Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Topic started by: faithraider on November 03, 2010, 11:41:19 AM
-
Hey All,
Every single one of my candidates LOST in the just concluded elections on Tues. ( In Massachusetts) I helped hold signs for them but I know I could have done more and next time I will.
How did your candidates fare?
JOHN
-
Here in VA we have just gone back to RED! Woohoo!
-
Yeah, I struck out as well in terms of candidates, too. CA Propositions went okay... I won't get high just walking down the street. :)
-
The only republican candidate I was rooting for (Christine O'Donnel) LOST!@#~!@#~!@~!@~!#%!@~!@!!~!!~!~!~@!$!$#^@!#
-
The liberal bastion of the North that is Minnesota was pretty heavily affected by the Republican tidal wave: Our governor's race is too close to call (which in MN means a recount, which means we might not have a governor sworn in until June :o), but both the blue House and blue Senate went red, which is the first time for the Senate since the 70's. The three incumbent Republican Representatives won pretty easily, and newcomer Chip Cravaack unseated Jim Oberstar, who had represented our eighth district since 1974. The other representative races were won pretty handily by the democratic incumbents.
In the end, I would bet that Mark Dayton (D) will win the Governor's race after the recount, but it will be interesting to see how much he gets done with Republican majorities in both houses.
Hey All,
Every single one of my candidates LOST in the just concluded elections on Tues. ( In Massachusetts) I helped hold signs for them but I know I could have done more and next time I will.
How did your candidates fare?
JOHN
That's kind of what you get for voting Republican in Massachusetts, though, right? It's kind of like being a Nebraskan Democrat. :P
-
Probably the same amount that Pawlenty did with Democratic majorities in both houses.
-
That write in chick from Alaska won :O!
-
Surprisingly, the votes went mostly Republican in Wisconsin this election. My roommate (a self-proclaimed "independent") is all in a temper tantrum that Walker got Governor, lol. I think he's just fooling himself and is really a democrat.
I didn't actually get to vote, though, stupid election being on my all-day on campus day. >_<
-
Tennessee is even more red than usual, which is impressive.
-
Stewart still didn't win...
-
I went 3 for 4. Not bad for my first election.
-
The repeal of the Class Size Ammendment was not approved. My high school classes will stay under 26 students, and I get to teach an extra class next semester (more money, woo-hoo!).
-
My parents aren't happy that 25 passed here in CA. I don't know what that means, but I guess it's not good. :D
-
BTW, I'm glad that this thread was not about being disappointed with your Catholic sermon.
-
Yeah Thats right. Catholics are just fine up here. But in New England its tough to be a Christian & Republican. The good news is that we wear our battle scars well and each witnessing opportunity & conversation about conservatism is heartfelt and meaningful. We win converts slowly BUT thoroughly. God is GOOD !!!
JOHN
-
BTW, I'm glad that this thread was not about being disappointed with your Catholic sermon.
This is definitely what I thought the thread was about before I read John M's post. :)
-
My parents aren't happy that 25 passed here in CA. I don't know what that means, but I guess it's not good. :D
That requires only a 51% vote to approve the budget, rather than 67%. Considering the CA budget was passed 93 days late this year, which hurt schools and such that needed money during that time, I understand why people were excited to pass it, but it opens the door for the majority democrats to pass whatever budget they want in the future.
-
yeah the only problem in MN is that if Mark Dayton wins that will be the first time since the 1980's(i think) that we will have a democratic governor :'(
-
My parents aren't happy that 25 passed here in CA. I don't know what that means, but I guess it's not good. :D
That requires only a 51% vote to approve the budget, rather than 67%. Considering the CA budget was passed 93 days late this year, which hurt schools and such that needed money during that time, I understand why people were excited to pass it, but it opens the door for the majority democrats to pass whatever budget they want in the future.
Yes, that's right. Well that's not the only problem. The problem is that ANY majority party can pass whatever they want.
-
I voted for Olson as a write-in, for governor.
Yes, that's right. Well that's not the only problem. The problem is that ANY majority party can pass whatever they want.
I'm not informed about CA politics, but isn't anywhere close to true in MN or on the national level.
