Are we losing our humanity?

We lost it a while back. Well, a lot of you did.

you of all posters talking about compassion when you say we don't need food stamps ... we don't need to pay for school lunches ... then you try to come across as a person who knows what life is all about??? really!!! give me a break ...
Careful, billyerock, this is the Clean Debate Zone. You don't want to get banned, do you?

I'll repeat...
you of all posters talking about compassion when you say we don't need food stamps ... we don't need to pay for school lunches ... then you try to come across as a person who knows what life is all about??? really!!! give me a break ... I rest my case ... you couldn't comment about the truths I told about you ...
 
Careful, billyerock, this is the Clean Debate Zone. You don't want to get banned, do you?

I'll repeat...
you of all posters talking about compassion when you say we don't need food stamps ... we don't need to pay for school lunches ... then you try to come across as a person who knows what life is all about??? really!!! give me a break ... I rest my case ... you couldn't comment about the truths I told about you ...
Like I said, this is the Clean Debate Zone, so I see no point in responding to your insults.

well you seem to like to drop the F bomb here a lot I would say thats not to Clean Debate Zonedish ... I have I simply made a statement, that you couldn't seem to deny here ... you said we don't need welfare ... you've said we don't need food stamps .... you've said we don't need school lunches ... are you now denying thats this is your position ??? that am i wrong in posting here what you said in the past ??? and please explain to us here how is it a insult in quoting to people here what you have said in the passed ... are you now ashamed of your past post, or are you just not to proud of what you've said in the past ... which is it ??? you can tell us!!! or are you just :dig: a deeper hole
 
Last edited:
There are hundreds of thousands of public and private shelters scattered around the Country. The problem is that the majority of "homeless" people refuse to abide by simple rules that exist in humanity. Some are genuinely crazy and should be institutionalized for their own health and protection and some are so addicted to substance abuse that it will eventually kill them. Throwing more federal dollars to poverty pimps to distribute for votes for democrats is a proven failure.

HUMMM who was it that closed down all of the mental institution ... who said they were a bunch of lolly gagers ... that would be your hero, not mine, ronald Reagan ... the ones who don't want to follow the rules or stay in a shelter are the crazies that ronald Reagan let loose on to the city so blame him ... you are wrong about federal dollars ... put the crazies in a institution by using federal dollars thats where they belong, not on the streets and not in the prisons ... the homeless in shelters ... a shelter thats designed with federal dollars that will help them get a job along with educating them for that job in the world... just to saying "Throwing more federal dollars to poverty pimps" is uneducated thinking ...
 
One can't help but wonder if Luddly invites homeless people to sleep on his sofa.

He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor...
no we liberals believe that we should all pay ... by opening mental institution for the mentally ill ... that we should open homes for the homeless to help them get back on their feet ... by educating them in a job that they would like to do ... educate someone with what they enjoy doing and they will work for life ... put them in a job that they hate they will quit as we all do ... but to say "He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor" is uneducated thinking ...
 
So people do not want drug addicts and nut cases sleeping on their doorstep. So whats the newsflash here? What do you expect people to do when they see a homeless guy lying on the sidewalk? Give him a hundred dollars and a hand job? Be real.

WTF is this totally bizarre Right-Wing obsession with gay sex?

Damn, that is just plain old weird.

:cuckoo:

I think according to right winger Bill Clinton, hand jobs aren't sex. They certainly shouldn't be if blow jobs aren't counted either.
no bill clinton said sexual relations ...which is define as sexual intercourse ... sexual intercourse isn't a hand job nor is it oral sex ... I can't help you don't understand what he was saying ... when he was accuse of have sexual relations ... Bill Clinton never said he wasn't having sex
 
Last edited:
WTF is this totally bizarre Right-Wing obsession with gay sex?

Damn, that is just plain old weird.

