Ben Carson Says Muslims Should Be Disqualified From Presidency

[Seawytch]

You apparently don't. See, how it works is you can say what you want and everyone else has the right to say "woah dude, that's fucked up"

you're the ignoramous......if muslims had their say in the law you would be stoned to death....

You've never met a Muslim have you?

what does that have to do with anything....? you probably even know a gay-loving muslim or two...i'm sure there are plenty of nice friendly muslims in this world but their leadership and laws are what control them (unless they are living free in places like the U.S.)

Actually I've never met an American Muslim that had a problem with me being gay or a female. I have met lots of evangelicals that did though.

Do you think American Muslims belief and interpretation of Islam is any different that those abroad? You sound like an extremely ignorant, naive person.

Yes, it is. Its cultural. Talk to some American Muslims, I beg you.

 

[Mertex]

Never said they can't have the same RIGHTS as married couples. Why don't they call it a civil union and leave the world alone. But no, they want to stomp and insult people's faiths as well. They have the "right".

Marriage isn't owned by any one religion. "Marriage" is just a word to describe two people that have vowed before the courts that they are committed to each other and under the rules of being wedded.....it's not magically "spiritual", especially when so many like Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump don't even take the word "marriage" seriously. I don't see conservatives denouncing Limbaugh for making a mockery of marriage....so I presume that it is all feigned sanctimony for those that abhor homosexuality.

Gee, all this vitriol when your leader used religion as the main reason he was against gay marriage? Or was he lying through his teeth just to get elected?

I see my Limbaugh, Trump comment was too difficult for you....so instead you play the old bait and switch......

I'm actually glad Obama changed his mind, because he is the leader of a country that embraces many religions and even non-religion. But, even if some Christians believe it is a sin, it doesn't mean that they are committing the sin of homosexuality if they don't condemn, ridicule, ostracize and deny homosexuals their rights as citizens of this great country....they would have to participate in the act of homosexuality for it to be a sin for them....something you homophobes seem to have a hard time understanding.

Mainly because we are not a country like those in the ME, that condemn anyone that doesn't follow the same religion.....every American pays taxes, so they shouldn't be forced to follow the rules of a particular religion. Just like you wouldn't like to be forced to follow Sharia law or the beliefs of Muslims, I'm sure that those who worship other than Christ don't like it either.

 

[LittleNipper]

The state cannot tell Christians how to practice their faith. And their faith tells them that gay marriage, in the religious sense, is a sin.

Then they shouldn't marry a person of the same sex....but they also cannot tell others, who don't practice their faith that they can't. Adultery is a sin, too, and I don't see too many here on this forum that are against ssm, voicing complaints about that. Donald Trump committed adultery with Marla Maples, and yet there's a bunch of homphobes here that think Donald Trump should be President.....

Fornication is fornication. It doesn't matter if is between a man and a woman, between two men, or between two women. I cannot imagine that Trump is proud of an affair. But "Gay" PRIDE does seem to be the fashion of today! There is clearly that difference.

 

[Mertex]

The state cannot tell Christians how to practice their faith. And their faith tells them that gay marriage, in the religious sense, is a sin.

Then they shouldn't marry a person of the same sex....but they also cannot tell others, who don't practice their faith that they can't. Adultery is a sin, too, and I don't see too many here on this forum that are against ssm, voicing complaints about that. Donald Trump committed adultery with Marla Maples, and yet there's a bunch of homphobes here that think Donald Trump should be President.....

Fornication is fornication. It doesn't matter if is between a man and a woman, between two men, or between two women. I cannot imagine that Trump is proud of an affair. But "Gay" PRIDE does seem to be the fashion of today! There is clearly that difference.

It doesn't matter whether Trump is proud or not of his affair....the thing in question here is the hypocrites, who pick and choose those sins that they want to elevate to "mortal" while ignoring others and actually praising the people that are known to have committed them.

 

[Skylar]

The constitution gives a woman the right to control her own body.

It's not her body that is being killed.

Oh boy, here we go. A fetus is a fetus, it is reliant on the female body and the female has authority over the fetus, it is her body, there is no way in hell to control uterus's, it's impossible, well, unless you want to force women to give birth.

