Well, he isn't cracking down on the illegal immigrant situation like he
should be doing - that's where he is trying to get the minority vote, which
usually means more Democrat votes but at the same time, it does hurt some
of the people working now (please don't hit me, not picking on immigrants
in general just pointing out the "foreign nationale" issue and how it's
being used in re-election). If anyone looked at LA Times' statistics (I
would think they'd have a good idea with the Latino population since
California has many of them), the Bush's popularity with their people
increased since he made his proposals on what to do with the illegal
immigrant situation. Sure it will require them renewing their card every
now and then, but they get to stay - it's cheap labor for some of the
greedier business men, what can I say. Personally, I think we should work
with the ones here (maybe teach the younger generations some English) and
start cracking down on the borders...but I know it wont happen anytime
soon.
On top of it, the Mars rant and yes, the Gay Marriage issue is trying to
wean him a bit "right" again. He's getting in dead heat with most moderate
Republicans and middle-class Republicans for the fact that they are not
happy with the way he dealt with the immigration issue (we went over it in
American Government class and how politicans will do that). There's also a
growing number of people that're not happy about how the war is turning
out...so he is going to do some flip-flopping here and there, like most
politicans do, to get the vote. I'm all for going to Mars, do not get me
wrong, but I do not understand the revelance of the issue since it'd take
the minimum of thirty years or so to get it going. Again, it's to impress
his own party, which he is shunning right now.
He isn't trying to get just the Republican vote on the whole Gay Marriage
thing, though, all fundamentalists in general are going to get turned on by
the proposal. Many people in the South are actually Democrats as well as
Republicans. People are quick to say the homophobia goes with the Repub's,
but there's still a lot of religious people in the Southern Democrat
population so he will pick them up too...assuming they're not 1 on the 1 to
5 Liberal-Conservative scale. Yes it seems the Repub's in the White House
decide to make Homosexuality an issue for the party, but there's also the
Log Cabin Republicans that're fighting it really hard...I'd not be
surprised if they went berserk in short time over the issue, if not
already. If you watch, though, both political parties barely get off the
Homosexual issue...it's turned into a political debate right to a "Who's
more opposed to homosexuality than the other" debate. I think there's
better things to worry about, but I guess the public freak out over these
little things too much...can't help but to roll my eyes.
For liability's sake, know that all the Republicans I talked to (as well as
myself) were not voting for Bush in the primaries...even the die-hard
Republicans.
Britva
Moderator
Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 24/3/2004 at 01:09 AM
Well, since I only trust numbers, I thought I would introduce a few to the
debate. Actually, scratch that... a debate needs two sides... this is more
of a bitch session, but still, I want to bitch with the rest of you.
Now, this is all from an AP poll dated Jan 21, 2004 which I think is recent
enough to still be accurate.
Should same sex marriages be legal?
Yes 41%
No 55%
These numbers are the scariest thing yet. Guess what guys, we're in the
minority by a significant margin. This issue isn't about politicians
mouthing off to wealthy constituents; this really is the voice of the
people. You can see why the Bush administration has picked up on this
issue so quickly. It allows Bush to placate his supporters on the right,
and it forces Kerry to take a position (on a very emotional issue) that a
majority of Americans disagree with or risk alienating his liberal base.
But that's what the Constitution is there for right? To protect the
minority from the tyranny of the majority? Well that's where the first bit
of good news comes in. While 55% of Americans feel that same sex marriages
should be illegal, only 38% are in favor of a constitutional amendment
stating such. That's not nearly enough support to get an amendment
through.
The best news, though, is the age breakdown.
Age 18-29: legal 55, illegal 42
Age 65+: legal 21, illegal 75
Surprise surprise. It's the old people who want to keep antuquated
traditions exactly as they have been for the past couple of centuries. Now
we just have to wait about 20 years for them all to die off and same-sex
marriages will be a no-brainer.
The answer is simple: Don't let the elderly vote. Look I know they fought
in Viet Nam and WW2 and they know things, but they're old. Soylent green
their asses. I'm tired of hearing about them not knowing how to vote, and
I'm even more tired of the fact the god-damned goverment is a bunch of old,
prejudiced white men ,and the god dmaned voter are old, prejudiced white
men and their wives. So I say this to all of you, a call to arms so to
speak: If you see 'em, and they're over 65, eliminate them! Any, means,
neccesary. Thug love, I'm out.
____________________ “The only thing that can alter the good writer is death.”
“You know that if I were reincarnated, I’d want to come back a buzzard.
Nothing hates him. He is never bothered or in danger, and he can eat
anything.”
Faulkner
ariadne
Member
Posts: 107 Registered: 26/9/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 29/3/2004 at 08:09 PM
you would think that with the state the economy is in that it would make
sense to legalize gay marriages. it would be a contribution to the economy
. once again right wing christianity makes it's mark, even if these said
marriages are not accepable in a christian church that should not influence
any political votes in this matter. there is a fine line drawn, separating
church and state. homosexuals pay taxes like the rest of us so they deserve
to marry like the rest of us. they are human beings. they should not be
kept from adopting children and having a family, dammit if you pay taxes
then your right to life, liberty & happiness should be recognised.
[Edited on 30/3/2004 by ariadne]
____________________
Abbadon
Fanatic
Posts: 499 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 30/3/2004 at 06:56 AM
The Bible has been the basis of your society since its inception. You only
complain about it when it says something that inconveniences you. It
inconveniences those outside it to the point of death every day, get a grip
you fascist.
____________________ Light is changing to shadow, and casting a shroud over all we have known.
ariadne
Member
Posts: 107 Registered: 26/9/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 30/3/2004 at 11:07 AM
fascist? look ,everybody,abbadon learned a knew word. awwwww.........
Abadon: you speak only partly correctly... you forget that the norther part
of the country was deeply influenced by the french, the southern by the
spaniards...
Reguardless... you state that we only complain when it is an
inconvenience... by speaking in broad generalities about something you
honestly have no idea in... less than 50% of the population claims to
adhere to those tenets... and of that 50% most of them are the OLDER
generation... UNFORTUNATELY... that generation is making the laws...
NOT... Until you can bring a well researched statement or argument to the
table... chill...
Feral
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
Abbadon
Fanatic
Posts: 499 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 30/3/2004 at 03:18 PM
You're telling me the Grench and the Spanish aren't Christian??? The moral
code which rules American society is a primarily Biblical one. Whether it
be the approach to welfare, legal system or simple family values. Things
that are not mentioned in the Bible are often accepted, but those things
opposed to by it rarely, if ever, make it into 'constitutional' law. Apart
from the whole kosher thing obviuosly.
____________________ Light is changing to shadow, and casting a shroud over all we have known.
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 30/3/2004 at 03:25 PM
Grench? Is that the plural of grinch? Or maybe a grinch wench.
____________________ "You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and the
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism"
1) I was making a reference to the past, not the present...
2) the government is not representative of its people at this point. Those
that make the laws are from an earlier generation... the AVERAGE american
is no longer christian... Until you have actually experienced a people, you
have no room to talk...
3) again I say... Until you can bring a well researched statement or
argument to the table... chill...
Feral
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
Britva
Moderator
Posts: 37 Registered: 1/8/2003 Status: Offline
posted on 30/3/2004 at 05:42 PM
I'm not sure what you mean exactly when you say that the moral code which
rules American society is a primarily biblical one. If you mean that most
of the people in the U.S. are Christian and (at least nominally) support
Christain values, then I would have to agree. These people also tend to
support laws which reinforce their values (surprise surprise). Of course,
according to the last UN survey, over 130 of the member nations (including
the UK) were predominantly Christian, so this hardly makes the US unique.
But our legal system certainly isn't based on the Bible. If it was, we
would be doing as the Bible recommends and putting people to death for
working on the sabbath, eating shellfish, wearing garments of two different
kinds of thread, and trimming the hair around their temples. In addition, I
would have probably sold my sister into slavery by now to pay off my
student loans, which the Bible is also ok with. Women would not be able to
teach male children, speak in church, and, thanks to my favorite bible
quote of all time, "If two Israelite men are fighting and the wife of one
tries to rescue her husband by grabbing the testicles of the other man, her
hand must be cut off without pity." (Deuteronomy 25:11-12 NLT)
Also, our system of government certainly isn't based on the Bible. In fact,
our Constitution specifically mandates a separation between church and
state. If you could say our government was based on any one school of
thought, I would probably pin it on Enlightenment philosophy, but that's a
whole other story. For the most part, our laws and government have been a
pretty strong tool for the protection of religious minorities.
So in short, do we have a lot of religious conflict? Yes. Do we have to
deal with a lot of powerful Christian assholes trying to force their views
on everyone? Yes. Is the Bible the foundation for society and culture in
the United States? Not hardly.
Bane
Occasional Poster
Posts: 28 Registered: 14/7/2004 Status: Offline
posted on 19/7/2004 at 03:43 AM
There is a law in America that prevents gay marriages?
Seems a bit odd.... forbidding gay marriages in the land that deemed itself
the inventor of tolerance itself.... strange...
even round here it is now legal....
hum...
thank you for your dazzling social commentary... seems odd that our contry
has never really claimed to be tollerant... just that we were a
democracy... if you pay attention to the last 20 years of foreing policy,
you would see that the government is far from tolerant...
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
callei
Extreme Fanatic
Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 19/7/2004 at 07:14 AM
feral dont pretend a teenager has any grasp of history, reality, or even
thier own genitals. let them go on hating "America" for whatever petty
little make believe reason they want. and certainly dont try to explain
that America was founded by the intolerant. it will just make my eyes bleed
to have to read all that again.
____________________ Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
Andree
Member
Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 20/7/2004 at 12:30 AM
I was just arguing with Luke, my Oklahoman cousin, about gay marriage. I
presented my usual argument, which is:
Religious reasoning cannot enter the argument. If you believe
homosexuality is wrong, fine. Don't marry another guy. But you have no
right to let your religious beliefs interfer with the lives of those who
don't believe the same as you do. Banning gay marriage would be banning
extramarital sex--morality applies to the individual.
Many people will argue that homosexuality is a sin, and should therefore be
banned. I'm not arguing whether it is or not; all I'm saying is that the
government cannot make it illegal on a moral basis. People will say, "yes,
but like it or not, America is a religious government." But like Britva
said, America is NOT a religious government. Many of our laws parallel
Biblical laws, but not because they're Biblical laws; it's because
they're just good laws. They're practical; they're utilitarian--the reason
we don't kill is because it takes away another person's right to live.
Practical. Most laws exist to prevent harm to others. But we can also
make laws to prevent personal harm; e.g., the seatbelt law. The seatbelt
law is fairly black-and-white: dying is harmful, and crashing into a
guardrail without a seatbelt will probably kill you. But whether or not
homosexuality is harmful . . . that's speculative. The Bible says that any
sin a man commits is outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins
against his own body. Try telling that to someone who does not believe in
the Christian Bible. Religious arguments cannot be used in governmental
debates; only arguments based on practicality.
I have yet to hear a good argument against homosexual marriage that is not
religious. There is a weak argument that has to do with Darwinistic
principles (procreation is difficult between two men or two women.) But
the last time I checked, America did not have a problem with
procreation.
Anyway, this argument with my cousin Luke took a different turn. He said,
"Fine, but I wouldn't want a homosexual couple adopting my child." Later
in the day a similar conversation was going on, and I learned something
that I find disturbing. The state of Oklahoma does not recognize other
states' gay adoptions. Essentially, if a gay couple legally adopts a child
in Washington or California or anywhere, then moves to Oklahoma, the
adoption is negated. This means that parents may be denied access to their
legally-adopted children.
'Course, this is Oklahoma, where it's illegal to get tattoos . . .
that is funny... cause oklahoma city has a couple tatoo shops...
____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
Andree
Member
Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
posted on 20/7/2004 at 08:16 AM
The tattoo shops in OKC are usually underground-type shops. Come cops just
look the other way. When I was in Norman last week, I asked a tattoo
artist all about it while a friend was getting some ink done. This guy
works underground, which means he has no taxable income, and I'm sure the
IRS finds that very suspicious . . .
Britva, just to let you know, "polls" mean absolutely nothing, ESPECIALLY
if they come from the press. All they do is spit numbers and percents out
at you, they don't tell you WHO was polled, how many people, in what area
of the nation (yes, it matters), and other important facts that make up the
stats and keep them "clean". I'm sure if they polled 500 homosexuals on
whether or not they should be allowed to marry, they would get at least 95%
approval. But lets say the go to the "bible belt" and ask middle aged
married heterosexuals you would probably get about 80% disapproval. The
numbers being 45% yes 55% no is fishy, makes it seem like "ooo it's so
close but that's the way the ball bounces folks" with NO information of
demographics polled. Plus you have to take into account the viewership or
readership of AP or whatever "news" organization, do they have a mostly
liberal or fundamentalist patronage? Fox news network is owned by
republicans and has a mostly republican viewership, and their polls they
take (mostly by having viewers call in to vote) usually lean toward
conservative results on issues. Same with more "liberal" networks. I
don't trust polls, especially on tv. I trust ones that give me stats along
with the percents. And even then, they're probably still lying to you.
I personally dont' see what the big deal is. What, they're going to screw
up privatised healthcare by being able to claim their spouse as a
dependent? You mean, just like heterosexuals? What, they're going to
wreak havoc on social security by claiming their spouse as a dependent?
Just like heteros? They're going to take advantage of marriage tax breaks
and family tax breaks? Just like heteros? Wow, all those things seem like
RIGHTS and benifits of the american citizens.....so aren't they citizens
too? I honestly don't think that it's anyone else's goddamned say what
someone else does with their life. It shouldn't even BE a debate. A
denial of rights, an injustice to one is an injustice to all, but
apparently that doesn't come into effect until it happens to YOU.
____________________ Trapped in time. Surrounded by evil. Low on gas.