neo-cons...this is why they are crazy

[David Jamieson]

seriously, wtf is wrong with these people?
Is there something not right in the water?
Are neo-cons inhuman?

wtf? wtf? wtf? This is the most blatantly stupid and mindless pos legislation to ever come from teh decrepit heads of an Idaho neo-con.

sweet lord, I don't see the difference between a dictator, a nazi and an american conservative anymore.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/idaho-almighty-abortion/

[sanjuro_ronin]

Can of worms meet can opener.

[solo1]

I don't see the difference between a dictator, a nazi and an american conservative anymore.


without a doubt this comment has defined you as an unhinged raging lunatic.

[MasterKiller]

God raped Mary, afterall. And she was just 14.

[sanjuro_ronin]

God raped Mary, afterall. And she was just 14.

Don't worry about that anymore, the virgin conception is not a big deal nowadays, anyone can have a child without even losing their virginity and it took less than 2000 years !!!
Take that Holy Spirit !!
LMAO !!

[BJJ-Blue]

without a doubt this comment has defined you as an unhinged raging lunatic.

Sounds about right.

Also, if people actually read the entire article, they will see that the bill only outlaws abortions after the 20th week. So while it does not allow exceptions for rape after that time, the solution is simple if you are raped and want an abortion - Don't wait 5 months to get an abortion.

[Lebaufist]

5 months is a long time. It used to be the first trimester .

Frankly, some of theses kids, LAMy!, need the bar raised to a 5 year warranty type of deal.

[MasterKiller]

Sounds about right.

Also, if people actually read the entire article, they will see that the bill only outlaws abortions after the 20th week. So while it does not allow exceptions for rape after that time, the solution is simple if you are raped and want an abortion - Don't wait 5 months to get an abortion.

The bill itself is not really that disturbing. It's sentiments like

"State Rep. Brent Crane, the bill’s sponsor, took it a step further. Believing that “tragic, horrific” acts of rape or incest are the “hand of the Almighty,” Crane said women should trust God to turn the consequences of their sexual assault into “wonderful examples”:"

that come from elected representatives. It's truly frightening to some of us that people who are that deluded are in positions of power.

[BJJ-Blue]

I agree with you on that MK.

We do have to keep religion and politics separate as much as possible. I myself am a Christian, but you have to read and interpret the Constitution in a bias free way, imo. I think ****sexuality is a sin, and disgusting to boot. But I'm against sodomy laws. I feel the Constitution grants us the freedom to do whatever we want in our bedrooms between consenting adults. I'm also against prostitution, but I feel it should be legalized. I also do not drink (not for religious resons btw), but you don't see me calling to get it banned. Too many people try and force their beliefs on others through legislation, and it's not just religious people. But no matter who does it, it's wrong.

But back to the topic, some people appear to have blasted this law without actually reading it simply because it's sponsors mentioned the religious reasons they want it passed.

[David Jamieson]

without a doubt this comment has defined you as an unhinged raging lunatic.

lol. really? so, you're ok with "the almighty" causing rapes and swaying legislators to that end. Because that defines you as batsh1t crazy.

[Lebaufist]

There should be yet another party devoted to further legislating the separation between church and state.

[BJJ-Blue]

There should be yet another party devoted to further legislating the separation between church and state.

There already is, it's the Libertarian Party.

[David Jamieson]

There already is, it's the Libertarian Party.

really?

There's a party that isn't just a bunch of fragmented philosophies presented as libertarianism but in reality represent "I , Me , Mine" thinking.

What defines libertarianism these days anyway? Especially in context to a nation of 300 million.

I'd like to hear someone speak to that.

And before anyone starts posting Ron Paul clips, don't.

lol

[wenshu]

http://ouramericangeneration.org/blog/wp-content/themes/vigilance/images/top-banner/apathy-party-sticker1.jpg

[sanjuro_ronin]

I'd give the Apathy party my vote, if I cared.
I don't.

[Lebaufist]

There already is, it's the Libertarian Party.


really?

There's a party that isn't just a bunch of fragmented philosophies presented as libertarianism but in reality represent "I , Me , Mine" thinking.

What defines libertarianism these days anyway? Especially in context to a nation of 300 million.

I'd like to hear someone speak to that.

And before anyone starts posting Ron Paul clips, don't.

lolWhat was anything close to unilateral movement in the libertarian party has since been co-opted by the republican party and then by proxy by the evangelical religious right. Its a nice idealism to say " I'm libertarian" But that doesn't mean what it used to any more.

Just because an idea is radical doesn't mean it will actually work, Or, be a viable economic system. What people forget, what obama is finding out, is that no matter what methods you subscribe to economically, it has to fit the situation at hand. It has to compliment the economy at hand and how its set up to work. You can't just flip a switch without creating a gigantic inertial vortex.


So called libertarianism has branched out to be a banner for every crack pot idea that would only loosely apply to the philosophy. A real libertarian would give women rights over there bodies AT ANY TIME. A real libertarian would not be making legislation regarding the suspension of ANY personal rights. Pot would be legal in a libertarian country.


And finally, even libertarianism isn't perfect and requires to be reigned in a bit. The younger Paul was talking about repealing segregation laws. Because it wasn't fair for people who are racist to serve da' nerga.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Anytime you make a belief statement you are making a statement that you view those beliefs as better than someone elses.
Even what I just wrote is that.

The libertarian party is just another manifestation of any political ideology that one person comes up with and some others agree.

It is no less correct or incorrect as any other.

It just is.

Anytime we impose our ideas on another, majority or otherwise, we are influencing and curtailing their liberties, as such there is no such things as a "libertarian" party.

[BJJ-Blue]

What was anything close to unilateral movement in the libertarian party has since been co-opted by the republican party and then by proxy by the evangelical religious right. Its a nice idealism to say " I'm libertarian" But that doesn't mean what it used to any more.

The Libertarians are for legalizing drugs and prostitution. If you think they've been co-opted by the evangelicals, you're sadly mistaken.


Anytime we impose our ideas on another, majority or otherwise, we are influencing and curtailing their liberties, as such there is no such things as a "libertarian" party.

This is correct.

But look at whose worse. Republicans are generally not pro-choice when it comes to abortion. Democrats have passed anti-choice laws on cars, guns, smoking, light bulbs, school lunch choice, and Happy Meals.

