But if you are looking at a larger family (er, let's try 4 kids), then that kind of space just isn't going to cut it in terms of psychological health.
How about you don't be the type of fucking douchebag that has 4 kids? Especially don't do that and then expect everybody else to subsidize your piss poor decision making capabilities which we are forced to in a number of ways.
You can argue that a lifestyle choice about not having a larger family is more sustainable, but I don't know that it's ethical to make that call for another person.
True, but the complete lack of ethics of the type of scumbag that would have 4 fucking kids kind of removes them from ethical discussions. They've chosen to consider themselves above ethical considerations towards others so there's no real reason to pretend that ethical considerations should apply to scumbags like themselves.
That's not to say that enforcing invasive government policies is a good thing, just don't pretend that ethical discussions apply to people without ethics. That's always been a recipe for disaster as summed up in the quote, "Evil will always triumph over good because good is dumb". Dumb is thinking ethics are held by unethical amoral scum.
You didn't just... seriously... describe the Reagan defense as "good"? Please, seriously?
In the sense that he literally got away with murder, drug dealing, and aiding and abetting terrorists it was a good defense. In the sense that justice was completely miscarried and Congress's cowardly failure to hold him and the rest of that pack of traitors accountable led to them coming back in the current administration to continue their crimes against this nation, it was a bad thing.
I would suggest that if you are good enough for the Holy See, you are probably good enough (too good?) to run for the US Senate.
He was also a Nazi sympathizer who won his position through actively working to subvert justice to prevent prosecution of scumbags who rape little kids.
You might consider actually developing a set of ethics and morals rather than claiming the magical sanctity of one of the most evil organizations in history.
Sure, he's perfect for the Church, but let's not pretend that the Church would know a moral if it got bitten on the ass by a pack of them.
Um.. what positions are you referring to there? I'm curious as to what Europeans (and I'm assuming here, based on what you stated, that you are one) think are "far right positions" that Americans would be ignorant of.
No, I'm an American. It's just that I'm not ignorant. That must have been what confused you.
Name one "left" position Obama holds. Go, on, if you're so weirded out to hear him called "centrist" surely there must be a whole bunch of them?
What I said was that even Obama is a bit far right *for my tastes*. Fr example, he voted to let Shrub and AT&T off for committing treason with the telecom immunity bill. He panders to the religious loons when religion should not even be mentioned in a presidential campaign in a country explicitly founded on the rejection of religion having any role in the government of a free society.
It's all well and good to call someone ignorant, but it's really quite a sin to allow that condition to continue if you have access to the very thing that will relieve it.
If you're over 10 years old and you're that far out of touch with reality, how TF am I supposed to fix *that*?!?
Here's what you would know if you had ever taken 5 minutes out of your life in an attempt to know what you're talking about politically:
"Left" and "Right" as political terms arose in the French Assembly before the revolution. The representatives of the crown, the nobility and the church sat on the right. The representatives of the people sat on the left. There was no center as Liberalism (what the word actually means, not what you probably think it means) hadn't been invented yet.
So "Right" is an inherently elitist, big government philosophy dedicated to maintaining and growing the power of the elite group at the expense of the populace. Feudalism, corporatism/fascism, theocracy are all characteristic right wing forms of government.
That's why there is no "American" right. The right by its very nature is inherently anti-American. So is the left, really, just not as clearly and absolutely and it's more a question of degree and action rather than a necessary part of the philosophy as it is with the right.
Liberalism is the only philosophy compatible with America, which makes sense as our constitution was the crowning achievement of the Liberal movement.
Um...since when is socialism (whether national socialism [wikipedia.org] or any other sort) a conservative creation?
Um... since when does calling a thing something make it so? Let me guess, you think "People's Democratic Republic" typically describes a democratically run republic?
"conservative" is a completely relative term. It just means wanting to move backwards to some most likely mythical "golden age". US "conservatives" currently have invented a "golden age" where America was a theocracy and they are actively working to undermine and subvert the constitution in order to achieve that.
Hitler *defined* Naziism purely by its opposition to communism. He pushed extreme Christianity as an arm of the state. He was not pushing Socialism.
If you think he was, well, you might take a look at what groups in America were huge fans of his and see if those groups are at all socialistic. Well, you have a lot of the industrialists Henry Ford, for example as well as our current President's grandfather. No, the Nazis were rabidly pro corporate, pro Christianity, jingoistic and war mongering. Wow, that's an exact match to the current US Republican party.