-
My parents aren't happy that 25 passed here in CA. I don't know what that means, but I guess it's not good. :D
That requires only a 51% vote to approve the budget, rather than 67%. Considering the CA budget was passed 93 days late this year, which hurt schools and such that needed money during that time, I understand why people were excited to pass it, but it opens the door for the majority democrats to pass whatever budget they want in the future.
Yes, that's right. Well that's not the only problem. The problem is that ANY majority party can pass whatever they want.
But considering we're in CA, it's only going to be democrats in the majority.
-
Terry Branstead FTW
-
Unless this election/the next four years gets people hyped up enough to finally split the state in two (doubt it but a good thought).
-
Anyone else think that the Red vs Blue map of the US looks ridiculous now? 95% red, looking at square miles. But then you throw in the Blue West Coast and Blue Northeast, and pockets of blue in the big cities/north. It just looks odd, in my opinion.
-
I'm pretty sure that the dems still hold a noticeable lead when it coms to population, however.
The empty states really give the republicans a huuuuuuge advantage.
-
Anyone else think that the Red vs Blue map of the US looks ridiculous now? 95% red, looking at square miles. But then you throw in the Blue West Coast and Blue Northeast, and pockets of blue in the big cities/north. It just looks odd, in my opinion.
That is fascinating.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faidwatchers.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F11%2F3-D-US-Electoral-Map-Alexander-ONeill.gif&hash=e2dab644ac34ffa6b6bf3eebdd89e424cbf390b3)
-
Minnesota Recount, seems to be a recurring theme.
Who wants to bet that boxes are mysteriously found in someones car again?
-
Anyone else think that the Red vs Blue map of the US looks ridiculous now? 95% red, looking at square miles. But then you throw in the Blue West Coast and Blue Northeast, and pockets of blue in the big cities/north. It just looks odd, in my opinion.
That is fascinating.
*Image Removed*
Apparently there's a ton of democrats in the Milwaukee/Chicago area, that bar is by far the highest, lol. Doesn't surprise me one bit, though; I know only too well that I live in a very democratic city >_<.
-
It would be so cool if Christ returned right at the 2012 presidental election. Then we wouldn't be worrying about it.
Relax, God has a master plan! :)
In Texas, Sadness
-
Anyone else think that the Red vs Blue map of the US looks ridiculous now? 95% red, looking at square miles. But then you throw in the Blue West Coast and Blue Northeast, and pockets of blue in the big cities/north. It just looks odd, in my opinion.
That is fascinating.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faidwatchers.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F11%2F3-D-US-Electoral-Map-Alexander-ONeill.gif&hash=e2dab644ac34ffa6b6bf3eebdd89e424cbf390b3)
What does the colors on that map represent?
-
What does the colors on that map represent?
I can't tell if you're being serious. Its hard over the internets :o.
I'm going to guess it represents the difference in numbers between the dems and the republicans. (By county?)
-
What does the colors on that map represent?
I can't tell if you're being serious. Its hard over the internets :o.
I'm going to guess it represents the difference in numbers between the dems and the republicans. (By county?)
haha. I'm pretty sure what the red and blue part is, but seems weird to me that NY doesn't have a super monopoly tower too.
-
Someone said the dems have a population advantage? Far from it! The population is maaaaaybe close to even because cities tend to be flaming liberal, but to say that, person for person, there are more liberals in this country is absurd.
-
Hey Pol,
Please point me to some numbers indicating otherwise. I know in 2004ish the dems had about 17 million/31% more than the republicans, but that has likely diminished some since then. Keep in mind that more often than not, independents lean to the left more often than the right, and said independents are not included in that number.
Also, keep in mind that the definition of liberal is one not bound by traditions, which perfectly describes the republican party. And considering the term liberal would group most of the democratic party, most the the republican party, most of the various third parties, and most independents I don't think it is such a bold statement to claim that yes, the vast majority of this country = liberals.
-
I would say that, speaking based mostly on affiliation, Democrats have more people but they are more concentrated and thus have less land. No numbers to back that up though.
-
Are you saying democrats are Japanese? Thereby stating democrats attacked America (what seems like) yesterday?
Agreed!
-
Anyone else think that the Red vs Blue map of the US looks ridiculous now? 95% red, looking at square miles. But then you throw in the Blue West Coast and Blue Northeast, and pockets of blue in the big cities/north. It just looks odd, in my opinion.