:cuckoo:

I think according to right winger Bill Clinton, hand jobs aren't sex. They certainly shouldn't be if blow jobs aren't counted either.
no bill clinton said sexual relations ...which is define as sexual intercourse ... sexual intercourse isn't a hand job nor is it oral sex ... I can't help you don't understand what he was saying ... when he was accuse of have sexual relations ... Bill Clinton never said he wasn't having sex

Ha. Sexual intercourse - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary Sexual intercourse:

1: heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis : coitus
2
: intercourse (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis
 
I think according to right winger Bill Clinton, hand jobs aren't sex. They certainly shouldn't be if blow jobs aren't counted either.
no bill clinton said sexual relations ...which is define as sexual intercourse ... sexual intercourse isn't a hand job nor is it oral sex ... I can't help you don't understand what he was saying ... when he was accuse of have sexual relations ... Bill Clinton never said he wasn't having sex

Ha. Sexual intercourse - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary Sexual intercourse:

1: heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis : coitus
2
: intercourse (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis

you need to look at legal dictionaries not merriam-webster ... at least they define it differently in legal dictionaries .... as for Merriam-Webster Dictionary for many years I debated this issue ... I pointe out that they they weren't the same and I quoted Merriam-Webster Dictionary as my source ... today is the first time that I've seen this change to the dictionary ... they never, in the past had this in its definition stating of sexual intercourse ... this number 2 definition "2
: intercourse (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis" I know you didn't add it because you used it as your source ... in the past it never had the number 2 definition in it ... I guess because of the bill clinton statement to the country they redefined its meaning .... as I said it never had that in it before ... I used it all the time... [/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
No good deed goes unpunished is more true today than ever.

Another angle in this debate is that more and more people expect the government to do the humanitarian thing. Take the poster that wants to talk about food stamps and school lunches. Ok then if you are spending so much of my money on that then I can spend time thinking about other things. So socialism leads to less individual humanitarianism, it disconnects us from thinking about it because govt is taking care of this. Socialism breaks down the inter connectivity and the conscious caring among people because it assigns that obligation to govt. I. E. Another reason it is bad for us.

As a tangent to the caring part in this thread, which has until recently turned out to be a good one, let me vent about young people asking for money for worthy causes. Living in a small town you will find that anytime the cheerleaders, the class trip, uniforms for the volleyball team, summer programs for athletes, church activities, and on and on want money the first place they go to is the local businesses. We have become swamped with so many requests, most all worthy, that there is no way we can give to any of them. The constant drumbeat for money is verwhelming and the costs of all of these activities now is off the charts. 3000 for a class trip per person is insane, especially for for a poor family in this area. My point is just that while you want to help the requests for donations are unlimited and the ability to contribute is very limited.
 
One thing many people don't understand is there is a percentage of the population where homelessness is a way of life. They choose to be homeless. Even if we find a place for every homeless person to live, there is a percentage that would refuse to take advantage of that shelter.
I must admit I'm among those who do not understand why any mentally stable individual would choose to endure the discomforts, the humiliation, and probably the miseries of being without a reasonably comfortable and safe place to retreat to.

How did you learn about this category of homeless people? Have you met any of them? If so, do you consider them mentally stable? Is it possible they choose living on the street rather than living in what today are typical shelters because of the general quality of those places? Based on what I've learned most of these so-called shelters are in some ways worse than living on the street. They are sparsely funded and have been described as "prisons without guards" where peaceful residents are abused by assaultive, predatory residents.

I agree, I can't understand anyone wanting to live homeless. That said, one of my good friend's brother is doing exactly that. He met a woman that lived homeless as her way of life. They have been living in Las Vegas for the past 15 years. My friend will go to Vegas to see him occationally, and to offer them a place to live. But they don't want one. It's their lifestyle. :dunno:
 
No good deed goes unpunished is more true today than ever.

Another angle in this debate is that more and more people expect the government to do the humanitarian thing. Take the poster that wants to talk about food stamps and school lunches. Ok then if you are spending so much of my money on that then I can spend time thinking about other things. So socialism leads to less individual humanitarianism, it disconnects us from thinking about it because govt is taking care of this. Socialism breaks down the inter connectivity and the conscious caring among people because it assigns that obligation to govt. I. E. Another reason it is bad for us.