If you can stop foaming at the mouth long enough to keep from drooling into the pages,
You not having the foggiest idea what you're talking about doesn't constitute rabid foaming on my part. All you said is that you don't understand what you're talking about. Ignorance like yours is what let the original Nazis get in power and your specific ignorance is what's letting them do it again.
If Grandpa leaves you his collection of hate literature, that's not an inheritance you have to embrace. Ditto for the U.S. Consitution, a document drafted without the input of women, without the input of the poor, and without the input of minorities.
*Originally* drafted....
All of the amendments are actually part of the constitution now, and they were not all so drafted.
I think the apathy about the Constitution among the American people is based not only on simple laziness. The recognition that it's a bigoted document must play some role.
There are several reasons. Among the religious extremists who have come out of the woodwork since the rise of the threat of "the godless communists" and were put to work against their country and even against their religion by the Republican party, they despise the constitution with every bit of vitriol they can muster. They hate it because it was specifically designed to prevent them from inflicting their religious hatred on others. What's an easy way to tell if somebody absolutely despises America and every decent thing it ever claimed to stand for? If they say, "America is a Christian nation" or "America was founded on Christianity" then they hate America with all their hearts.
For the people who actually benefit from the Republican party (the very rich), they hate the constitution because it doesn't allow them to rob the people to pay for their own mistakes and hence avoid taking any personal responsibility. It doesn't allow them to keep making up wars for their personal profit and to the detriment of America and the American people. and on and on.
The Democrats hate the constitution because while it guarantees equality under the law, it doesn't guarantee any other sort of equality. It deals with the fact that some people just are better than others at various things and they don't like that. Of course, they enjoy robbing the people blind as well which is another reason they hate it.
So given that the current text of the constitution has eliminated all discrimination (just from itself, not actually in reality or anything of the sort;-), your argument doesn't really apply. It applied before many of the amendments, but not any more.
Now the fact that unless you're really fucking rich you have no control over your government certainly leads many people to give up the futile efforts, but there's nothing more satisfying than giving a would be ruler a bullet hole where their face used to be, so I'd think more people would be eager to get behind such counter revolutionary activity.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a description of Obama as "Centrist."
Well, your difficulty is due to the fact that you don't have any sort of a reasonable reference.
The Republican party is essentially the far right extreme, or corporate fascist. They are out there on the fringe. The Democratic party is essentially moderate right wing with a few centrist/ moderate left elements.
So if you hear somebody described on the media in the US as "extremely liberal", what they mean is something between centrist and moderate right. What they'll describe as "centrist" is hard right and what they call "right" is the far right fringe of the right wing.
So Obama is pretty much centrist, although leans a bit far to the right. It's just that since WW2, after defeating the fascists (which the US industrialists at the time were rabidly opposed to. They loved fascism and wanted it here badly.) the US took a hard right turn and has continued down that path until now we're living under the system we fought WW2 against.
So, it's really easy to wrap your head around the idea that Obama is a centrist, but you have to actually understand what that means, what the left and right are and how America was designed explicitly to be neither, meaning both left and right are anti-American.
It's this deeply gross level of ignorance over basic, simple concepts which you demonstrate which is endemic in America these days and why so many weak willed fools let themselves be so easily manipulated to work against their own best interests.
If you knew anything at all about history, politics, or damn near any other related field you wouldn't have a hard time wrapping your head around a basic simple fact.
Please for everyone's sake try and learn a little bit about reality or don't vote.
Real Americans can take a look around, and say "I've seen worse." and rebuild. If you're not interested in that, move.
Except there has never been worse fascism in America, so of course, you'd be nothing but a liar were you to claim that you'd seen worse here. Let me guess, you're one of the fascist fucks working against America? McCain sticker on the car?
Can you remember the last time a constitution violation has been protested by a violent mob carrying guns, shooting police officers and lynching everyone in Capitol?
Unfortunately not, but it would be the greatest day this nation has seen in over a hundred years. Imagine, the American people getting off their lazy, cowardly, treasonous asses and actually trying to live up to their birthright? Naw, it'll never happen.
The market is supposed to create that pressure, not the threat of piracy.
