Obama or Romney - Armor Games Community

213	63728

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted August 29, '12 4:00pm UTC

I'm all for educating students, and if you want to give free condoms to people, YOU and everyone who supports giving free contraceptives to people should write your own checks. Or, you could become a part of one of the insurance companies that provide free contraceptives.

So you're willing to let people who actually care about the population pay for all just by themselves whilst you free ride? Sounds like a good one. You're all for education, yet where do you think the money from education will come from? The FR doling out cash?

You can choose whether you want to have sex or not, but being impotent is not a choice. Impotency is a medical condition, whereas urges to have sex isn't one.

The point here isn't whether they can choose or not. The point made here is that we're willin to subsidise Viagra but not contraceptions. This is a curiosity, now one person's freedom is valued more than another's?

Teen pregnancy is rough. However, I hold strong the belief that cutting teen pregnancy should be done in a non-coercive manner. Heck, I bet teen pregnancies would drop if there were condom machines at high schools.

With the money now coming from? As a counter example, the state of Texas received about twice as much Federal funding as any other state for "abstinence only" education, yet had the highest rate of repeat births to teens of any state (24% of teens who have already had one baby have another in TX, compared to a national average for repeat births of 20%). Education doesn't work by itself.

Contraceptives are:
a.) cheap
b.) easy to obtain

The Pill, for example, can cost $850 per year when you include the cost of a doctor's visit. The patch and ring can set users back $1200 per year. And sterilization costs around $6,000 without insurance. Condoms ARE cheap but there are many reasons why people don't use them. Pills can vastly reduce menstrual related problems, they can even reduce periods. Pills are much more effective than condoms in preventing pregnancies.

[quote]I'm all for educating students, and if you want to give free condoms to people, YOU and everyone who supports giving free contraceptives to people should write your own checks. Or, you could become a part of one of the insurance companies that provide free contraceptives.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nSo you're willing to let people who actually care about the population pay for all just by themselves whilst you free ride? Sounds like a good one. You're all for education, yet where do you think the money from education will come from? The FR doling out cash? \r\n\r\n[quote]You can choose whether you want to have sex or not, but being impotent is not a choice. Impotency is a medical condition, whereas urges to have sex isn't one.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThe point here isn't whether they can choose or not. The point made here is that we're willin to subsidise Viagra but not contraceptions. This is a curiosity, now one person's freedom is valued more than another's? \r\n\r\n[quote]Teen pregnancy is rough. However, I hold strong the belief that cutting teen pregnancy should be done in a non-coercive manner. Heck, I bet teen pregnancies would drop if there were condom machines at high schools.\r\n\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nWith the money now coming from? As a counter example, the state of Texas received about twice as much Federal funding as any other state for "abstinence only" education, yet had the highest rate of repeat births to teens of any state (24% of teens who have already had one baby have another in TX, compared to a national average for repeat births of 20%). Education doesn't work by itself. \r\n\r\n[quote]Contraceptives are:\r\na.) cheap\r\nb.) easy to obtain[/quote]\r\n\r\n The Pill, for example, can cost $850 per year when you include the cost of a doctor's visit. The patch and ring can set users back $1200 per year. And sterilization costs around $6,000 without insurance. Condoms ARE cheap but there are many reasons why people don't use them. Pills can vastly reduce menstrual related problems, they can even reduce periods. Pills are much more effective than condoms in preventing pregnancies.

offline

partydevil

5,129 posts

Jester

Posted August 29, '12 8:44pm UTC

Look just because a president spent something in one year doesn't mean the spending is going to go in a linear rate. Therefore taking one year in Bush's term and multiplying it by 8 doesn't work

it's the average, not just 1 year.
source: i already gave you that. just read it.

Also here it states as quote from your link to back up my statement (its not a graph):

nice of you to only look at 1 side of the coin. take a look at the rest of the page aswell plz. =)

offline

NoNameC68

5,043 posts

Shepherd

Posted August 29, '12 11:44pm UTC

So you're willing to let people who actually care about the population pay for all just by themselves whilst you free ride?