As a tangent to the caring part in this thread, which has until recently turned out to be a good one, let me vent about young people asking for money for worthy causes. Living in a small town you will find that anytime the cheerleaders, the class trip, uniforms for the volleyball team, summer programs for athletes, church activities, and on and on want money the first place they go to is the local businesses. We have become swamped with so many requests, most all worthy, that there is no way we can give to any of them. The constant drumbeat for money is verwhelming and the costs of all of these activities now is off the charts. 3000 for a class trip per person is insane, especially for for a poor family in this area. My point is just that while you want to help the requests for donations are unlimited and the ability to contribute is very limited.
Part of that problem is that those groups tend to go to a business rather than the community that they area part of. As you mentioned, we are getting disconnected because we expect 'someone else' to take care of these things. That is what government taking the role over does. That is just plane asinine.

These people should be looking into the local community, not wal mart shoppers, and the families of those that are in the school/activity that needs the money. Such moves are almost always successful because those people have a strong buy in. When my sons school needs something from me that I am capable of doing, I do it. It is MY school, MY son and MY friends that are befitting. Why would you not?
 
One thing many people don't understand is there is a percentage of the population where homelessness is a way of life. They choose to be homeless. Even if we find a place for every homeless person to live, there is a percentage that would refuse to take advantage of that shelter.
I must admit I'm among those who do not understand why any mentally stable individual would choose to endure the discomforts, the humiliation, and probably the miseries of being without a reasonably comfortable and safe place to retreat to.

How did you learn about this category of homeless people? Have you met any of them? If so, do you consider them mentally stable? Is it possible they choose living on the street rather than living in what today are typical shelters because of the general quality of those places? Based on what I've learned most of these so-called shelters are in some ways worse than living on the street. They are sparsely funded and have been described as "prisons without guards" where peaceful residents are abused by assaultive, predatory residents.

I agree, I can't understand anyone wanting to live homeless. That said, one of my good friend's brother is doing exactly that. He met a woman that lived homeless as her way of life. They have been living in Las Vegas for the past 15 years. My friend will go to Vegas to see him occationally, and to offer them a place to live. But they don't want one. It's their lifestyle. :dunno:

It is perplexing, is it not?

I have a cousin that does the same thing. Hitch hikes all over the nation or jumps trains. Just plain crazy. And the real kicker is that she is INCREDIBLY talented. You can place any instrument in her hands and she will make magic with it. Sings opera too. Just a waste of talent.

Any time that she decides that she wants a job and almost instantly gets one. Her talents are obvious and few have it. Even with that, she purposely lives the life of a hobo. If it is what she wants – more power to her.
 
One can't help but wonder if Luddly invites homeless people to sleep on his sofa.

He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor...
no we liberals believe that we should all pay ... by opening mental institution for the mentally ill ... that we should open homes for the homeless to help them get back on their feet ... by educating them in a job that they would like to do ... educate someone with what they enjoy doing and they will work for life ... put them in a job that they hate they will quit as we all do ... but to say "He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor" is uneducated thinking ...

What is the name of the charitable organization that you have started to accomplish said goals?
 
He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor...
no we liberals believe that we should all pay ... by opening mental institution for the mentally ill ... that we should open homes for the homeless to help them get back on their feet ... by educating them in a job that they would like to do ... educate someone with what they enjoy doing and they will work for life ... put them in a job that they hate they will quit as we all do ... but to say "He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor" is uneducated thinking ...

What is the name of the charitable organization that you have started to accomplish said goals?

It called the US government - here to force YOU to pay for his ideals....
 
I'll repeat...
you of all posters talking about compassion when you say we don't need food stamps ... we don't need to pay for school lunches ... then you try to come across as a person who knows what life is all about??? really!!! give me a break ... I rest my case ... you couldn't comment about the truths I told about you ...
Like I said, this is the Clean Debate Zone, so I see no point in responding to your insults.

well you seem to like to drop the F bomb here a lot I would say thats not to Clean Debate Zonedish ... I have I simply made a statement, that you couldn't seem to deny here ... you said we don't need welfare ... you've said we don't need food stamps .... you've said we don't need school lunches ... are you now denying thats this is your position ??? that am i wrong in posting here what you said in the past ??? and please explain to us here how is it a insult in quoting to people here what you have said in the passed ... are you now ashamed of your past post, or are you just not to proud of what you've said in the past ... which is it ??? you can tell us!!! or are you just :dig: a deeper hole
You should post a link to back it up instead of expecting me to give you credibility by responding to an erroneous accusation.
 
He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor...
no we liberals believe that we should all pay ... by opening mental institution for the mentally ill ... that we should open homes for the homeless to help them get back on their feet ... by educating them in a job that they would like to do ... educate someone with what they enjoy doing and they will work for life ... put them in a job that they hate they will quit as we all do ... but to say "He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor" is uneducated thinking ...

What is the name of the charitable organization that you have started to accomplish said goals?

thats the problem here ... everybody hates to see crazies laying out side of their building or favorite place they go to... it amazes me how republicans think... for many years prior to 1980 we had mental institutions ...you hardly ever saw any people lying down on a side rambling on incoherently until after 1980... now its the norm ... now you expect us to start a charity to help these crazies on the street ... hows that been working for us so far??? but when they start killing people you on the right start saying we need more guns to take care of this problem... we never had this problem prior to 1980 of crazies wondering the streets... how you can say leave it up to the charities to take care of them ... or start a charity to take care of them ...tells me more and more that the republican party hasn't any Idea of what humanity is...tells me more and more that i want no part of the republican party ... they are the most selfish human beings on this planet to date ...
 
no we liberals believe that we should all pay ... by opening mental institution for the mentally ill ... that we should open homes for the homeless to help them get back on their feet ... by educating them in a job that they would like to do ... educate someone with what they enjoy doing and they will work for life ... put them in a job that they hate they will quit as we all do ... but to say "He believes that charity starts in the pocket of his neighbor" is uneducated thinking ...

What is the name of the charitable organization that you have started to accomplish said goals

It called the US government - here to force YOU to pay for his ideals....
thats right its the job of the federal government to force you degenerates to pay for the housing of the crazy people of this country ... its the job of the federal government to force you degenerates to pay for the housing of criminal or should we leave the housing of criminals to charity too ??? how many prison charity have you started ... if thats not the most stupidest answer I seen so far????
 
Like I said, this is the Clean Debate Zone, so I see no point in responding to your insults.

well you seem to like to drop the F bomb here a lot I would say thats not to Clean Debate Zonedish ... I have I simply made a statement, that you couldn't seem to deny here ... you said we don't need welfare ... you've said we don't need food stamps .... you've said we don't need school lunches ... are you now denying thats this is your position ??? that am i wrong in posting here what you said in the past ??? and please explain to us here how is it a insult in quoting to people here what you have said in the passed ... are you now ashamed of your past post, or are you just not to proud of what you've said in the past ... which is it ??? you can tell us!!! or are you just :dig: a deeper hole
You should post a link to back it up instead of expecting me to give you credibility by responding to an erroneous accusation.

If you think that I'm going to take the time post a link to back it up what you have said in the past, XXXXXXXX The fact that you're in denial here now says it all you're just :dig: a deeper hole for yourself ...

people here have seen you talk about welfare ... people here have seen you talk about food stamps and school lunches... I don't deed to go and fine a post where you had said you felt these programs are wrong .... now you're trying to get us to believe you're all for them now??? really ??? well there's this bridge I have for sale
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Help them with an opportunity to earn money. If they turn it down, walk away. 9 times out of 10 they will turn it down.

That happened with one of my brothers. This guy would "work for food" so my brother talked to him and gave him a job. They guy never showed up. My brother tracked him down and his excuse was that his car was broken down. My brother arranged for his transportation to work. The guy still wouldn't show up. After a couple back and forths the guy just said flat out he was not going to work because it wasn't really his thing.

I am not willing to ignore the chronic problem because people run cons, however, because the con men will do other cons and the homeless will still be homeless. I am open to taking different approaches to homelessness if they have good prospects of working.
 

Forum List

Back
Top