The threat of piracy *is* a market force which is creating that pressure. Sony, being rabidly anti free market as are all major corporations, hates having to deal with market pressure, so they lobby for laws criminalizing the relevant market pressure.
How you can try to pretend that there's some magical way of taking a real market pressure and declaring it not a market pressure is beyond me, but please stop. It isn't correct and it makes you look like you've blindly swallowed some crappy corporate agenda.
A right wing conservative is a theocrat. You can't separate those things. Right wing is necessarily big government and big church in league against the people hence theocratic. That's what "right" means for fuck's sake.
Please stop using words to describe yourself if you don't even know what they mean. Ignorant dipshits like yourself is why this country has gone so far to the right. Now keep in mind any leanings to the right whatsoever are completely anti-American and unconstitutional as the right has nothing to offer which is in any way consistent with the constitution and there's damn little on the left which is consistent either, but at least there are philosophical overlaps between Liberalism (the basis of America) and moderate leftism. The right, being inherently elitist and supportive of big oppressive government is entirely inconsistent with America and our constitution.
You know we fought WW2 against you sickening right wing conservative fuckers and now you've signed on for the same fucking thing?
What a scumbag nazi sympathizing piece of shit you are.
Wow, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have presumed to speak for the raging psychotic fringe of our population.
Ahhh, so actually paying attention counts as raging psychotic fringe now? *Looks around* going by percentages maybe. The fact remains though, that thanking douchebags for supporting our government's douchebaggery thereby enabling it makes you a piece of shit and a liability to everybody around you.
A great many of these one-way travelers were fleeing religious persecution (obviously a few years later) - limited not necessarily so much by transportation technology, but by conviction to not bow to the governing church - and willing to die for it.
That inaccurately describes some of the original settlers, hardly a great many though. Most of the people leaving Europe for religious reasons were extremist nutjobs who could not live in a civil society without trying to murder and oppress everyone around them. That's why we have the highest percentage of extremist wackos today who despise this country and all it stands for from the bottom of their black little hearts. That is who and what most of the people "fleeing religious persecution" were. You know, the same sick fuckers who came over here and started hanging witches and all that other typical religious lunacy?
Haven't you gone to an elementary school Thanksgiving play lately? Oh wait - we can't talk about US Christian history in schools anymore.
Well, your deeply debilitating problem is you apparently haven't learned anything about history above an elementary school level if you're still mindlessly repeating elementary school fairy tales.
Where's my ticket?
Given the fact that the only "religious" persecution going on in America is by religious loons against people who don't share every twisted little scrap of lunacy in their specific beliefs you're pretty clearly delusional and out of touch with reality.
We, the decent *citizens* of America, do not appreciate it *at all*. We have a hard enough time dealing with the criminals composing our government and moronic tools like you who refuse to ever actually think. Supporting your government in criminal actions makes you a fucking traitor you piece of shit. So if Australia and the rest of our sycophantic followers would grow a spine and start doing the right thing rather than blindly following along with our various hare brained schemes for world domination, then we'd not be as able to engage in them.
In short, grow up and be a man you pathetic boot licking coward.
You have no argument, and you know it. I accurately pointed out what you were doing and how thoroughly disgusting it is and so you crawl away on your belly like the cowardly piece of shit you are, afraid to even attempt to defend your completely bankrupt position.
What a pathetic disgrace to your species and this nation you are.
You do know that merely making an ad hominem doesn't constitute an argument, right? Perhaps you should think before babbling in future?
Actually, I do protect and defend America right here on her streets, staving off its fall into lawlessness and anarchy for as long as possible but I have no doubt latte liberals like you would consider me the enemy or, at the very least, a mere tool for the "American Taliban" as you so succinctly put it.
I don't know what a latte liberal is or why you would think that describes me, but you've already demonstrated your lack of rational thinking ability, so I'm as unsurprised as I am confused by what you think your point is. Right, you're fighting off lawlessness and anarchy on American streets? WTF are you on about? More delusional babbling? Most likely.
What is it you're doing so I can even attempt to address your question?
Someone like you calling me delusional or cowardly as you likely sit comfortably in your plush chair in a quiet American suburb is the purest form of irony. Have a fantastic day.
"Likely" obviously doesn't mean what you think it does. There's nothing ironic about me speaking the truth. You tried to pretend that because America isn't yet as bad as Afghanistan in spite of the best efforts of the religious extremists in this country that decent people should shut up about the problems here and allow our own Taliban free reign to continue undermining and subverting this nation. That *proves* you to be delusional and cowardly as well as a despiser of this country and what it stands for.
