Zo to RINOs: No, seriously, leave the party

now if you want, you can go to that thread and answer, and we can debate on that issue, or go for it on this thread…

right4life on May 9, 2009 at 10:36 PM

I don’t really want to debate evolution with you when you’re going to respond with dogma. It’s a little like a shark trying to attack a lion or vice versa.

You can’t argue against physics with meta physics or meta physics with physics. It’s like trying to determine which is better… Klingons or Vikings. On the one hand the Klingons do have super human strength and disrupter pistols… on the other hand, the vikings actually existed.

If you would let me use any evidence that wasn’t in your holy book I might bother with you, but you won’t. And before you protest that point, allow me to just check one thing.

Carbon dating? Do you or do you not accept the validity of carbon dating? If you do, then I’ll bother educating you. If you don’t, then I won’t waste my time.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 12:38 AM

again, you’ve lost…your guy mccain ran…not my choice exactly..

McCain wasn’t a libertarian. I guess Ron Paul was a libertarian but he had other problems.

You really don’t know what you’re talking about do you? Besides, Huckebee lost too so what are you crowing about? You just don’t make any sense. You’re this big irrational ball of misplaced emotion and disjointed thought.

Calm down and make sense… or strip off your cloths and join the animals. As it is you’re a dysfunctional blend of the human and bestial.

no I will NEVER EVER EVER vote for anyone who is pro-abortion, or pro-gay marriage. not a chance in hell.

Would you vote for someone that was neutral on the point? That left it to the states or something?

I’m trying to compromise with you. But if I can’t find it I won’t just give up. We can both be glad that you don’t represent most of your peers, but still I’m hoping that I can gain some insight into your logic by talking to you.

Hopefully there is some common ground. If not, then we really are foes… and I neither of us will enjoy the schism.

reallY??? didn’t you just say that our positions make you sick?? that we’re ignorant, medieval, fascists???

Just because I tolerate you doesn’t mean I don’t judge you or have my own thoughts. Perhaps you don’t know what tolerance means?

Tolerance does not mean love… it means I don’t cut your legs out from under you. It means you don’t have to watch your back when I’m behind you. We can protect each other.

Or we attack each other. I’m attempting to find common ground here, but I have limits.

what ARE you smokin???

Whatever it is, it doesn’t make me excitable and myopic.

CALM DOWN.

you’re not my ally. I’d rather have a noble enemy that a traitorous treacherous ‘friend’ and you can have the republicans…right now they’re a bunch of moderates…with a few conservatives…I have no use for them.

Well, we’ve been your ally regardless of what you think. You’ve simply taken us for granted. You have no appreciation for how bad things can get without support.

You have no idea how quickly the worm can turn. Do you want this country to turn into France?

Because all your bold talk is just foolish bluster. You’ll destroy yourself and all for pride.

That’s one of the deadly sins isn’t it? Pride cometh before the fall. Heed the word.

nothing can stop murders, or rapes, or robbery…or assault…just abandon all laws!! great ‘logic’ ya got there!!!

You’re also entirely ignoring the rights of women.

You probably don’t know what rights are either do you? You can’t take away rights. Rights are ‘given by our creator’… Not for you to take or dictate. Find something that takes into consideration the rights of women and you’ll have a deal.

Try to oppress them and you’ll get nowhere and accomplish nothing.

Choose.

Will you do some good or no good? There are no other choices.

oh yeah right, sure you do…and your gay marriage ‘freedom’ will end freedom of religion for christians…but thats not the kind of ‘freedom’ you care about.

Again with the gay marriage? Cut out the legal defintion and you WIN! Don’t you see? Everyone will get civil contracts then. And what’s more by moving everything in the private world they’ll have no grounds to argue with you. To win any more ground they’ll have to convince YOUR church to change it’s policies. How likely is that? You’ll not have any more threats from that direction because they’ll have no recourse to harm you. What’s more you’ll have taken the moral sting out of it by disenfranchising the government as it applies to marriage.

What you’ll effectively be doing is taking away the government’s right to declare ANYONE married. Marriage will then be a private matter. You don’t have to recognize ANYONE else as married for any reason. You don’t like gay marriage? Fine… don’t recognize it. Because the government won’t recognize any marriage at all.

