August 21, 2019, 06:40:02 PM

Author Topic: Socio-political discussion  (Read 3379 times)

Mason Pierce

  • X-REGISTERED
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1082
  • Orion Rules.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #50 on: May 08, 2012, 08:16:57 PM »
Foamy is wise squirrel.

TheLegacy

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
    • View Profile
    • GuysNation
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #51 on: May 08, 2012, 09:48:32 PM »
The MMA analogy doesn't quite work for me... but maybe I'm looking at it differently.


If Person A pays Person B for sex, it's illegal....

...unless there are video cameras involved with an intent to distribute it as art.


"Belote is now the new quote champion of the AJAX"
Post Whore Goal:
**Completed Goals**
2,222 before 1/1/2012
2,888 before 2/14/2012
4,500 before 12/25/2012
4554 before 1/1/2013
**New Goals**
4664 before 1/1/2013

CadreCross

  • We all have our Cross to bear ...
  • X-REGISTERED
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1053
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #52 on: May 08, 2012, 11:05:28 PM »
Man, I love that this thread exists. :D

We have three states/territories here in Oz where marijuana is "decriminalised", ie. if you're caught with a small amount there's no criminal charge involved but you have to pay a fine. Other jurisdictions have the option of lesser penalties for minor possession but you can still end up with a criminal record from it if you catch the cop on a bad day.

With regards to what Trey said: having worked in the health system I know how badly pot can fuck some people up. I actually think one of the strongest arguments for legalisation is to introduce a minimum age for legal use. We know alcohol consumption in kids can fuck up their brain development, so we try to make it harder for 'em to drink before their brain is set. By the same token, a significant minority of the young people hospitalised for psychotic episodes, or with long-term problems related to schizophrenia, had their psychiatric issues either triggered or exacerbated by pot use. Read enough mental health cases and you start to pick which ones started toking up when they were 12...

As for the gateway drug argument? I don't buy it. Yeah, a high percentage of people who take "harder" drugs have also partaken of cannabis, but there's probably also a higher percentage of jaywalkers, illegal parkers, shoplifters etc amongst that demographic too. Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.


B: It's possible I have a small man crush on you.  Just wanted to get that out there.
Nicolle: I like you, so I will do things for you.
It's nice to be wanted.

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #53 on: May 09, 2012, 06:16:18 AM »
The MMA analogy doesn't quite work for me... but maybe I'm looking at it differently.


If Person A pays Person B for sex, it's illegal....

...unless there are video cameras involved with an intent to distribute it as art.
Pornography is a record of a performance. You are watching a film and not, yourself, engaging in any direct activity. Prostitution is a direct engagement with another. That's the difference: one is "I'm watching baseball on TV" and the other is "I'm playing baseball in the park."

Quote
As for the gateway drug argument? I don't buy it. Yeah, a high percentage of people who take "harder" drugs have also partaken of cannabis, but there's probably also a higher percentage of jaywalkers, illegal parkers, shoplifters etc amongst that demographic too. Correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation.
This is the single best way to refute the "gateway drug" propaganda: pointing out other "gateway" activities that have nothing to do with anything else.

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

Trey

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 595
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #54 on: May 09, 2012, 08:26:19 AM »
There is obvious correlation.  I dep't that the gateway issue had to be brought up.  There's no way to prove that t is complete propaganda just like there is no way to prove that it is true.  But it is still a vital part of the issue that has to be considered. 

Decriminalization is probably the best you can ever hope for.  I like the death of it, I liked the idea when it came up in Cali Courts. 

My wife and I have talked extensively about this issue over the course of our marriage and I think we have pretty close to the same feelings on it.  Decriminalization would be grand.  It would solve the over population issue in prisons, and bring more money into local governments via fines.  The problem America will run into is the same problem that derailed the entire %99 movement.  If you want to be taken seriously then you have to have professional people at the forefront of your movement. 

Honest to got, prop 19 (decriminalizing in Cali) had a damned good chance yo succeed...until a bunch of hippie stoner kids started demanding legalization.  This made the older, more Republican base a little nervous and shot the whole thingbin the foot.

