Tulpa | 3,537 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said: Damn. I’ll bet there’s enough room for an NWC in that closet. It's always the really outspoken ones, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodysGameRoom | 2,009 Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share Posted January 9, 2020 42 minutes ago, NES CONNOISSEUR said: but you are intolerant of people who share my position on things Correct. I AM intolerant of you being intolerant of other people's lifestyle choices. I AM intolerant to hatred and bigotry. I WON'T tolerate it. So when you say you don't support some people's lifestyle choices, yes, I have no tolerance for that. So congratulations on assessing the situation correctly. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Rothchild | 9,599 Editorials Team · Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 42 minutes ago, NES CONNOISSEUR said: Wow ..You all’s ignorance is showing it’s ugly head more and more ..A lot of this country’s “laws “are historically based on “my Church’s /religion “perception of things ..Lol Yeah and the roots of democracy stem from a society where sex slaves were aplenty But what that has to do with the price of tea in China is anyone's guess 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWunderful | 2,927 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Holy mother of word salad with quotes on the side That incredible response was more than I could’ve ever asked for. @arch_8ngel is probably Still working on his response to that guy’s first seven part thesis. Nah hes too smart to waste time responding 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 45 minutes ago, MrWunderful said: @arch_8ngel is probably Still working on his response to that guy’s first seven part thesis. Nah hes too smart to waste time responding That was something special, to be sure... Edited January 9, 2020 by arch_8ngel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffeewithmrsaturn | 100 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 Even if that guy could convince me that he knew what was intended by the founders, who cares? I don't understand the bizarre obsession with idolizing the founders and their vision. We should have our own progressive vision for the country. I mean, our society as a whole is really not some glorious beacon of equality and prosperity. We should want to do better as a country...as a world, really. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PineappleLawnchair | 88 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 41 minutes ago, coffeewithmrsaturn said: Even if that guy could convince me that he knew what was intended by the founders, who cares? People who actually care about our country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 3 hours ago, MrWunderful said: Holy mother of word salad with quotes on the side That incredible response was more than I could’ve ever asked for. @arch_8ngel is probably Still working on his response to that guy’s first seven part thesis. Nah hes too smart to waste time responding Mr. Connoisseur is doing a very poor job at articulating very complex ideas (that apparently not many are familiar with). Given the time I could probably elaborate on his points more clearly in a broader theological and historical context so that they make a bit more sense to the casual observer, but it would turn into a bloody novel (which I couldn't blame anyone for not reading). One point I think I can make relatively quickly and succinctly would be that the society the founders were a part of and engaged in (as shown rather well by spacepup's post of Thomas Jefferson's letter and so VERY many of the writings of the time) was profoundly Christian in it's morality, while the theology was (largely) left up to one's own agency. There were, of course, exceptions (from state to state for example), because nothing in life or history is as simple as we were taught in school. Moving on to more recent events: (Dons tinfoil helm) I'm kinda sorta of the opinion that: A - Someone high in the Iranian government saw Soleimani as an eventual threat to their power and "dropped a dime" on the man so that their position would remain secure. They then launched the missiles so that they wouldn't appear weak to their people, but that also didn't require a US response in force. Or... B - That hypothetical high official saw all the damage Soleimani was doing and figured it might be easier to broker a deal with the US in some respect if the guy wreaking havoc all the time was out of the way. Kinda hard to make nice if there's a highly popular war monger that the people love (given the crowd at his funeral) raising hell every now and then through proxy militias. 1 cent for A, plus 1 cent for B equals... a straight to DVD episode of a 24 knock off :P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 2 hours ago, coffeewithmrsaturn said: Even if that guy could convince me that he knew what was intended by the founders, who cares? I don't understand the bizarre obsession with idolizing the founders and their vision. We should have our own progressive vision for the country. I mean, our society as a whole is really not some glorious beacon of equality and prosperity. We should want to do better as a country...as a world, really. With regards to the founders, in terms of the lives they led, what they were facing, where they came from, what they went through, and what they ended up crafting... They were the genesis of why people got it into their heads that our leaders should be looked up to. Is what they crafted perfect? Nope, but I think they knew that when they crafted the line "a more perfect union" (emphasis added). Too many are in the habit of shitting on our society as of late without any hint of gratitude for what we are living in and where we came from. You can only think our society is not a glorious beacon if you ignore the absolute F@$!