Civil contracts will exist and will provide rights similar to what existed in legal marriage but because they’ll just be normal contracts they won’t have special status in the government.

You win because your religion is protected. They get the same rights as everyone else which means they win. And the power of the government is reduced which means I win.

You’re not going to get a better deal. Be smart or be treated like you’re stupid. You can’t ask better from anyone.

right4life on May 9, 2009 at 10:52 PM

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 12:57 AM

ok so was lincoln right to end slavery with war, or was he, as libertarian sites like lewrockwell.com say, a DICTATOR??? hmmm?? try not to dodge the question…

I’ll answer any real question. Are you asking a question or are you shouting snooty answers at me?

Please show me a little respect here, I’m already showing you far more then you deserve.

As to Lincoln, he did much to reform US policy towards slaves as a member of what was then known as the “radical republicans”. Sadly much of their work was undone after the assassination but you should know that.

As to excesses such as martial law. I’ll point out it was a civil war he was fighting that saw more conflict on US soil then at any other period in our national history. So take that into consideration. That is if you’re taking anything into consideration… and not just concocting snooty comebacks.

this is foolishness. government has an interest in protecting the citizens…and that includes the basic unit of civilization, marriage. we’ve seen what happens in the black community when marriage falls apart…it gives rise to gangs, drugs, murder, violence. and gay marriage does the same thing…see Kurt’z ressearch on gay marriage in the netherlands..

You don’t understand. I’m not trying to destroy marriage. I’m trying to take it out of the government’s hands.

Those are two very different ideas. Furthermore, the government isn’t protecting marriage as it is. It’s hurting marriage.

Do you think the government has shown itself as worthy to dictate who is married and who is not? Answer me?

No you do not. Regardless of that fact that you’d LIKE it to be worthy, you feel the government’s power is being abused in this respect and that it is being used to change the concept of marriage.

A way to win the battle however it to remove the government’s power to dictate the terms. Just take it’s authority away and put the power in YOUR hands.

Listen to that. Who else is willing to let YOU personally decide? No one. Only the followers of freedom will let everyone decide for themselves.

You decide what marriage means. And when you marry your marriage contract can say pretty much whatever you want.

Remember the days when it was very hard to get a devoice and if you got one the person that forced it was punished? Well, you can still have marriages like that. Draw up the contract and if your wife signs it’s a done deal.

The government is screwing up everything it touches. By putting the destinies of people in their own hands we benefit everyone and provide freedom for all.

actually yours is the primitive doctrine…RACIST primitive doctrine…and you think I wil EVER be your ally?? laughable!!

My doctrine based upon empirical observation and experimentation is primitive when compared to your doctrine based upon dogmatic recitation from a thousands year old text that predates modern science?

Really? That’s the argument you’re going with? Unless you’re going to walk on water or turn water into wine… or have any other miracles up your sleeve… that argument is stillborn.

well lets see you answer my questions there sonny boy. as far as the fossil record…guess what??? it supports MY position!!

Riiiight, because millions of years of progressive adaptation of life into increasingly complex life forms supports ‘your’ idea.
*laughs*

ever hear of ‘punctuated equilibrium’?? hmmmm?? gould and eldridge came up with it because of the lack of transitional sequences…

That doesn’t disprove evolution it just means evolution is not an even consistent transition from point A to point B. It’s full of stops, starts, missteps, dead ends, rediscovered ways of living, and ways of living lost.

If we were all created whole then why would there be punctuated changes at all? Why wouldn’t we all just be the same forever? Clearly there is change.

If we disagree on anything it is the extent of change. I can prove my point from there and you cannot refuse it without rendering yourself un-credible.

as far as DNA?? it validates ID, or creationism far more than it does evolution….

The fact that we share 95 percent of the same genetic material with apes validates “your” position? The fact that vast portions of our DNA are full of junk code validates your position? The fact that we’re full of genetic disorders, mutations, and countless other extranious code proves that we were created by a divine being in his image?

Really? You’re not thinking. I question whether you even know how to think. You seem to just repeat things without thinking about them.

I question everything. I take nothing for granted. Evolution is a simplified concept for a very complex process. But I do understand it well enough to see it as the most likely explanation for our existence.