That is fascinating.
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Faidwatchers.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F11%2F3-D-US-Electoral-Map-Alexander-ONeill.gif&hash=e2dab644ac34ffa6b6bf3eebdd89e424cbf390b3)
Woah. Light blue is pwning, with gray close behind.
-
Also, keep in mind that the definition of liberal is one not bound by traditions,
Haha fail, that's like trying to say the definition of "gay" is "happy." Technically, yes, but that's not what anyone means by it anymore. And now there are actually studies coming out claiming to have found a "liberal" gene, furthermore proving that liberalism is a disease.
-
Not in the slighest bud. Its just a set of ideas, which describes the majority of the population. The term "intelligent" doesn't solely refer to those that have graduated college, but it is a common association (similar to the term liberal).
If you were referring to democrats solely, then you should say that and be more clear (in which case you're still wrong)
-
The majority of the population is not liberal. Perhaps the majority of the population votes democrat. Liberalism is a blight and a curse and flies in the face of Biblical principles.
-
Please point me to some numbers indicating otherwise.
How about this? (http://www.gallup.com/poll/141032/2010-conservatives-outnumber-moderates-liberals.aspx) :)
-
Please point me to some numbers indicating otherwise.
How about this? (http://www.gallup.com/poll/141032/2010-conservatives-outnumber-moderates-liberals.aspx) :)
D-man pulling out the sources ftw :)
(https://www.cactusforums.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsas-origin.onstreammedia.com%2Forigin%2Fgallupinc%2FGallupSpaces%2FProduction%2FCms%2FPOLL%2Figlnwvn0jeaslencabs5iq.gif&hash=aa107044d545c41bbf3f38cccd1e2f6a98a1f933)
-
The majority of the population is not liberal. Perhaps the majority of the population votes democrat. Liberalism is a blight and a curse and flies in the face of Biblical principles.
The majority of the nation does not vote democratic (assumption. No statistical backing). Liberal =/= democratic, nothing stops me from being part of the Republican party with Liberal ideology, and nothing stops me from being part of the Democratic part with Conservative ideology. I'm not discussing the morality of it, either, as I do agree to some extent, so please keep the attacks out.
@Prof/D-Man: My argument was most self-identified conservatives are actually liberal. I honestly believe the likes of both Bushes, Reagen, etc are far left. Whether they believed in conservatism or not may be a different story, but their actions were far more on the liberal side.
I view conservative/liberal as an idea that are unrelated to parties: Liberal is new, innovative, uncaring of traditions. Conservative being old, traditional, "if it isn't broke don't fix it". Parties are totally separate entities that group opinions, which may or may not have a correlation
-
Props for sauce being the biggest contributor to the conversation.
Also, keep in mind that the definition of liberal is one not bound by traditions,
Haha fail, that's like trying to say the definition of "gay" is "happy." Technically, yes, but that's not what anyone means by it anymore. And now there are actually studies coming out claiming to have found a "liberal" gene, furthermore proving that liberalism is a disease.
So, there's also genetic basis for intelligence. Is that that a "disease" too? Liberals are for helping the poor through welfare and affirmative action. These may not be the best way to handle the problem, but at least they're taking action.
New International Version (©1984)
"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html
-
I simply don't have the energy to argue against liberalism on these boards again. Every six months or so this argument springs back up, the latest crop of members tries to defend liberalism, and this time I'm not going to rebut. You lost, big time, two days ago, and I'll just let the scoreboard speak for me.
To Somekittens, I will leave you with the supposition that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and that the right thing done in the wrong way inevitably leads to disaster.
-
I realize that you have firm beliefs based with good cause. Every six months or so this argument springs back up, the latest crop of members tries to defend liberalism, and this time I realize they actually have a basis that I cannot rebut. The democrats (a party which you have not publicly affiliated yourself with, but I'm just choosing to label you) lost control of of congress, but it doesn't really change anything beings the republicans were abusing the filibuster anyway, so as long as the republicans don't get a super majority next election.
Is that a fair assessment of your post?
Also, how does the score board decide anything? Have the dems been winning almost every year since WW2?
I like liberalism. I like conservatism in many aspects also, but I lean more towards the liberal side. I don't like the democratic party, but I like it more than the republican party.