The same can be said for Occupy.  I don't take then seriously.  I do not think that the 2 or three dozen unemployed kids with metal in their face and beer in their hands have any claim to the "%99."  They are not.  Those of us that pay taxes, work our asses off to support our families, and yet sill manage to make just too much money for help?  Hose are the people that should have protested, but we were too busy working.

Granted I am aware these are two separate issues, and I don't want to get too far off topic.  The point is, if you want decriminalization, people who look like Willie Nelson are not your best best for spokespeople.  Not saying its right, but its politics and to win the game, you have to know how to play it.







Trey

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 595
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #55 on: May 09, 2012, 08:27:42 AM »
Also.  I hate posting from my phone.  I don't like the death of decriminalization.  I like the idea of it.







B

  • Bend the Knee
  • The Brass
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #56 on: May 09, 2012, 08:34:28 AM »
Personally, I've had enough conversations with Kidd I understood you extremely well.






TheLegacy

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
    • View Profile
    • GuysNation
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #57 on: May 09, 2012, 11:15:17 AM »
The MMA analogy doesn't quite work for me... but maybe I'm looking at it differently.


If Person A pays Person B for sex, it's illegal....

...unless there are video cameras involved with an intent to distribute it as art.
Pornography is a record of a performance. You are watching a film and not, yourself, engaging in any direct activity. Prostitution is a direct engagement with another. That's the difference: one is "I'm watching baseball on TV" and the other is "I'm playing baseball in the park."


you're looking at the Porno / MMA comparison as a spectator. 

I don't believe it's illegal to pay your neighbors to let you sit in their bedroom and watch them have sex.


I'm saying that in a porno, someone is paying a woman to have sex with a guy.  Does it matter if the guy is getting paid too? If that's the case, then what if a guy pays a prostitute $1000 and as part of the agreement she pays the guy $2. Does that make it acceptable?

What if Person C pays Woman D to have sex with Guy E? Does that make it acceptable, because Guy E didn't pay for the sexual experience?

If you're talking about things needing to be recorded w/ intent to distribute, and you want to talk about art, then we're limiting the boundaries of what's to be considered art by the size of the audience. By that measure, plenty of artists throughout history were not artists at the time they were creating their art.


"Belote is now the new quote champion of the AJAX"
Post Whore Goal:
**Completed Goals**
2,222 before 1/1/2012
2,888 before 2/14/2012
4,500 before 12/25/2012
4554 before 1/1/2013
**New Goals**
4664 before 1/1/2013

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #58 on: May 09, 2012, 11:26:32 AM »
There is obvious correlation.  I dep't that the gateway issue had to be brought up.  There's no way to prove that t is complete propaganda just like there is no way to prove that it is true.  But it is still a vital part of the issue that has to be considered.
 
Well, here's a nice article (from Time, no less, so it's not some radical Geocities nonsense) that explains why the belief of marijuana being a "gateway drug" is inaccurate. The argument isn't whether or not there is a correlation (as said, marijuana happens to be one of the easiest and cheapest illicit substances to procure, so it would make sense that junkies would have tried something abundant and cheap first rather than jumping right to hard drugs) as there's a correlation between breathing patterns and hard drug use, it's that correlation DOES NOT EQUAL causation.
Quote
Decriminalization is probably the best you can ever hope for.  I like the death of it, I liked the idea when it came up in Cali Courts.  

My wife and I have talked extensively about this issue over the course of our marriage and I think we have pretty close to the same feelings on it.  Decriminalization would be grand.  It would solve the over population issue in prisons, and bring more money into local governments via fines.  The problem America will run into is the same problem that derailed the entire %99 movement.  If you want to be taken seriously then you have to have professional people at the forefront of your movement.  