&# horror show that most of human history has been and focus solely on one or two parameters that don't match up to some imagined utopia. Find me someone who does not want to do better or does not want some form of justice. Find me the person or people who are twiddling their fingers at the thought of holding someone else down for evil's sake. They will be few and far between. Now find me the figures for how many people have been lifted out of abject poverty, received some form of life saving procedure, and invented some miraculous new device that benefits all of mankind in the last decade alone. MAN I need to go to bed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWunderful | 2,927 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 1 hour ago, m308gunner said: Mr. Connoisseur is doing a very poor job at articulating very complex ideas (that apparently not many are familiar with). Given the time I could probably elaborate on his points more clearly in a broader theological and historical context so that they make a bit more sense to the casual observer, but it would turn into a bloody novel (which I couldn't blame anyone for not reading). One point I think I can make relatively quickly and succinctly would be that the society the founders were a part of and engaged in (as shown rather well by spacepup's post of Thomas Jefferson's letter and so VERY many of the writings of the time) was profoundly Christian in it's morality, while the theology was (largely) left up to one's own agency. There were, of course, exceptions (from state to state for example), because nothing in life or history is as simple as we were taught in school. Moving on to more recent events: (Dons tinfoil helm) I'm kinda sorta of the opinion that: A - Someone high in the Iranian government saw Soleimani as an eventual threat to their power and "dropped a dime" on the man so that their position would remain secure. They then launched the missiles so that they wouldn't appear weak to their people, but that also didn't require a US response in force. Or... B - That hypothetical high official saw all the damage Soleimani was doing and figured it might be easier to broker a deal with the US in some respect if the guy wreaking havoc all the time was out of the way. Kinda hard to make nice if there's a highly popular war monger that the people love (given the crowd at his funeral) raising hell every now and then through proxy militias. 1 cent for A, plus 1 cent for B equals... a straight to DVD episode of a 24 knock off :P. Dont bother on my account, I have zero patience for anyone trying to convince me of “god says this” or “the bible says that” because I dont believe in any of that. If other people want to believe in it I support them, but I personally find it insane that people think same sex couple shouldnt enjoy tax benefits because “god says so”. Im sure God really wanted states to get that extra tax revenue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 9 hours ago, m308gunner said: With regards to the founders, in terms of the lives they led, what they were facing, where they came from, what they went through, and what they ended up crafting... They were the genesis of why people got it into their heads that our leaders should be looked up to. Is what they crafted perfect? Nope, but I think they knew that when they crafted the line "a more perfect union" (emphasis added). Too many are in the habit of shitting on our society as of late without any hint of gratitude for what we are living in and where we came from. You can only think our society is not a glorious beacon if you ignore the absolute F@$!&# horror show that most of human history has been and focus solely on one or two parameters that don't match up to some imagined utopia. Find me someone who does not want to do better or does not want some form of justice. Find me the person or people who are twiddling their fingers at the thought of holding someone else down for evil's sake. They will be few and far between. Now find me the figures for how many people have been lifted out of abject poverty, received some form of life saving procedure, and invented some miraculous new device that benefits all of mankind in the last decade alone. MAN I need to go to bed! I think you are missing the point of what was said. The Constitution, at least by the account of the guy that wrote it, was intended to be re-written on a generational basis, as society moved forward and our understanding of each other and the world evolved. But instead, you have a group of "originalists" that view the words of the country's founders with the same reverence as if it came from God. They act like the Constitution can't be improved upon as we know more about the people around us and grow as a culture and country. They act like a group of guys in a pre-industrial, limited-science, world knew some absolute truth about good governance, economics, race, religion, and sexuality that could never be informed by new information. It is an absurd position to take, especially given that they fairly quickly codified 10 major amendments to the document. They knew they didn't have all the answers and didn't get it right the first time, and left the process of revision open for future generations to have their own input. It terms of your "find me a person" comments (about people that don't want justice or want to hold others down)... surely you can't be serious. You don't have to look very far to find clear examples of either, and they quite unfortunately are not "few and far between". 