Things you have to believe to vote Republican

A lot of what so-called "progressives" believe, are just as much faith-based as what the biggest bible-thumper thinks.

Like that guns cause crime, that it's great for the government to force you into their retirement scheme, that spending money on the "poor" helps them, the whole class warfare dogma, that a doctor cannot give a child an asprin without parental permission but can give them an abortion on demand. The list can fill a book far thicker then any bible.

The progressive "secular humanism" is just as much a religion as any, and even some of it's faith-based beliefs can be scientifically disproven. Lott has destroyed the myth of gun control for example, yet they still cling to it.
 
No abortion and teach creationism - Yawn. Is that what the Republicans are fundamentally all about? Don't let gays get married?

Certainly, it isn't about gun rights from Mr. President who would have signed the AWB if it got to his desk. But he's against abortion, gays and wants creationism taught in the schools.

What a boring platform.
 
Some of the biggest problem that the Democrats:
1. They are completely devoid of ideas.

2. The snake oil elixir they are attempting to shove down the throats of everyday Americans is impossible to digest.

3. They are basically miserable people who see America as the cause of all of the problems of the world and not the solution.

4. They are all a bunch of cradle-to-grave nanny staters.

5. They are of the opinion that people are not capable of achieving anything on their own. Indeed, they need government intervention.

6. They believe that the military is made up of a bunch of sadistic torturers.

7. They don't believe in free speech unless of course that speech agrees with them.

8. They believe George Bush who flew fighter jets in the National Guard is a draft dodger, but Bill (the military is loathsome) Clinton is a true patriot.

9. They are against sexual harassment unless of course it occurs in the Whitehouse by a Democrat president.

10. They believe in minority inclusiveness unless you happen to be a minority conservative.
 
Actually it's all about convenience. Priests in the Catholic church are always men and altar boys are always boys.
Click to expand...

Wrong, and has been for, oh, about thirty years. With the rare exception of a few dioceses, such as Lincoln, Nebraska and Arlington, Virginia, girls can be and are "altar servers." In many liberal dioceses, they predominate.

The idea that Catholic priests were just frustrated heterosexuals who took advantage of targets of opportunity is risible and entirely belied by the histories of these predators. These were homosexual deviants who lied their way into the priesthood and then made a career of predating on, largely, adolescent boys.

The most comprehensive study on the subject, the John Jay study, says over 80 percent of the victims were boys.

And while we're free-firing as to the sources and causes of priestly deviance, let us not forget the bishops, the shepherds, sworn by oath to God above to protect and teach the littlest ones. Instead, they protected and shepherded the perverts, from one parish to another, with no warnings given.

"The floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." - attributed to St. John Chrysostom.
 
Liberals

WEEG, add this one from jay Leno, You have to believe that it is ok to take Jesus out of Christmas, but leave satan in Halloween.
 
Not to be picky here about GWB and the NG. Let's be real here.

1. The National Guard is honorable service.
2. Joining the Guard in Viet Nam days was a ploy to avoid being sent to Viet Nam.

Clinton tried various shennigans and avoided the draft. Cheney had a slew of deferrments.

All of these things were various strategies to avoid the war. Let's be honest here.
 
NitroX: Halloween has nothing to do with Satan. Before Christian misinterpretation of the holiday, it was a festival honoring saints and hallowed souls, hence the original name "All Hallows Eve". The problem stems with the christian faith incorrectly ascribing pagansim with satanism.

Glenn: Clinton was a Rhode's Scholar and the use of political connections to avoid draft orders was very common among the ivy leaguers. Were the draft still in effect I have no doubt that it would still be common since how often do politicians willingly send their own children into war?

Not arguing that he did things to avoid the draft but neither of them did anything illegal in those regards. And to be honest, I don't look down on any draft dodger because I don't believe any man should be forced to fight in a war he doesn't believe in. Conscription is tantamount to slavery; if our shores had been invaded by Vietnamese landing parties it would have been a different story altogether.
 
*sigh*
I should have unsubbed from this thread...

>The idea that Catholic priests were just frustrated heterosexuals who took advantage of targets of opportunity is risible and entirely belied by the histories of these predators. These were homosexual deviants who lied their way into the priesthood and then made a career of predating on, largely, adolescent boys.<emphasis mine

They're predators, pure and simple. Such go where they will have the easiest/safest access to their prey: for a lion, it's the savahanna. For a gay sexual predator, the most common are Boy Scouts and the Preisthood. basic logic, folks...