That said, that doesn’t mean there is not spiritual value in all of this. Can we not look upon the waves in the sea or the clouds in the sky and feel the power of God? Why must we blind our reason? When I walk upon the plane I hear my ancestors calling to me. I feel them.

You don’t need to blind yourself to science to be closer to God. You can have both and through both be closer to God. Why must we be ignorant in your eyes to be moral? Is not ignorance an evil? Would not Satan want us to be fools? And before you tell me that men of God are not tempted by Satan, need I point out all the men of religion that did evil in their God’s name? Religiosity is no defense against evil sir.

Reason however has done more to stamp out evil in this world in the last 200 years then the last 1000 years of Christianity. Give credit where credit is due. Logic is good too.

get a clue, I’m in a coalition with anyone who thinks i’m some fascist, medieval ignorant moron. and I think the same of you if you haven’t guessed…

right4life on May 9, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Well… you are kinda fascistic with your imposition of thought on other people and stepping all over other people’s rights. That’s evil, bro. Evil.

As to being Medieval, your conception of science and culture is literally Medieval. I’m not insulting you here, I’m just pointing out exactly where your ideas are coming from. They’re barbaric. I don’t say that to hurt your ego but to make you think. Your world view hearkens back to a dark and sad time in western culture. All our gains have come from it’s sublimation.

As to being a moron, you’ve demonstrated very little reason and a lot of poorly formed emotion. I have no use for it and it does nothing to justify your statements. I apologize if I’ve offended you but I do need you to present a credible argument or I can’t respect your opinion.

I will continue to TOLERATE your opinion. But if you can’t defend it then I can’t respect it. Do note the difference between respect and tolerance.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 1:39 AM

silly ad hominen?? your first post to me had this litle gem in it…so are you just a liar, or delusional??

That’s not ad hominem. If I say I find your beliefs to be barbaric that isn’t against you.

You are demonstrably ignorant of what ad hominem means. That doesn’t help your credibility.

You’d do better to be more humble for you have much to be humble about.

you keep saying this, but I am not an ally of a racist, hateful person like you.

I’m neither racist nor hateful. I said nothing against your genetic line and hold no prejudice in that category in any case. As to being hateful, while I am offended by many of your beliefs I do not hate you. You trouble me and to some extent I feel sorry for you. But I don’t hate you. That said, if you threaten my freedoms I will do my best to destroy you. Nothing personal. No one threatens my freedoms with impunity.

If anything can be said here it is that you’re pretty irrational on top of everything else.

Make sense please.

this is delusional. did you notice the voting patterns in proposition 8 in CA?? did you notice that blacks and latinos, who usually vote democrat, voted AGAINST gay marriage…and they were my ally in this matter.

Yes, do you think you can win a presidency on those grounds?

Do you think you’ll take congress with one issue?

You’re a one trick pony and your trick isn’t even very good.

who is your ally again?

Well, you’ll notice they’re not messing with Gun control that much anymore which is one of my issues.

So we’re even there aren’t we?

Please, be rational or be treated as if you’re irrational.

again you are either delusional, or ignorant of history. my culture, christianity, will NEVER die. I’ve read the back of the book and HE wins in the end. tell me where an atheist state has killed christianity??? ain’t never happened…and it never will.

You’ve read the “history book” from the future, huh? Well, I hope you’re right.

I really do. I hope your culture prevails and that in some shadowy end time the forces of darkness of slain for all time by the forces of light.

That said, I just have a hard time taking it seriously. It sounds about as credible as a starwars plot.

No offense.

But seriously, I’m not against your faith. That’s one of the things that makes our alliance possible. I’m happy to let you believe what you like and won’t act against you. In return I expect the same respect.

I don’t live and die by politics, sorry.

You’re a human being in a society… of course you live and die by politics. You just happen to live in a society where the rules are very favorable to individuals which means you can ignore politics more then in other societies.

However, if we ignore them too much then the tyrants take over. We have a responsibility to our children to leave this world as good or better then we found it.

That means securing for them all the rights we have enjoyed at the very least.

again you have no clue about us, you hold is sneering disdain, and you expect us to ally with people like you??? laughable…I can see why you have NO allies.

I’m not sneering at you. I’m only reminding you that I’ve made sacrifices to be your friend.