Sure, otherwise it's not compassion.

You're all for education, yet where do you think the money from education will come from? The FR doling out cash?

The government already pays for much of our education. The good news is that there's a lot of room for improvement that won't cost a dime.

The point here isn't whether they can choose or not. The point made here is that we're willin to subsidise Viagra but not contraceptions. This is a curiosity, now one person's freedom is valued more than another's?

I'm not against insurance companies providing contraceptives, I'm against forcing them to provide contraceptives.

With the money now coming from? As a counter example, the state of Texas received about twice as much Federal funding as any other state for "abstinence only" education, yet had the highest rate of repeat births to teens of any state (24% of teens who have already had one baby have another in TX, compared to a national average for repeat births of 20%). Education doesn't work by itself.

This isn't proof that education doesn't work by itself. It's proof that lack of education and misinformation is dangerous.

As for the money to pay for the condom machines, schools can sell them for a profit or the machines could be installed using money from people who want to pay for them. If you want the government to take some of your money and buy condoms for teens with it, then you should go ahead and buy the condoms yourself and provide them. If you want the government to take money from everyone else and buy condoms for teens with it, you need to convince as many people as possible to join your cause.

The Pill, for example, can cost $850 per year when you include the cost of a doctor's visit. The patch and ring can set users back $1200 per year. And sterilization costs around $6,000 without insurance. Condoms ARE cheap but there are many reasons why people don't use them. Pills can vastly reduce menstrual related problems, they can even reduce periods. Pills are much more effective than condoms in preventing pregnancies.

If you can't afford the most expensive, go with something cheaper. Not all birth control is that expensive. Not to mention, many people are able to get their pills through Planned Parenthood.

[quote]So you're willing to let people who actually care about the population pay for all just by themselves whilst you free ride?[/quote]\r\n\r\nSure, otherwise it's not compassion.\r\n\r\n[quote]You're all for education, yet where do you think the money from education will come from? The FR doling out cash? [/quote]\r\n\r\nThe government already pays for much of our education. The good news is that there's [i]a lot[/i] of room for improvement that won't cost a dime.\r\n\r\n[quote]The point here isn't whether they can choose or not. The point made here is that we're willin to subsidise Viagra but not contraceptions. This is a curiosity, now one person's freedom is valued more than another's? [/quote]\r\n\r\nI'm not against insurance companies providing contraceptives, I'm against forcing them to provide contraceptives.\r\n\r\n[quote]With the money now coming from? As a counter example, the state of Texas received about twice as much Federal funding as any other state for "abstinence only" education, yet had the highest rate of repeat births to teens of any state (24% of teens who have already had one baby have another in TX, compared to a national average for repeat births of 20%). Education doesn't work by itself.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThis isn't proof that education doesn't work by itself. It's proof that lack of education and misinformation is dangerous. \r\n\r\nAs for the money to pay for the condom machines, schools can sell them for a profit or the machines could be installed using money from people who want to pay for them. If you want the government to take some of your money and buy condoms for teens with it, then you should go ahead and buy the condoms yourself and provide them. If you want the government to take money from everyone else and buy condoms for teens with it, you need to convince as many people as possible to join your cause.\r\n\r\n[quote]The Pill, for example, can cost $850 per year when you include the cost of a doctor's visit. The patch and ring can set users back $1200 per year. And sterilization costs around $6,000 without insurance. Condoms ARE cheap but there are many reasons why people don't use them. Pills can vastly reduce menstrual related problems, they can even reduce periods. Pills are much more effective than condoms in preventing pregnancies.[/quote]\r\n\r\nIf you can't afford the most expensive, go with something cheaper. Not all birth control is that expensive. Not to mention, many people are able to get their pills through Planned Parenthood.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted August 30, '12 1:06am UTC

Sure, otherwise it's not compassion.

All fine and dandy until we hit more political bumps and problems for the sake of values.

I'm not against insurance companies providing contraceptives, I'm against forcing them to provide contraceptives.

62% of the female population supports it; 55% of the population does. If "forcing" has to be "forcing" due to the phenomenon of imperfect knowledge, so be it.

This isn't proof that education doesn't work by itself. It's proof that lack of education and misinformation is dangerous.

And given that states do like to meddle in education systems, what are the odds that such bills will fully last before being watered down. Indeed what are the odds that education by itself will work? It's a very flimsy and risky bet to take.

As for the money to pay for the condom machines, schools can sell them for a profit or the machines could be installed using money from people who want to pay for them. If you want the government to take some of your money and buy condoms for teens with it, then you should go ahead and buy the condoms yourself and provide them. If you want the government to take money from everyone else and buy condoms for teens with it, you need to convince as many people as possible to join your cause.

They already did the convincing. There are almost no policies that will garner a full backing from the people. Furthermore, the machine idea comes out ad a tad bit idealistic. What if people who didn't lay now use the machines? Free rider problem emerges again.

If you can't afford the most expensive, go with something cheaper. Not all birth control is that expensive. Not to mention, many people are able to get their pills through Planned Parenthood.

It is within every woman's right to have as much control as she can over her body; getting pregnant is not a lighthearted affair. A ten percent difference in chance can lead to Faustian nightmares for all parties, especially if sex is frequent.

As for PP, theres a limit they can go before they are stretched thin. They had 4 million clients last year, and that's already on an exorbitant funding of one billion.

[quote]Sure, otherwise it's not compassion.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nAll fine and dandy until we hit more political bumps and problems for the sake of values.\r\n\r\n[quote]I'm not against insurance companies providing contraceptives, I'm against forcing them to provide contraceptives.[/quote]\r\n\r\n62% of the female population supports it; 55% of the population does. If "forcing" has to be "forcing" due to the phenomenon of imperfect knowledge, so be it. \r\n\r\n[quote]This isn't proof that education doesn't work by itself. It's proof that lack of education and misinformation is dangerous.[/quote]\r\n\r\nAnd given that states do like to meddle in education systems, what are the odds that such bills will fully last before being watered down. Indeed what are the odds that education by itself will work? It's a very flimsy and risky bet to take.\r\n\r\n[quote]As for the money to pay for the condom machines, schools can sell them for a profit or the machines could be installed using money from people who want to pay for them. If you want the government to take some of your money and buy condoms for teens with it, then you should go ahead and buy the condoms yourself and provide them. If you want the government to take money from everyone else and buy condoms for teens with it, you need to convince as many people as possible to join your cause.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nThey already did the convincing. There are almost no policies that will garner a full backing from the people. Furthermore, the machine idea comes out ad a tad bit idealistic. What if people who didn't lay now use the machines? Free rider problem emerges again. \r\n\r\n[quote]If you can't afford the most expensive, go with something cheaper. Not all birth control is that expensive. Not to mention, many people are able to get their pills through Planned Parenthood.[/quote]\r\n\r\nIt is within every woman's right to have as much control as she can over her body; getting pregnant is not a lighthearted affair. A ten percent difference in chance can lead to Faustian nightmares for all parties, especially if sex is frequent. \r\n\r\nAs for PP, theres a limit they can go before they are stretched thin. They had 4 million clients last year, and that's already on an exorbitant funding of one billion.

offline

NoNameC68

5,043 posts

Shepherd

Posted August 30, '12 3:17am UTC

62% of the female population supports it; 55% of the population does. If "forcing" has to be "forcing" due to the phenomenon of imperfect knowledge, so be it.

It's easy to support ideas in which coercion works in your favor. If you're a woman, you're more likely going to support such a plan because it benefits you. People often want the government to cater to their own lives, and they often think their lives that they live are the perfect models.

And given that states do like to meddle in education systems, what are the odds that such bills will fully last before being watered down. Indeed what are the odds that education by itself will work? It's a very flimsy and risky bet to take.

I guess we'll just have to find other solutions if education alone doesn't work.