Again, it is not her body.

As for viability, there are quite a few bodies that are not viable without external help, and yet we are not allowed to kill them at will just because they are a huge financial and emotional drain or a big cost to the state.

It IS her body, the fetus relies on her body, she is the one who has full control of the fetus, not you, not the state, not old billy down the street.

It is her body, and she most likely chose to have unprotected sex with the man, and so has chosen the strong possibility of getting pregnant. The possibility of getting pregnant on the first try is extremely rare. Most need to choose to have sex several times.

She has more than one choice. She has as many as she decides she does.

So, the point is murder is murder. It isn't different because the women has chosen to be sexually active and chosen not to be married.

A bundle of cells isn't a person. Thus, there's nothing to murder. A zygote or fetus at that stage of development lacks key characteristics we recognize as vital for being a person.

And even by your standards, a woman can deny the use of her body to....anyone. Or anything. She has no obligation to allow another human being to live inside her.

So by your standard or mine.......you've got no leg to stand on. And legally you're nobody. Rendering your perspective on this issue gloriously irrelevant. As it doesn't matter what you believe. It only matters what she believes.

 

[Mertex]

I think the state shouldn't pay and sponsor murder of an unborn child, just because a woman or man fucked up and didn't use proper birth control.

And it doesn't. And not all abortions are of the "careless" type thatyou mention. Rape, incest and mother's life at risk are not the fault of the woman....quit being so dismissive.

 

[David_42]

I think the state shouldn't pay and sponsor murder of an unborn child, just because a woman or man fucked up and didn't use proper birth control.

And it doesn't. And not all abortions are of the "careless" type thatyou mention. Rape, incest and mother's life at risk are not the fault of the woman....quit being so dismissive.

"In terms of her reproduction?" That reply has earned you a trip to weasel purgatory, nitwit.

As we're discussion abortion, her reproduction is immediately relevant. Your babble about assisted suicide isn't.

Again, you're nobody. You get no say in her reproduction. You never do. She always does.

See how this works?

The anti abortion right wing would love to force a women to give birth, and once the child is born, they will then tell the women it's her fault and that she doesn't deserve any evil "socialist" assistance.

Absoloutely. Remmeber, there's a very vindictive strain running through social conservatives. A desire to punish. To make people suffer. They want to make her abide their will. Then they want her to suffer the consequences of their decisions.

You see the same argument in many discussions of social welfare. Where many conservatives argue that suffering will motivate people to work harder. The more you make them suffer, the harder they work. And that the reason they aren't working hard enough is that we aren't hurting them enough.

Its the Gospel of Bizzaro Jesus. Where poverty is a character flaw that needs to be punished accordingly.

Social conservatives are authoritarian lunatics who can care less about a child, as long as it's not a fetus. They will do anything to protect the fetus, they will do anything to blame mothers for any problem the child has, they love the idea of getting a women to give birth against her will, it's what these lunatics crave, it's what they live for, their wet dream.. Yep, the conservative views on welfare are disgusting and barbaric, the sick idea that punishing people will somehow motivate them to work harder. Let's take billy, a 23 year old man raising a child with his 22 year old wife, billy is a manager at mcdonalds (shift) who barely makes enough to afford rent, let alone his kid. His wife works alongside him as a crew member, together, they have virtually no disposable income. They are on food stamps/wic/etc.. Now, the conservative ideology says we need to punish billy, his child, and his wife to motivate them to work harder. Another key conservative point that only spits on the working poor is to blame someone personally for holding a job that essentially forces them to rely on federal assistance, as if the working poor somehow have control of employment opportunities and the education they're provided. Then again, republicans will shout and holler for low wage workers to "GO TO COLLEGE." Ok, great, do you know how much college costs? The time required? These same "social" conservatives want to take away all federal aid from these low income potential college students and tell them to "**** off." Why? Conservatives are truly insane. That's all I can come up with.

Very well said. Conservatives make excuses for their actual non-caring attitude and protect themselves from any "Christian conviction" by fabricating the idea that all poor people are poor because they don't work hard enough, or because they are lazy.