-
Politics is cyclical.
A while back, there was a thread about how President Obama was (allegedly) practicing witchcraft. The title was something like "My pastor says Obama practices witchcraft." It was a lot more fun than this discussion.
-
Us: "Obama is a witch!"
Obama: "I'm not a witch, I'm your president! But after a statement like that, I'm not even sure I want to be that anymore!"
-
Anyone who doesn't claim they aren't a witch is a witch. That is why I would have voted for O'Donnel.
-
I simply don't have the energy to argue against liberalism on these boards again. Every six months or so this argument springs back up, the latest crop of members tries to defend liberalism, and this time I'm not going to rebut. You lost, big time, two days ago, and I'll just let the scoreboard speak for me.
To Somekittens, I will leave you with the supposition that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and that the right thing done in the wrong way inevitably leads to disaster.
You seem to define liberals as "everyone with a a different opinion." This doesn't make them wrong, just different.
-
To me, what liberals feel "about the issues" usually do not lineup with Biblical principles. Just seems that way. I'm talking about social issues too btw.
-
What do liberals "feel about issues"? The basis is change, the willingness to do what is necessary despite precedent. I don't see how that doesn't line up with Biblical principles.
Liberal =/= Democrat.
-
How does "change" and "despite precedent" line up with biblical principles? Proverbs says not to associate wth those given to change. God says "I do not change." And Hebrews says that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. I just wanted to point this out, lest you think that "change" is encouraged in the bible. The only change anyone or any "church" should ever make is in conforming their life closer to Christ's and His will for them. Other than this I don't think you can make the case that God is a big proponent of change and being more "liberal minded".
-
Are you suggesting all change (that doesn't effect your faith) is wrong? I was going to go get a haircut later, which changes my appearance. That doesn't effect my faith, so should I just keep it long?
I assume the passage you're referring to is referring to those unsure of their faith ("changing obedience"), but I'm too lazy to look up the passage right now.
-
Are you suggesting all change (that doesn't effect your faith) is wrong? I was going to go get a haircut later, which changes my appearance. That doesn't effect my faith, so should I just keep it long?
If your name is Samson, yes ;)
-
Dude, I wish I was Samson. Killing 1000 philistines with a donkey jaw is one of the most awesome things (a human did) in the bible.
-
And what a way to die! Hmm, get forgiven, wipe out thousands of Phillies without your eyes....
Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNcMgGGOwzE
-
I think we should vote for a pro-life, christian, tax lowering, friendly, and caring person that opposes gay marriage and terrorists.
I am not pressing my views on you.
I am giving my :2cents:.
-
Move to Greenland
-
I think we should vote for a pro-life, christian, tax lowering, friendly, and caring person that opposes gay marriage and terrorists.
I am not pressing my views on you.
I am giving my :2cents:.
You mean conservative?
-
That's what I thought until I saw friendly and caring.
-
This is why I don't vote. Politics are the root of all evil.
-
That's what I thought until I saw friendly and caring.
Boy have you bought the lie.
-
It is an undeniable fact that 100% of liberals kill babies, encourage mediocrity, and listen to techno.
-
That's what I thought until I saw friendly and caring.
Boy have you bought the lie.
Name me a politician that's nice and shows it.
-
It never ceases to amaze me how our Unity in Christ is so easily divided on party lines.
-
I'm not gonna open my mouth.
-
I'm disturbed by the lack of techno in this thread.
Sandstorm Techno song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujKRFbPYUmM#ws)
-
Massive + 1 there, YMT. We are so ready to tell someone they're wrong, and unwilling to listen.
-
I'm disturbed by the lack of techno in this thread.
Sandstorm Techno song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujKRFbPYUmM#ws)
this song is so severely played out its no longer even recognized by people that listen to techno or trance.
-
Speaking of techno, did you get my PM, M KChief?
-
Political Parties are not present in Antarctica, only Penguins
-
I'm disturbed by the lack of techno in this thread.
I think you mean:
Techno (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwZwkk7q25I#ws)
-
Republicans are a bunch of right wing homophobic bigets who are mean sprited and clings to their guns/religion
Democrats are a bunch of left wing baby killer nutjobs who want to destroy this country and make it a socialistic society.
Now that we have the name calling from both sides out of the way, how about we go listen to more techno!!!