Now, if you misspoke, then you should just apologize and make a statement which you actually agree with. Whining about me honestly calling you out on your actual statement rather than what you might have meant to say had you thought it through, again, just makes you look like a douche.
For all the hipsters here in the states that whine about this being a police state anytime some real criminal gets tased, please see above article.
For all the delusional, ignorant, cowards like yourself in the states who think pointing to the worst of the worst, claiming that we're *currently* still a bit better than them and pretending that constitutes a sane point please remove cranium from rectum.
This is exactly what the good decent American *Citizens* (not you, you obviously prefer to be a subject) are working to prevent here in the face of a massive well funded campaign to destroy American liberty in the same manner by our own America Taliban.
In short, when you ignorantly whine and froth like that, you're not defending America from anything. You're defending its enemies right here at home.
Wasn't the whole point of the invasion to remove the religious extremists from power in Afghanistan?Wasn't the whole point of the invasion to remove the religious extremists from power in Afghanistan?
Of course not. Have you ever read a history book? Ever paid a scrap of attention to how anything in the world actually works? I hope you were kidding.
People high in American Government publicly said that if there was a credible strong-man (aka dictator) that they could have installed in Afghanistan or Iraq, they would have done it just to quell the violence and return order to the region.
How the fuck do you think Saddam got there in the first place, you ignorant refusing to learn a damn thing from history piece of shit?
The alternative is *a fucking alternative* not doing the same exact fucking thing again and claiming it's different this time even though the same subhuman fuckers are pocketing all the cash for it once again.
This is exactly the gross sort of delusional ignorance that makes Republicans the worst threat and the most ignorant, cowardly traitors America has ever seen by a long shot.
Then they are *not* a Christian. Go read the fucking Bible. The whole thing, cover to cover. And then look at the actual history of Christianity and it's current treasonous incarnation in America. Then *and only then* come back and open your mouth again. You'll at least be speaking from a position of knowledge rather than one of gross delusion as you currently are .
Reading comprehension is not your strong suite in this language. No one said it was a rational argument. The whole point I was making is that there is a difference in beliefs about this fact as evidenced by the argument.
"argument" can have a few different meanings. One is a reasoned logical series of statements designed to prove or demonstrate the likelyhood of some view. Another is "yes it is", "no it isn't" etc. ad nauseum.
When dealing with people, those who are capable of the first are able to be swayed by such. Those who aren't capable of the first and base real decisions solely on some version of the second can't be reasoned with. You can't reason somebody out of a position reason didn't get them into.
But basically, you seem to be as unwilling to put yourself in someone else's mindset as they are. And I don't understand why, but I'd like to learn.
I've already done so and found it utterly lacking. Spouting ignorant nonsense because somebody else told you it was true, while ignoring all evidence to the contrary does not lead anywhere good. That's the problem with religious beliefs. By that I mean beliefs which are held religiously, not necessarily beliefs about religion. Obviously religion falls completely into that ignorant area, but other non-religious beliefs are arrived and held in a religious manner, that is without any rational backing and in spite of evidence to the contrary.
So, it's easy to put yourself in their mindset, but unhelpful and utterly without value. To sum it up: Ignorance is bad mmmkay?
So if you'd answer these few questions we can get started:
Not interested in filling out a survey, thanks anyhow.
I'll address this one though just for shits and grins:
Explain in detail how arguments amongst those with the same religious convictions are resolved and why these would be impossible to use to change their stance on an issue.
Typically throughout history it's done by declaring them heretics and torturing them to death. That's the history of the Christian religion, Islam and Judaism as well.. Hopefully it's obvious to you now why the founding fathers were so adamant and so absolutely correct that religion can have no place in the government of a free society.
If that was more than a rhetorical question I fear your ignorance.
Slashdot Mirror
But if you are looking at a larger family (er, let's try 4 kids), then that kind of space just isn't going to cut it in terms of psychological health.
How about you don't be the type of fucking douchebag that has 4 kids? Especially don't do that and then expect everybody else to subsidize your piss poor decision making capabilities which we are forced to in a number of ways.
You can argue that a lifestyle choice about not having a larger family is more sustainable, but I don't know that it's ethical to make that call for another person.
True, but the complete lack of ethics of the type of scumbag that would have 4 fucking kids kind of removes them from ethical discussions. They've chosen to consider themselves above ethical considerations towards others so there's no real reason to pretend that ethical considerations should apply to scumbags like themselves.
That's not to say that enforcing invasive government policies is a good thing, just don't pretend that ethical discussions apply to people without ethics. That's always been a recipe for disaster as summed up in the quote, "Evil will always triumph over good because good is dumb". Dumb is thinking ethics are held by unethical amoral scum.
Real geeks brag about writing failed pilots!
And only the scum beneath the bottom of the barrel brag about voting for failed pilots ;-)
I still kind of like the guy but even I'm not going to say he's terribly bright.
Why do you hate America?
You didn't just... seriously... describe the Reagan defense as "good"? Please, seriously?
In the sense that he literally got away with murder, drug dealing, and aiding and abetting terrorists it was a good defense.
In the sense that justice was completely miscarried and Congress's cowardly failure to hold him and the rest of that pack of traitors accountable led to them coming back in the current administration to continue their crimes against this nation, it was a bad thing.
I would suggest that if you are good enough for the Holy See, you are probably good enough (too good?) to run for the US Senate.
He was also a Nazi sympathizer who won his position through actively working to subvert justice to prevent prosecution of scumbags who rape little kids.
You might consider actually developing a set of ethics and morals rather than claiming the magical sanctity of one of the most evil organizations in history.
Sure, he's perfect for the Church, but let's not pretend that the Church would know a moral if it got bitten on the ass by a pack of them.
A Senator in the Fed Pen? he's going to come face to face with a whole new series of tubes!
Better get some lube for your tube, Stevie boy!
Um.. what positions are you referring to there? I'm curious as to what Europeans (and I'm assuming here, based on what you stated, that you are one) think are "far right positions" that Americans would be ignorant of.
No, I'm an American. It's just that I'm not ignorant. That must have been what confused you.
Name one "left" position Obama holds. Go, on, if you're so weirded out to hear him called "centrist" surely there must be a whole bunch of them?
What I said was that even Obama is a bit far right *for my tastes*.
Fr example, he voted to let Shrub and AT&T off for committing treason with the telecom immunity bill. He panders to the religious loons when religion should not even be mentioned in a presidential campaign in a country explicitly founded on the rejection of religion having any role in the government of a free society.
It's all well and good to call someone ignorant, but it's really quite a sin to allow that condition to continue if you have access to the very thing that will relieve it.
If you're over 10 years old and you're that far out of touch with reality, how TF am I supposed to fix *that*?!?
Here's what you would know if you had ever taken 5 minutes out of your life in an attempt to know what you're talking about politically:
"Left" and "Right" as political terms arose in the French Assembly before the revolution. The representatives of the crown, the nobility and the church sat on the right. The representatives of the people sat on the left. There was no center as Liberalism (what the word actually means, not what you probably think it means) hadn't been invented yet.
So "Right" is an inherently elitist, big government philosophy dedicated to maintaining and growing the power of the elite group at the expense of the populace. Feudalism, corporatism/fascism, theocracy are all characteristic right wing forms of government.
That's why there is no "American" right.
The right by its very nature is inherently anti-American.
So is the left, really, just not as clearly and absolutely and it's more a question of degree and action rather than a necessary part of the philosophy as it is with the right.
Liberalism is the only philosophy compatible with America, which makes sense as our constitution was the crowning achievement of the Liberal movement.
Um...since when is socialism (whether national socialism [wikipedia.org] or any other sort) a conservative creation?
Um... since when does calling a thing something make it so?
Let me guess, you think "People's Democratic Republic" typically describes a democratically run republic?
"conservative" is a completely relative term. It just means wanting to move backwards to some most likely mythical "golden age".
US "conservatives" currently have invented a "golden age" where America was a theocracy and they are actively working to undermine and subvert the constitution in order to achieve that.
Hitler *defined* Naziism purely by its opposition to communism. He pushed extreme Christianity as an arm of the state. He was not pushing Socialism.
If you think he was, well, you might take a look at what groups in America were huge fans of his and see if those groups are at all socialistic.
Well, you have a lot of the industrialists Henry Ford, for example as well as our current President's grandfather. No, the Nazis were rabidly pro corporate, pro Christianity, jingoistic and war mongering. Wow, that's an exact match to the current US Republican party.
If you can stop foaming at the mouth long enough to keep from drooling into the pages,
You not having the foggiest idea what you're talking about doesn't constitute rabid foaming on my part. All you said is that you don't understand what you're talking about. Ignorance like yours is what let the original Nazis get in power and your specific ignorance is what's letting them do it again.
Thanks for nothing.
If Grandpa leaves you his collection of hate literature, that's not an inheritance you have to embrace. Ditto for the U.S. Consitution, a document drafted without the input of women, without the input of the poor, and without the input of minorities.
*Originally* drafted....
All of the amendments are actually part of the constitution now, and they were not all so drafted.
I think the apathy about the Constitution among the American people is based not only on simple laziness. The recognition that it's a bigoted document must play some role.
There are several reasons.
Among the religious extremists who have come out of the woodwork since the rise of the threat of "the godless communists" and were put to work against their country and even against their religion by the Republican party, they despise the constitution with every bit of vitriol they can muster. They hate it because it was specifically designed to prevent them from inflicting their religious hatred on others.
What's an easy way to tell if somebody absolutely despises America and every decent thing it ever claimed to stand for? If they say, "America is a Christian nation" or "America was founded on Christianity" then they hate America with all their hearts.
For the people who actually benefit from the Republican party (the very rich), they hate the constitution because it doesn't allow them to rob the people to pay for their own mistakes and hence avoid taking any personal responsibility. It doesn't allow them to keep making up wars for their personal profit and to the detriment of America and the American people. and on and on.
The Democrats hate the constitution because while it guarantees equality under the law, it doesn't guarantee any other sort of equality. It deals with the fact that some people just are better than others at various things and they don't like that. Of course, they enjoy robbing the people blind as well which is another reason they hate it.
So given that the current text of the constitution has eliminated all discrimination (just from itself, not actually in reality or anything of the sort ;-), your argument doesn't really apply. It applied before many of the amendments, but not any more.
Now the fact that unless you're really fucking rich you have no control over your government certainly leads many people to give up the futile efforts, but there's nothing more satisfying than giving a would be ruler a bullet hole where their face used to be, so I'd think more people would be eager to get behind such counter revolutionary activity.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around a description of Obama as "Centrist."
Well, your difficulty is due to the fact that you don't have any sort of a reasonable reference.
The Republican party is essentially the far right extreme, or corporate fascist. They are out there on the fringe.
The Democratic party is essentially moderate right wing with a few centrist/ moderate left elements.
So if you hear somebody described on the media in the US as "extremely liberal", what they mean is something between centrist and moderate right.
What they'll describe as "centrist" is hard right and what they call "right" is the far right fringe of the right wing.
So Obama is pretty much centrist, although leans a bit far to the right. It's just that since WW2, after defeating the fascists (which the US industrialists at the time were rabidly opposed to. They loved fascism and wanted it here badly.) the US took a hard right turn and has continued down that path until now we're living under the system we fought WW2 against.
So, it's really easy to wrap your head around the idea that Obama is a centrist, but you have to actually understand what that means, what the left and right are and how America was designed explicitly to be neither, meaning both left and right are anti-American.
It's this deeply gross level of ignorance over basic, simple concepts which you demonstrate which is endemic in America these days and why so many weak willed fools let themselves be so easily manipulated to work against their own best interests.
If you knew anything at all about history, politics, or damn near any other related field you wouldn't have a hard time wrapping your head around a basic simple fact.
Please for everyone's sake try and learn a little bit about reality or don't vote.
Real Americans can take a look around, and say "I've seen worse." and rebuild. If you're not interested in that, move.
Except there has never been worse fascism in America, so of course, you'd be nothing but a liar were you to claim that you'd seen worse here. Let me guess, you're one of the fascist fucks working against America? McCain sticker on the car?
Can you remember the last time a constitution violation has been protested by a violent mob carrying guns, shooting police officers and lynching everyone in Capitol?
Unfortunately not, but it would be the greatest day this nation has seen in over a hundred years. Imagine, the American people getting off their lazy, cowardly, treasonous asses and actually trying to live up to their birthright? Naw, it'll never happen.
The market is supposed to create that pressure, not the threat of piracy.
The threat of piracy *is* a market force which is creating that pressure. Sony, being rabidly anti free market as are all major corporations, hates having to deal with market pressure, so they lobby for laws criminalizing the relevant market pressure.
