No Prayer in Public Schools !

[JakeStarkey]

You lack the authority to define people and labels.

That requires no authority.

It does if you don't want to be ridiculed. Apparently, you enjoy being ridiculed. nevertheless, if you can't make your argument using the standard accepted meanings of words, your argument isn't worth making.

We define by historical and traditional definitions.

The far left and the far right have for almost two decades now been trying to give not only their own opinions (their right) but also their own facts and definitions (not their right).

 

[AmericanFirst]

If you don't want religion in schools then idiots like you need to speak up about muslims allowed to pray and not the one true faith, Christianity. There are plenty of cases of Christians being persecuted and muslims being allowed to practice. The "provide a link" cry when you idiots do not agree doesn't work with me, I know the truth.

You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the ass. I know because I've seen it do so and it hasn't fazed you a bit. That's what dogma does: it closes the mind, locks down thinking, and blinds you to the truth.

Every single alleged instance of "Christians being persecuted" has proven, so far, to be one of Christians being denied the privilege of persecuting others. Which is, of course, exactly what you want to do, you with your "one true faith" garbage.

Dogma is totalitarianism. You are the enemy of freedom.

Wrong again. But what do you expect from satans soldiers denying the truth.

 

[daveman]

It does if you don't want to be ridiculed.

You will ridicule me regardless because you ridicule everyone you disagree with. That's just how you roll. Most people won't. Most don't. I can live with you being the odd one who does.

Nnevertheless, if you can't make your argument using the standard accepted meanings of words, your argument isn't worth making.

I made the argument that I was actually making just fine. I didn't make the straw man you assigned to me, namely that all "conservatives" behave like that school, because I neither tried to nor believe in it. That's the point of straw men after all.

You're doing it AGAIN!!

 

[Dragon]

Wrong again. But what do you expect from satans soldiers denying the truth.

Do you think it's enough merely to say that I'm wrong without offering any argument or evidence? Apparently so. How typical.

This is what I mean about authoritarian thinking. It's a kind of arrogance. "This is the truth because I say so." That's the kind of thinking that, joined with government power, produces Inquisitions and Crusades.

And that's why the First Amendment and the separation of church and state are so crucial to the liberty of this country.

 

[daveman]

That requires no authority.

It does if you don't want to be ridiculed. Apparently, you enjoy being ridiculed. nevertheless, if you can't make your argument using the standard accepted meanings of words, your argument isn't worth making.

We define by historical and traditional definitions.

The far left and the far right have for almost two decades now been trying to give not only their own opinions (their right) but also their own facts and definitions (not their right).

Sorry, Jake, but anyone who claims to be a mainstream Republican and criticizes Obama for not being far enough left doesn't have a lot of credibility in the history, traditions, and definitions departments.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It does if you don't want to be ridiculed. Apparently, you enjoy being ridiculed. nevertheless, if you can't make your argument using the standard accepted meanings of words, your argument isn't worth making.

We define by historical and traditional definitions.

The far left and the far right have for almost two decades now been trying to give not only their own opinions (their right) but also their own facts and definitions (not their right).

Sorry, Jake, but anyone who claims to be a mainstream Republican and criticizes Obama for not being far enough left doesn't have a lot of credibility in the history, traditions, and definitions departments.

You are saying that I said something I did not say. He did not go far enough in leadership on getting what he wanted. He had big majorities and blew them.

He is not the leader we want..

Romney, if he gets such majorities, will put through programs that will make the lefties weep.

You are a far righty,and your wing's power is diminishing. Just witness the far right's confusion in the primaries of an election year in which the GOP candidate should be an almost certainty but such is not the case because of growing far right confusion and weakness.

 

[daveman]

This is what I mean about authoritarian thinking. It's a kind of arrogance. "This is the truth because I say so." That's the kind of thinking that, joined with government power, produces Inquisitions and Crusades.

You don't seem to mind doing it yourself.

Dave, "conservatism" is such a nebulous, poorly-defined ideology that there is no set of ideas that can be said to represent all "conservatives."

 

[daveman]

We define by historical and traditional definitions.

The far left and the far right have for almost two decades now been trying to give not only their own opinions (their right) but also their own facts and definitions (not their right).

Sorry, Jake, but anyone who claims to be a mainstream Republican and criticizes Obama for not being far enough left doesn't have a lot of credibility in the history, traditions, and definitions departments.

You are saying that I said something I did not say.

Yes, you did.

Go back and read through our comments. This has been explained to you before. Don't do it, and you are fine.

I'm not wading through your inanity again, but let me guess:

You claim I'm an Obama cheerleader rofl I've pointed out two instances where I've supported his actions. You seem to think there are more, but have offered no proof.

Meanwhile, I have yet to see you condemn any of Obama's actions or policies. You support everything he's done, but laughably, you claim you're NOT an Obama cheerleader.

That about cover it, O-Fan Boi?

See, I got ya. You are so stupid. I got on Obama about not pushing through a single payer health care, got on him about not bringing the Iraq troops home more quickly, plus a few other things. I knew you would lie.

 

[Dragon]

This is what I mean about authoritarian thinking. It's a kind of arrogance. "This is the truth because I say so." That's the kind of thinking that, joined with government power, produces Inquisitions and Crusades.

You don't seem to mind doing it yourself.