-
attack attack interlude (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5Y923eHrr4#)
-
I'll talk politics with Christians when they take their beliefs out of it.
-
With all due respect Alex,
That is quite possibly the silliest statement I've ever heard - Politics is all about beliefs, we vote for politicians based upon how their ideals, beliefs and the policies they wish to enact line up with our own. You're saying that because I'm Christian I should ignore my belief that all life is sacred and should vote for Bob "Abort all babies" Bradstrom.
-
+1 w/ RDT.
You can't legislate morality but you can vote for those who demonstrate good morals.
-
Why not legislate morality? All laws are legislated morality. So either you're an anarchist, or you're not so opposed to legislated morality as you thought.
-
Not all laws/policies are based on morality.
-
Like what?
-
Here in VA we have just gone back to RED! Woohoo!
Yeah, I watched the news a few days ago... and the republicans did great in the election! :D
-
@ Ironica:Yes most laws are bsed on morality save abortion/Health care and some of the more ungodly laws(The health care isn't ungodly just wrong)
-
Does anyone remember Visser Three from the Animorphes?
Visser Three wanted the 1950's to come back. The 1950's aren't coming back.
-
I don't think anyone ever said they wanted that.
-
@ Ironica:Yes most laws are bsed on morality save abortion/Health care and some of the more ungodly laws(The health care isn't ungodly just wrong)
What's so wrong about the health care plan? Helps the sick and needy, right?
-
Wrong.
-
The sick and needy are able to be helped without Obamacare. Obamacare will help to pay for abortions with taxpayer money. Also, a lot of people have less money than they used to, this bill requires them to buy insurance(they can't afford it though) and then are fined for not buying insurance. Doesn't work out. The Medicare/Medicaid system is working for Americans right now and a massive bad change to our healthcare system was not needed. Hopefully this bill is repealed, or at least has massive changes to it.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/William-Saunders-Democrats-EO-offer-shows-Obamacare-does-fund-abortion--88766547.html (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/William-Saunders-Democrats-EO-offer-shows-Obamacare-does-fund-abortion--88766547.html)
http://catholicexchange.com/2010/10/27/139753/ (http://catholicexchange.com/2010/10/27/139753/)
P.S. I'm not saying we don't need healthcare reform, but no reform is better than horrible healthcare reform.
-
I will try to keep the negative rhetoric down, and just explain things the way I see it.
I feel I have to vote my conscience, but my conscience should be trained by God's word, not by uninspired men. Here is why my family's situation is especially ironic. My wife is a stay at home mom and I do not make very much money at all. The oldest of our two boys was born with severe autism. He does not speak or have a reliable means of communication, so he is in special education in the public schools (since we can't afford private school). Our other son is homeschooled by his mother now (the reason for which you'll see later). We live in a 90 year old house that is falling apart, but at least we own it. Almost all of our kids' clothes and toys are handmedowns or from the flea market (and I'm not complaining). We just dropped our health insurance at work because I cannot afford the $721 a month that it would cost to insure the whole family, and because assistance that VA was providing just ran out (budget shortfalls).
I point all of this out because you would think the party I should vote for would be obvious. There is a party out there whose policies WOULD benefit my family more than the other. That party will give us more affordable health care (whether we want it or not), it will increase government funding for special needs children like our son, and it would love to help lower income families like ours in many other financial ways. Yet in all my years I have yet to vote for this party, and I will try to explain why.
The short answer is because of what I believe from God's word. That same party that would like to help us out financially, and help my son, also believes that a pregnant mother should have the right to kill her unborn child. Can I justify this from God's word? They also believe that a man should have the right to marry another man, and the same for a woman marrying a woman. How does God feel about this? This party also wants to educate my 6 year old about why its OK that Jennifer has two mommys, about all the horrible things that a stranger might do to them, to give my child condoms when he is older so that he can practice safe sex, etc. (Hence our homeschooled son.) They claim to be the most caring of groups, but when there are the worst kinds of human suffering being inflicted in other parts of the world they don't want to commit our military might to stopping it. They provide our tax dollars to people who can work but choose not to, and we know how God feels about these people. They do not enforce the laws we already have when it comes to illegal immigration and drugs. They say they want to increase the number of jobs in the country, but they also want to raise the taxes on the very business owners whom they wish would hire more people. (If you earn a million dollars a year right now and live in New York, a full 50% of your income is taken from you by the powers that be.) Finally, most politicians in this party have no problem with one unelected judge singlehandedly overturning the vote/will of millions of citizens.