I really wish the Libertarians were more of a viable Party. I can't think of any laws they are for that ban choices Americans can make.

[wenshu]

The Tea Party has as much to do with Libertarianism as Crossfit does with peroidization.

[Lebaufist]

Who is "they"? I'm sure there are a few actual libertarians in every rally. But if you take a closer look, a good portion of the people around you (mostly angry white middle class guys) are just disgruntled Republicans that will very quickly forget libertarians as soon as they find a Rep. candidate that excites them. You guys still have to work within the current system. Ron Paul ran as a republican.

[Syn7]

Sounds about right.

Also, if people actually read the entire article, they will see that the bill only outlaws abortions after the 20th week. So while it does not allow exceptions for rape after that time, the solution is simple if you are raped and want an abortion - Don't wait 5 months to get an abortion.

some people dont know they are preggers till after 5 months... it happens... and if you were date raped with some drug and didnt even know you were raped then 6 months down the line you put the puzzle together and some ******* is gonna force you to have a rape baby??? fukc off with that... there are always exeptions...

im okay with the 20 month rule... for ur average abortion, thats more than enough time... and if you are so irresponsible that you dunno ur preggers after 5 months, then too bad for you... if youre active sexually you should be actively checking... but rape is a whole diff ball game... no woman should be forced to have a rape baby, no matter the reasons... and to put god into this debate is the height of idiocy... theres a reason we seperate church and state... go with it...

[Syn7]

libertarianism is such a broad term... i think ayn rand is a ditz, but if anyone asked me what i identify with most, i would have to say progressive libertarianism... but i doubt anyone here would put that title to me...

libertarianism is complicated in the way that its really hard to balance communal rights with individual rights and no matter how you look at it, there are scenarios where somebody will get the sh1t end of the stick... to me, libertarianism as defined is contradictory by nature...

[BJJ-Blue]

some people dont know they are preggers till after 5 months... it happens... and if you were date raped with some drug and didnt even know you were raped then 6 months down the line you put the puzzle together...

Did you actually type that with a straight face?

[SoCo KungFu]

The Libertarians are for legalizing drugs and prostitution. If you think they've been co-opted by the evangelicals, you're sadly mistaken.



This is correct.

But look at whose worse. Republicans are generally not pro-choice when it comes to abortion. Democrats have passed anti-choice laws on cars, guns, smoking, light bulbs, school lunch choice, and Happy Meals.

I really wish the Libertarians were more of a viable Party. I can't think of any laws they are for that ban choices Americans can make.

Did you really just try to compare a female's right to control her own body to some brat kid not being able to have mommy's pb&j? Really? Did you type THAT with a straight face?

Tell ya what, you can smoke in public. And I can stab you in the throat in self defense of my lungs. Seems fair to me

[Drake]

We are SO doomed...

[MasterKiller]

im okay with the 20 month rule... for ur average abortion, thats more than enough time... and if you are so irresponsible that you dunno ur preggers after 5 months, then too bad for you... if youre active sexually you should be actively checking... but rape is a whole diff ball game... no woman should be forced to have a rape baby, no matter the reasons... and to put god into this debate is the height of idiocy... theres a reason we seperate church and state... go with it...

After 20 months, it's called homicide, bro.

I'm very pro-choice, but I think abortions should only be allowed in the first trimester unless the mother's life is at risk.

If you get raped and wait too long to abort, give it up for adoption. No one says you have to be saddled with that burden forever.

[sanjuro_ronin]

After 20 months, it's called homicide, bro.

I'm very pro-choice, but I think abortions should only be allowed in the first trimester unless the mother's life is at risk.

If you get raped and wait too long to abort, give it up for adoption. No one says you have to be saddled with that burden forever.

I agree with MK.

[David Jamieson]

libertarianism is such a broad term... i think ayn rand is a ditz, but if anyone asked me what i identify with most, i would have to say progressive libertarianism... but i doubt anyone here would put that title to me...

libertarianism is complicated in the way that its really hard to balance communal rights with individual rights and no matter how you look at it, there are scenarios where somebody will get the sh1t end of the stick... to me, libertarianism as defined is contradictory by nature...

Libertarianism has some weird flavours these days, that's for sure.

It breaks down into:

Minarchists - minimal governance, keep the lights on, everything else is free

Anarcho-capitalists - no government, complete free for all market

Libertarian Socialists - similar to minarchists but with stronger posts beneath education, health care and defense.

I don't know what a progressive libertarian is?

Libertarianism is the closest thing you can find to classical liberalism. That being the Libertarian socialist model.

don't get caught up in the rhetoric that surrounds any of these words by the way. a Libertarian socialist is nothing in the least like a marxist-leninist socialist. The contrast is huge. so beware. :-)

having to choose, I would choose libertarian socialist because it would afford me the life style I have now with added freedoms in material possession and financial growth.

[BJJ-Blue]

Did you really just try to compare a female's right to control her own body to some brat kid not being able to have mommy's pb&j? Really? Did you type THAT with a straight face?

The Constitution gives all the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It also in no way advocates the Government telling us what we can and cant eat.

And it was not a certain case-vs-certain case comparison at all. I simply posted those to show the sheer numbers of things each Party is not pro-choice on. And the Democrats happened to have alot more examples. Feel free to add ones you feel I missed.


Tell ya what, you can smoke in public. And I can stab you in the throat in self defense of my lungs. Seems fair to me

First off, I don't smoke cigarettes. But I do believe in speaking up when other's rights are being trampled on. If you don't speak up for others, who will speak up for you when they come after your rights? I also do not have kids, but I believe parents have the right to give their child a lunch of their choice even if the Democrats in Chicago do not approve of the parents choices.

Second, it's about property rights. If a business owner chooses to allow smoking in his establishment, it's his right. If you don't like it, dont patronize his business. We don't need the Democrats telling private property owners they have to bar their patrons from behavior they choose to allow.

[BJJ-Blue]

I agree with MK.

As do I.


We are SO doomed...

Yes, I believe me agreeing with MK is a sign of the Apocolypse. ;)

[MasterKiller]

The Constitution gives all the right to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It also in no way advocates the Government telling us what we can and cant eat. or whom we marry.....

[David Jamieson]

or whom we marry.....

Or where we build a church, mosque or temple.
Or regarding personal decisions regarding end of life
Or regarding what goes on in our bedrooms

Or... dang, I can think of a lot of things gov sticks their nose in where it shouldn't...

hmmn

[BJJ-Blue]

or whom we marry.....

Agreed.

It's really the not Governments business. If a private company wants to give 'domestic partner' benefits, thats their call. We also should not be taxed differently if we get married instead of just living together.

[Drake]

Agreed.

It's really the not Governments business. If a private company wants to give 'domestic partner' benefits, thats their call. We also should not be taxed differently if we get married instead of just living together.

Then the GOP needs to leave ****sexuals alone. Funny how government intervention is fine when it fits some whacked out, old testament religious agenda.

[Syn7]

After 20 months, it's called homicide, bro.

I'm very pro-choice, but I think abortions should only be allowed in the first trimester unless the mother's life is at risk.

If you get raped and wait too long to abort, give it up for adoption. No one says you have to be saddled with that burden forever.

yeah sure, im okay with that... unless its rape... i dont care if its 7 months... nobody should be forced to have a rape baby... there should always be an out for the extreme cases...

like say some girl is raped by her dad and kept in the basement... when she finally escapes shes 5 months pregnant... fukc it, scramble the lil fukcer... until it has a name and a face that i can commune with, its not an actual person to me... but im ok with the 3 month rule in almost all cases... gotta draw the line somewhere... but when rape is concerned, that line should be able to be moved...

[David Jamieson]

as drug technology improves, abortion will be a non issue in the future.

ru482 or "the day after pill" and others like it will commonly be replacing abortion altogether.

No need to argue. It will be the women's choice with her body and that's that.

[Lebaufist]

I think there should be a mandate compelling hospitals to give rape victims the advised choice for the new contraceptive. Information is key in prevention.

That evil planned parenthood has met the mighty sword of justice. Now all things will return to their once proud glory..................

[BJJ-Blue]

Then the GOP needs to leave ****sexuals alone. Funny how government intervention is fine when it fits some whacked out, old testament religious agenda.

Again, I don't care what people do in their own bedrooms. Most States don't have sodomy laws on the books anymore, and the ones that do rarely if ever enforce them.

The only thing I do say the Gov't needs to do is not give domestic partner benefits. It would open a huge can of worms in terms of fraud that the taxpayers would be on the hook for. If a private company offers them, I don't care, it's their money not mine.

[curenado]

Again, I don't care what people do in their own bedrooms. Most States don't have sodomy laws on the books anymore, and the ones that do rarely if ever enforce them.

The only thing I do say the Gov't needs to do is not give domestic partner benefits. It would open a huge can of worms in terms of fraud that the taxpayers would be on the hook for. If a private company offers them, I don't care, it's their money not mine.

If people are married or have lived together in common law, then it should not matter what sex they are.

<<yeah sure, im okay with that... unless its rape... i dont care if its 7 months...
like say some girl is raped by her dad and kept in the basement... when she finally escapes shes 5 months pregnant... fukc it, scramble the lil fukcer>>

As long as I don't have to dissect and pull out piece by piece. Pretty horrific stuff.

<<.. until it has a name and a face that i can commune with, its not an actual person to me... >>

That is priceless - your criteria of a "actual person" is whether or not the poor creature can "commune" with you.
That's not a argument for or against - it was just too funny not to notice!

[Drake]

Again, I don't care what people do in their own bedrooms. Most States don't have sodomy laws on the books anymore, and the ones that do rarely if ever enforce them.

The only thing I do say the Gov't needs to do is not give domestic partner benefits. It would open a huge can of worms in terms of fraud that the taxpayers would be on the hook for. If a private company offers them, I don't care, it's their money not mine.

Because there isn't fraud now? Do you think the benefits they want will cost you a penny? Visitation rights? Better yet, how many taxpayer dollars do you think were spent trying to block it?

Marriage is pretty much penalized these days.

[BJJ-Blue]

Because there isn't fraud now? Do you think the benefits they want will cost you a penny? Visitation rights? Better yet, how many taxpayer dollars do you think were spent trying to block it?

Of course the benefits will cost me money. I'm a taxpayer, where do you think the Gov't gets its money? Every taxpayer will be paying for it. And again, I'm talking about Gov't employees and benefits, not private sector employees and benefits.

Not sure what you are talking about in regards to visitation rights and blocking. Can you be more specific on that?


Marriage is pretty much penalized these days.

Pretty much anything is penalized, except for having kids you can't afford to take care of. Then you get the Earned Income Tax Credit even if you pay no income taxes.

[Syn7]

If people are married or have lived together in common law, then it should not matter what sex they are.

<<yeah sure, im okay with that... unless its rape... i dont care if its 7 months...
like say some girl is raped by her dad and kept in the basement... when she finally escapes shes 5 months pregnant... fukc it, scramble the lil fukcer>>

As long as I don't have to dissect and pull out piece by piece. Pretty horrific stuff.

<<.. until it has a name and a face that i can commune with, its not an actual person to me... >>

That is priceless - your criteria of a "actual person" is whether or not the poor creature can "commune" with you.
That's not a argument for or against - it was just too funny not to notice!


yeah, but i meant it... we kill eachother, we kill all sorts of animals, we pretty much kill anything in our path, why not a "not ready to be born" baby??? fukc it, too bad for the fetus, better luck next time around...


i dunno any rape babies but i do know a few trick babies and i can honestly say that they are all fukced up beyond redemption... everyone but them wouldve been better off if they were aborted... but it was tough back then...

[Lebaufist]

If people actually believed in their respective religions, they'd know those children go straight to heaven. Or at least reincarnate if you're Buddhist/Hindu.

Its pure evil to want them to suffer in this world.

[David Jamieson]

If people actually believed in their respective religions, they'd know those children go straight to heaven. Or at least reincarnate if you're Buddhist/Hindu.

Its pure evil to want them to suffer in this world.

Actually...

In buddhism there is an extensive lecture in the Lotus sutra regarding reincarnation and what you are reborn as for rejecting the sutra itself.

Buddhists in fact may well believe it is karma and payback for misdeeds or rejection of the dharma in a past life.

Yes, it's true.

As Buddhism sprang forth from Hinduism (and quite possibly Jainism), these religions also believe in the ladder of life and merit, reincarnation and the fear of coming back with fur and sharp teeth instead of coming back as a human.

It is not necessarily evil for them or anyone else to suffer.

Life IS suffering according to Buddha. If we want to quell that, we must cause cessation of desire. We quell desire through Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration.

there are elements of Christianity that also point to this "not caring" and it is "the will of god" or "the mysterious ways".


what doesn't fit is one passing judgment on another. And why would a rape baby necessarily suffer? If all is mind, that child can grow up to be whatever he or she chooses to be.

socially, there may be stigma attached, but hey, if you were a black dude in 1962 you had a stigma attached to you in north america and if you were a native dude in canada in 1960 you couldn't even vote!

anyway...I wanted to point out that religious belief isn't necessarily out of line with some of the comments made on it's behalf by people who "really" do believe! :)

[Syn7]

not all rape babies would suffer...


but i can see a woman with too many issues swimming around in her head, has a rape baby and ten years later you have this kid being treated like sh1t from the parent as a reminder of how much life sucks... but then her maternal instincts would kick in and make her feel like a douchebag for thinking that way which in turn creates even more stress and more acting out in negative ways... especially if she felt forced to have the baby...

and you know this stuff happens all the time... not just rape babies, but women who have kids with men they despise... then they see that man in their kid... its gotta suck...

[Lebaufist]

Said woman should then put it up for adoption.

[David Jamieson]

not all rape babies would suffer...


but i can see a woman with too many issues swimming around in her head, has a rape baby and ten years later you have this kid being treated like sh1t from the parent as a reminder of how much life sucks... but then her maternal instincts would kick in and make her feel like a douchebag for thinking that way which in turn creates even more stress and more acting out in negative ways... especially if she felt forced to have the baby...

and you know this stuff happens all the time... not just rape babies, but women who have kids with men they despise... then they see that man in their kid... its gotta suck...

This can happen in people who were born out of consensual sex.

The causation of the inception is not going to necessarily define who the child as an adult is when they start making their contributions to society, or being a burden upon it. It's usually one or the other and few are truly neutral.

I don't believe that can be determined by "how" a child was conceived.

[Syn7]

no, not directly, but it could have an effect on how people treat the kid and that will have an effect on who they become...


anyways, is there anyone who is upset that people cant abort after 5 months? if so, i havent seen it yet... unless it was to save the mothers life, i cant see why anyone would be in a situation like that... i mean, its possible, but so unlikely i dont think we need to really plan ahead for it...

[curenado]

<< i mean, its possible, but so unlikely i dont think we need to really plan ahead for it... >>

Every reason in the world is on record. The reason there is more intensity about it because it is much more horrific. Imagine the pictures legislators get shown irregardless of the reason. (It has to have the most pre-planned contingencies because it is the most severe and barbarous.)

I think that influences it a lot, even though it does not change the rarer instances when a late term abortion might be a life saving option or other compelling reason. It is a horror.

[Kansuke]

I don't see the difference between a dictator, a nazi and an american conservative anymore.



you must be pretty stupid then.

[Kansuke]

Or where we build a church, mosque or temple.
Or regarding personal decisions regarding end of life
Or regarding what goes on in our bedrooms



hmmn


Yes it does, yes it does, yes it does.

[David Jamieson]

no, not directly, but it could have an effect on how people treat the kid and that will have an effect on who they become...


It could, or maybe not. It can't be said really can it?

[Syn7]

It could, or maybe not. It can't be said really can it?

more likely to be hated under those circumstances than otherwise... im just sayin', i wouldnt blame any woman for not wanting a rape baby, no mater how far along she is...

that is such a small part of the overall abortion debate tho... no need to dwell on that part... lets just say i support a womans right to choose and leave it at that... i dont really care about the details... as long as they have a reasonable window, im satisfied... 3 months should be enough under normal conditions... and i have no issue with 3 day waiting periods or whatever... but i do object to forced council... leave em to their own council for a few days, no problem, but they dont need to be preached at by some d1ck with an agenda...

[Lee Chiang Po]

The greatest failing of mankind has been religion. Governments have been led by it, and people have suffered greately from it. If anything was ever truely evil, it is religion in any form. The entire abortion subject has been fed by religious ethics. Religion has no place in the governance of people. If a person wants to have such beliefs, let them do so, but it should never be placed upon others.

[BJJ-Blue]

The greatest failing of mankind has been religion.

No, it's only some religions.

I was raised Baptist. We believed (and were taught) to be kind to your neighbors, to work for an honest living, to give to those in need, to not have kids out of wedlock, and to obey the law among other things. We were taught not to hate anyone, and that includes people of other religions.

So knowing that, how would the world be a bad place if everyone led a life with those beliefs?

[SoCo KungFu]

No, it's only some religions.

I was raised Baptist.

Oh that does explain a lot of things....


We believed (and were taught) to be kind to your neighbors, to work for an honest living, to give to those in need, to not have kids out of wedlock, and to obey the law among other things. We were taught not to hate anyone, and that includes people of other religions.

So knowing that, how would the world be a bad place if everyone led a life with those beliefs?

Yes you sure are a paragon of moral excellence there aren't you?...


Those idiots also cancelled the "Trail of Lights" this year because of lack of funds (it costs the City $400,000). Of course right before that they announced they were giving $500,000 to support the homeless (ie bums) community here.

You care more about your piece of **** lightshow than helping someone in need.


I told my wife the only thing i'd like more than watching the kid explode would be if the parents said a word to me. When it comes to dealing with rude people, i'm not very tolerant, and i have a pretty good left hand.

Been publicly teasing any 10 year olds lately?

Trash...

[curenado]

The greatest failing of mankind has been religion. Governments have been led by it, and people have suffered greately from it. If anything was ever truely evil, it is religion in any form. The entire abortion subject has been fed by religious ethics. Religion has no place in the governance of people. If a person wants to have such beliefs, let them do so, but it should never be placed upon others.

The world has been godless long enough for the blame to be on people where it belongs so they can deal with it themselves instead of that lame whiny crap about religion.
I mean if stupid, godless trash have been ruling at least a century them maybe the problems really come from stupid, godless trash and ghetto/leach cultures like cali where classless earth crud demands that viable people support that which nature and life won't, when they could be enjoying thier hard earned money with pleasant community things or picking the kind of works and things they might contribute to support. Buying libraries, museums, galleries and science centers - not hateful, effete undesirables. Investing in things for the worthwhile and living so that there is still some social concern and money NOT being given to sustain and create more ugly garbage with big mouths and nothing else.

But yeah - the current state of affairs is factually a testament to godlessness, not religion. Religion got thrown off for the all-wise secularism you claim is so great long ago. They aren't fat, stupid, sick, dying, parasitical, criminal, ugly or low class/quality because of religion.....they are because of them and thier ways.

California is fun in places as well as beautiful, but it is one of the biggest and most vile national scum-ghettos we have and doesn't get a opinion on sustainable human culture of anything but toxic quality (Ha! That's a joke!) or any more whine room about how crud that doesn't act up to the level of an animal should be given anything free but typhoid and though BJ doesn't think so, abortions.

With the free-ride train about to crash in this country though, it really does not matter much except avoiding those areas when they begin eating each other which is of course the natural, inevitable result of a welfare state and "people" can only think "Well of course. There isn't anyone too stupid to see that and everyone knew how false and toxic that was all along."

To destroy what is inferior before it poisons and consumes what is not is actually high moral excellence - you just wouldn't think so if you were a california check sucker with a couple crossed eyed criminal young about as desirable as crotch rot and pathological taste in art/music.
You ask a race to throw out it's baby and bathwater so something wretched can take it's place and have the front to demand it's "morality" - I don't think most people are really going for that anymore if they ever did.

[Drake]

I am completely and utterly godless. Are you saying I am less of a person because of it?

[curenado]

I am completely and utterly godless. Are you saying I am less of a person because of it?

I said maybe after all this time and the proud, self-evident results maybe the godless thing isn't all it cracked up to be - whether or not you are less of a person didn't hit my radar because I didn't know considering you was so important except that you say so.

If I got to know you and thought you were some kind of man, then that would probably be what mattered more. It has pretty much so far.

[Drake]

I said maybe after all this time and the proud, self-evident results maybe the godless thing isn't all it cracked up to be - whether or not you are less of a person didn't hit my radar because I didn't know considering you was so important except that you say so.

If I got to know you and thought you were some kind of man, then that would probably be what mattered more. It has pretty much so far.

I work for a living, pay my bills, and am good in bed. Does that qualify me as "some kind of man", or does it make me a troglodyte?

[BJJ-Blue]

You care more about your piece of **** lightshow than helping someone in need.

2 Things:

1) most homeless people choose to be homeless and only want free money for drugs and beer. If you don't believe me, go up to the next guy holding up a sign and offer him $25 to mow your yard.

2) I aleady pay ~40% of my money in taxes. That's enough so that if I want to see a light show, I have every right to and I don't have to feel guilyt about it one bit.


Been publicly teasing any 10 year olds lately?

I don't do that. But no, I havent ran into any brats I've need to teach a lesson to. Remember, I said I'd post it when I do.


Trash...

And another liberal stoops to name calling. Par for the course.

[BJJ-Blue]

I am completely and utterly godless. Are you saying I am less of a person because of it?

I'm not. I actually think you're a good guy.

[SoCo KungFu]

2 Things:

1) most homeless people choose to be homeless and only want free money for drugs and beer. If you don't believe me, go up to the next guy holding up a sign and offer him $25 to mow your yard.

A fourth of the US homeless that you so lovingly call bums, are homeless veterans. They've done and suffered far more than you have any right to judge. So on behalf of my fellow veterans that are suffering, kindly go **** yourself.


2) I aleady pay ~40% of my money in taxes. That's enough so that if I want to see a light show, I have every right to and I don't have to feel guilyt about it one bit.

And unless something has changed TX, while granted a donor state, is one of the states receiving federal assistance as a "developing" western states to help cover energy costs. So no, I don't want MY tax money going to your piece of **** lightshow. The homeless however, all for that.


And another liberal stoops to name calling. Par for the course.

you don't know **** about me, don't kid yourself into thinking you do

[BJJ-Blue]

A fourth of the US homeless that you so lovingly call bums, are homeless veterans. They've done and suffered far more than you have any right to judge.

So these brave men and women fought for our country and made sacrifices no one should have to make. And some came back with problems that needed special attention. And despite the Government's promise to these great men and women to take care of them, they have not. They have left those most in need to rot and die on the streets.

And now liberals say that we should let the Government run ALL of our healthcare. What could possibly go wrong?

[Drake]

PTSD comes in many forms, and many times DOES make employment difficult. It's also harder to find jobs in certain places than others.

PTSD can range from bad dreams to being unable to function as a member of society. It's not like the flu, where everyone has the same symptoms. We also have a large number of people who not only have PTSD, but are also compounded by amputations, TBI, and addictions to painkillers due to the very painful loss of limbs.

BJJ, I suggest not making generalizations about PTSD, because it s a very complex and varied illness, many times rendering even simple jobs impossible. Most people in Vietnam never saw action, given it was a conventional fight with FLOTs and "in the rear with the gear". Everyone sees it in Afghanistan.

[BJJ-Blue]

Drake, I don't want to involve my dad in this (as I don't want to see him insulted). But he has PTSD, it's been diagnosed by the VA. He saw combat in Vietnam and has a Purple Heart. The ugly physical scars are there on his body forever.

So yes, I have firsthand experience in it. I'm not looking for any sympathy for my dad, but I'll say that as children me and my brother could NEVER jump into bed with dad to wake him up. When dad fell asleep in his recliner, we could not touch him. And we were awakened many nights by him as well. Yet he served as a fireman for over 20 years until he retired.

So yes, I know everyone is different. But my dad definately had issues, yet he functioned as a productive member of society. I met many of his buddies too. One of his best friends lost a leg and a half over there. He was also productive. He took up scuba diving and invented/fabricated a flipper he could use to get around underwater. He had every excuse to sit on a corner and beg, but he chose not to. Matter of fact, every one of his buddies I met had a job. While some did have issues with employment, none ever begged on the streets. And the Vietnam vets had it ALOT worse in regards to PTSD treatment than the vets now have. Thankfully we were able to learn from their experiences and apply those lessons to the vets returning home today.

[BJJ-Blue]

And don't those who received Honorable Discharges get extra points on Civil Service Exams as well to help them achieve employment in places like the Post Office, Fire/Police/EMS, and the IRS, etc? Vietnam Vets got even more points. Do they still give combat vets even more points?

[Drake]

And don't those who received Honorable Discharges get extra points on Civil Service Exams as well to help them achieve employment in places like the Post Office, Fire/Police/EMS, and the IRS, etc? Vietnam Vets got even more points. Do they still give combat vets even more points?

Eh... kind of. The federal employment market is tricky, to say the least. You get points, but if you don't know how to "outsmart the system", no human being will ever even see your resume.

[BJJ-Blue]

Eh... kind of. The federal employment market is tricky, to say the least. You get points, but if you don't know how to "outsmart the system", no human being will ever even see your resume.

Don't we have Civil Service laws in effect that are supposed to guarantee the highest scores get the jobs first?

FYI, when my dad took his you could score over 100 on the test. You got 5 points for having an Honorable Discharge and 5 points for being a minority. So if you were a veteran (not a minority lets say) and you scored a 98 on the test itself you really scored a 103. So you beat others who scored 100 on the test but were not veterans or minorities.

[Drake]

Don't we have Civil Service laws in effect that are supposed to guarantee the highest scores get the jobs first?

FYI, when my dad took his you could score over 100 on the test. You got 5 points for having an Honorable Discharge and 5 points for being a minority. So if you were a veteran (not a minority lets say) and you scored a 98 on the test itself you really scored a 103. So you beat others who scored 100 on the test but were not veterans or minorities.

It's largely automated now. Scans resumes, and if you don't have the right phrases, VERBATIM, the system discards your resume. Had an Air Force vet who spent four years loading missiles unable to find a job in an area with THREE military installations nearby.

[BJJ-Blue]

I see. But what about the Civil Service Exam? Is it not used anymore? It's different than a resume.

A friend of mine joined the APD a few years ago. He said alot of the guys in his training class were military veterans. It's either a huge coincedence, or they do get some kind of preferential treatment in the hiring process (which I do support btw).

[Syn7]

Don't we have Civil Service laws in effect that are supposed to guarantee the highest scores get the jobs first?

FYI, when my dad took his you could score over 100 on the test. You got 5 points for having an Honorable Discharge and 5 points for being a minority. So if you were a veteran (not a minority lets say) and you scored a 98 on the test itself you really scored a 103. So you beat others who scored 100 on the test but were not veterans or minorities.

so if you score 100% and you are a vet and you are white, a guy who scores 96% and is a vet and happens to be black, he gets the job because even tho white guy gets 4 points higher??? thats dumb...


they did alot of that sh1t up here in the 90's... mosty of our police force is brown now... doesnt seem fair, does it... i dont understand how one can claim to be enforcing equality by giving one an edge over another based on skin color... thats so ass backwards... i hate that tree hugging bullsh1t... the only way to do it is to just make everyone on the same level, by law, from now on... no points for color, no special treatment for being a certain race... just equality for all under law... simple... well, it should be, anyways... it could be...

[Syn7]

2 Things:

1) most homeless people choose to be homeless and only want free money for drugs and beer. If you don't believe me, go up to the next guy holding up a sign and offer him $25 to mow your yard.

2) I aleady pay ~40% of my money in taxes. That's enough so that if I want to see a light show, I have every right to and I don't have to feel guilyt about it one bit.



I don't do that. But no, I havent ran into any brats I've need to teach a lesson to. Remember, I said I'd post it when I do.



And another liberal stoops to name calling. Par for the course.


if somebody had the nerve to try and talk to my kids in public like that i would bomb on em... not even the back of my hand, but a serious boot stomping... dont mess with peoples kids... its none of your biz anyways... if you dont like how a kid is acting in a store or whatever, you are free to p1ss off and go be a pr1ck at home or at the very least, somewhere else... thats your right... but what isnt your right is to discipline other peoples kids... one day some lady is gonna scratch ur face off and if you fight back you'll be even worse off than if you just take it like a b1tch...

[Drake]

Doesn't matter. President Obama killed Bin Laden. None of this means a thing.

[BJJ-Blue]

so if you score 100% and you are a vet and you are white, a guy who scores 96% and is a vet and happens to be black, he gets the job because even tho white guy gets 4 points higher??? thats dumb...

That's how it used to be, he joined up ~30 years ago though.

He also hated how they tried to increase the number of women firefighters. First off, he said if you could do the job, you were fine in his book. That said, they lowered the physical requirements for women. He said a 220lb man who needs pulled out of a fire is a 220lb man who needs pulled out of a fire no matter if its a woman who got in using the lower standards or a man who passed the rigorous ones who has to try and do it. He said it wasn't fair to the public or the other firemen to lower physical standards just to increase diversity.


if somebody had the nerve to try and talk to my kids in public like that i would bomb on em... but what isnt your right is to discipline other peoples kids... one day some lady is gonna scratch ur face off and if you fight back you'll be even worse off than if you just take it like a b1tch...

It has ZERO to do with discipline. If a kid is annoying me and annoying others and the parents refuse to do anything about it, I'll simply rile the kid up so bad THEY will have to suffer the whole ride home as they made everyone else suffer. It's only fair. It's that simple.

FYI, I would NEVER put my hands on anyone else's kids. But if anyone ever attacked me, I'd defend myself. And I live in Texas....

[MasterKiller]

It has ZERO to do with discipline. If a kid is annoying me and annoying others and the parents refuse to do anything about it, I'll simply rile the kid up so bad THEY will have to suffer the whole ride home as they made everyone else suffer. It's only fair. It's that simple.

Typical Christian, unfortunately.

[BJJ-Blue]

Typical Christian, unfortunately.

What's wrong with teaching your kid not to throw a fit when they don't get what they want?

Sometimes I think some of you argue with me just for the sake of arguing with me.

[MasterKiller]

What's wrong with teaching your kid not to throw a fit when they don't get what they want?

Sometimes I think some of you argue with me just for the sake of arguing with me.

There is nothing wrong with you teaching your kid. But taunting a stranger's kid is pathetic.

[BJJ-Blue]

There is nothing wrong with you teaching your kid. But taunting a stranger's kid is pathetic.

To me, it's punishing the parents. They have to ride home with it screaming. I (and everyone else who knows how to behave in public) just had to listen to it in a store.

My buddy actually did this last week, but by mistake. He works at a store where alot of the customers speak Spanish, and he does not. So a kid was at the front counter crying and pulling on his dad's shirt. They both were speaking Spanish though. My buddy walked over to the candy machine acroos the room and got some candy. The kid just went ballistic. After they left one of my buddies co-workers who speaks Spanish said the kid wanted some candy.

[MasterKiller]

To me, it's punishing the parents. They have to ride home with it screaming. I (and everyone else who knows how to behave in public) just had to listen to it in a store. Taunting a child is punishing the parents.... Seriously, if I saw you do this to anyone else's kids but your own, we would have words, my friend.

[BJJ-Blue]

Taunting a child is punishing the parents.... Seriously, if I saw you do this to anyone else's kids but your own, we would have words, my friend.

Honestly, I'm sure most people would be happy someone did something. It's rude, and people like it when rude people get whats coming to them. I cursed out a woman in a grocey store a few years ago for having a full cart in the express lane. No one, including her husband assaulted me. He got in my face, but when I asked him to hit me, he walked off. So I continued to curse the both of them. Again, people don't like rude *******s.

Do you allow your children to throw fits in public when they don't get what they want? Though you and I rarely see eye-to-eye, I'm betting you're a good enough parent that they don't.

[MasterKiller]

Honestly, I'm sure most people would be happy someone did something. It's rude, and people like it when rude people get whats coming to them. You messing with a kid is far more rude than a child throwing a tantrum. Be a man and lead by example. Or maybe that's the example you want to set. If so, it's chickensh1t. Especially from a guy who has no kids himself.


Do you allow your children to throw fits in public when they don't get what they want? Though you and I rarely see eye-to-eye, I'm betting you're a good enough parent that they don't. What my kids do is my business.

[BJJ-Blue]

What my kids do is my business.

:rolleyes:


Sometimes I think some of you argue with me just for the sake of arguing with me.

[Drake]

Honestly, I'm sure most people would be happy someone did something. It's rude, and people like it when rude people get whats coming to them. I cursed out a woman in a grocey store a few years ago for having a full cart in the express lane. No one, including her husband assaulted me. He got in my face, but when I asked him to hit me, he walked off. So I continued to curse the both of them. Again, people don't like rude *******s.

Do you allow your children to throw fits in public when they don't get what they want? Though you and I rarely see eye-to-eye, I'm betting you're a good enough parent that they don't.

Turn the other cheek. So what if someone had a loaded cart in an express lane? It's not your grocery store. It's not your checkout lane. You are just a customer. Instead of embarrassing yourself in public, perhaps quietly asking the management about their policies would have been better. That was outright childish. Do you also throw a fit when someone double-parks?

You didn't give them what was coming to them. You looked small and petty and started a conflict.

[BJJ-Blue]

It's as much my grocery store as theirs. And I was the one following the rules.

I worked at 2 grocery stores as a kid (the one we're talking about was one actually). We were taught at both stores if someone came into the Express Lane with too many items you just rang them up.

[MasterKiller]

It's as much my grocery store as theirs. And I was the one following the rules.


I worked at 2 grocery stores as a kid (the one we're talking about was one actually). We were taught at both stores if someone came into the Express Lane with too many items you just rang them up.

Whose rules were you "following"?

[MasterKiller]

:rolleyes:

Next time I tell you how to raise your own kids, you can roll your eyes...

[BJJ-Blue]

Whose rules were you "following"?

The rules that say 'XX items or less'. Did you really need me to point that out? They put those things in there for convenience, and they clearly label the lines. They are the rules that make shopping easier. They are put there for consideration. And they are rules, they just were (and maybe still arent) not enforced.

[BJJ-Blue]

Next time I tell you how to raise your own kids, you can roll your eyes...

Whatever. I'd bet your kids are behaved, you just want to argue with me. And that's why I'm rolling my eyes, fyi.

[Drake]

Petty and small. I am tapping out of this ridiculous sh*t too. You made an utter fool out of yourself throwing a fit in a grocery store. And then you have the audacity to pat yourself on the back over it, like you dispensed some justice? YOU ALMOST STARTED A FIGHT IN A GROCERY STORE OVER THE GOD**** EXPRESS LANE. YOU ARE SOCIALLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND A COMPLETE NARCISSIST.

F*CK, I'M DONE HERE.

[MasterKiller]

The rules that say 'XX items or less'. Did you really need me to point that out? They put those things in there for convenience, and they clearly label the lines. They are the rules that make shopping easier. They are put there for consideration. And they are rules, they just were (and maybe still arent) not enforced.

But store policy is to allow them to go in that line, regarless. So you aren't really enforcing anyone's policy but your own.

[BJJ-Blue]

It's their policy whether they enforce it or not. They do put the signs up after all. I didn't put the signs up. I just chose to call them on it.

As to me being an ass/arrogant/narcissist/etc, no one said a word to me. And the store was packed too. There was someone behind them when I rolled up with my 2 items, and he looked at their cart and walked off. Someone else came behind me before the incident, and also looked at them and walked off. I was just the only one who said something.

FYI, I had a buddy who worked there at the time, he is a cop now. He said he wished he could have seen it, because he despises rude people. He later told me several of the people working up front that day were laughing about it. And not at me, but at them for being rude, getting told they were rude, and for punking out when called on it. He said they especially loved it because they have to deal with rude people every day and can't say anything, so they loved seeing someone say what they've been wanting to say many times.

[MasterKiller]

It's their policy whether they enforce it or not. They do put the signs up after all. I didn't put the signs up. I just chose to call them on it.

As to me being an ass/arrogant/narcissist/etc, no one said a word to me. And the store was packed too. There was someone behind them when I rolled up with my 2 items, and he looked at their cart and walked off. Someone else came behind me before the incident, and also looked at them and walked off. I was just the only one who said something. The other people who didn't speak up were being civil. You seem to think you were standing up for them because they wouldn't, when in actuality you just make yourself out to be an inexcusable @ss. Get over yourself.


FYI, I had a buddy who worked there at the time, he is a cop now. He said he wished he could have seen it, because he despises rude people. He later told me several of the people working up front that day were laughing about it. And not at me, but at them for being rude, getting told they were rude, and for punking out when called on it. He said they especially loved it because they have to deal with rude people every day and can't say anything, so they loved seeing someone say what they've been wanting to say many times.Your buddy sounds like a real winner, too.

[BJJ-Blue]

Your buddy sounds like a real winner, too.

He is. He's a good husband, father, cop, fought pro, a BJJ Brown Belt. He's a pretty mature guy. He just don't like rude people anymore than I do.

Let me leave you guys with this, then I'm done:

I'm the guy who holds doors open for people. I'm the one who calls the clerk, sandwhich maker, custodian, etc 'Sir' or Ma'am'. I'm the guy who gave someone a buck once who was ~45 cents short and the clerk was gonna make them return something. I'm the guy who lets someone with 2 items cut in front of me when I have a full cart and no Express Lines are open. I'm the guy who waves and winks at little kids who wave or smile at me. I'm the guy who tells people they have a cute kid. I'm not a bad guy, I just don't like rude people.

[MasterKiller]

I just don't like rude people. I'm sure the people you were rude to didn't either.

[Reality_Check]

I'm the guy who holds doors open for people. I'm the one who calls the clerk, sandwhich maker, custodian, etc 'Sir' or Ma'am'. I'm the guy who gave someone a buck once who was ~45 cents short and the clerk was gonna make them return something. I'm the guy who lets someone with 2 items cut in front of me when I have a full cart and no Express Lines are open. I'm the guy who waves and winks at little kids who wave or smile at me. I'm the guy who tells people they have a cute kid. I'm not a bad guy, I just don't like rude people.

So, the way you behave on this forum is out of character (with the insults and whatnot)? I guess that would make you some sort of keyboard warrior. :p

[Syn7]

That's how it used to be, he joined up ~30 years ago though.

He also hated how they tried to increase the number of women firefighters. First off, he said if you could do the job, you were fine in his book. That said, they lowered the physical requirements for women. He said a 220lb man who needs pulled out of a fire is a 220lb man who needs pulled out of a fire no matter if its a woman who got in using the lower standards or a man who passed the rigorous ones who has to try and do it. He said it wasn't fair to the public or the other firemen to lower physical standards just to increase diversity.



It has ZERO to do with discipline. If a kid is annoying me and annoying others and the parents refuse to do anything about it, I'll simply rile the kid up so bad THEY will have to suffer the whole ride home as they made everyone else suffer. It's only fair. It's that simple.

FYI, I would NEVER put my hands on anyone else's kids. But if anyone ever attacked me, I'd defend myself. And I live in Texas....

i know a smoking hot firewoman, worked with my pops. she was really good at her job too. but maaaaan was is hot.

[BJJ-Blue]

So, the way you behave on this forum is out of character (with the insults and whatnot)? I guess that would make you some sort of keyboard warrior. :p

I've openly called for name-calling to stop. I've done it in the past, I admit. But I've said I'd stop awhile back and kept my word. Over that time I've repeatedly been called names, mostly by Jamieson.

I am a tad defensive, I admit. I'm one of the few conservative posters here in a sea of liberals. And again, it's rare to go a week without being called names. Racist seems to be the most common one, but Jamieson has a whole slew of them he likes to use as well. As an aside, that is unique to this site. I hang around on mostly car forums, and they are mostly inhabited by more conservative people. I've also never had a personal attack or an e-challenge dropped on me on any car forum.

As to being a keyboard warrior I'm not dropping e-challenges nor filling the forum with tales of my fighting prowess. I'm very open that I'm not near the best guy at my gym, or any others I've trained at.

[BJJ-Blue]

i know a smoking hot firewoman, worked with my pops. she was really good at her job too. but maaaaan was is hot.

None ever worked at my dad's station. But there were some at other stations.

Did they lower the physical requirements for the women in his city?

[Syn7]

None ever worked at my dad's station. But there were some at other stations.

Did they lower the physical requirements for the women in his city?

i dunno... but i would be willing to venture a guess that yes they did... i know military requirements are less for women... same with RCMP and VPD(police)...

she can save me any day... so so hot...

she was the only woman i met that worked there... i know of one more but never saw her, and of course there are tons of women in other jobs at the dept... like dispachers, admins and sh1t like that...

[David Jamieson]

Collectively in Canada, Requirements for height, weight and strength, endurance and fitness tests were severely reduced to include women and people of other cultures who were on average a lot smaller than you average Canadian.
This happened at the beginning of the 1980's.

Prior to that, cops and firefighters had pretty much teh same reqs, except cops had a higher req on edcation.

But they were all required to be at least 6 ft tall, at least 180lbs, at least HS grads and preferred with some uni.

Nowadays it is not a surprise to see a chain smoking 110lb female in a cruiser by herself. Seriously, it's goofy.

[Syn7]

Collectively in Canada, Requirements for height, weight and strength, endurance and fitness tests were severely reduced to include women and people of other cultures who were on average a lot smaller than you average Canadian.
This happened at the beginning of the 1980's.

Prior to that, cops and firefighters had pretty much teh same reqs, except cops had a higher req on edcation.

But they were all required to be at least 6 ft tall, at least 180lbs, at least HS grads and preferred with some uni.

Nowadays it is not a surprise to see a chain smoking 110lb female in a cruiser by herself. Seriously, it's goofy.

yeah its crazy... i dont see very many cops that i would consider intimidating... in a head to head confrontation i would bet on myself 99 out of 100 times... and it sure isnt hard outrunning police, in the 80's or today... not that i would know from experience recently, but if i could out run em in the 80's and 90's, i can out run em now... and they are mostly out of shape people... without the radio and gun the are sub par human beings as far as security is concerned... not all of course, but most... there is the odd really good cop, like 1 in every 100 or so... most are guilty of looking the other way when a fellow officer broke the rules, at the very least... its hard for me to trust em when they are such a brotherhood... they will stick up for eachother even when they know they are wrong... and thats wrong... they shouldnt allow one persons bad integrity ruin the integrity of the rest... but they do exactly that when they stick up for eachother... ironic how the excuse is always "we dont want people to think all cops are bad, its just a few bad apples" then they go stick up for the bad apples... in that respect, they have sweet union deals... suspended with pay for committing crimes... not bad, not bad at all...

[BJJ-Blue]

in that respect, they have sweet union deals... suspended with pay for committing crimes... not bad, not bad at all...

I thought you supported government employee unions? :confused:

[Syn7]

I thought you supported government employee unions? :confused:

i do, in general... but that doesnt mean i support every decision that is made... there are tons of union deals i could wine about... i just dont...