one faith's rules the law of the land is not only a clear violation of the 1st Ammendment, but antithetical to the very idea of freedom.

When I said Godly institution, I was speaking from my perspective so excuse that. However the definition of marriage is 1 man and 1 woman. Nowhere in the definition does it say 2 men or 2 women. Once again homosexuality is not equivalent to heterosexuality and never will be.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Once again, factually inaccurate. All evidence points to innate orientation determined by a mix of environmental and genetic factors long before puberty, possibly entirely in utero.

Actually this is controversial, the origins of homosexuality is not as clear cut as you'd like to make it sound. There is no concrete "genetic" answer.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
And the broken, worthless foster system that bounces kids from home to home with no semblance of stability or family is somehow better?

Have you read the studies on this? Apparently not. The best environment for a child that is growing up is to have 2 parents, 1 of each sex. If you truely believe in what you stated that homosexuality is caused by genetics, what is the child to do if he's not genetically homosexual? The problems the child would face are obvious.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Define "normal"? Statistically, it is not the majority, instead comprising roughly 5-6% of the populace according to the most effective research done. However, frequency of occurence does not denote moral or value judgement.

As in socially, historically, and culturaly normal.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
You are aware that the US economy is now so completely globalized that a dip in the Nikei can affect the Dow within hours, right? And that a large part of any international relationship, trade or otherwise, is diplomacy, right?

Like it or not, for better or worse, we are part of the global community. Who you piss off today might impose restrictive tarrifs on imports from us tommorrow, cutting trade and costing thousands of jobs.

Obviously we will appease when it is in our best interest. However our job should not be pleasing the world and thankfully we aren't.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]
Yeah, they're really suffering with their free healthcare, excellent public education, and diplomacy.

Nothing is free. Trust me they pay for that health care, as do the Canadians. Excellent public education... It is apparent you have no idea what your talking about ::shrug::.
 
  • #20
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Capslock @ Oct. 25 2006,10:31)]Outsider, you may want to consider that you proposed that JLAP is not fit for parenthood, and shouldn't enjoy the legal and financial benefits of marriage. JLAP has not proposed that you are not fit for parenthood or shouldn't have those things. So it isn't really just "opposite opinions" on something.

Imagine if you had posted what you said, but instead of gay people, it was Jews. Or black people. There were times in our VERY recent past where those actually were widely held positions. But it seems absurd now to say them. Well, for a gay person like JLAP, it's exactly like that today.

I respect the right to differing opinions, but when they are openly advocating discrimination against the poster who is right here, you can't expect it to be received well.

Capslock
Please read my last response. There's just reasons for my beliefs and they aren't discrimminatory.
 
Back
Top