Conservative Hypocrisy

[LeftCoastVoter]

No.

Thank you for the logical fallacy. Continue to adhere blindly to leftist political dogma/atheist play books.

oh so you just agreed there is no proof god exists. thanks for your confirmation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

prove god exists?

Prove you exist?

 

[koshergrl]

Look, another logical fallacy.

I didn't agree there is no proof, I said I wasn't going to provide proof.

Though there is no proof. There won't be until Christ comes again and kicks naysayers to the pit.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

prove god exists?

Prove you exist?

prove your not a retarded monkey?

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Look, another logical fallacy.

I didn't agree there is no proof, I said I wasn't going to provide proof.

Though there is no proof. There won't be until Christ comes again and kicks naysayers to the pit.

wow, you are simply retarded. in 2 sentences you say "I didn't agree there is no proof," but not more than 9 words later you say "Though there is no proof."

so you just agreed there is no proof that god exists. thanks again!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

prove me wrong.

ROFL

Communists; stupid as petrified dog turds...

As usual, rw's call names because their position is so weak.

How weak is it?

They LOST.

 

[Plasmaball]

making stuff up really doesnt help your argument. Straw men suck.

you do it all the time.

 

[blackhawk]

Speaking of hypocrisy how about the liberal hypocrisy of claiming to care about the poor and middle class yet constantly put in programs that keep the poor in poverty and dependent on government rather ones that help them move out of poverty and put out so many taxes and regulations that anyone in the middle class trying to start or expand a business has a better chance of finding a snowball in hell.

 

[koshergrl]

prove me wrong.

ROFL

Communists; stupid as petrified dog turds...

As usual, rw's call names because their position is so weak.

How weak is it?

They LOST.

We lost to communist dog turds?

Why yes, I guess we did.

 

[blackhawk]

This from the loons who think that man has no God, has the right to kill babies, and that Christians are dummies.

prove god exists?

Prove God doesn't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Put plainly: conservatives want a country where they get big government
benefits and small government restrictions, while imposing small government benefits
and big government restrictions on everybody else.

Despite claiming to support a small and unobtrusive government, the
conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion
rights being the most common things that modern conservatives decry and attempt
to legislate away.

Conservatives don’t see these restrictions as “big government
overreach” simply because such regulations don’t overreach into THEIR lives,
only the lives of others. The conservative hypocrisy in the realm of social
issues is indicative of their ideological mindset and gives us a clear look
into the conservative views on the size of government.

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

1. You're not merely stupid, but manage to be stupid in a boisterous manner.


2. "conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion"

List same?


3. Now, for today's education, let's begin with a question.
Where would one find all the regulations produced by the government?


Answer:
. The Federal Register is the main source for the U.S. federal government agencies':
 Proposed new rules and regulations
 Final rules
 Changes to existing rules
 Notices of meetings and adjudicatory proceedings
In essence, the Federal Register is a way for the government to think aloud to the people, and also serves as official journal of record for the approved acts of the U.S. Government. The notice and comment process outlined in the Federal Register gives the people a chance to participate in agency rulemaking.
The United States Government Manual is published as a special edition of the Federal Register. Its focus is on programs and activities
Federal Register - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a. In 2010 however, President Obama cranked up the federal government's regulation mill to all time highs, keeping it there at least through 2011.
Wayne Crews' data for 2010 through 24 July 2012 indicates that the federal government is currently on pace to issue at least 76,300 pages of new rules and regulations this year, but we suspect the actual figure will be much larger.
The reason why is because of ObamaCare, where the recent Supreme Court decision allowing the law to go into effect will require the federal government to issue a very large number of new rules and regulations before next year:
The Regulation of the American People - Political Calculations - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary


4. Further edification...free of charge:

Despite the weak economy, the Obama Administration continued to increase the regulatory burden on Americans in 2011, adding 32 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens, almost $10 billion in annual costs, and $6.6 billion in one-time implementation costs. From the beginning of the Obama Administration through 2011, a staggering 106 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens have been issued, with costs exceeding $46 billion. While the President has acknowledged the need to rein in regulation, the steps taken to date have been meager.
Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations


So, as concerned as you are about regulation, looking forward to your posts about the Obama avalanche of regulation.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

This from the loons who think that man has no God, has the right to kill babies, and that Christians are dummies.

prove god exists?