Conservatives have abandoned the teachings of jesus, jesus would never tell a poor man to work harder to get a piece of bread.

 

[Mertex]

In terms of her reproduction, it absolutely does. Her reproductive choices are hers. Not yours. And for a lot of conservatives the fact that she gets to make this decision herself infuriates them. As these conservatives feel that its a choice they should be making for her.

Nope. In the question of her reproduction......you're nobody.

"In terms of her reproduction?" That reply has earned you a trip to weasel purgatory, nitwit.

As we're discussion abortion, her reproduction is immediately relevant. Your babble about assisted suicide isn't.

Again, you're nobody. You get no say in her reproduction. You never do. She always does.

See how this works?

The anti abortion right wing would love to force a women to give birth, and once the child is born, they will then tell the women it's her fault and that she doesn't deserve any evil "socialist" assistance.

Absoloutely. Remmeber, there's a very vindictive strain running through social conservatives. A desire to punish. To make people suffer. They want to make her abide their will. Then they want her to suffer the consequences of their decisions.

You see the same argument in many discussions of social welfare. Where many conservatives argue that suffering will motivate people to work harder. The more you make them suffer, the harder they work. And that the reason they aren't working hard enough is that we aren't hurting them enough.

Its the Gospel of Bizzaro Jesus. Where poverty is a character flaw that needs to be punished accordingly.

Social conservatives are authoritarian lunatics who can care less about a child, as long as it's not a fetus. They will do anything to protect the fetus, they will do anything to blame mothers for any problem the child has, they love the idea of getting a women to give birth against her will, it's what these lunatics crave, it's what they live for, their wet dream.. Yep, the conservative views on welfare are disgusting and barbaric, the sick idea that punishing people will somehow motivate them to work harder. Let's take billy, a 23 year old man raising a child with his 22 year old wife, billy is a manager at mcdonalds (shift) who barely makes enough to afford rent, let alone his kid. His wife works alongside him as a crew member, together, they have virtually no disposable income. They are on food stamps/wic/etc.. Now, the conservative ideology says we need to punish billy, his child, and his wife to motivate them to work harder. Another key conservative point that only spits on the working poor is to blame someone personally for holding a job that essentially forces them to rely on federal assistance, as if the working poor somehow have control of employment opportunities and the education they're provided. Then again, republicans will shout and holler for low wage workers to "GO TO COLLEGE." Ok, great, do you know how much college costs? The time required? These same "social" conservatives want to take away all federal aid from these low income potential college students and tell them to "**** off." Why? Conservatives are truly insane. That's all I can come up with.

Very well said. Conservatives make excuses for their actual non-caring attitude and protect themselves from any "Christian conviction" by fabricating the idea that all poor people are poor because they don't work hard enough, or because they are lazy.

 

[Kondor3]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

 

[Pogo]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy.

Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that.
Now if you wanna reword that to say The American People will not elect a terrorist for President at any time in the foreseeable future, you've got a no-brainer.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You claim;
"Gay marriage has been considered an abomination for the last two years in the U.S."
Actually, I would say it's been just a tad longer than that. Is that from a secular perspective or a canonical POV you're speaking from? The answer is, obviously, the latter of the two just as with Islamic law, Sharia! The canonical law of a Christian, a Jew and a Muslim are the same in that respect and are held fast by the fundamentalists of those faiths, with some being "more faithful" than others!

You seem afraid, very afraid, of the possibility of Sharia & its Courts here in the US. We may share a common concern, but I'm not as one sided as you seem to be, but lets see! How about Jewish Law Courts and Rabbinical Courts that are already existing here in the US? Do you not fear those religious courts? I don't believe those civil law courts established by fundamentalist Jewry and Mosaic law are in harmony with the establishment clause either, but they exist. So are you going to be just as strident against those EXIXTING JEWISH LAW & COURTS (BETH DIN) AS YOU ARE AGAINST THE NON-EXISTENT ISLAMIC LAW & COURTS (SHARIA) AND PERHAPS SHOW ALL A HYPOCRITICAL, BIGOTED SIDE?