>And while we're free-firing as to the sources and causes of priestly deviance, let us not forget the bishops, the shepherds, sworn by oath to God above to protect and teach the littlest ones. Instead, they protected and shepherded the perverts, from one parish to another, with no warnings given.<

You can expand that: in family abuse situations, you have a similar problem. People have GOT to quit excepting the abuse of children as "normal", or hiding it to "protect the faith" or "protect the family". That just leads to more abuse...
 
Well, I just gotta disagree with you there Miss Rose,

What about the priesthood would make it a natural haven for homosexual predators? Priests in their daily work deal with everyone in the parish, young, old, white, black, single, married, man, woman, boy, girl. As noted, even the old altar-boy-in-the-sacristy stereotype, while perhaps being true for some of the older predators wouldn't really obtain today. Am I to take it the vow of celibacy gives greater cover to homosexual predators than to heterosexual predators? Where are all those heterosexual predator priests?

As to [ac]cepting child abuse as "normal," I've never encountered anyone in my 45 years who claimed it to be so. In fact, the universal reaction to it, even among hardened criminals, seems to be one of revulsion and an urge to very rough justice. I take it from your sig line, your experience is different. That saddens me.

Go well, dear lady. . .
 
Hitler was worse than Stalin, who killed over 20 million of his people? Some critique; no credibility after the first attempt; bzzt, try again.

The Repubs suck perspiring, follicle-laden gonads. The Dems are slightly worse, most days; slightly better some.

www.constitutionparty.com
 
*sigh*

>Well, I just gotta disagree with you there Miss Rose,<

Assuming that someone is female because they have the word "Rose" in their handle isn't the best idea. FYI, I have an outie (or did last time I checked). Last time my wife (Spoon) checked, it was functional... ;)

>What about the priesthood would make it a natural haven for homosexual predators? Priests in their daily work deal with everyone in the parish, young, old, white, black, single, married, man, woman, boy, girl. As noted, even the old altar-boy-in-the-sacristy stereotype, while perhaps being true for some of the older predators wouldn't really obtain today. Am I to take it the vow of celibacy gives greater cover to homosexual predators than to heterosexual predators? Where are all those heterosexual predator priests?<

Up until fairly recently, it was assumed that lil' Johnny was safe with the parish priest. At least in all the cases I'm aware of, the victims are now adults, placing the abuse at 15, 20, or even more years ago. At that time, the Church Heirarchy took the position that hiding any cases of abuse better served the Church...

>As to [ac]cepting child abuse as "normal," I've never encountered anyone in my 45 years who claimed it to be so. In fact, the universal reaction to it, even among hardened criminals, seems to be one of revulsion and an urge to very rough justice. I take it from your sig line, your experience is different. That saddens me.<

In any group not directly involved, it IS reviled. In families where abuse has been occuring, quite often it is covered up: sometimesto "protect the family's good name", sometimes because admitting it happened would be admitting that mom & dad "aren't good parents" (not necessarily true, but a common belief). Sometimes denial is just because the mind can't wrap around it (uncle Buck COULDN'T have molested Suzy!")...

Had a meeting today with a potential BACA member, who had been abused herself as a child. She's no longer in touch with her family, as they STILL deny that any abuse happened. Which is a shame: she had her 1 year old with her, and the child was a bundle of joy. His grandparents are missing out because they can't admit to something that happened years ago, and she can't let go (and I can't say as I blame her)...

>Go well, dear lady. . .<

Think I covered this well enough above. Although, should Dick get ahold of this, I'm gonna catch all kinds of greif about guys in kilts, with long hair... ;)
 
Whoa, Mr. Rose,

I do apologize. I confused you with another intelligent, articulate, infinitely patient, oh- and female - member. Please, it was an honest brain cramp, and not a result of rash assumptions. Now, who the heck was I thinkin' of...?

Go well, good sir!
 
>I do apologize. I confused you with another intelligent, articulate, infinitely patient, oh- and female - member. Please, it was an honest brain cramp, and not a result of rash assumptions. Now, who the heck was I thinkin' of...? <

'Sok... you just helped set me up for Dick to take a couple shots at me... I'm used to THAT by now... ;)

No harm, no foul... no need for you to hold a target for me... ;) DON'T do it again, or I have to break out the wet noodle!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top