Was I fool to trust you? Was I a fool to ally with you? Was I fool to treat you like anything but an irrational barbarian? Because when you say you will not compromise that is what you’re saying. You’re saying that anyone that is your friend is an idiot because you don’t respect friends. You will betray them at the first opportunity because you only value your own agenda.

kiss my a** you racist, condescending arrogant bastard.

right4life on May 10, 2009 at 8:08 AM

I’m not racist… that’s an unsupportable statement. As to condescending and arrogant. I think it is pretty clear that I am better then you… so I’m not really condescending to you as much as lowering myself enough to speak with you. As to my arrogance… I’ve earned it. If it bothers you perhaps you should work harder to make more sense. As it is you’re consistently embarrassing yourself.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM

huh? can’t you read??? I just posted a list of scientific objections…guess you cannot debate the issue because you’re too stupid to.

Sure I can. But for you to support ID you have to not read much yourself so I won’t bother wasting time in a quote war.

You’ve clearly no respect for 99 percent of the scientific community so why quote it to you? it’s a waste of time.
explain the tuatara. which has the fastest rate of molecular (DNA) evolution of any animal found…and yet is a living dinosaur…in other words, micro does not add up to macro evolution.

See, you’re not reading. Molecular evolution and evolution are not the same thing.

You’re also not taking into consideration mutation, isolation, cataclysm, or the dozen other events that cause “punctuated” evolution.

And what’s more you still haven’t explained why punctuated evolution supports ID instead of regular evolution. After all that means there was change.

Ok… here’s another question for you. How old is the earth? Do you think the earth is only 6000 years old or do you think it’s billions of years old?

This will help me understand where you’re coming from. My assumption is that you think it’s 6000 years old which means there’s no point in trying to talk to you about this. The 6000 years is something that only comes from a religious text and no scientific data backs it up. So if you think the world is 6000 years old then you’ve confused your religion with science and until you separate the two I can’t talk to you about it. If you think it’s billions of years old then I’ll talk to you about it because you might not be entirely closed minded.

and explain Haldane’s Dilemma

you cannot.

Sure I can. He didn’t take into consideration isolation, cataclysm, or big differences in reproduction. What’s more his statement was retracted and has subsequently been shown the product of error.

You’re trying to disprove me with scientific typos. Unlike your doctrine that admits no fault ever, science is full of mistakes that have to be corrected all the time. Listen to this, the theory of evolution has mistakes in it. Any scientist will admit that. We make mistakes all the time. That said, we’re looking for these mistakes all the time as well and because you’re not looking for mistakes in your doctrine… your doctrine is more prone to error then the scientific method.

Now, I know you think your doctrine can’t be wrong but remember how much of your doctrine is interpretation by man? Does the bible say anything about DNA or carbon dating? No.

So even from the religious stand point you’re just arguing one interpetation against another. God never said anything about evolution and there’s no way you can know that god didn’t work through evolution.

Now just because there’s evolution doesn’t mean that you can’t claim it’s ID as well. That’s fine with me. Why can’t the process of evolution by guided by God’s hand THROUGH the process of evolution? Are not the stars and planets held in place by the forces of physics? If God places the stars in the sky and put the plants around them does not god guide the stars with physics?

See?

We don’t need to fight about this. I don’t want to fight with you on it because it’s pointless. And likewise as you’ve got no proof there’s no point arguing with me until you do have proof.

So why don’t we stop crapping on each other’s parades? I’ll let you claim that evolution is God’s will. And you let me figure out how “god’s will” works at the molecular level.

carbon dating?? what does that have to do with evolution?? do you even know the mechanism for evolution? do you even know what you say you believe???

It’s relevant to the fossil record which is where much of the evidence for evolution comes from. Most creationists dismiss carbon dating because among other things it proposes that the world is much older then they think it is…

If you dismiss carbon dating then I was right and you’ll just throw out any evidence you don’t like without cause. Thus I would also be right that arguing the point with you would be pointless no matter how right I was.

moron.

right4life on May 10, 2009 at 8:11 AM

Ironic.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 1:12 PM

mccain was a FISCAL conservative, who didn’t really care much for social issues…just your kinda guy…guess you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

Well, you don’t get to say who represents me. That’s my right. McCain never represented my values.