For one's edification:
http://www.nylslawreview.com/wp-con...012/11/NYLS_Law_Review_Volume-57-2.Broyde.pdf
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=ulj

I meant "gay marriage has been considered an abomination for the last TWO HUNDRED YEARS" and rightly so. When you see a priest or rabbi perform a religious marriage ceremony for two men or women, IT IS AN ABOMINATION and an insult to all three faiths, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. Let them have a different union and call it something else and give them the same exact rights as married couples. But to mock a faith and force it to change it's basic teachings, to me reeks of fascism, which is what radical leftists are really good at.

Shariah law is a barbaric and neanderthal. Take a look at all the areas ISIS has captured, or the Taliban are ruling, that is Shariah law.

Other than in the first line where you admit your error, what the hell does the rest of your rant have to do with the totality of my post to you? Now will you respond to the rest of my original reply or continue to pretend it that what you wrote in the first line was merely a typo?

BTW, "Sharia law" is redundant. Sharia is Islamic law, so it's like saying Islamic law law!

Exactly, Shariah is Islamic law, which is barbaric and intolerant and has been PROVEN to be incompatible with the constitution, freedom Western way of life. Which is why a "devout Muslim" cannot be president, ever. And that's what Carson said.

My initial post to you had nothing to do with your deflection. You don't want to reply to this:

You claim;
""Gay marriage has been considered an abomination for the last two years in the U.S."
Actually, I would say it's been just a tad longer than that. Is that from a secular perspective or a canonical POV you're speaking from? The answer is, obviously, the latter of the two just as with Islamic law, Sharia! The canonical law of a Christian, a Jew and a Muslim are the same in that respect and are held fast by the fundamentalists of those faiths, with some being "more faithful" than others!

You seem afraid, very afraid, of the possibility of Sharia & its Courts here in the US. We may share a common concern, but I'm not as one sided as you seem to be, but lets see! How about Jewish Law Courts and Rabbinical Courts that are already existing here in the US? Do you not fear those religious courts? I don't believe those civil law courts established by fundamentalist Jewry and Mosaic law are in harmony with the establishment clause either, but they exist. So are you going to be just as strident against those EXIXTING JEWISH LAW & COURTS (BETH DIN) AS YOU ARE AGAINST THE NON-EXISTENT ISLAMIC LAW & COURTS (SHARIA) AND PERHAPS SHOW ALL A HYPOCRITICAL, BIGOTED SIDE?"

For one's edification:
http://www.nylslawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2012/11/NYLS_Law_Review_Volume-57-2.Broyde.pdf
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=ulj
"
So will you continue to deflect from the points made above for a third time or address them?

Deflect what, Shariah law is burning down the middle east, and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Again, not all religions are equal:

Dance away you Phony ****! You have proven yourself to be a hypocritical bigot by refusing to respond to the points made thrice! You just PARROT with no critical thinking of your own!

 

[LittleNipper]

BUT the government NOW can and does tell me what I may and may not present via Public Education.

The government says my children cannot be forced to pray to your God in their school.

You are more than free to teach your children whatever you like.

They NEVER made your precious children pray. I remember a time before the REMOVAL of Prayer and Bible reading. I was in the 4th grade in 1963. There were accommodations. Those who didn't wish to merely remained quiet. And those who didn't wish to hear the Bible being read were sent to another room until after morning exercises were accomplished. I might add that prayer was usually not a part of morning exercises except for extreme instances ---- like a very sick classmate or someone's mom or dad, etc...

I never witnessed any student wanting to be excluded from the Christmas Party ------------------------------ Jehovah Witness, atheist, or not. Maybe your kids would have been different?

 

[LittleNipper]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy.

Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that.

BUT religion said it was all a Jewish conspiracy!

 

[B. Kidd]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

The left just loves when MSNBC and CNN, and most of the media in their bag, create a narrative (to divert from Hill-beasts' e-mails) to get a Dem elected.

Muppets are so desperate for real change, that they'll elect a real asshole.
It couldn't get any worse than it is now, right?

