The most important question which nobody is asking

[P@triot]

Jesus didn't live in a Democracy. If he did, do you think he'd vote against feeding the hungry and helping the homeless? I wonder how he'd feel about Felons voting?

I always love when atheists use this nonsensical libtard talking point (I really do).

Jesus said and did amazing things. But in all of his works, I would love for you to show me where in the Bible he stated "and thou shall elect government to point a gun at the head of the people, and ye shall steal their money, waste 90% of it, and then give 10% to those in need".

My dear....if you can show me that verse in the Bible (or anything that even remotely resembles it), I give you my word right here and now that I will vote for a Democrat in every election, for every office, for the rest of my life. I'm waiting.

Jesus could not have conceived of our 21st Century Democracy.

I know how Jesus would vote. Deep inside you do too...and it wouldn't be for very many of your positions. You oppose divorce, right?

The fact that you just said (and I quote) "Jesus could not have conceived of our 21st Century Democracy" unequivocally proves that you have no idea how Jesus would "vote".

For starters, we are not - nor have we ever been - a "Democracy". We are a Republic. In a Democracy, the people themselves vote on every piece of legislation (like Obamacare - which you did not vote on). In a Republic, you elect representatives to handle legislation on your behalf (like Obamacare - which are representatives crafted and voted on).

Second, Jesus never advocated for anyone to take by force. He would absolutely insist that the people should have foundations and that each person should give based on their ability and what was in the heart.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Then fuck the constitution and the law.

And here is the truly sad thing - Fenton here would rather violate the highest laws in the land than get up off of his lazy ass and help anyone else. At G5000, as big of an asshole as he is, does make a genuine effort to help others. You just want to be parasite - always feeding off of society and never giving back to anyone.

Any system that serves its citizens so badly that people are dying in the streets needs to be taken down. The founding fathers did it for far less, and we deploy our military all the time into other societies on this basis. Still stand by what I posted.

 

[P@triot]

Actually all you ever do is sneer "liberal" at anyone you ever had a thought you couldn't handle. If the constitution and the laws serve the population so badly that people are dying in the streets, then it's time to take the system down. Your founding fathers did it for much, much less. I stand by what I posted.

Well that's a cute story. But there is just one problem with it. Our founders had no choice but to "take the system down". Because they lived through the exact same type of oppression you are trying to recreate, they had the foresight to build into the U.S. Constitution the ability to alter it based on the needs of the people (so there wouldn't be a need to resort to violence).

So why don't you just amend the Constitution to satisfy your desires? Well....the truth of the matter is...you can't get the votes you need to amend it. But rather than accept that that is the will of the people, in typical tyrannical fashion, you say "fuck the constitution, fuck the law, and fuck the American people - I want what I want and I will get what I want". Almost like a small and immature petulant child.

The people have spoken Fenton. They've basically told you to go f' yourself. Deal with it. Or....go ahead and try to "take the system down". Best of luck with that

 

[g5000]

BLUE JESUS: I wear a WWOD (What Would Obama Do?) bracelet.

RED JESUS: I will not heal you, blind man, until you show me some ID.


Red Jesus:And a Canaanite woman from that region came out and began to cry out, saying, "Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed." But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came and implored Him, saying, "Send her away, because she keeps shouting at us." But He answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Moral of the story: Red Jesus would support building a wall to keep out aliens so they don't suck up holy resources.


Blue Jesus: And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them.

Moral of the story: Blue Jesus hates profit, and believes health care should be free.

 

[P@triot]

I'm just so very glad all that debt has nothing at all to do with interventionist wars of empire, over half of all discretionary spending going to the military, god knows ('cause it's hidden) how much going to private war contractors and corporate socialism, subsidizing Israel’s defense budget, and on and on. I mean look, fuck American society, I’m into the N Korean model.

Then go live there, asshole. Move. Because you're sure as hell not bringing the North Korean model to our shores. It's not happening. Ever. We kicked your disgusting racists asses in the first Civil War and we'd be glad to do it all over again. Only this time, you morons disarmed yourselves. So good luck fighting a citizenry armed to the teeth with snowballs and your shoes.

Still waiting for you to answer here Fenton. If North Korea is so wonderful, and the U.S. sucks so bad that you feel you need to "tear the system down", why don't you simply go live in your utopian North Korea?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Actually all you ever do is sneer "liberal" at anyone you ever had a thought you couldn't handle. If the constitution and the laws serve the population so badly that people are dying in the streets, then it's time to take the system down. Your founding fathers did it for much, much less. I stand by what I posted.

Well that's a cute story. But there is just one problem with it. Our founders had no choice but to "take the system down". Because they lived through the exact same type of oppression you are trying to recreate, they had the foresight to build into the U.S. Constitution the ability to alter it based on the needs of the people (so there wouldn't be a need to resort to violence).

So why don't you just amend the Constitution to satisfy your desires? Well....the truth of the matter is...you can't get the votes you need to amend it. But rather than accept that that is the will of the people, in typical tyrannical fashion, you say "fuck the constitution, fuck the law, and fuck the American people - I want what I want and I will get what I want". Almost like a small and immature petulant child.

The people have spoken Fenton. They've basically told you to go f' yourself. Deal with it. Or....go ahead and try to "take the system down". Best of luck with that

People dying in the streets you said, fuck the constitution, fuck the laws that would allow the system to do that to human beings. Pretty simple, and had a good deal with WWII and liberating others from govts that were doing that to their citizens.

 

[P@triot]

I'm just so very glad all that debt has nothing at all to do with interventionist wars of empire, over half of all discretionary spending going to the military, god knows ('cause it's hidden) how much going to private war contractors and corporate socialism, subsidizing Israel’s defense budget, and on and on. I mean look, fuck American society, I’m into the N Korean model.

Then go live there, asshole. Move. Because you're sure as hell not bringing the North Korean model to our shores. It's not happening. Ever. We kicked your disgusting racists asses in the first Civil War and we'd be glad to do it all over again. Only this time, you morons disarmed yourselves. So good luck fighting a citizenry armed to the teeth with snowballs and your shoes.

Ignorant fuck, way over your head.

Ahahahaha! In other words, "damn Rott is right and I just got my ass handed to me. I was too stupid to realize that if North Korea was so great, I could just move there".

Incidentally, you're as angry as you are ignorant (just like G5000). Is there some kind of correlation there? Are all ignorant people angry? Are they angry about being ignorant?

 

[Fenton Lum]

I'm just so very glad all that debt has nothing at all to do with interventionist wars of empire, over half of all discretionary spending going to the military, god knows ('cause it's hidden) how much going to private war contractors and corporate socialism, subsidizing Israel’s defense budget, and on and on. I mean look, fuck American society, I’m into the N Korean model.

Then go live there, asshole. Move. Because you're sure as hell not bringing the North Korean model to our shores. It's not happening. Ever. We kicked your disgusting racists asses in the first Civil War and we'd be glad to do it all over again. Only this time, you morons disarmed yourselves. So good luck fighting a citizenry armed to the teeth with snowballs and your shoes.

Still waiting for you to answer here Fenton. If North Korea is so wonderful, and the U.S. sucks so bad that you feel you need to "tear the system down", why don't you simply go live in your utopian North Korea?

You're too stupid to keep up. That's the path we're bending toward. Hypermilitarization, cannibalizing our society. You're deflecting the tear down, cuz ya got caught in your own web.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Actually all you ever do is sneer "liberal" at anyone you ever had a thought you couldn't handle. If the constitution and the laws serve the population so badly that people are dying in the streets, then it's time to take the system down. Your founding fathers did it for much, much less. I stand by what I posted.

Well that's a cute story. But there is just one problem with it. Our founders had no choice but to "take the system down". Because they lived through the exact same type of oppression you are trying to recreate, they had the foresight to build into the U.S. Constitution the ability to alter it based on the needs of the people (so there wouldn't be a need to resort to violence).

So why don't you just amend the Constitution to satisfy your desires? Well....the truth of the matter is...you can't get the votes you need to amend it. But rather than accept that that is the will of the people, in typical tyrannical fashion, you say "fuck the constitution, fuck the law, and fuck the American people - I want what I want and I will get what I want". Almost like a small and immature petulant child.

The people have spoken Fenton. They've basically told you to go f' yourself. Deal with it. Or....go ahead and try to "take the system down". Best of luck with that

Your dying people in the streets would have no choice.

 

[P@triot]

Actually all you ever do is sneer "liberal" at anyone you ever had a thought you couldn't handle. If the constitution and the laws serve the population so badly that people are dying in the streets, then it's time to take the system down. Your founding fathers did it for much, much less. I stand by what I posted.

Well that's a cute story. But there is just one problem with it. Our founders had no choice but to "take the system down". Because they lived through the exact same type of oppression you are trying to recreate, they had the foresight to build into the U.S. Constitution the ability to alter it based on the needs of the people (so there wouldn't be a need to resort to violence).

So why don't you just amend the Constitution to satisfy your desires? Well....the truth of the matter is...you can't get the votes you need to amend it. But rather than accept that that is the will of the people, in typical tyrannical fashion, you say "fuck the constitution, fuck the law, and fuck the American people - I want what I want and I will get what I want". Almost like a small and immature petulant child.

The people have spoken Fenton. They've basically told you to go f' yourself. Deal with it. Or....go ahead and try to "take the system down". Best of luck with that

People dying in the streets you said, fuck the constitution, fuck the laws that would allow the system to do that to human beings. Pretty simple, and had a good deal with WWII and liberating others from govts that were doing that to their citizens.

Well, aside from your completely incoherent rambling here, the one thing I can say is that you are so confused you can't even figure out who was doing what during World War II.

We didn't wage war to stop people from dying in the streets. We waged war to free people from the same oppressive government you desire to create here in the U.S.

Your hate for freedom and liberty is really palpable. What is the deal with that? Are you just a mini-wannabe-Hitler or is there something else?

 

[Fenton Lum]

The people have spoken Fenton.

Bwa haha ha h a ha ha ha, nah shoog, that was your dumb little can't-have-a serious-conversation-with ass. G'day.

 

[P@triot]

You're too stupid to keep up. That's the path we're bending toward. Hypermilitarization, cannibalizing our society. You're deflecting the tear down, cuz ya got caught in your own web.

LMAO!!! You're the one advocating for a federal government yielding unlimited power. You're the one saying "fuck the Constitution and fuck the law". That's what Saddam Hussein said as well. And every other dictator in history. I can't tell if you are really this dumb or if you are just so desperate you're tying to make stuff up now.

 

[Timmy]

Giving to church is not giving to charity.

Really?

Only giving to radical leftist hate groups is charity?

I'll just stating a fact . A church MAY do charity, but they are not a charity .

 

[P@triot]

The people have spoken Fenton.

Bwa haha ha h a ha ha ha, nah shoog, that was your dumb little can't-have-a serious-conversation-with ass. G'day.

At least you've finally realized that your absurd position is indefensible and left. But the fact remains, you can't get the votes to amend the U.S. Constitution. The people have spoken. You just don't like what they said. Well, too bad.

 

[P@triot]

BLUE JESUS: I wear a WWOD (What Would Obama Do?) bracelet.

RED JESUS: I will not heal you, blind man, until you show me some ID.


Red Jesus:And a Canaanite woman from that region came out and began to cry out, saying, "Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is cruelly demon-possessed." But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came and implored Him, saying, "Send her away, because she keeps shouting at us." But He answered and said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Moral of the story: Red Jesus would support building a wall to keep out aliens so they don't suck up holy resources.


Blue Jesus: And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them.

Moral of the story: Blue Jesus hates profit, and believes health care should be free.

Yes. We must allow our nation to be invaded by foreigners because (in the mind of the modern day libtard) "that's what Jesus would do".

Thank God these mindless minions weren't around during World War II. I can just hear them now "how dare you take on Adolf Hiter. Jesus wouldn't take to arms, nor would he prevent Hitler from entering his country".

 

[rightwinger]

Why not have a combination of private and government support of the needy?
That is what we have been doing for 70 years

Finally. A half way decent question from a liberal. I salute you here LW.

Why? Well for one, it's just not necessary. Research shows that conservatives are exponentially more generous with charity. If all of the liberals who claim to care so much were to do their work through foundations rather than charity, we could solve all the problems (and we would no longer have a reason to clash, which would be a great thing for America). But more importantly, at the federal level (where far too much of this stuff is going on), it is illegal. The states delegated 18 enumerated powers to the federal government, and for them to involve themselves in anything beyond those 18 enumerated powers is highly illegal.

If you must insist on government interaction (and I can't imagine why since foundations solve everyone's problem and insures Constitutional government), at least demand that it be stripped from the federal government and entrusted to the state government (where it may not be illegal depending on what it is and what that states constitution says).

OK where to start?
Conservatives do not give more to charity.....they give more to churches.
Damage from hurricanes is more than individual homes being knocked down. It is roads, bridges, schools, infrastructure, hospitals. Whole communities need to be rebuilt
States cannot handle catastrophic damage of that magnitude. Louisiana and Mississippi were economically incapable of recovering from Katrina without help from other states

 

[Juicin]

Liberals will tell you all day about how they are angels sent from Heaven. They weep for the less fortunate. Their heart beats only for those in need. They will tell you that God created liberals because... sometimes... even actual angels themselves need angels. And that is why a liberal exists.

Just one small problem. If they care so much - why don't they achieve all of their goals legally through foundations rather than illegally through government? George Soros is a radical left-wing billionaire. Mark Zuckerberg is a hard-core liberal billionaire. Bill Gates is a moderate liberal billionaire who has long been the wealthiest man in the world (recently relegated to #2). Warren Buffet is a very generous billionaire who is the third wealthiest man in the world. So what is the problem? Habitat for Humanity has been doing it for many years. They don't mandate that government provide people with a home. They go out and build them themselves.

Liberals get so angry when conservatives oppose them. But no conservative would oppose liberals creating a foundation which provides health insurance policies to those that don't have any. In fact, conservatives would join them in that effort. Everybody would be a winner. Same with food. Transportation. Housing. Liberals would get all of the social assistance they claim to desire, conservatives would get all of the liberty and Constitutional government that they desire, and both sides would come together in harmony.

The fact that liberals refuse to do this legally through private foundations (where conservatives wouldn't have any case to oppose them) kind of proves that their agenda and their ideology has nothing to do with "helping" people. It is exclusively about control. Exerting power over other people. Stripping you of your rights and liberties so that they can feel "powerful".

Because if we hadn't done it extra legally most rich people would have ended up under the guillotine in 1930

FDR saved capitalism

Lincoln saved the union with some totalitarian shit

And again "you didn't build that"

If you're an AMerican and you're rich you didn't build that. You had to be part of a society that gave you property rights and infrastructure and a labor force to pull from. Now pay up mother fucker, and if you don't owe us you owe wherever the fuck you came from.

Granted people who are wealthy already know this. It's only stupid white trash who imagine that a free market anywhere has ever provided for the likes of them.

 

[daws101]

The op is a pretentious know nothing slapdick.

 

[Fenton Lum]

You're too stupid to keep up. That's the path we're bending toward. Hypermilitarization, cannibalizing our society. You're deflecting the tear down, cuz ya got caught in your own web.

LMAO!!! You're the one advocating for a federal government yielding unlimited power. You're the one saying "fuck the Constitution and fuck the law". That's what Saddam Hussein said as well. And every other dictator in history. I can't tell if you are really this dumb or if you are just so desperate you're tying to make stuff up now.

You don't need my participation in this. You just make up something I "said", and argue against that, K? That's all you do on here anyway. Carry on. This is too unhealthy to participate in, you're not well.

 

[P@triot]

Why not have a combination of private and government support of the needy?
That is what we have been doing for 70 years

Finally. A half way decent question from a liberal. I salute you here LW.

Why? Well for one, it's just not necessary. Research shows that conservatives are exponentially more generous with charity. If all of the liberals who claim to care so much were to do their work through foundations rather than charity, we could solve all the problems (and we would no longer have a reason to clash, which would be a great thing for America). But more importantly, at the federal level (where far too much of this stuff is going on), it is illegal. The states delegated 18 enumerated powers to the federal government, and for them to involve themselves in anything beyond those 18 enumerated powers is highly illegal.

If you must insist on government interaction (and I can't imagine why since foundations solve everyone's problem and insures Constitutional government), at least demand that it be stripped from the federal government and entrusted to the state government (where it may not be illegal depending on what it is and what that states constitution says).

OK where to start?
Conservatives do not give more to charity.....they give more to churches.
Damage from hurricanes is more than individual homes being knocked down. It is roads, bridges, schools, infrastructure, hospitals. Whole communities need to be rebuilt
States cannot handle catastrophic damage of that magnitude. Louisiana and Mississippi were economically incapable of recovering from Katrina without help from other states

Well now you're moving the goal posts. Initially you said "fires" - not "hurricanes".

As far as "roads, bridges, schools, etc." that has always been the responsibility of local government. Who is arguing that now? Certainly not me.

Finally, you were doing so well. Don't start making stuff up now. Conservatives give WAY more to charity than liberals.

Republicans Most Generous People In The World, Democrats: Not So Much