Honest to got, prop 19 (decriminalizing in Cali) had a damned good chance yo succeed...until a bunch of hippie stoner kids started demanding legalization.  This made the older, more Republican base a little nervous and shot the whole thingbin the foot.
This is actually part of why I believe it'll be legalized sooner rather than later: the aforementioned "good ol' boy" network is dying out and being replaced by generations that grew up exposed to marijuana. Much as legal policies regarding equal rights for same-sex couples have changed in the last few decades due to younger generations taking office and having grown up more tolerant than prior ones, I have little doubt that the generation of leaders who are currently into their 20's and 30's, most of whom grew up with many of the anti-marijuana myths deconstructed, will make due with the push to legalize. I may have been rash with the timeframe (10 years does seem a bit too soon given the current obstacles), but it will happen.

Enough people want it to be legalized, regardless of class or which sub-culture they identify with, and so it will be.
Quote
The same can be said for Occupy.  I don't take then seriously.  I do not think that the 2 or three dozen unemployed kids with metal in their face and beer in their hands have any claim to the "%99."  They are not.  Those of us that pay taxes, work our asses off to support our families, and yet sill manage to make just too much money for help?  Hose are the people that should have protested, but we were too busy working.
The Occupy movement didn't fail, oddly enough, though I wholeheartedly agree with your views on it. One of the major reasons I didn't support it after the initial formation was that it became a gathering point for all sorts of liberal agendas that had nothing to do with the original core value of taking the nation's top money-earners to task for not having to pay their fair share of the bill. I took a few friends that supported it to task over that very criticism and not one could argue why discussions of foreign politics (not the foreign policies of our own nation, but the politics of other countries in general) should be attributed to the matter at hand.

The Occupy movement, though, got a large portion of the world discussing the current global economic slump and how it could have been avoided by those who were then the targets of the protests. Unintentionally, it also began conversations about police brutality, abuses of power, and media blackouts of important topics.

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2012, 11:31:38 AM »
you're looking at the Porno / MMA comparison as a spectator.  

I don't believe it's illegal to pay your neighbors to let you sit in their bedroom and watch them have sex.


I'm saying that in a porno, someone is paying a woman to have sex with a guy.  Does it matter if the guy is getting paid too? If that's the case, then what if a guy pays a prostitute $1000 and as part of the agreement she pays the guy $2. Does that make it acceptable?

What if Person C pays Woman D to have sex with Guy E? Does that make it acceptable, because Guy E didn't pay for the sexual experience?
I'm not saying I agree with the distinctions, but that's what separates pornography from prostitution: one is witnessing a performance and the other is engaging in the act itself. Pornography is sex without the customer/consumer involved, prostitution is sex with the customer/consumer involved. That's what separates them.

As for paying adult film stars, they are being paid to act, first and foremost. That acting requires sexual intercourse, more often than not, but it's still acting.
Quote
If you're talking about things needing to be recorded w/ intent to distribute, and you want to talk about art, then we're limiting the boundaries of what's to be considered art by the size of the audience. By that measure, plenty of artists throughout history were not artists at the time they were creating their art.
To be fair, there does exist "live sex shows" which are perfectly legal. The customer/consumer pays for the performance and not the act itself.

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

G

  • Guest
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #60 on: May 09, 2012, 02:26:30 PM »
How hard is it to understand that what is illegal should not be done for the betterment of society? That's not to say that smoking pot "harms" society, but it doesn't better it, either. It's less harmful than drinking or texting while driving - doesn't make it any less illegal.

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #61 on: May 09, 2012, 03:13:54 PM »
How hard is it to understand that what is illegal should not be done for the betterment of society? That's not to say that smoking pot "harms" society, but it doesn't better it, either. It's less harmful than drinking or texting while driving - doesn't make it any less illegal.
...did you read the first page again and decide to post this, dude? That part of the discussion's been done for a day or two. If this is in response to my response to Trey then you're entirely missing where the conversation went.

Trey used the old "gateway drug" argument. I tried to refute it. It then broke down into "correlation does not equal causation." We then moved on to why pornography is legal and prostitution isn't when, in truth, they're different slices of the same loaf. I didn't defend prostitution (I actually said I disagree with it earlier), I merely tried to point out the reasoning why pornography is legal and prostitution isn't when both can be simplified to "people being paid to have sex."