5 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, m308gunner said: Moving on to more recent events: (Dons tinfoil helm) I'm kinda sorta of the opinion that: A - Someone high in the Iranian government saw Soleimani as an eventual threat to their power and "dropped a dime" on the man so that their position would remain secure. They then launched the missiles so that they wouldn't appear weak to their people, but that also didn't require a US response in force. Or... B - That hypothetical high official saw all the damage Soleimani was doing and figured it might be easier to broker a deal with the US in some respect if the guy wreaking havoc all the time was out of the way. Kinda hard to make nice if there's a highly popular war monger that the people love (given the crowd at his funeral) raising hell every now and then through proxy militias. 1 cent for A, plus 1 cent for B equals... a straight to DVD episode of a 24 knock off :P. Let's stick with the Occam's Razor for a moment, because it requires much less suspension of disbelief: The US Secretary of State has had a hard-on for killing Soleimani for a LONG time. The US Secretary of State has more influence over Trump than any other person in Washington. If Iran wanted to let Soleimani die for the purpose of brokering a better deal, there would have been WAY less contentious ways for it to happen. It would take some pretty extraordinary evidence to convince me that killing Soleimani happened at anyone's behest other than a few top US officials, damn the possible consequences. Edited January 10, 2020 by arch_8ngel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 20 hours ago, MrWunderful said: Dont bother on my account, I have zero patience for anyone trying to convince me of “god says this” or “the bible says that” because I dont believe in any of that. If other people want to believe in it I support them, but I personally find it insane that people think same sex couple shouldnt enjoy tax benefits because “god says so”. Im sure God really wanted states to get that extra tax revenue. Heh, well to be fair that is probably the last line in the list of reasons a person of faith who does not support same sex marriage would give you, if it were even on the list. But as you indicated, your mind is already made up, so I shan't elaborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 12 hours ago, arch_8ngel said: I think you are missing the point of what was said. The Constitution, at least by the account of the guy that wrote it, was intended to be re-written on a generational basis, as society moved forward and our understanding of each other and the world evolved. But instead, you have a group of "originalists" that view the words of the country's founders with the same reverence as if it came from God. They act like the Constitution can't be improved upon as we know more about the people around us and grow as a culture and country. They act like a group of guys in a pre-industrial, limited-science, world knew some absolute truth about good governance, economics, race, religion, and sexuality that could never be informed by new information. It is an absurd position to take, especially given that they fairly quickly codified 10 major amendments to the document. They knew they didn't have all the answers and didn't get it right the first time, and left the process of revision open for future generations to have their own input. It terms of your "find me a person" comments (about people that don't want justice or want to hold others down)... surely you can't be serious. You don't have to look very far to find clear examples of either, and they quite unfortunately are not "few and far between". Hmm. That is a compelling argument (in terms of the constitution). Though the founders did have a very well educated view of history and human nature, and knew that governments (because they were made up of men) tended towards corruption over time. For that reason alone I would hope we as a country would tread lightly in regards to amendments, but history is not a subject most seem interested in. Perhaps it is not so absurd as you would like to think, though some have taken it to extremes. And speaking of "the guy who wrote it" (I assume you mean Gouverneur Morris) he has some rather striking quotes, such as "I believe that religion is the only solid basis of morals, and that morals are the only possible support of free governments", among many others. Even if one has no interest or belief in the faith of the founders, it would benefit one greatly to understand the context in which the constitution was crafted, and that apparently it was meant for a society that held said morals. But that is a subject for another time. And I am serious. And don't call me Shirly But I will lean towards disagreeing much along the lines of our previous disagreement on the common characterization of Trump supporters. You have your sample sizes, and I have mine, but I think it might have more to do with one's own interpretation of human nature than anything else (which I recognize cuts both ways). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PineappleLawnchair | 88 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 12 hours ago, arch_8ngel said: I think you are missing the point of what was said. The Constitution, at least by the account of the guy that wrote it, was intended to be re-written on a generational basis, as society moved forward and our understanding of each other and the world evolved. But instead, you have a group of "originalists" that view the words of the country's founders with the same reverence as if it came from God. They act like the Constitution can't be improved upon as we know more about the people around us and grow as a culture and country. They act like a group of guys in a pre-industrial, limited-science, world knew some absolute truth about good governance, economics, race, religion, and sexuality that could never be informed by new information. It's not so much that the constitution can't be improved upon, so much as it is the changes proposed to it are often terrible, such as gun control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWunderful | 2,927 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, m308gunner said: Heh, well to be fair that is probably the last line in the list of reasons a person of faith who does not support same sex marriage would give you, if it were even on the list. But as you indicated, your mind is already made up, so I shan't elaborate. Ive always believed People can have whatever reason they want to hate someone, just keep it to themselves But if the government is going to give two consenting adults a tax benefit for signing a contract, the gender of the two adults shouldn’t matter. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWunderful | 2,927 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 50 minutes ago, PineappleLawnchair said: It's not so much that the constitution can't be improved upon, so much as it is the changes proposed to it are often terrible, such as gun control. “Terrible” is subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PineappleLawnchair | 88 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 So is the value of the entire human race, Sargon. Doesn't mean i'm just going to implicitly trust the government enough to relinquish my only means of defense against them.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 1 hour ago, m308gunner said: And speaking of "the guy who wrote it" (I assume you mean Gouverneur Morris). I get that there is attribution to numerous framers, but I was pretty clearly talking about Jefferson, who is commonly associated with a statement to the effect of every generation should get rid of the old document and write a new one for their own time. Obviously that is extreme when taken literally, but the point is the Constitution isn't some kind of unalterable holy text like it is frequently made out to be. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 I mean those founding fathers lived 100's of fucking years ago should it really be gospel what they said? They should get a honorary mention as for their historical impact and pioneering the nation but they are not sacred, just normal people. That goes with everything. If you invent a guitar it doesn't mean nobody else will perform it better than you, or that it won't become completely obsolete. A legendary athlete and cultural icon will eventually be outdone by someone coming after him that's just the way it is. You can't just stop time but like i said you can still honor the past. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 16 hours ago, MrWunderful said: Ive always believed People can have whatever reason they want to hate someone, just keep it to themselves But if the government is going to give two consenting adults a tax benefit for signing a contract, the gender of the two adults shouldn’t matter. People can oppose same sex marriage without holding hateful intentions or opinions, and in my experience often do just that (oppose but not hate). To accept it is not virtuous and to oppose it is not evil. Are you in regular contact with a person of faith who acts in a manner that informs that opinion? I had assumed the government got into the marriage business with the intention of incentivizing the creation of more little tax payers (in which case the genders would play a large part), but I could be dead wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Rothchild | 9,599 Editorials Team · Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 "I don't hate you, I just think you deserve less than me" 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m308gunner | 352 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 48 minutes ago, Reed Rothchild said: "I don't hate you, I just think you deserve less than me" Which sounds like more false equivalency and mind reading without any nuance or real understanding of an opposing view point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWunderful | 2,927 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 24 minutes ago, m308gunner said: Which sounds like more false equivalency and mind reading without any nuance or real understanding of an opposing view point. Opposing Religious viewpoints are irrelevant when discussing government and taxes. In my opinion, people who choose to live their life religiously, should be less concerned with whether or not people get certain governmental breaks, and more concerned with the abuse that is rampant within. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 11, 2020 Share Posted January 11, 2020 So create a partnership contract then and equate it with whatever tax benefits married couples get. And if religious institutions don't want to sanction gay marriage then let them not do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts