ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
How long did a day last, when the universe was first created? If you are going to fact-check the bible, then use facts.

kind of hard to say it was 24 hours when there wasnt any sun for any earth to rotate around! or any earth for that matter....
Haha yes. Of course. Use the facts.
 
according to many scientist and atheist, life started from the primordial ooze. LIFE.

Foregone conclusion, warrior-cat. Science already proved in lab tests over and over that life bursts forth from non-living matter, right? It's settled science!

Yep. Testable they say. It must be testable.

T E S T A B L E
 
On day 4 he creates the sun, you know, the source of photosynthesis. Makes sense.
He said "let there be light", and it was good.
hqdefault.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaBossIsBack
according to many scientist and atheist, life started from the primordial ooze. LIFE.

According to Christian's the first woman was created from a man's rib. The entire universe in was created in 6 days. On day two and day three God creates the oceans, continents and plants. On day 4 he creates the sun, you know, the source of photosynthesis. Makes sense.

I always love these responses when someone discusses their faith. As if life springing forth out of primordial ooze is any more ridiculous sounding than an omniscient being. Newsflash: they both sound ridiculous.

The difference, is that religion requires its believer to accept certain things on faith, because they cant be proven; and the practitioner accepts this. Whereas science is in the same predicament, except the theory is passed off as fact; and any opposing viewpoints are condescendingly cast aside as ridiculous.
 
I always love these responses when someone discusses their faith. As if life springing forth out of primordial ooze is any more ridiculous sounding than an omniscient being. Newsflash: they both sound ridiculous.

The difference, is that religion requires its believer to accept certain things on faith, because they cant be proven; and the practitioner accepts this. Whereas science is in the same predicament, except the theory is passed off as fact; and any opposing viewpoints are condescendingly cast aside as ridiculous.
Ughh..that was the point. I'm agnostic but I tend to lean toward deism. But hey lump me into whatever category helps you get through the day.
 
I always love these responses when someone discusses their faith. As if life springing forth out of primordial ooze is any more ridiculous sounding than an omniscient being. Newsflash: they both sound ridiculous.

The difference, is that religion requires its believer to accept certain things on faith, because they cant be proven; and the practitioner accepts this. Whereas science is in the same predicament, except the theory is passed off as fact; and any opposing viewpoints are condescendingly cast aside as ridiculous.
Also the theory isn't just "passed off" as fact. Do you even science bro? http://m.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html
 
From abortion to creationism in less than a page. Wonderful.

We ready to talk about SS and Medicare reform yet or nah? Tougher subject than biblical errancy, obv, but could be construed as more relevant to public policy. Maybe. I guess.
 
From abortion to creationism in less than a page. Wonderful.

We ready to talk about SS and Medicare reform yet or nah? Tougher subject than biblical errancy, obv, but could be construed as more relevant to public policy. Maybe. I guess.
My bad. You're correct. We have more pressing matters. Thoughts on neoliberalism?
 
Foregone conclusion, warrior-cat. Science already proved in lab tests over and over that life bursts forth from non-living matter, right? It's settled science!

Yep. Testable they say. It must be testable.

T E S T A B L E

Nothing settled, but they will figure it out. They have found the the two mesons that cause time to move forward. There isn't anything that humans won't figure out unless we kill ourselves off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaBossIsBack
Willy, I don't believe for one second this is what you base your viewpoint on.

A "financial burden to the taxpayers"?

Really??

You know what other things are a financial burden on tax payers?

Michelle Obama's vacation itinerary.

Submarines.

Potholes.

State Parks.

etc.

Well, I agree with all of those. haha But are they more costly than raising a child? Unwanted kids are a burden, economically and probably criminally. Why not let the church and its church members pay for these unwanted kids? It's only fair. I don't want my the money I pay in taxes going to unaborted babies. Not a dime. let the church and it's church members pay it if they value life so much. I want no part of it.
 
Nothing settled, but they will figure it out. They have found the the two mesons that cause time to move forward. There isn't anything that humans won't figure out unless we kill ourselves off.

Is that satisfactory to you? It's not good enough for me, personally.

Humans - we will kill ourselves off eventually and are trending in that exact direction unless we are stopped.
 
I could eliminate tax paid social welfare within 2 moves. Federally legalize drugs, prostitution, and gambling. All monies pay for social welfare. Rule abortion illegal, give churches a bigger tax break and cut tax payer support for all unaborted babies and put the burden on the church.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigBlueSean
Is that satisfactory to you? It's not good enough for me, personally.

Humans - we will kill ourselves off eventually and are trending in that exact direction unless we are stopped.

Totally satisfactory for me because unless life extension happens, I won't be alive to see it happen. My death doesn't end with advancing research. World keeps turning, humans keep discovering. That's our purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mashburned
Well, I agree with all of those. haha But are they more costly than raising a child? Unwanted kids are a burden, economically and probably criminally. Why not let the church and its church members pay for these unwanted kids? It's only fair. I don't want my the money I pay in taxes going to unaborted babies. Not a dime. let the church and it's church members pay it if they value life so much. I want no part of it.
But what if one those 55 million dead turns out to be Bill Gates, Albert Einstein, etc?

In other words, what if they actually added, rather than subtracted to the world?

I mean, wouldn't it better to get rid of unproductive people (after they've been given a chance, say at age 30)?

I'm saying the same thing as you, simply at a different age.
 
I could eliminate tax paid social welfare within 2 moves. Federally legalize drugs, prostitution, and gambling. All monies pay for social welfare. Rule abortion illegal, give churches a bigger tax break and cut tax payer support for all unaborted babies and put the burden on the church.
Ha! My solution to abortion is that all pro-lifers register as such and then each time an abortion is requested one of those from the register will be randomly called and ordered to report for fetal implantation. We'll figure out the way that both sexes can be surrogates and they will be responsible for carrying the child to term at which time they get to keep the child.
 
But what if one those 55 million dead turns out to be Bill Gates, Albert Einstein, etc?

In other words, what if they actually added, rather than subtracted to the world?

I mean, wouldn't it better to get rid of unproductive people (after they've been given a chance, say at age 30)?

I'm saying the same thing as you, simply at a different age.
What if one of those 55 million end up being responsible for killing the next Bill Gates or Albert Einstein? The odd would be about the same either way.
 
I really hate when conservatives and politicians get suckered into the game that libs play when they attack religion (not Islam of course though). It always plays into their hands so they can spin it and distract you from how horrific they are in every other facet by trying to turn everything into social issues like gay marriage, abortion and racial division.

What I do find comical is a group that mocks people who believe there's a God and calls them "wackos" will somehow back/believe

- A man can be a woman
- That trans freaks should be allowed to use whatever bathroom they want and the hell with how the 99.7 percent feel who do not fall into this category
- Freaks out over "climate change" and gobbles up everything government funded studies tell them
- Believes there's no correlation between Islam and violence but jumps at the chance to freak out over stupid stuff like Chic-Fil-A and Duck Dynasty and blames gunowners for the crimes of criminals
-Thinks criminals will follow gun free zones and gun laws
- And that everything just randomly fell in place and works perfectly based off of the hypothesis of other men, which is exactly what they make fun of the religious folk for.
 
Last edited:
What if one of those 55 million end up being responsible for killing the next Bill Gates or Albert Einstein? The odd would be about the same either way.

The idea that you get to play God with someone else's life and determine if they're worthy to live or should be allowed to live is comical because your group seems to be so concerned with the "rights" and well-being of everyone else that believes in your ideology..

but I'm not surprised. Your group thinks there's no such thing as personal responsibility and that everyone else should foot the bill.

"Hey you made terrible choices with your life and didn't work hard? No problem. I'll steal from these idiots over here and give their money to you. Just vote Democrat."

"Hey you got pregnant from having sex with Jamal that you just met at White Castle? You don't want to have that kid? Psst. No problem. We'll snuff that little thing right out of you but we'll tell you it's not "alive" so you don't immediately feel bad about what you're doing. The psychological scarring may come later but hey...women's rights, right?"

"Oh you came here illegally, refuse to assimilate, learn the language and think we should adapt to your culture? No sweat. We will make everyone else pay for you and your anchor babies and then if they complain about it, we'll just call them bigots and xenophobes."
 
  • Like
Reactions: DNOKAT
Ha! My solution to abortion is that all pro-lifers register as such and then each time an abortion is requested one of those from the register will be randomly called and ordered to report for fetal implantation. We'll figure out the way that both sexes can be surrogates and they will be responsible for carrying the child to term at which time they get to keep the child.

In other words, you want someone else do deal with the actual consequences of liberal behavior.
 
The idea that you get to play God with someone else's life and determine if they're worthy to live or should be allowed to live is comical because your group seems to be so concerned with the "rights" and well-being of everyone else that believes in your ideology..

but I'm not surprised. Your group thinks there's no such thing as personal responsibility and that everyone else should foot the bill.

"Hey you made terrible choices with your life and didn't work hard? No problem. I'll steal from these idiots over here and give their money to you. Just vote Democrat."

"Hey you got pregnant from having sex with Jamal that you just met at White Castle? You don't want to have that kid? Psst. No problem. We'll snuff that little thing right out of you but we'll tell you it's not "alive" so you don't immediately feel bad about what you're doing. The psychological scarring may come later but hey...women's rights, right?"

"Oh you came here illegally, refuse to assimilate, learn the language and think we should adapt to your culture? No sweat. We will make everyone else pay for you and your anchor babies and then if they complain about it, we'll just call them bigots and xenophobes."
Why does it have to be Jamal? Why can't it be Hunter or Augustus?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big_Blue79
Why does it have to be Jamal? Why can't it be Hunter or Augustus?

I played the numbers because blacks abort babies 4x the rate as whites do. That is a statistical fact that blacks have the most abortions.

The_Question_Graph.jpg


Professors at Howard University said that without abortion, the black population would have increased by 36 percent would be over 52 million blacks in the U.S. That would piss me off if I was in that community especially when you consider the racist original intent of Planned Parenthood.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaBossIsBack
In other words, you want someone else do deal with the actual consequences of liberal behavior.
Dude, I could give you a laundry list of good ole Southern Baptist and Catholic girls in college whose daddy's were/are "conservatives" and yet when Suzy got knocked up...they had the problem taken care of. If you want to kid yourself that it's just those "damn liberals" that are having abortions...you go right ahead and think so.
 
They're the worst. Can we send them back with the Mexican rapists and Islamic terrorists?

And this is related in what way? I'm against abortion and show what it has done to the black population and now it's related to illegals who love violence and rape?
 
Dude, I could give you a laundry list of good ole Southern Baptist and Catholic girls in college whose daddy's were/are "conservatives" and yet when Suzy got knocked up...they had the problem taken care of. If you want to kid yourself that it's just those "damn liberals" that are having abortions...you go right ahead and think so.

Not really the case any more with women having greater access to contraception. There is a big race and class divide among those having abortions. The people having abortions today tend to be in groups that are heavily liberal voters. This coming from someone who is pro-choice.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/09/abortions-racial-gap/380251/

http://prospect.org/article/demographics-abortion-its-not-what-you-think
 
Last edited:
That would piss me off if I was in that community especially when you consider the racist original intent of Planned Parenthood.
big controversy in Louisville right this very second about a new PP abortion facility that opened & immediately began their patented tissue recycling process ("I need a new Lamborghini!"), but did not bother waiting for all the pesky government licenses to be filed.
http://insiderlouisville.com/metro/...-clinic-now-providing-abortions-for-patients/
 
But what if one those 55 million dead turns out to be Bill Gates, Albert Einstein, etc?

In other words, what if they actually added, rather than subtracted to the world?

I mean, wouldn't it better to get rid of unproductive people (after they've been given a chance, say at age 30)?

I'm saying the same thing as you, simply at a different age.

More than likely not. They're more likely to end up a movie theater terrorist, school shooter, or Jeffrey Dahmer before they would likely be an Albert Einstein or Bill Gates.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT