How dangerous are liberal social policies?

[ding]

What we permit in a democratic society hinges on whether or not it causes harm.

Do you mean like abortion?

Same sex marriage does no harm.

I've already explained to you how it does in posts #12, #20, #41 and #45.

Look at what you wrote:

Normalization of deviance leads to predictable surprises. What happens when a standard is lowered? Usually nothing right away. It takes time to realize why the standard was established in the first place. In this instance, it is the children who will be harmed. Nature has established that male/female unions is how natural selection is passed down from generation to generation. That's the rule. That's the standard. Children need a male and a female role model in their lives. Does this mean that every child who does not have a male and female role model in their lives will be harmed? No. It means that as a rule, those children who do will be better served. So you can argue the exceptions all day long, but it will never change the rule, that a child's best interest is served by having a male and a female role model.

That's some fucked up shit. Where are you getting these asshole "rules". Pulling them out yer butt? This is why your kind is so dangerous to America. That's not just speculation, it's delusion backed up with no facts. Just delusion.

I hope you don't mind if i see it differently. From my perspective it is not in a child's best interest or our society's best interest. From my perspective, you are trying to force your religion of socialism upon us. The religion of socialism worships big government and social policy. Gay marriage and transsexual bathrooms are social policies of socialist and in effect your religious beliefs. They are based on atheism and deification of man and proceeds from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. The religious nature of socialism explains the extraordinary attraction to socialist doctrines and its capacity to inflame individuals and inspire popular movements such as gay marriage and transsexual bathrooms.

**** perspective. Yours is rotten, nasty and inhuman.

Come back with facts and not just a "feeling".

You remind me of Phyllis Schlafly, the mother of the American conservative movement. She said she did everything right. Bowed to her husband. Homeschooled the kids. Kept them isolated and insulated from anything not conservative. And still her son was gay. She said she can't figure out what went wrong.

http://www.qrd.org/qrd/misc/text/schlafly.outing.reaction-KNIGHT.RIDDER

Well it's not just my perspective. Your own beloved government - you know the one you worship at its altar - also recommends that children have a male and female role model.

 

[the_human_being]

Since neither ding nor being define what is normal, the above by them means nothing.

Well Idiot. Since you apparently are too stupid to know yourself, a normal male is naturally attracted toward a female.

Stay calm, boxy. You by your very posts are far outside the norm. By the same thinking, gays and lesbians are attracted to gays and lesbians.

Poor Jake. He's just a freak. I already knew you were not normal.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Since neither ding nor being define what is normal, the above by them means nothing.

Well Idiot. Since you apparently are too stupid to know yourself, a normal male is naturally attracted toward a female.

Stay calm, boxy. You by your very posts are far outside the norm. By the same thinking, gays and lesbians are attracted to gays and lesbians.

Poor Jake. He's just a freak. I already knew you were not normal.

See, you have no idea what is normal if you think I am not normal.

 

[the_human_being]

Since neither ding nor being define what is normal, the above by them means nothing.

Well Idiot. Since you apparently are too stupid to know yourself, a normal male is naturally attracted toward a female.

Stay calm, boxy. You by your very posts are far outside the norm. By the same thinking, gays and lesbians are attracted to gays and lesbians.

Poor Jake. He's just a freak. I already knew you were not normal.

See, you have no idea what is normal if you think I am not normal.

Keep it up Jake. You can get away with it since you have already lost all credibility.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Since neither ding nor being define what is normal, the above by them means nothing.

Well Idiot. Since you apparently are too stupid to know yourself, a normal male is naturally attracted toward a female.

Stay calm, boxy. You by your very posts are far outside the norm. By the same thinking, gays and lesbians are attracted to gays and lesbians.

Poor Jake. He's just a freak. I already knew you were not normal.

See, you have no idea what is normal if you think I am not normal.

Keep it up Jake. You can get away with it since you have already lost all credibility.

Keep it up, gay boy. You have demonstrated you have no grasp of normalcy.

 

[Papageorgio]

These right wing thread always come back to who they hate. And boy, do they hate.

Rdean, you are not one to repudiate the hate of the far right. Clean up the hate and intolerance of the left, help to see that rioting is absolutely unacceptable in this country, just because you don't get your way. However I know you like this keeping it stirred up. Congrats you reap what you sow.

 

[the_human_being]

Well Idiot. Since you apparently are too stupid to know yourself, a normal male is naturally attracted toward a female.

Stay calm, boxy. You by your very posts are far outside the norm. By the same thinking, gays and lesbians are attracted to gays and lesbians.

Poor Jake. He's just a freak. I already knew you were not normal.

See, you have no idea what is normal if you think I am not normal.

Keep it up Jake. You can get away with it since you have already lost all credibility.

Keep it up, gay boy. You have demonstrated you have no grasp of normalcy.

Most of us have concluded that you are incapable of grasping anything at all.

 

[mgh80]

While I would like to believe this...it's not the case. Hillary won the popular vote, and barely lost the electoral college (most of the swing states were VERY close).

While Trump won fair and square, I wouldn't ever call it a "massive rejection".

I'd call it massive. Trump's electorial win is at 306. The Dems pushed their agenda too hard and lost a lot of voters over it. Most parents do not want to see a grown man in their daughter's restroom. Most white men and white women are against late term abortion. Most white men and women actually do believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Most white men and women do not want to see the Hyde Act repealed forcing taxpayers to fund abortion. Most white men and women do not want the federal government forcing the Nuns to hand out contraceptaives against their religios views.

White men and white women, both the undereducated and the college educated overwhelmingly rejected the Democratic Party's stance on social issues. The Democrats ignored and lost the white working class vote.

The only concrete fact that you posted is Trump winning 306 electoral votes, and you cited that as being a "massive rejection" of Clinton. 306 is actually a pretty small win. Here are the last 10 presidential elections and how many electoral votes they received:

2016: 306 (Trump)
2012: 332 (Obama)
2008: 356 (Obama)
2004: 286 (Bush)
2000: 271 (Bush)
1996: 379 (Clinton)
1992: 370 (Clinton)
1988: 426 (Bush)
1984: 525 (Reagan)
1980: 480 (Reagan)

8th most out of 10 elections is not a "massive rejection" of the other person.

Would you say that the country "massively rejected" Obama's opponents?

But the fact still remains that you lost. Suck it up.

I didn't vote for Hillary...I would say nice attempt, but honestly you had zero basis to think that I voted for her, so really it's a lazy attempt.

Your response is pathetic because it only highlights your lack of reading comprehension and your inability to put forth a decent argument.

Your response has no merit since Trump won. Get over it.

It has plenty of merit. You stated that Trump won due to a "massive rejection" or liberal ideals.

You specifically cited Trump's 309 electoral votes as evidence.

I cited Trumps 309 electoral votes as the third worse out of the past 10 winners of presidential elections, and Hillary winning the popular vote as evidence.

Your response to that was "get over it". It's ok to lose arguments-we all do.

Maybe you should just get over the fact that you just lost this debate.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Let's keep everyone's religion out of government. .

why should we do that? Before Christianity created the West an afternoons entertainment consisted of watching people being eaten alive at the Colosseum and the individual did not exist. everyone was simple a slave to Caesar.

The current loveless divorce abortion drug gang Grand Theft Auto liberal culture needs to be erased. Do you want to wait till love and family have completely disappeared?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Whatever, Ding. Just don't be callin' me a Marxist. Please.

right, like Bernie is not a marxist and like our liberals did not spy for Stalin and elect Obama despite 3 communist parents!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Republicans caring about blacks? Is this satire?

actually it is liberals that care which is why they crippled them with welfare and herded them into ghetto concentration camp plantations that are literally more dangerous than war zones!! Liberalism is not only caring but love itself!!

 

[OldLady]

Whatever, Ding. Just don't be callin' me a Marxist. Please.

right, like Bernie is not a marxist and like our liberals did not spy for Stalin and elect Obama despite 3 communist parents!!

I suppose this means you're going to keep calling me a Marxist, huh? Oh well.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually, I believe Trump's policies are geared more to keep folks like you from imposing your agenda upon religious institutions and the Church.

Trump is not religious: he does not like religious or secular phanatics. He just does not care.

And one correction for ding: perpetuation of the species does not require marriage.

And if you then argue governmental recognition to protect families, adoption for LGBT couples does that also.

I made no comment concerning Trump's religious beliefs, Dipshit. That is not between him and me. As far as your knowing what Trump believes, you have lost all credibility being so wrong in all your predictions. Why should anyone take anything you say seriously?

Calm down, tonto. His lack of religious beliefs spurs him to holding the phanatics at arm's length. He is not going to let the social cons or the radical LGBT left upside the apple cart.

On this issue, I have always been correct. Ask sil.

You keep right on predicting what Trump thinks and what he will do Jake. Unlike you, I don't know what he will do so I will simply have to wait and see.

Jake just spews script he's paid to spew.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually, I believe Trump's policies are geared more to keep folks like you from imposing your agenda upon religious institutions and the Church.

Trump is not religious: he does not like religious or secular phanatics. He just does not care.

And one correction for ding: perpetuation of the species does not require marriage.

And if you then argue governmental recognition to protect families, adoption for LGBT couples does that also.

I made no comment concerning Trump's religious beliefs, Dipshit. That is not between him and me. As far as your knowing what Trump believes, you have lost all credibility being so wrong in all your predictions. Why should anyone take anything you say seriously?

Calm down, tonto. His lack of religious beliefs spurs him to holding the phanatics at arm's length. He is not going to let the social cons or the radical LGBT left upside the apple cart.

On this issue, I have always been correct. Ask sil.

You keep right on predicting what Trump thinks and what he will do Jake. Unlike you, I don't know what he will do so I will simply have to wait and see.

Jake just spews script he's paid to spew.

You are the paid blogger, kg, not me. Send me some of your money, because my posts are far better than yours.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

-Republicans do control the House easily I agree
-Republicans do control the Senate (albeit barely)
-The founders never intended for any political belief to be illegal...hence the 1st amendment (people have the right to be stupid).

The did intend for certain abuses of government power to be illegal, and wrote the Constitution to make it so. Modern liberalism is based on, and rooted in these illegal abuses.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

So you are saying that the govt. controls what individuals do?

To some degree, that's the very definition of government.

Directly, government controls what individuals do, by enacting and enforcing laws.

Much less directly, government has a significant influence on the direction that society takes; in this case, by requiring that immorality and indecency be treated as at least equal to morality and decency, facilitating the breakdown of the family, and of society based thereon. The high rate of bastardy—especially among certain demographic minorities—is an obvious result of this.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Additionally, gay marriage and transsexual bathrooms are effectively tools used by Cultural Marxists to replace loyalty to God, Country and Family with loyalty to state.

Among his stated goals, Marx wanted to abolish marriage and family, and replace it with a collectivist “free love” type of social structure. This particular principle was quickly abandoned by nearly every society that explicitly attempted to implement Marxism; but the LGBpbiWTF pervert-rights movement is a bastardized offshoot of Marxism. I doubt if Marx ever imagined, in his brightest fantasies or in his darkest nightmares, the degree to which mutated offshoot of his following would try not only to distort and undermine marriage and family, but to even try to minimize and deny the distinction between male and female.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I don't see that as the "exact same argument," since pedophilia involves a victim. I've dealt with the victims and I've dealt with the pedophiles, and I can confidently tell you that it is NOT the same as same sex marriage.

So do the perversions that you defend, though you'll surely deny it.

High school girls, forced to undress and shower in a locker room in front of a boy who claims to “identify as female” are victims. Children denied a proper, normal set of parents, in order to cater to the demands of homosexual perverts, are victims. Small businesses owners, forced to violate their moral beliefs in order to cater to immoral homosexual mockeries of weddings, are victims.

When your evil movement crossed those lines, it forfeited any right to speak of consent or of victims as if its own hands were clean.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What we permit in a democratic society hinges on whether or not it causes harm. Same sex marriage does no harm.

I continue to be amazed at the extreme ignorance that it takes to believe that; in the face of the overwhelming examples of the damage that has been done to our society as a direct and observable result of undermining marriage and family.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Gays generally live in cities. If you look in a gay publication, the pictures don't look like kids, they look like macho men with hair and muscles.

Having never perused any such publications, and having no interest or desire to do so, I suppose we'll have to take your word as to what the content of such publications looks like.