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

G

  • Guest
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #62 on: May 09, 2012, 03:40:39 PM »
...I posted it because it's still being talked about after the </topic>. I'm frustrated that it's hard to comprehend what is illegal should not be done for any reason. I'm POSITIVE that politicians didn't spend countless hours and tax payers money deciding that prostitution and marijuana was illegal just to wiggle their dicks in our faces. I'm tired of the bible coming into play in our nation's laws, but the bible does hold many of the morals that we as Americans, Australians and/or Earth People hold true.

The topic of whether or not you should do anything illegal is counter-productive. Stop wasting time asking questions about whether or not it should be illegal and start making petitions, go door-to-door, take it to your politicians and get the shit legalized, rather than sit on your ass asking about it so you can thump your chest at the next person to point out it's illegal.

I'm not trying to be an asshole here, if this comes off as me being an asshole, I apologize. But, damn. I'd rather read more about what you're doing to to try to legalize marijuana and prostitution, or make porn illegal, or whatever stances you have on whatever topics you choose than people's thoughts on it, especially if there's going to be countless pages about whether or not porn is prostitution. Who gives a fuck. Porn is legal, prostitution isn't.

For all the good shit that we've discussed in this thread, none of it has been put to use in any way, shape or form, and now this thread reads like, "my opinions > yours lolo".

B

  • Bend the Knee
  • The Brass
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #63 on: May 09, 2012, 11:15:40 PM »
Well, it IS a discussion thread, not a planning thread where Drezzy and Trey and everybody gets geared up to march on Washington with pot leafs and hookers.

To say you're tired of the Bible being utilized in laws and then use the Bible as a moral compass defeats your sentence's purpose before you get to the punctuation mark.  The Bible's use and interpretation as a moral compass is exactly why 90% of laws become laws in the first place, regardless of the stance that is desperate to separate church and state.

I'll go ahead and say when the whores and the weed is officially over, we move into the pros and cons of the separation of church and state, if we all promise to be respectful of everyone's religious views and focus on whether or not a book written by men purported to the word of an almighty deity should dictate the fundamental course of a nation so long as it follows a decent moral path.

On second thought, if weed and whores can get people riled up, I don't want to think about what religion (or any of the other fun topics like abortions or something) would do. I don't think we're the group who can have that discussion.  Let's not.






Saint

  • Root for the Bad Guy
  • X-REGISTERED
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1954
    • View Profile
    • eWScene
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #64 on: May 09, 2012, 11:21:14 PM »
I hear enough religion from my brother.  I think we should all pass on religion.  It's saner for all.


B

  • Bend the Knee
  • The Brass
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 11144
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #65 on: May 09, 2012, 11:23:07 PM »
This is the time where I point out that I am an ordained minister and can legally send all of you to the afterlife of your choice.






Eric Rohkar

  • The Assistant Sheriff of Scottingham
  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2401
    • View Profile
    • wearefilth.com
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #66 on: May 09, 2012, 11:29:12 PM »
Because it's a discussion we can have for the fun of it. Because it's a distraction from work/school/regular boring life. Because it's fun to discuss. And that is what we are doing. Discussing. No one is arguing, no one thinks their opinion is better than anyone else's.

I disagree with Drezzy. I still find legal porn and illegal prostitution hypocritical, but I don't think less of Drezzy because he disagrees with the distinction. We are having a discussion because, well, hell, why the fuck not? We want to. We want to discuss it. I don't get the fucking problem with this.

I don't march on Washington to legalize pot and whores because, honestly, I don't give THAT much of a fuck. I'll discuss it. I'll present my opinions, but if whores and pot is never legalized, I couldn't give two fucks less. But it's fun to discuss.

Should we not discuss our dream match ups(IRL or E-Fedding) unless we put some work into making them happen? Don't talk about wanting to see Ultimate Warrior vs Daniel Bryan. SEND PETITIONS TO EVERYONE!?

I would love love love to discuss segregation of church and state.