Now I know that I am describing the group as a whole and not individuals. If I were to find an individual in that party who DID NOT feel this way and vote this way then I would gladly cast my vote for that person. But I have not found them yet. Now if the other party does not put forth a person who would vote the way that I feel they should, then they will not get my vote either (my vote for 2008 was a write-in). But I feel that my vote for anyone puts me in fellowship with them in an odd way, because I have given my assent that they have the best ideas for our country. Let's not forget that the purpose of government, according to God's word, is the punishment of evil-doers (here and abroad). A secondary function might be to assist the less fortunate and especially those who cannot help themselves, but that is a requirement of EVERY PERSON also. But I CANNOT punish and write laws against sin. It is not my responsibility, but it IS the responsibility of government. And history (and the bible) shows that once a government starts failing to punish the wicked and instead punish the righteous, that nation's days are numbered.
To sum up, I feel that we have to distinguish between policies that we don't like because they are inconvenient to us, but God's word is silent on those policies, versus policies that the bible would clearly label as sinful. Thanks for listening.
-
With all due respect Alex,
That is quite possibly the silliest statement I've ever heard - Politics is all about beliefs, we vote for politicians based upon how their ideals, beliefs and the policies they wish to enact line up with our own. You're saying that because I'm Christian I should ignore my belief that all life is sacred and should vote for Bob "Abort all babies" Bradstrom.
You think I didn't know you (or some one) would say that?
I agree with everyone you say. However, when you are discussing politics like this, you have to remove yourself from your personal beliefs to attempt to understand the opposition - we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, yet when we discuss politics we might as well be two rival mob families. I believe this is because Christians today largely view politics in the black and white. Politics has no black or white or right and wrong - it has a bunch of general theories that each party believes will be best for the country. There is nothing wrong with liberal policies on how to run the country.
You may respond that Abortion is wrong. I agree. However, with that exception, I can not think of another policy held by liberals that fundamentally disagrees with Biblical principles. Does liberalism attempt to replace the social aspect of the Church? Perhaps, but that is a personal opinion, so why do we talk about it in absolutes? Politics is not an absolute; it is the ultimate opinion. Why let an opinion (and not even a one involving doctrine) divide us so much?
-
That's a good statement Alex. If the Bible is very clear on something (Abortion, Gay Marriage), I'll leave little wiggle room for my beliefs. But I understand that others are different, and even Christians disagree on how we interpret the Bible.
For instance, Alex and I disagree on the position of women in leadership. I don't announce that his posts are full of fail, or that he's bought into some sort of lie, but acknowledge that we have differences. Intelligent discourse is necessary if we're to stay together as a Christian community.
I'll talk politics with Christians when they take their beliefs that those who disagree are wrong out of it.
I think this is a very important statement to make. Jesus said the greatest commandment was to "love one another".
-
Wrong.
FTR, I don't agree with the health care plan at all. I was just trying to troll Red.
-
and Pol got caught as well, it seems. Two for one!
-
Wrong.
FTR, I don't agree with the health care plan at all. I was just trying to troll Red.
I've learned sometimes to keep my yap shut. So that didn't work FTR.
-
I support socialized healthcare :c.
-
I support socialized healthcare :c.
Now I'm going to have to beat you down with my Noah deck. :o
-
Thats okay. I have health insurance.
-
Why not legislate morality? All laws are legislated morality. So either you're an anarchist, or you're not so opposed to legislated morality as you thought.
You misunderstood what I meant, which is probably partially my fault because it was a little vague. When I said you can't legislate morality, I meant you can't change how people act--you can't change the heart. People are still going to disobey (i.e. act immoral) because we live in fallen world. Our primary job as Christians is to reach out to people with God's love, which is the only thing that can change hearts. Aside from that though, we can use the power of voting to support politicians who demonstrate and support the morals we believe in.
-
But...but...Guardian, there's nothing I disagree with in your post? How can I argue if I don't disagree? Dang, I need to give Colin a call.