 

[bripat9643]

So you admit women don't have the right to control their own bodies.

 

[Roudy]

Never said they can't have the same RIGHTS as married couples. Why don't they call it a civil union and leave the world alone. But no, they want to stomp and insult people's faiths as well. They have the "right".

Marriage isn't owned by any one religion. "Marriage" is just a word to describe two people that have vowed before the courts that they are committed to each other and under the rules of being wedded.....it's not magically "spiritual", especially when so many like Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump don't even take the word "marriage" seriously. I don't see conservatives denouncing Limbaugh for making a mockery of marriage....so I presume that it is all feigned sanctimony for those that abhor homosexuality.

Gee, all this vitriol when your leader used religion as the main reason he was against gay marriage? Or was he lying through his teeth just to get elected?

I see my Limbaugh, Trump comment was too difficult for you....so instead you play the old bait and switch......

I'm actually glad Obama changed his mind, because he is the leader of a country that embraces many religions and even non-religion. But, even if some Christians believe it is a sin, it doesn't mean that they are committing the sin of homosexuality if they don't condemn, ridicule, ostracize and deny homosexuals their rights as citizens of this great country....they would have to participate in the act of homosexuality for it to be a sin for them....something you homophobes seem to have a hard time understanding.

Mainly because we are not a country like those in the ME, that condemn anyone that doesn't follow the same religion.....every American pays taxes, so they shouldn't be forced to follow the rules of a particular religion. Just like you wouldn't like to be forced to follow Sharia law or the beliefs of Muslims, I'm sure that those who worship other than Christ don't like it either.

Funny, all the things you object about ie the opposition to gay marriage, the religious based institution of marriage, are true about Obama before he got elected. He was even against letting the courts or having it be a cinstitional issue to be decided.

Obama: "God is in the mix here". No he didn't change his mind, it's obvious he lied. You guys are total frauds just like Obama.

 

[Roudy]

Carson's remarks are relatively unimportant...

The American People will not elect a Muslim for President at any time in the foreseeable future...

9-11 took care of that...

Once again --- the argument cannot be made without employing a Composition Fallacy.

Religions didn't fly planes into buildings --- terrorists did that.
Now if you wanna reword that to say The American People will not elect a terrorist for President at any time in the foreseeable future, you've got a no-brainer.

Dumbest logic.

 

[Roudy]

I meant "gay marriage has been considered an abomination for the last TWO HUNDRED YEARS" and rightly so. When you see a priest or rabbi perform a religious marriage ceremony for two men or women, IT IS AN ABOMINATION and an insult to all three faiths, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. Let them have a different union and call it something else and give them the same exact rights as married couples. But to mock a faith and force it to change it's basic teachings, to me reeks of fascism, which is what radical leftists are really good at.

Shariah law is a barbaric and neanderthal. Take a look at all the areas ISIS has captured, or the Taliban are ruling, that is Shariah law.

Other than in the first line where you admit your error, what the hell does the rest of your rant have to do with the totality of my post to you? Now will you respond to the rest of my original reply or continue to pretend it that what you wrote in the first line was merely a typo?

BTW, "Sharia law" is redundant. Sharia is Islamic law, so it's like saying Islamic law law!

Exactly, Shariah is Islamic law, which is barbaric and intolerant and has been PROVEN to be incompatible with the constitution, freedom Western way of life. Which is why a "devout Muslim" cannot be president, ever. And that's what Carson said.

My initial post to you had nothing to do with your deflection. You don't want to reply to this:

You claim;
""Gay marriage has been considered an abomination for the last two years in the U.S."
Actually, I would say it's been just a tad longer than that. Is that from a secular perspective or a canonical POV you're speaking from? The answer is, obviously, the latter of the two just as with Islamic law, Sharia! The canonical law of a Christian, a Jew and a Muslim are the same in that respect and are held fast by the fundamentalists of those faiths, with some being "more faithful" than others!