On the contrary, when I say something I always present an argument or evidence to back it up.

Now, when you say I say something that I didn't, I'll grant you I may not have presented argument or evidence in favor of it, and when you say I say something that I not only didn't say but don't even believe, it's pretty much a given that I haven't backed it up. But that's different.

 

[Moonglow]

Even Jesus wants you to pray in private.

 

[Dragon]

[
You're doing it AGAIN!!

I never said that all conservatives behave like that school. I don't even believe that. It was a straw man.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sorry, Jake, but anyone who claims to be a mainstream Republican and criticizes Obama for not being far enough left doesn't have a lot of credibility in the history, traditions, and definitions departments.

You are saying that I said something I did not say.

Yes, you did.

I'm not wading through your inanity again, but let me guess:

You claim I'm an Obama cheerleader rofl I've pointed out two instances where I've supported his actions. You seem to think there are more, but have offered no proof.

Meanwhile, I have yet to see you condemn any of Obama's actions or policies. You support everything he's done, but laughably, you claim you're NOT an Obama cheerleader.

That about cover it, O-Fan Boi?

See, I got ya. You are so stupid. I got on Obama about not pushing through a single payer health care, got on him about not bringing the Iraq troops home more quickly, plus a few other things. I knew you would lie.

That is only your misguided, bigoted analysis. I jumped on him for his lack of leadership.

Romney will not make those mistakes, and good Repubs expect you to vote for Romney if he is the candidate.

 

[daveman]

This is what I mean about authoritarian thinking. It's a kind of arrogance. "This is the truth because I say so." That's the kind of thinking that, joined with government power, produces Inquisitions and Crusades.

You don't seem to mind doing it yourself.

On the contrary, when I say something I always present an argument or evidence to back it up.

Now, when you say I say something that I didn't, I'll grant you I may not have presented argument or evidence in favor of it, and when you say I say something that I not only didn't say but don't even believe, it's pretty much a given that I haven't backed it up. But that's different.

Invariably, your arguments seem to consist of "...because I say so."

 

[daveman]

[
You're doing it AGAIN!!

I never said that all conservatives behave like that school. I don't even believe that. It was a straw man.

Do keep up. You're claiming there is no clear definition of conservatism.

Patently false.

 

[daveman]

You are saying that I said something I did not say.

Yes, you did.

See, I got ya. You are so stupid. I got on Obama about not pushing through a single payer health care, got on him about not bringing the Iraq troops home more quickly, plus a few other things. I knew you would lie.

That is only your misguided, bigoted analysis. I jumped on him for his lack of leadership.

Romney will not make those mistakes, and good Repubs expect you to vote for Romney if he is the candidate.

You're trying to run away from your statement again?

It never works, kid. You criticized Obama for not being far enough left. Own it.

 

[Dragon]

Do keep up. You're claiming there is no clear definition of conservatism.

Patently false.

I'm claiming that there is no CONSISTENT definition of conservatism, and that different political beliefs may receive that label. You and American First are cases in point. You both call yourselves "conservatives." He believes in doing what that school was doing. You (as far as I can tell) do not. Many other conservatives on this forum and elsewhere also disagree with him.

A person can be "conservative" purely around economic issues, believing in a laissez-faire, free-market economy. A person can be "conservative" purely on foreign-policy issues, believing in a strong military and an aggressive stance abroad. Or of course, a person can be "conservative" on social and religious issues, and that's what this thread is about.

If Ron Paul and Rick Santorum can both be called "conservative," the word obviously has more than one meaning.

 

[daveman]

Do keep up. You're claiming there is no clear definition of conservatism.

Patently false.

I'm claiming that there is no CONSISTENT definition of conservatism, and that different political beliefs may receive that label. You and American First are cases in point. You both call yourselves "conservatives." He believes in doing what that school was doing. You (as far as I can tell) do not. Many other conservatives on this forum and elsewhere also disagree with him.

A person can be "conservative" purely around economic issues, believing in a laissez-faire, free-market economy. A person can be "conservative" purely on foreign-policy issues, believing in a strong military and an aggressive stance abroad. Or of course, a person can be "conservative" on social and religious issues, and that's what this thread is about.

If Ron Paul and Rick Santorum can both be called "conservative," the word obviously has more than one meaning.

Wait...I thought us conservatives all walked in lockstep, and demanded rigid adherence to one set of principles.

You mean the left's been lying about us?

I'll be darned.

 

[Dragon]

Wait...I thought us conservatives all walked in lockstep, and demanded rigid adherence to one set of principles.

You should at least be able to recognize a straw man when the other side uses it.

 

[daveman]

Wait...I thought us conservatives all walked in lockstep, and demanded rigid adherence to one set of principles.

You should at least be able to recognize a straw man when the other side uses it.

Yes, you use them a lot, along with your patented "...because I say so."

Chicks dig that. No, really.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, you did.

​

That is only your misguided, bigoted analysis. I jumped on him for his lack of leadership.

Romney will not make those mistakes, and good Repubs expect you to vote for Romney if he is the candidate.

You're trying to run away from your statement again?

It never works, kid. You criticized Obama for not being far enough left. Own it.

You are in deflection, kiddo, and losing focus. You are saying things I did not say again, a typical far left and far right behavior.

I said he did not lead and used those as examples.

Now answer the question, because I am going to keep bringing it up until you do.