Prove God doesn't.

as is the typical response of the christian right. no matter what answer is given you will blindly believe without evidence that a god does exist.

The Juxtaposition…
According to Christianity, their God exists and he is perfect. Thus, an imperfect God cannot exist. So, if we can prove that their God is not perfect, then by default, we can prove that he does not exist. In doing so, the house of cards that is Christianity collapses. How can we do this? Easy, as the Christians have already provided the means to do so by virtue of their enigmatic, ambiguous, error-laden, interpolated, inconsistent collection of ancient writings they call “The Bible.“
Christian doctrine teaches that “creation” was perfect because it was fashioned by a “perfect” God, and it remained so until the “fall of man” occurred in the Garden of Eden. This begs the question of why God felt the need to create anything in the first place. The need to create results from a perceived lack of balance between what is and what should be. So, what disturbed God’s perfection and compelled him to create? If God is presumably perfect, then he would have been complete and in need of nothing. Conventional Christian “wisdom” teaches that God created us because he desires our worship. Well, desire results from need, and need connotes lack, and lack connotes imperfection. This is where the existence of the Christian God becomes impossible, because perfection cannot exist as long as there is need, want or desire. A God who is perfect does nothing except exist and thus, a perfect God who creates anything is not perfect.
Of course, a favorite amongst Christians is the answer of “his ways are higher,” which is not only the height of ignorance, but shows a lack of reason so profound that all you really can do is just shake your head in disbelief. What it comes down to is that an allegedly perfect God created a perfect universe which was rendered imperfect by his creation, humans. Thusly, the ultimate source of imperfection is God himself. An imperfect humanity could have only been created by an imperfect God and Christianity does not allow for an imperfect God, so thus, God does not exist. He is a logical fallacy unto himself.
The Paradox…
This is a paradox of monumental proportions for Christians, and has spawned a plethora of Christian colleges, universities and think tanks all for the purpose of trying to eliminate the unavoidable cognitive dissonance that is part and parcel of being a Christian. The best they can come up with is the concept of “free will,” which basically states that human imperfection is only a byproduct of our capacity as free moral agents. That’s all good and well, but the concept was doomed to fail from the start. According to Christian theology, the fictional Characters of Adam and Eve used their free will to choose evil, which was a design flaw. If we are to believe in intelligent design, then creating something that is broken does not make God intelligent at all. It was this flaw in God’s design that was responsible for the introduction of imperfection into his previously perfect universe. Another proof of imperfection, thus another proof that God does not exist.
To make matters worse, God knew that Adam and Eve were going to totally fuck everything up for the rest of humanity and did nothing about it, in spite of hearing screams of the damned. No, this perfect, all-compassionate, all-loving God went ahead with his plan anyway, knowing that billions of humans would end up eternally damned to hell. Nothing screams compassion louder than eternal suffering for temporal sins… Of course, eternal damnation is avoidable as long as one accepts Jesus as lord and savior. However, salvation is only necessary because the problem of sin was brought on by God in the first place. The need for salvation is incompatible with a perfect God because if God were perfectly just, he would not dole out infinite punishment for finite sins. The fact that the best God could do was offer up human sacrifice as a solution to his design flawed humanity is further proof that he is imperfect, and thus does not exist.