How you can try to pretend that there's some magical way of taking a real market pressure and declaring it not a market pressure is beyond me, but please stop. It isn't correct and it makes you look like you've blindly swallowed some crappy corporate agenda.
Right-wing, yes. Conservative, oh yes. Theocratic? Likely not.
Contradiction.
A right wing conservative is a theocrat. You can't separate those things. Right wing is necessarily big government and big church in league against the people hence theocratic.
That's what "right" means for fuck's sake.
Please stop using words to describe yourself if you don't even know what they mean.
Ignorant dipshits like yourself is why this country has gone so far to the right. Now keep in mind any leanings to the right whatsoever are completely anti-American and unconstitutional as the right has nothing to offer which is in any way consistent with the constitution and there's damn little on the left which is consistent either, but at least there are philosophical overlaps between Liberalism (the basis of America) and moderate leftism. The right, being inherently elitist and supportive of big oppressive government is entirely inconsistent with America and our constitution.
You know we fought WW2 against you sickening right wing conservative fuckers and now you've signed on for the same fucking thing?
What a scumbag nazi sympathizing piece of shit you are.
Wow, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have presumed to speak for the raging psychotic fringe of our population.
Ahhh, so actually paying attention counts as raging psychotic fringe now? *Looks around* going by percentages maybe.
The fact remains though, that thanking douchebags for supporting our government's douchebaggery thereby enabling it makes you a piece of shit and a liability to everybody around you.
A great many of these one-way travelers were fleeing religious persecution (obviously a few years later) - limited not necessarily so much by transportation technology, but by conviction to not bow to the governing church - and willing to die for it.
That inaccurately describes some of the original settlers, hardly a great many though.
Most of the people leaving Europe for religious reasons were extremist nutjobs who could not live in a civil society without trying to murder and oppress everyone around them. That's why we have the highest percentage of extremist wackos today who despise this country and all it stands for from the bottom of their black little hearts. That is who and what most of the people "fleeing religious persecution" were. You know, the same sick fuckers who came over here and started hanging witches and all that other typical religious lunacy?
Haven't you gone to an elementary school Thanksgiving play lately? Oh wait - we can't talk about US Christian history in schools anymore.
Well, your deeply debilitating problem is you apparently haven't learned anything about history above an elementary school level if you're still mindlessly repeating elementary school fairy tales.
Where's my ticket?
Given the fact that the only "religious" persecution going on in America is by religious loons against people who don't share every twisted little scrap of lunacy in their specific beliefs you're pretty clearly delusional and out of touch with reality.
And in all seriousness, we do appreciate it.
Speak for yourself you fucking douchebag.
We, the decent *citizens* of America, do not appreciate it *at all*. We have a hard enough time dealing with the criminals composing our government and moronic tools like you who refuse to ever actually think. Supporting your government in criminal actions makes you a fucking traitor you piece of shit. So if Australia and the rest of our sycophantic followers would grow a spine and start doing the right thing rather than blindly following along with our various hare brained schemes for world domination, then we'd not be as able to engage in them.
In short, grow up and be a man you pathetic boot licking coward.
Typical.
You have no argument, and you know it. I accurately pointed out what you were doing and how thoroughly disgusting it is and so you crawl away on your belly like the cowardly piece of shit you are, afraid to even attempt to defend your completely bankrupt position.
What a pathetic disgrace to your species and this nation you are.
Remove foil hat. I think you are overheating.
You do know that merely making an ad hominem doesn't constitute an argument, right? Perhaps you should think before babbling in future?
Actually, I do protect and defend America right here on her streets, staving off its fall into lawlessness and anarchy for as long as possible but I have no doubt latte liberals like you would consider me the enemy or, at the very least, a mere tool for the "American Taliban" as you so succinctly put it.
I don't know what a latte liberal is or why you would think that describes me, but you've already demonstrated your lack of rational thinking ability, so I'm as unsurprised as I am confused by what you think your point is.
Right, you're fighting off lawlessness and anarchy on American streets? WTF are you on about? More delusional babbling? Most likely.
What is it you're doing so I can even attempt to address your question?
Someone like you calling me delusional or cowardly as you likely sit comfortably in your plush chair in a quiet American suburb is the purest form of irony. Have a fantastic day.