You seem afraid, very afraid, of the possibility of Sharia & its Courts here in the US. We may share a common concern, but I'm not as one sided as you seem to be, but lets see! How about Jewish Law Courts and Rabbinical Courts that are already existing here in the US? Do you not fear those religious courts? I don't believe those civil law courts established by fundamentalist Jewry and Mosaic law are in harmony with the establishment clause either, but they exist. So are you going to be just as strident against those EXIXTING JEWISH LAW & COURTS (BETH DIN) AS YOU ARE AGAINST THE NON-EXISTENT ISLAMIC LAW & COURTS (SHARIA) AND PERHAPS SHOW ALL A HYPOCRITICAL, BIGOTED SIDE?"

For one's edification:
http://www.nylslawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2012/11/NYLS_Law_Review_Volume-57-2.Broyde.pdf
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1890&context=ulj
"
So will you continue to deflect from the points made above for a third time or address them?

Deflect what, Shariah law is burning down the middle east, and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Again, not all religions are equal:

Dance away you Phony ****! You have proven yourself to be a hypocritical bigot by refusing to respond to the points made thrice! You just PARROT with no critical thinking of your own!

Calm and take take your meds you dickless, spineless terrorist worshiper.

I proved my point you just refused to see it.

 

[LittleNipper]

You all have seen how the Muslin Islam haters react to pictures of what we have done ....they shrug and call it "war" and that resolves all moral issues ..."hey its war" LOl

This is the nut bag other genius response

"victims of war for the past 5000 years" but I only used samples from the last half of the 20 th century and 21 st century...there was no napalm 5000 years ago

This poster talks as though the wars create themselves

We did go to war with Nazi Germany and many Americans died as well as 15 million Germans. I'm sure you have some pretty horrific pictures of Germans when the allies bombed the shit out of Dresden. Didn't make the Germans right though. Neither did it make the Japanese right when America cooked hundreds of Japanese by dropping the A bomb on them. Your response qualifies you for ADD treatment.

I think the state shouldn't pay and sponsor murder of an unborn child, just because a woman or man fucked up and didn't use proper birth control.

And it doesn't. And not all abortions are of the "careless" type thatyou mention. Rape, incest and mother's life at risk are not the fault of the woman....quit being so dismissive.

As we're discussion abortion, her reproduction is immediately relevant. Your babble about assisted suicide isn't.

Again, you're nobody. You get no say in her reproduction. You never do. She always does.

See how this works?

The anti abortion right wing would love to force a women to give birth, and once the child is born, they will then tell the women it's her fault and that she doesn't deserve any evil "socialist" assistance.

Absoloutely. Remmeber, there's a very vindictive strain running through social conservatives. A desire to punish. To make people suffer. They want to make her abide their will. Then they want her to suffer the consequences of their decisions.

You see the same argument in many discussions of social welfare. Where many conservatives argue that suffering will motivate people to work harder. The more you make them suffer, the harder they work. And that the reason they aren't working hard enough is that we aren't hurting them enough.

Its the Gospel of Bizzaro Jesus. Where poverty is a character flaw that needs to be punished accordingly.

Social conservatives are authoritarian lunatics who can care less about a child, as long as it's not a fetus. They will do anything to protect the fetus, they will do anything to blame mothers for any problem the child has, they love the idea of getting a women to give birth against her will, it's what these lunatics crave, it's what they live for, their wet dream.. Yep, the conservative views on welfare are disgusting and barbaric, the sick idea that punishing people will somehow motivate them to work harder. Let's take billy, a 23 year old man raising a child with his 22 year old wife, billy is a manager at mcdonalds (shift) who barely makes enough to afford rent, let alone his kid. His wife works alongside him as a crew member, together, they have virtually no disposable income. They are on food stamps/wic/etc.. Now, the conservative ideology says we need to punish billy, his child, and his wife to motivate them to work harder. Another key conservative point that only spits on the working poor is to blame someone personally for holding a job that essentially forces them to rely on federal assistance, as if the working poor somehow have control of employment opportunities and the education they're provided. Then again, republicans will shout and holler for low wage workers to "GO TO COLLEGE." Ok, great, do you know how much college costs? The time required? These same "social" conservatives want to take away all federal aid from these low income potential college students and tell them to "**** off." Why? Conservatives are truly insane. That's all I can come up with.

Very well said. Conservatives make excuses for their actual non-caring attitude and protect themselves from any "Christian conviction" by fabricating the idea that all poor people are poor because they don't work hard enough, or because they are lazy.

Conservatives have abandoned the teachings of jesus, jesus would never tell a poor man to work harder to get a piece of bread.

2 Thessolonians 3:10
Young's Literal Translation
For even when we were with you, this we did command you, that if any one is not willing to work, neither let him eat.

It would seem that the Apostles of Christ were taught that at the very least, no one got a free ride.

 

[Roudy]

You all have seen how the Muslin Islam haters react to pictures of what we have done ....they shrug and call it "war" and that resolves all moral issues ..."hey its war" LOl

This is the nut bag other genius response

"victims of war for the past 5000 years" but I only used samples from the last half of the 20 th century and 21 st century...there was no napalm 5000 years ago

This poster talks as though the wars create themselves

We did go to war with Nazi Germany and many Americans died as well as 15 million Germans. I'm sure you have some pretty horrific pictures of Germans when the allies bombed the shit out of Dresden. Didn't make the Germans right though. Neither did it make the Japanese right when America cooked hundreds of Japanese by dropping the A bomb on them. Your response qualifies you for ADD treatment.

I think the state shouldn't pay and sponsor murder of an unborn child, just because a woman or man fucked up and didn't use proper birth control.

And it doesn't. And not all abortions are of the "careless" type thatyou mention. Rape, incest and mother's life at risk are not the fault of the woman....quit being so dismissive.

The anti abortion right wing would love to force a women to give birth, and once the child is born, they will then tell the women it's her fault and that she doesn't deserve any evil "socialist" assistance.

Absoloutely. Remmeber, there's a very vindictive strain running through social conservatives. A desire to punish. To make people suffer. They want to make her abide their will. Then they want her to suffer the consequences of their decisions.

You see the same argument in many discussions of social welfare. Where many conservatives argue that suffering will motivate people to work harder. The more you make them suffer, the harder they work. And that the reason they aren't working hard enough is that we aren't hurting them enough.

Its the Gospel of Bizzaro Jesus. Where poverty is a character flaw that needs to be punished accordingly.

Social conservatives are authoritarian lunatics who can care less about a child, as long as it's not a fetus. They will do anything to protect the fetus, they will do anything to blame mothers for any problem the child has, they love the idea of getting a women to give birth against her will, it's what these lunatics crave, it's what they live for, their wet dream.. Yep, the conservative views on welfare are disgusting and barbaric, the sick idea that punishing people will somehow motivate them to work harder. Let's take billy, a 23 year old man raising a child with his 22 year old wife, billy is a manager at mcdonalds (shift) who barely makes enough to afford rent, let alone his kid. His wife works alongside him as a crew member, together, they have virtually no disposable income. They are on food stamps/wic/etc.. Now, the conservative ideology says we need to punish billy, his child, and his wife to motivate them to work harder. Another key conservative point that only spits on the working poor is to blame someone personally for holding a job that essentially forces them to rely on federal assistance, as if the working poor somehow have control of employment opportunities and the education they're provided. Then again, republicans will shout and holler for low wage workers to "GO TO COLLEGE." Ok, great, do you know how much college costs? The time required? These same "social" conservatives want to take away all federal aid from these low income potential college students and tell them to "**** off." Why? Conservatives are truly insane. That's all I can come up with.

Very well said. Conservatives make excuses for their actual non-caring attitude and protect themselves from any "Christian conviction" by fabricating the idea that all poor people are poor because they don't work hard enough, or because they are lazy.

Conservatives have abandoned the teachings of jesus, jesus would never tell a poor man to work harder to get a piece of bread.

2 Thessolonians 3:10
Young's Literal Translation
For even when we were with you, this we did command you, that if any one is not willing to work, neither let him eat.

It would seem that the Apostles of Christ were taught that at the very least, no one got a free ride.

Gesuz, where does that leave all the people that are living off govt paid subsidies?