What We Have Here Is A Lack of Communication…
Another proof that God is not perfect is the venue that he chose to communicate with his imperfect creation – the Bible. Avoiding eternal punishment by knowing and believing in Christ is wonderful if you have access to a bible. However, there are billions of people in the past, present and future all over the planet in remote areas who have never heard of nor will likely never hear of Jesus Christ or his “gospel of salvation.” According to Christian theology, all of these people are doomed to eternal punishment – regardless of their generosity, kindness, morality, ethics or disposition – because they have not accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. Without access to the Bible, they are being punished for committing a crime they had no idea even existed. A God that would judge a man by his beliefs rather than his actions is imperfect, and thus does not exist.
So, how does God combat the problem of the shortage of bibles in every language known to humanity and the equal shortage of Christian bookstores in the Amazon jungle and other remote places where there isn’t even a Starbuck’s? Happy feet! Yes, happy are the feet that bring the gospel of the good news of Jesus Christ to the world, right? And who do these feet belong to? None other than one of the most destructive groups of people ever to walk the face of the earth. Missionaries. They have destroyed whole cultures and have stolen entire countries from their indigenous inhabitants. If you don’t believe me, just ask any Native American. Missionaries believe that their job is to bring the “Word of God” to the savage masses, savage meaning anyone who does not believe like they do. The problem is that like the imperfect Christian God, the bible is also imperfect.
It is a logically indecipherable fusion of books that contain so many errors, contradictions, misinformation and ignorance beyond any standards of reason that it boggles the mind that it’s even taken seriously. It is a poor excuse for the supposedly perfect word of God. The fact that no two individuals will ever agree on what the bible says in its entirety makes it suspect. An imperfect God who reveals his imperfect will in an imperfect book is another proof that God does not exist.
Another interesting point to note is that according to Christianity, God experiences all of the emotions of a human being. What they fail to understand is that emotion is a response to something previously unknown. A perfect God who is omniscient God would be ignorant of nothing. Nothing would be hidden from him and nothing can be revealed, thus there would be no need to act emotionally. Thus, he is not all-knowing. Another point to ponder as to why God cannot exist.
Mass Delusion Happens…
Yet, more than two billion people still stubbornly insist that there is a God and he is watching us all the time, which should make them uncomfortable, to say the least. Is he casting his watchful eye over us as we take a shit? Does he watch us have sex? Masturbate? Pick our noses? Scratch our asses? Does he listen into our phone conversations? Read our email? God is everywhere? God lives within us? Is he up our asses? Please, when will people realize just how illogical and unreasonable the whole God thing is and come to the place in their lives when they finally realize that there is no God?
Deities were invented at the dawn of time and persisted throughout our history to explain what was unexplainable in the early years of our development. The culmination of human knowledge and intelligence has answered many questions with certainty that were unknown even up until very recently. We no longer need to rely on ancient superstitions to explain weather patterns, genetics, biology and other life sciences. We no longer need to make sacrifices or live a life if credulous servility to appease an angry God so he allows our crops to grow or to keep sickness at bay or any one of a plethora of other superstitions.

 

[koshergrl]

Look, another logical fallacy.

I didn't agree there is no proof, I said I wasn't going to provide proof.

Though there is no proof. There won't be until Christ comes again and kicks naysayers to the pit.

wow, you are simply retarded. in 2 sentences you say "I didn't agree there is no proof," but not more than 9 words later you say "Though there is no proof."

so you just agreed there is no proof that god exists. thanks again!

You're obviously too stupid to have this conversation.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Put plainly: conservatives want a country where they get big government
benefits and small government restrictions, while imposing small government benefits
and big government restrictions on everybody else.

Despite claiming to support a small and unobtrusive government, the
conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion
rights being the most common things that modern conservatives decry and attempt
to legislate away.

Conservatives don’t see these restrictions as “big government
overreach” simply because such regulations don’t overreach into THEIR lives,
only the lives of others. The conservative hypocrisy in the realm of social
issues is indicative of their ideological mindset and gives us a clear look
into the conservative views on the size of government.

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

1. You're not merely stupid, but manage to be stupid in a boisterous manner.


2. "conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion"

List same?


3. Now, for today's education, let's begin with a question.
Where would one find all the regulations produced by the government?


Answer:
. The Federal Register is the main source for the U.S. federal government agencies':
 Proposed new rules and regulations
 Final rules
 Changes to existing rules
 Notices of meetings and adjudicatory proceedings
In essence, the Federal Register is a way for the government to think aloud to the people, and also serves as official journal of record for the approved acts of the U.S. Government. The notice and comment process outlined in the Federal Register gives the people a chance to participate in agency rulemaking.
The United States Government Manual is published as a special edition of the Federal Register. Its focus is on programs and activities
Federal Register - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a. In 2010 however, President Obama cranked up the federal government's regulation mill to all time highs, keeping it there at least through 2011.
Wayne Crews' data for 2010 through 24 July 2012 indicates that the federal government is currently on pace to issue at least 76,300 pages of new rules and regulations this year, but we suspect the actual figure will be much larger.
The reason why is because of ObamaCare, where the recent Supreme Court decision allowing the law to go into effect will require the federal government to issue a very large number of new rules and regulations before next year:
The Regulation of the American People - Political Calculations - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary


4. Further edification...free of charge:

Despite the weak economy, the Obama Administration continued to increase the regulatory burden on Americans in 2011, adding 32 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens, almost $10 billion in annual costs, and $6.6 billion in one-time implementation costs. From the beginning of the Obama Administration through 2011, a staggering 106 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens have been issued, with costs exceeding $46 billion. While the President has acknowledged the need to rein in regulation, the steps taken to date have been meager.
Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations


So, as concerned as you are about regulation, looking forward to your posts about the Obama avalanche of regulation.

your ability to read an comprehend is sorely lacking. the question on the table is not that the left embrace or produce more regulations, it is if conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim by production legislation that limits personal freedoms and rights?

the rest of your post is irrelevant. can you stay on topic?

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Look, another logical fallacy.

I didn't agree there is no proof, I said I wasn't going to provide proof.

Though there is no proof. There won't be until Christ comes again and kicks naysayers to the pit.

wow, you are simply retarded. in 2 sentences you say "I didn't agree there is no proof," but not more than 9 words later you say "Though there is no proof."

so you just agreed there is no proof that god exists. thanks again!

You're obviously too stupid to have this conversation.

ok ms. I didn't agree there is no proof, Though there is no proof.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Put plainly: conservatives want a country where they get big government
benefits and small government restrictions, while imposing small government benefits
and big government restrictions on everybody else.

Despite claiming to support a small and unobtrusive government, the
conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion
rights being the most common things that modern conservatives decry and attempt
to legislate away.

Conservatives don’t see these restrictions as “big government
overreach” simply because such regulations don’t overreach into THEIR lives,
only the lives of others. The conservative hypocrisy in the realm of social
issues is indicative of their ideological mindset and gives us a clear look
into the conservative views on the size of government.

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

1. You're not merely stupid, but manage to be stupid in a boisterous manner.


2. "conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion"

List same?


3. Now, for today's education, let's begin with a question.
Where would one find all the regulations produced by the government?


Answer:
. The Federal Register is the main source for the U.S. federal government agencies':
 Proposed new rules and regulations
 Final rules
 Changes to existing rules
 Notices of meetings and adjudicatory proceedings
In essence, the Federal Register is a way for the government to think aloud to the people, and also serves as official journal of record for the approved acts of the U.S. Government. The notice and comment process outlined in the Federal Register gives the people a chance to participate in agency rulemaking.
The United States Government Manual is published as a special edition of the Federal Register. Its focus is on programs and activities
Federal Register - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a. In 2010 however, President Obama cranked up the federal government's regulation mill to all time highs, keeping it there at least through 2011.
Wayne Crews' data for 2010 through 24 July 2012 indicates that the federal government is currently on pace to issue at least 76,300 pages of new rules and regulations this year, but we suspect the actual figure will be much larger.
The reason why is because of ObamaCare, where the recent Supreme Court decision allowing the law to go into effect will require the federal government to issue a very large number of new rules and regulations before next year:
The Regulation of the American People - Political Calculations - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary


4. Further edification...free of charge:

Despite the weak economy, the Obama Administration continued to increase the regulatory burden on Americans in 2011, adding 32 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens, almost $10 billion in annual costs, and $6.6 billion in one-time implementation costs. From the beginning of the Obama Administration through 2011, a staggering 106 major regulations that increase regulatory burdens have been issued, with costs exceeding $46 billion. While the President has acknowledged the need to rein in regulation, the steps taken to date have been meager.
Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations


So, as concerned as you are about regulation, looking forward to your posts about the Obama avalanche of regulation.

your ability to read an comprehend is sorely lacking. the question on the table is not that the left embrace or produce more regulations, it is if conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim by production legislation that limits personal freedoms and rights?

the rest of your post is irrelevant. can you stay on topic?

On that point at least conservatives are consistent.

Along with their propensity to attempt to deflect when unwilling or unable to respond to the topic at hand, in this case conservative hypocrisy.

 

[jtpr312]

Put plainly: conservatives want a country where they get big government
benefits and small government restrictions, while imposing small government benefits
and big government restrictions on everybody else.

Despite claiming to support a small and unobtrusive government, the
conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion
rights being the most common things that modern conservatives decry and attempt
to legislate away.

Conservatives don’t see these restrictions as “big government
overreach” simply because such regulations don’t overreach into THEIR lives,
only the lives of others. The conservative hypocrisy in the realm of social
issues is indicative of their ideological mindset and gives us a clear look
into the conservative views on the size of government.

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

The ignorance and hypocrisy of the leftists in this nation never ceases to amaze and amuse me. We, Conservatives, don't want more regulation in these areas, we want morality to prevail, and seeing that we live in a nation that is filled with immoral, leftist, scum, we need govt to do it's job, which is NOT to support unionaztion, free shit for able bodied people who refuse to work and the 100001 other things you leftist scum want, but is to protect traditional family values from immoral scumbags, and to protect the innocents from irresponsible scum that have no concept of what life is.

 

[squeeze berry]

making stuff up really doesnt help your argument. Straw men suck.

prove me wrong.

how can you disprove a negative?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

too silly!!!You've got economic conservatives, who believe in small government, confused with social conservatives who generally don't.

Our Founders were strict social conservatives who were content with the church's description and enforcement of family values. But, now that the liberals have virtually killed the church and so the family most conservatives are grudgingly willing to let government take over the churches' former role.

This is especially true when they look at the liberals near genocidal war on the black family!!

"We could survive slavery, we could survive Jim Crow, but we could not survive liberalism".- Walter Williams

Even in the antebellum era, when slaves often weren't permitted to wed, most black children lived with a biological mother and father. During Reconstruction and up until the 1940s, 75% to 85% of black children lived in two-parent families. Today, more than 70% of black children are born to single women. “The welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery couldn’t do, what Jim Crow couldn’t do, what the harshest racism couldn’t do,” Mr. Williams says. “And that is to destroy the black family

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Put plainly: conservatives want a country where they get big government
benefits and small government restrictions, while imposing small government benefits
and big government restrictions on everybody else.

Despite claiming to support a small and unobtrusive government, the
conservative movement has pushed heavily for increased governmental regulations
on personal activities that they find objectionable—gay marriage and abortion
rights being the most common things that modern conservatives decry and attempt
to legislate away.

Conservatives don’t see these restrictions as “big government
overreach” simply because such regulations don’t overreach into THEIR lives,
only the lives of others. The conservative hypocrisy in the realm of social
issues is indicative of their ideological mindset and gives us a clear look
into the conservative views on the size of government.

If conservatives truly claim to be about small government and personal responsibility, they why do they consistently act counter to this claim?

The ignorance and hypocrisy of the leftists in this nation never ceases to amaze and amuse me. We, Conservatives, don't want more regulation in these areas, we want morality to prevail, and seeing that we live in a nation that is filled with immoral, leftist, scum, we need govt to do it's job, which is NOT to support unionaztion, free shit for able bodied people who refuse to work and the 100001 other things you leftist scum want, but is to protect traditional family values from immoral scumbags, and to protect the innocents from irresponsible scum that have no concept of what life is.

so your claiming that the right is not trying to legislate these things?

and now you want to legislate morality? good luck with that.