"Likely" obviously doesn't mean what you think it does.
There's nothing ironic about me speaking the truth. You tried to pretend that because America isn't yet as bad as Afghanistan in spite of the best efforts of the religious extremists in this country that decent people should shut up about the problems here and allow our own Taliban free reign to continue undermining and subverting this nation.
That *proves* you to be delusional and cowardly as well as a despiser of this country and what it stands for.
Now, if you misspoke, then you should just apologize and make a statement which you actually agree with. Whining about me honestly calling you out on your actual statement rather than what you might have meant to say had you thought it through, again, just makes you look like a douche.
For all the hipsters here in the states that whine about this being a police state anytime some real criminal gets tased, please see above article.
For all the delusional, ignorant, cowards like yourself in the states who think pointing to the worst of the worst, claiming that we're *currently* still a bit better than them and pretending that constitutes a sane point please remove cranium from rectum.
This is exactly what the good decent American *Citizens* (not you, you obviously prefer to be a subject) are working to prevent here in the face of a massive well funded campaign to destroy American liberty in the same manner by our own America Taliban.
In short, when you ignorantly whine and froth like that, you're not defending America from anything. You're defending its enemies right here at home.
Wasn't the whole point of the invasion to remove the religious extremists from power in Afghanistan?Wasn't the whole point of the invasion to remove the religious extremists from power in Afghanistan?
Of course not. Have you ever read a history book? Ever paid a scrap of attention to how anything in the world actually works?
I hope you were kidding.
People high in American Government publicly said that if there was a credible strong-man (aka dictator) that they could have installed in Afghanistan or Iraq, they would have done it just to quell the violence and return order to the region.
How the fuck do you think Saddam got there in the first place, you ignorant refusing to learn a damn thing from history piece of shit?
The alternative is *a fucking alternative* not doing the same exact fucking thing again and claiming it's different this time even though the same subhuman fuckers are pocketing all the cash for it once again.
This is exactly the gross sort of delusional ignorance that makes Republicans the worst threat and the most ignorant, cowardly traitors America has ever seen by a long shot.
c) a Christian who doesn't go in for oppression
Then they are *not* a Christian. Go read the fucking Bible. The whole thing, cover to cover. And then look at the actual history of Christianity and it's current treasonous incarnation in America. Then *and only then* come back and open your mouth again. You'll at least be speaking from a position of knowledge rather than one of gross delusion as you currently are .
Math History and biographies (Pythagoras, Newton, Ramanujan, Hardy, Erdos).
Don't leave out Hypatia and Emmy Noether. Interesting stories and good female role models.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suite in this language. No one said it was a rational argument. The whole point I was making is that there is a difference in beliefs about this fact as evidenced by the argument.
"argument" can have a few different meanings. One is a reasoned logical series of statements designed to prove or demonstrate the likelyhood of some view.
Another is "yes it is", "no it isn't" etc. ad nauseum.
When dealing with people, those who are capable of the first are able to be swayed by such. Those who aren't capable of the first and base real decisions solely on some version of the second can't be reasoned with. You can't reason somebody out of a position reason didn't get them into.
But basically, you seem to be as unwilling to put yourself in someone else's mindset as they are. And I don't understand why, but I'd like to learn.
I've already done so and found it utterly lacking. Spouting ignorant nonsense because somebody else told you it was true, while ignoring all evidence to the contrary does not lead anywhere good. That's the problem with religious beliefs. By that I mean beliefs which are held religiously, not necessarily beliefs about religion. Obviously religion falls completely into that ignorant area, but other non-religious beliefs are arrived and held in a religious manner, that is without any rational backing and in spite of evidence to the contrary.
So, it's easy to put yourself in their mindset, but unhelpful and utterly without value. To sum it up: Ignorance is bad mmmkay?
So if you'd answer these few questions we can get started:
Not interested in filling out a survey, thanks anyhow.
I'll address this one though just for shits and grins:
Explain in detail how arguments amongst those with the same religious convictions are resolved and why these would be impossible to use to change their stance on an issue.
Typically throughout history it's done by declaring them heretics and torturing them to death. That's the history of the Christian religion, Islam and Judaism as well.. Hopefully it's obvious to you now why the founding fathers were so adamant and so absolutely correct that religion can have no place in the government of a free society.
If that was more than a rhetorical question I fear your ignorance.