-We want to go back and re-base all of our values and what not off of the constitution, the way it was supposed to be. Hey, life was good back then, so the constitution must work. -We want to eliminate terrorists and world threats, and the security of the nation and the people is one of our top priority's. -We are for less big government and more for more freedoms for the people. -We want less taxes for the people (the demis want more). -We do not want abortion, which is killing humans. -We do not want homosexuality, seeing it goes against god's law:
Note, I'm not on one side or the other. I'm just showing him how there can be 2 sides to every argument.
Democrats are better because:
-They don't want to go back and re-base all of our values and what not off of the constitution, the way it was supposed to be. Hey, life was bad back then, so the constitution must not work. -They have their own approach to eliminating terrorists and world threats, and the security of the nation and the people is one of their top priority's. -They are for more big government and less freedoms for the people. -They want more taxes for the people (the reppies want more). But this will help keep the government running -They want abortion, which is preventing a lot of possible pain for a mother and a son/daughter -They do not care much about homosexuality, seeing as it is perfectly fine to do whatever you want in a free country -So do they.
Once again, I am not on either side, I don't know anything about this, I do know that Ricador is exaggerating a bit, and I don't really care. I just wanted to show how everything can be seen two ways.
Wait, let me say something before you lock............Beacuse I am Canadian, so I must have something importent to say right?
Anyway, I agree with Ric, well his last Post, the way this thread was started, was off track, and was set in a mannor to witch the original poster wanted to set an argument off. There for I shall consider this topic to be locked or made clear, so that one may actally use the topic in a meaningful mattor.
Anyway, Ricador, I could tell you were setting it up for that, and I also wanted to show how useless a(n) discussion/argument about this will be as well.
Note: I am probably wrong with half of my previous post, and I know that. Please don't tell me.
Thats quite a hard question. I'm stuck in the middle. I like the Republicans for their tough stance on terrorism but the Democrats more for suppose Healthcare, environment policies energy policies. I just like the good points of both parties. But it actually doesn't matter, Obama won!
-We want to go back and re-base all of our values and what not off of the constitution, the way it was supposed to be. Hey, life was good back then, so the constitution must work. -We want to eliminate terrorists and world threats, and the security of the nation and the people is one of our top priority's. -We are for less big government and more for more freedoms for the people. -We want less taxes for the people (the demis want more). -We do not want abortion, which is killing humans. -We do not want homosexuality, seeing it goes against god's law:
One nation under God
-We have balls.
My main problem with conservative parties is that they are reactionary. They want to preserve traditional values, which seems fine, however what do you do if those values are incompatible with modern society?
Is the security of the nation not the democrat's top priority too? That is the first duty of any government. Obama plans to put more troops into Afghanistan. Pretty much contradicts what you are saying.
Conservatives are more for economic personal freedom, not so much from a cultural perspective. The deomcrats are clearly more left wing, more liberal and thus more in favour of individual freedom. Ypu say the republicans do not agree with abortion. Does this not contradict as is the choice to have abortion not a personal freedom?
These terrorists want the world to be run under their Gods law, so what may I ask is the difference between you and them. Is your God more right? In addition, by ruling under God's law this would restrict the freedom of religion of other faiths in your country restricting individual freedom again. Banning homosexuality, how is that not restricting personal freedoms.
It seems these points are contradictory. Care to explain.
A number of reasons. If it's a financial issue, then I understand, but if people just do it for pleasure, then that is immature and irresponsible.
If we do making abortion illegal, then that means every baby that would have been aborted will grow up, eventually turning into an adult. This will increase taxes, unemployment, inflation, homeless people, and the cost of homes/foundation. Forget the part about this being a moral issue, it's the part about "waiting to have a kid in a spacial environment, or having a kid immediately in one that's crowded, costly, and unhealthy". Do you want us to end up like China? Because that's what it was going to be if McCain was elected. He would have vowed to make the action illegal, which would have destroyed the U.S.A. indirectly.
Ricador: Gay Marriage
Constitution of the United States: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
The thread will not do any good if all of you post off-topic messages. Why should it be locked anyways? I don't see another like this that's dead. It's a legit thread, and it's going to stay that way, so long as this keeps on truckin'.