They already did the convincing. There are almost no policies that will garner a full backing from the people. Furthermore, the machine idea comes out ad a tad bit idealistic. What if people who didn't lay now use the machines? Free rider problem emerges again.

The machines would merely have to sell condoms, not give them away for free.

It is within every woman's right to have as much control as she can over her body; getting pregnant is not a lighthearted affair. A ten percent difference in chance can lead to Faustian nightmares for all parties, especially if sex is frequent.

A woman has every right to have as much control as she can over her body; but she does not have the right to take from other people to obtain said control. Rights are personal freedoms in which you are allowed, not in which you are entitled.

We have to decide when it's okay to coerce people to pay for things they don't agree to. I just don't see contraceptives as something people should be forced to pay for. Then again, I think the same fore socialized healthcare. I believe we should help people without resorting to coercion.

[quote]62% of the female population supports it; 55% of the population does. If "forcing" has to be "forcing" due to the phenomenon of imperfect knowledge, so be it. [/quote]\r\n\r\nIt's easy to support ideas in which coercion works in your favor. If you're a woman, you're more likely going to support such a plan because it benefits you. People often want the government to cater to their own lives, and they often think their lives that they live are the perfect models.\r\n\r\n[quote]And given that states do like to meddle in education systems, what are the odds that such bills will fully last before being watered down. Indeed what are the odds that education by itself will work? It's a very flimsy and risky bet to take.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI guess we'll just have to find other solutions if education alone doesn't work.\r\n\r\n[quote]They already did the convincing. There are almost no policies that will garner a full backing from the people. Furthermore, the machine idea comes out ad a tad bit idealistic. What if people who didn't lay now use the machines? Free rider problem emerges again. [/quote]\r\n\r\nThe machines would merely have to sell condoms, not give them away for free.\r\n\r\n[quote]It is within every woman's right to have as much control as she can over her body; getting pregnant is not a lighthearted affair. A ten percent difference in chance can lead to Faustian nightmares for all parties, especially if sex is frequent. [/quote]\r\n\r\nA woman has every right to have as much control as she can over her body; but she does not have the right to take from other people to obtain said control. Rights are personal freedoms in which you are allowed, not in which you are entitled.\r\n\r\nWe have to decide when it's okay to coerce people to pay for things they don't agree to. I just don't see contraceptives as something people should be forced to pay for. Then again, I think the same fore socialized healthcare. I believe we should help people without resorting to coercion.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted August 30, '12 3:52am UTC

It's easy to support ideas in which coercion works in your favor. If you're a woman, you're more likely going to support such a plan because it benefits you. People often want the government to cater to their own lives, and they often think their lives that they live are the perfect models.

Democracy is never fun if it works against you. We are now presented with a stark choice. Should we choose to respect the democratic ideals that anchor America, or only consider it democracy if it works for us? The Thais have a motto, that Democracy is only fair and just if my candidate wins. It's the incontrovertible truth; more people want something they get that thing. It is also the uncomfortable realization that most laws will be based and rooted in coercion if some form. The general consensus is that religion and law should not mix, yet there are millenarian groups that wish for a fundamentalist government. They are coerced into accepting the general standard we all stick to.

The machines would merely have to sell condoms, not give them away for free.

Well you did say that the machine would be paid for by proper who wish for such services. Who would want to pay for the initial cost if they van free reuse later?

A woman has every right to have as much control as she can over her body; but she does not have the right to take from other people to obtain said control. Rights are personal freedoms in which you are allowed, not in which you are entitled.

There are almost no such things as complete freedom. Someone is allowed to smoke, yet it infringes on the freedom of others to enjoy clean air. We have the right and freedom to enjoy the roads, yet we produce noise pollution that infringes on the freedom of people who want to rest and people with respiratory ailments. There is a limited amount of freedom, and it is the governments job to demarcate it such that the freedom each enjoys is maximized. Not at the potential maximum, but what is realistically possible so that it's "fair" for most.

We have to decide when it's okay to coerce people to pay for things they don't agree to. I just don't see contraceptives as something people should be forced to pay for. Then again, I think the same fore socialized healthcare. I believe we should help people without resorting to coercion.

Yet most women want contraceptions made more available. And it benefits employees too since it affects a workers productivity.

[quote]It's easy to support ideas in which coercion works in your favor. If you're a woman, you're more likely going to support such a plan because it benefits you. People often want the government to cater to their own lives, and they often think their lives that they live are the perfect models.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nDemocracy is never fun if it works against you. We are now presented with a stark choice. Should we choose to respect the democratic ideals that anchor America, or only consider it democracy if it works for us? The Thais have a motto, that Democracy is only fair and just if my candidate wins. It's the incontrovertible truth; more people want something they get that thing. It is also the uncomfortable realization that most laws will be based and rooted in coercion if some form. The general consensus is that religion and law should not mix, yet there are millenarian groups that wish for a fundamentalist government. They are coerced into accepting the general standard we all stick to. \r\n\r\n[quote]The machines would merely have to sell condoms, not give them away for free.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nWell you did say that the machine would be paid for by proper who wish for such services. Who would want to pay for the initial cost if they van free reuse later? \r\n\r\n[quote]A woman has every right to have as much control as she can over her body; but she does not have the right to take from other people to obtain said control. Rights are personal freedoms in which you are allowed, not in which you are entitled.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThere are almost no such things as complete freedom. Someone is allowed to smoke, yet it infringes on the freedom of others to enjoy clean air. We have the right and freedom to enjoy the roads, yet we produce noise pollution that infringes on the freedom of people who want to rest and people with respiratory ailments. There is a limited amount of freedom, and it is the governments job to demarcate it such that the freedom each enjoys is maximized. Not at the potential maximum, but what is realistically possible so that it's "fair" for most.\r\n\r\n[quote]We have to decide when it's okay to coerce people to pay for things they don't agree to. I just don't see contraceptives as something people should be forced to pay for. Then again, I think the same fore socialized healthcare. I believe we should help people without resorting to coercion.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nYet most women want contraceptions made more available. And it benefits employees too since it affects a workers productivity.

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted August 30, '12 3:54am UTC

If they can free ride*

offline

Mycal101

307 posts

Nomad

Posted August 30, '12 6:13pm UTC

Obama is the best thing thats ever happened to America.

offline

Nightfang21

117 posts

Nomad

Posted September 2, '12 3:48am UTC

^umm no

I believe Mitt Romney should win. The incumbent president had his chance and America isn't getting better.

offline

Moe

1,714 posts

Blacksmith

Posted September 2, '12 4:59am UTC

The incumbent president had his chance and America isn't getting better.

What chance? The republicans in congress blocked everything he wanted to do.

offline

samdawghomie

3,550 posts

Peasant

Posted September 2, '12 5:07am UTC

Ron Paul. I believe that states my feelings on the subject. Or should I just say we should completely obliterate the current process and start over. Clearly the two party dictatorship we have now isn't working to well. *hears knocking on door*

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted September 2, '12 5:28am UTC

Ron Paul is racist, anti liberal, denies global warming, anti tax, anti abortion, anti education and anti gay amongst others. Everything he detests is "Unconstitutional", even Federal Highways; he's a fake New Age Freedom Messiah who dangles the carrot of liberty in front of people, goading them into following him whilst he works on dismantling a system, but never proposes anything solid to cover the void that is left. His zealot like and dogmatic adherence to the idea of freedom over all will in the end just cause this sinking ship to just implode. Impractical above all.

offline

deathbewithyou

534 posts

Nomad

Posted September 4, '12 12:26am UTC

What chance? The republicans in congress blocked everything he wanted to do.

Of course they did, you know why? Because they would make things worse. And I don't want things to be worse since that health care bill has already caused trouble to private businessess including private clinics.

Ron Paul is racist, anti liberal, denies global warming, anti tax, anti abortion, anti education and anti gay amongst others.

I see a few things in here that I agree with Ron Paul; I deny Global warming as real(seriously I find it surprising that people still believe in global warming. I don't even know what it means any more since when it snows it's global warming, when it is really cold it's global warming, when there are tornadoes it's global warming, when there is a huricane it's global warming). I am anti abortion and anti Gay even though I am friends with a few gay people. I most definatley am anti- "modern"Liberal. I can understand why he is anti tax but I am just Anti "huge" tax I mean look at the huge dept we are in. I am not sure if he is racist, I don't know maybe he is maybe he isn't, but since people have been misusing the term racist I just don't know.

Oh yeah!

[quote]What chance?  The republicans in congress blocked everything he wanted to do.[/quote]\r\n\r\nOf course they did, you know why? Because they would make things worse. And I don't want things to be worse since that health care bill has already caused trouble to private businessess including private clinics.\r\n\r\n[quote]Ron Paul is racist, anti liberal, denies global warming, anti tax, anti abortion, anti education and anti gay amongst others. [/quote]\r\n\r\nI see a few things in here that I agree with Ron Paul; I deny Global warming as real(seriously I find it surprising that people still believe in global warming. I don't even know what it means any more since when it snows it's global warming, when it is really cold it's global warming, when there are tornadoes it's global warming, when there is a huricane it's global warming). I am anti abortion and anti Gay even though I am friends with a few gay people. I most definatley am anti- "modern"Liberal. I can understand why he is anti tax but I am just Anti "huge" tax I mean look at the huge dept we are in. I am not sure if he is racist, I don't know maybe he is maybe he isn't, but since people have been misusing the term racist I just don't know. \r\n\r\nOh yeah!

offline

nichodemus

14,991 posts

Grand Duke

Posted September 4, '12 2:51am UTC

Of course they did, you know why? Because they would make things worse. And I don't want things to be worse since that health care bill has already caused trouble to private businessess including private clinics.

As said, only people who are comforter with the status quo, I.e people who aren't as affected by the downturn don't support it. There are plenty of supporters of the Bill, old people, people who army covered by insurance, the unemployed, many women.

I see a few things in here that I agree with Ron Paul; I deny Global warming as real(seriously I find it surprising that people still believe in global warming. I don't even know what it means any more since when it snows it's global warming, when it is really cold it's global warming, when there are tornadoes it's global warming, when there is a huricane it's global warming

It is very sad to see people MIX up, mess up and confuse themselves over what is global warming. It is very sad to see someone being so bemused over the issue, instead of understanding what global warming really is. Much like it is when people like you confuse the Big Bang and Evolution as the same thing.

I am glad you are voting for a candidate who is personally not anti abortion, but only pandering for the evangelical vote now. I am glad youre supporting a candidate who actually stated that he supports abortion before the race and is now only merely lying to get your divinely sanctioned votes.

As for your anti gay stance; I can only hope people like you, people who know gays yet are against gays having any rights, disappear eventually because obviously your beliefs are built solely on a Holy Text that discriminates and doesn't believe in equality.

It's also funny to see you are anti Tax, because 1/3 of Obama's stimulus package were tax cuts. He signed a law this July further extending it.

Oh Ron Paul is racist alright. Have you read his old newsletters? Or that he voted against the Civil Rights Act? The Civil Rights Act repealed the notorious Jim Crow laws; forced schools, bathrooms and buses to desegregate; and banned employment discrimination. For the flimsy reason that it infringes on privacy? If he were Black he wouldn't be even thinking of that.

[quote]Of course they did, you know why? Because they would make things worse. And I don't want things to be worse since that health care bill has already caused trouble to private businessess including private clinics.\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\nAs said, only people who are comforter with the status quo, I.e people who aren't as affected by the downturn don't support it. There are plenty of supporters of the Bill, old people, people who army covered by insurance, the unemployed, many women.\r\n\r\n[quote]I see a few things in here that I agree with Ron Paul; I deny Global warming as real(seriously I find it surprising that people still believe in global warming. I don't even know what it means any more since when it snows it's global warming, when it is really cold it's global warming, when there are tornadoes it's global warming, when there is a huricane it's global warming[/quote]\r\n\r\nIt is very sad to see people MIX up, mess up and confuse themselves over what is global warming. It is very sad to see someone being so bemused over the issue, instead of understanding what global warming really is. Much like it is when people like you confuse the Big Bang and Evolution as the same thing.\r\n\r\nI am glad you are voting for a candidate who is personally not anti abortion, but only pandering for the evangelical vote now. I am glad youre supporting a candidate who actually stated that he supports abortion before the race and is now only merely lying to get your divinely sanctioned votes.\r\n\r\nAs for your anti gay stance; I can only hope people like you, people who know gays yet are against gays having any rights, disappear eventually because obviously your beliefs are built solely on a Holy Text that discriminates and doesn't believe in equality.\r\n\r\nIt's also funny to see you are anti Tax, because 1/3 of Obama's stimulus package were tax cuts. He signed a law this July further extending it.\r\n\r\nOh Ron Paul is racist alright. Have you read his old newsletters? Or that he voted against the Civil Rights Act? The Civil Rights Act repealed the notorious Jim Crow laws; forced schools, bathrooms and buses to desegregate; and banned employment discrimination. For the flimsy reason that it infringes on privacy? If he were Black he wouldn't be even thinking of that.

offline

deathbewithyou

534 posts

Nomad

Posted September 4, '12 3:09am UTC

I am glad you are voting for a candidate who is personally not anti abortion, but only pandering for the evangelical vote now. I am glad youre supporting a candidate who actually stated that he supports abortion before the race and is now only merely lying to get your divinely sanctioned votes.

I said I was for anti abortion.

As for your anti gay stance; I can only hope people like you, people who know gays yet are against gays having any rights, disappear eventually because obviously your beliefs are built solely on a Holy Text that discriminates and doesn't believe in equality.

The bible is not against equality, being gay has nothing to do with equality. I believe it is immoral and wrong and I will stand by my beliefs. Also I am not against gays having rights I am against gay marriage.

It's also funny to see you are anti Tax, because 1/3 of Obama's stimulus package were tax cuts. He signed a law this July further extending it.

I am afraid you haven't been reading my comment correctly. I said I was anti "huge" tax which means I don't want to have to pay so much money on taxes. Especially when it is over 15,000,000,000,000

There are plenty of supporters of the Bill, old people, people who army covered by insurance, the unemployed, many women.

New York maybe, but when I asked alot of people where I live... well you could say they are very angry. Small buisenessess are very angry because of what it is puting them through. I should know because my parents own a small business and they were enraged when they read some parts of the health care bill.

[quote]I am glad you are voting for a candidate who is personally not anti abortion, but only pandering for the evangelical vote now. I am glad youre supporting a candidate who actually stated that he supports abortion before the race and is now only merely lying to get your divinely sanctioned votes.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI said I was for anti abortion.\r\n\r\n[quote]As for your anti gay stance; I can only hope people like you, people who know gays yet are against gays having any rights, disappear eventually because obviously your beliefs are built solely on a Holy Text that discriminates and doesn't believe in equality.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThe bible is not against equality, being gay has nothing to do with equality. I believe it is immoral and wrong and I will stand by my beliefs. Also I am not against gays having rights I am against gay marriage.\r\n\r\n[quote]It's also funny to see you are anti Tax, because 1/3 of Obama's stimulus package were tax cuts. He signed a law this July further extending it.[/quote]\r\n\r\nI am afraid you haven't been reading my comment correctly. I said I was anti "huge" tax which means I don't want to have to pay so much money on taxes. Especially when it is over 15,000,000,000,000\r\n\r\n[quote]There are plenty of supporters of the Bill, old people, people who army covered by insurance, the unemployed, many women.[/quote]\r\n\r\nNew York maybe, but when I asked alot of people where I live... well you could say they are very angry. Small buisenessess are very angry because of what it is puting them through. I should know because my parents own a small business and they were enraged when they read some parts of the health care bill.

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → Obama or Romney