Question: Did Huckabee represent yours? Because he lost too. In fact, he had much much much less support.

that RACISM sure shows through with every post of yours…

How is my call for rationality racist? you’re not making any sense. I mean, does racist just mean “you hurt my feelings” to you? Because that’s not what it means in what we call the “english language”. Maybe you don’t speak English… You seem ignorant of what dozens of words mean and yet you use them anyway.

bingo!! you’re finally getting a clue. I enjoy the schism. people like you are worse than an enemy…a treacherous ‘friend’ backstabbing and traitorous…like AHNULD…

No, you won’t enjoy the schism. Only our mutual foes will do that. Only the democrats.

I’m sorry you’re too closed minded to see that.

oh yes, the ‘right’ of women to kill their babies…that right isn’t given by our creator..but you libs have to kill those babies…comes from serving a dark and bloodthirsty god…

If I’m a lib, then I’m a classical liberal. I am a son of Washington. We are the original liberals. The ACTUAL liberals. Those that believe in liberty.

The people that prance around now calling themselves liberals are in fact socialists. Which has nothing what so ever to do with liberty.

As to women’s rights, you lost the ability to oppress women when we gave them the right to vote.

If you want to take away their rights, I suggest you start with taking away their right to vote first. Until you’ve done that all attempts to remove their rights will be overwhelmed by female voters.

Be smart here. On top of everything else you have the tactics of a water buffalo. You literally can’t win.

right, a rose by any other name…your ‘victory’ is a victory for gay marriage…you render traditional marriage meaningless…clueless.

How am I rendering your marriage meaningless? Is not your church more qualified to determine if you are married or not? Is not the personal relationship of marriage more important then the legal definition?

The people in washington will betray you. Take the power out of their hands and they’ve lost that ability.

Sure, gays will be able to get contracts that are similar to marriage but then they can do that now anyway and ALWAYS have been able to get contracts. That’s English common law. The difference is that it won’t be called marriage and no one needs to recognize it as marriage.

You win. Because you put your church/family in charge of who is and is not married.

yeah then you also have polygamy, polyandry, pedophilia, and anything else goes…wondeful!

right4life on May 10, 2009 at 8:18 AM

What’s to stop polygamy or polyandry now anyway? Sure, you can’t get a marriage contract but you can live with these people, have sex with them, and draw up contracts of union that are not marriage but confer all the rights of marriage. Under my system that wouldn’t be changed. You still couldn’t get married because no one would be legally married. But you could draw up a contract of union that confers all the same rights as marriage.

MY SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVELY THE SAME. The difference is that nothing is called marriage by the government and the government doesn’t get to make rules about what marriage means. Everyone can individually decide when they get married what they want the rules to be. So for example, if you’re against devoice, you could write a clause into your contract that says there are certain penalties if either party dissolves the union. You can also put in an exclusivity clause that states that only ONE of these contracts can be kept at any one time with a given person. Of course, this is all to the choice of those involved.

As to pedophilia, I said nothing about repealing protections on minors.

Here’s my point, you’re giving up nothing and in return you gain control. It’s a great deal. And it’s the best offer you’re going to get.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 1:33 PM

you called me a ‘gorilla’ and then after knowing I’m part black you still go on an call me ‘beastial’…racist.

I had no idea you were part black.

And it doesn’t matter anyway. I’d say the same thing to a white person and in fact I thought you were white in the first place.

As to the “gorilla” comment I said “like a” gorilla. I was pointing out that you were trying to brute force arguments through instead of reasoning them.

That’s not a racist comment. I have no bias against people because of their skin color.

you ‘destroy’ me? not on your best day punk. is that a threat? you’re all talk fat boy.

Think what you like. I’ve been nothing but open and honest with you.

and yes you are a racist..you sound like some neo-nazi skinhead wacko.
right4life on May 10, 2009 at 1:57 PM

This is unsupportable. Those who do not use their reasoning have no advantage over those that do not have the ability. You are not using your brain and thus you’re equivalent to those without the ability. That is bestial. And I’m not being racist… I’m not inferring in any way that this is a consequence of your race and in fact had no idea you were black in the first place.

Race is as irrelevant as the color of a car is to how fast it goes. Blue cars are not faster then yellow cars or vice versa.

Either have a point or don’t post. Your pathetic ad hominem has worn thin.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 2:06 PM

You’re wasting your time.

vermillionsky on May 10, 2009 at 2:54 PM

Sadly, I think you’re right.

Oh well. I’ll see if I can mollify him at all. I’ve had good results in shutting down trolls on other forums. Maybe I’ll get lucky here.

I’d get a medal or something for that right? :P

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 2:57 PM

so when karma accused me of fascism, its OK, but when I do it its ‘ad hominen’ right.

no surprise, given the type of person you are though…

right4life on May 10, 2009 at 3:36 PM

Again, you don’t know what ad hominem means. It doesn’t just mean saying something bad about someone else. It means trying to dismiss someone else’s opinion on the grounds that there is something wrong with them.

That is, it is a rhetorical device used to defeat an argument by attacking the person saying it.

Ad hominem means “against the person”. If you say something stupid, I explain why it’s stupid, and then call you an idiot. That isn’t ad hominem. If however, you say something and I say it’s stupid because you’re stupid… THEN THAT is ad hominem.

See the difference? The difference is how you defeat the argument. If you defeat the argument by explaining why it’s wrong and then show how that leads to other conclusions. And THEN judge someone then it’s not ad hominem because you didn’t use the person to defeat the argument. The final conclusion that there was something wrong with the person was in ADDITION to that point and no reliant on it.

What you’ve been doing is throwing stupid groundless insults at me and then attempting to use them to justify other behavior. That is ad hominem.

Learn or be treated like an ignorant savage. I have no patience for the willfully stupid. If you want to learn then I’m happy to explain all of this with clarity and civility. However, if you’re going to intentionally act like a moron then I’m going to just treat you like something distasteful on the end of my shoe. Choice is yours.

In the one hand I offer mutual respect and peace. In the other I offer mutual hostility and strife. Do you wish to grow and prosper or vilify yourself through repeated acts of stupidity?

Love and peace, Karmashock.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 3:50 PM

oh yes, calling me a FASCIST, GORILLA, BEASTIAL…thats really offering me *respect*

you are seriously disturbed. get some help, you delusion moron.

right4life on May 10, 2009 at 3:55 PM

If I show you respect when you’re acting like an idiot then I’m not doing anyone any favors. My respect is conditional on you not acting stupid. If you continue to act like an idiot, I will continue to treat you like an idiot.

You can’t complain about that. That’s fair.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 4:11 PM

I expect you not to call me gorilla, or ‘beastial’ you racist piece of trash.

Don’t act like a stupid animal and I won’t describe you as such.

You can’t bully me with your baseless threats of racism. I don’t care what your race is and I don’t think race matters.

You’re acting foolishly and relying almost entirely on pathos. It’s not respectable. I literally cannot respect an argument based entirely on pathos.

thanks again, for proving what a racist you are.

Just because I think you’re acting like an idiot doesn’t mean I think the same thing of your race or any race. You really are thinking too highly of yourself if you think you can drag your whole race down with you.

My problem is with YOU personally. It has nothing what so ever to do with your race.

a racist who has no problems with cutting a hole in a babie’s head and sucking out the brains…you really are a piece of work.
right4life on May 10, 2009 at 4:14 PM

Where did I say I was ok with that? I just don’t see an alternative.

And in any case, I just told you that I’d be ok with relocating the baby INTACT to another womb if practical. I’d even support you in making that law. All rights would be observed then. The right of the mother would be observed in that the child would not be there anymore. And the right of the child to live would be observed in that (s)he would be allowed to live.

The problem with your concept is that you’re placing the rights of one person above another. You cannot do that.

For example, lets say you need a kidney to live and I have a kidney. Under your logic I MUST give you a kidney because I don’t need two to survive and you must have at least one. Without my help you’ll die.

You would then compel me by law to give you my kidney even if I didn’t want to do so.

What I am saying is that i don’t have to give you that kidney and that you’ll die because of it does not invalidate my right to refuse.

Savvy? The rights of both matter.

And no amount of pathos is going to alter that equation.

Karmashock on May 10, 2009 at 4:24 PM