Red River Jack

  • X-REGISTERED
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
    • IKindOfWantWrestling.Com
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #67 on: May 09, 2012, 11:49:12 PM »
You guys should try reddit sometime. /r/trees and /r/atheism and /r/politics are right up your alleys.
Want your Twitter feed clogged up? Follow: @BeardofMikeKnox

G

  • Guest
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #68 on: May 09, 2012, 11:55:54 PM »
All that I'm saying is this shit is getting into the third page of back and forths about the same shit over and over. I don't dislike ANYONE for ANYTHING they choose to do, unless it's harmful to me directly - JUST so that's clear.

And what I meant to say, and was too riled up to correctly say, was that I'm tired of it being "because the bible says so". It's more like a book of guidelines anyways, that was written 2000 some odd years ago and translated 15x probably incorrectly so something was lost in translation.

CadreCross

  • We all have our Cross to bear ...
  • X-REGISTERED
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1053
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #69 on: May 10, 2012, 03:38:37 AM »
And what I meant to say, and was too riled up to correctly say, was that I'm tired of it being "because the bible says so". It's more like a book of guidelines anyways, that was written 2000 some odd years ago and translated 15x probably incorrectly so something was lost in translation.

Not to mention the people who use it to justify whatever point they're making are almost always very selective about which bits they follow. Hint: it's the bits that (they think) agree with them.


B: It's possible I have a small man crush on you.  Just wanted to get that out there.
Nicolle: I like you, so I will do things for you.
It's nice to be wanted.

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #70 on: May 10, 2012, 06:07:02 AM »
I'm frustrated that it's hard to comprehend what is illegal should not be done for any reason.
We already has this discussion and you, yourself, agreed that it can be moral to break a law. Turning it around and complaining about the discussion's very existence under the guise of "if it's illegal it's bad" when you've already said that it can, occasionally, be justified.

You're acting like the whole thing is "HERE ARE ILLEGAL THINGS, WE SHOULD DO THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLEGAL" and not the legitimate "why are these illegal/why should they be legal" discussion it quickly became.
Quote
I'm POSITIVE that politicians didn't spend countless hours and tax payers money deciding that prostitution and marijuana was illegal just to wiggle their dicks in our faces.

I take it you've never heard of lobbyists or "playing the game" when it comes to politics, eh? Most political moves are effectively just seeing which side has the bigger cock.
Quote
The topic of whether or not you should do anything illegal is counter-productive. Stop wasting time asking questions about whether or not it should be illegal and start making petitions, go door-to-door, take it to your politicians and get the shit legalized, rather than sit on your ass asking about it so you can thump your chest at the next person to point out it's illegal.
We're having a discussion about whether or not something should BE illegal, not whether or not we should do it individually.

You don't smoke pot. Most of the people here don't. Cool. I do. Am I yelling at you to go smoke up right now? No. I'm pointing out reasons it's illegal and reasons it shouldn't be.

I also think it's important to note that the "asking questions" phase is probably one of the most important ones in ANY discussion, debate, or other form of discourse, since those tend to lead to answers. Answers? They're pretty cool in regards to boosting one's knowledge on a topic. Discussions are better when the parties involved know what they're talking about.
Quote
I'd rather read more about what you're doing to to try to legalize marijuana and prostitution, or make porn illegal, or whatever stances you have on whatever topics you choose than people's thoughts on it, especially if there's going to be countless pages about whether or not porn is prostitution.

...so don't enter the thread? You know the contents therein, nobody's forcing you to click on the link at the top of the folder, and yet you're complaining about reading opinions that run contrary to yours.
Quote
Who gives a fuck. Porn is legal, prostitution isn't.
Fuck us for trying to decipher why that is, eh?
Quote
For all the good shit that we've discussed in this thread, none of it has been put to use in any way, shape or form, and now this thread reads like, "my opinions > yours lolo".
It's all been put to use, actually. This isn't a "let's plan a revolution" thread, or "let's march on DC" thread, or anything like that. It's a "let's DISCUSS things of a socio-political nature." The two major topics to first pop up have been the legalization of marijuana or the legalization of prostitution.
All that I'm saying is this shit is getting into the third page of back and forths about the same shit over and over.
It's a DISCUSSION thread, dude. DISCUSSION. As in "people talk about a topic back and forth." Nobody's forcing you to come here and read it, nobody's forcing you to reply, and nobody's keeping you here. This isn't some "love it or leave it" bullshit, G, it's a fucking DISCUSSION.

Don't want to discuss the topic at hand? Offer a new topic. Have nothing to add? Don't enter the thread.

Also, I'd be fine with "separation of church and state" next.

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

Trey

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 595
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #71 on: May 10, 2012, 06:46:35 AM »
No.  I have no hard feelings.  I mean.  I hate filthy hippies and all lol.  Really, I imagine this thread will go places were there will be 3 or four pages on most topics.  Speaking of which.

I would like to talk about separation of church if state.  A quick overview of my opinion is that a complete separation isn't possible in America (to the detriment of the country.)

Id also like to talk about spanking.  I would not like yo talk spanking with Eric.  Rather the ups and downs of disciplining your child.  I know we have a few parents in here.  I am in the pro of spanking.

Another good one is governmental spending.  I know very well that we have a few soldiers in here.  How do you feel about constant propped budget cuts?

Gay marriage?

Its an election year.  We need to talk about issues here peoples :)







TheLegacy

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5050
    • View Profile
    • GuysNation
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #72 on: May 10, 2012, 07:34:06 AM »
Well, it IS a discussion thread, not a planning thread where Drezzy and Trey and everybody gets geared up to march on Washington with pot leafs and hookers.

The first thought that came to mind was that the march on Washington got derailed by a need to run to 7-11 by the pot smokers.

Made me laugh.



I'll go ahead and say when the whores and the weed is officially over, we move into the pros and cons of the separation of church and state, if we all promise to be respectful of everyone's religious views and focus on whether or not a book written by men purported to the word of an almighty deity should dictate the fundamental course of a nation so long as it follows a decent moral path.

On second thought, if weed and whores can get people riled up, I don't want to think about what religion (or any of the other fun topics like abortions or something) would do. I don't think we're the group who can have that discussion.  Let's not.

I think we could talk about the separation of Church & State without making it a discussion of peoples religious beliefs.


"Belote is now the new quote champion of the AJAX"
Post Whore Goal:
**Completed Goals**
2,222 before 1/1/2012
2,888 before 2/14/2012
4,500 before 12/25/2012
4554 before 1/1/2013
**New Goals**
4664 before 1/1/2013

DrezzyF2T

  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3422
  • Life. Deal. Rock.
    • View Profile
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #73 on: May 10, 2012, 07:49:01 AM »
Hey, 7/11 is a wonderful place. Fucking SLURPEES and BIG GULPS and CHEAP KING-SIZED CANDY. That's all I need.

*"Behind the Scenes" graphic by Sam Valentine
*Corey Lazarus banner by Ben Duke

Eric Rohkar

  • The Assistant Sheriff of Scottingham
  • SHOOT Project Soldiers
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2401
    • View Profile
    • wearefilth.com
Re: Socio-political discussion
« Reply #74 on: May 10, 2012, 09:41:13 AM »
Awwwww, Trey, you know me so well.

I'm gonna put this out there. Separation of church and state is great, in theory, but it is inherently flawed based on this fact:

Religion is a huge factor in some people's lives. It SHOULD be, if you choose to partake in it. Think about it, these are people who believe that not only are your daily lives effected by God/Xenu/Tim Curry(still pushing for that religion to take off), but your life AFTER death will be effected by God/Xenu/Tim Curry. So, consider how important that is for people. Consider how much they would want YOU to consider that important. If your standard of morality is based on whether you spend eternity in paradise or eternity suffering in a fiery pit of hell and pitchfork rape, I'd say you'd think making laws based on this is a pretty good idea.

We, of course, need checks and balances to insure that one religious(or one section of a religious groups' view) view does not dominate all the others. Hence issues like gay marriage and what not.

However, you have to understand that in a nation like the United States, a nation considered predominately Christian(yes, I realize  many of the founding fathers were deists and/or non religious), Christian themes are going to make their way into the government. You can't really avoid it.

In essence, stop getting all up in arms about people wanting to build a statue of the ten commandments in a courthouse.