Legit Questions for ATS Liberals…Shed Some Light Please

reply to post by woodwardjnr

IF the Jewish community can use the Beth Din courts to settle arbitration cases then I do not have a problem with Muslims doing the same thing with their Sharia courts As with Beth Din courts they do not replace the law of the land. In an ideal world these would not be needed but we do not live in a an ideal world.

No law supersedes the constitution. Also, American citizens should not be subject to religious doctrine. Besides, my point was that liberals are pro-Muslim and pro-gay marriage which is an obvious conflict of interest because devote Muslims practicing Sharia would like to KILL HOMOSEXUALS; it’s in their teaching, sir!

I don't believe there is a homosexual agenda. It is just easier for people to " come out" and be proudly gay in these modern times. A good thing, I'm sure you'll agree.

Then explain to me whose idea it was to teach my 5 year old daughter about the achievements of gays throughout history??

Do you remember learning in school about the sexuality of historical figures? I sure as heck don’t nor do I believe it’s appropriate. So YES there most certainly is a gay agenda.

I always like Condoleezza Rice. Was surprised she did not run for president. The problem with Palin and Bachman is that they are both mad as hatter's.

Does that make it OK for people on the left to say Palin looks like a ‘slutty flight attendant?” My point was that it’s acceptable for the left to make those comments yet any disagreement with a liberal women instantly gets you labeled a sexist.

I think abortion should always be seen as the very last resort for the most serious cases. But as a male I feel uncomfortable making a decision over a woman's most private of property.

The thing with abortion is that women will have it done whether legal or illegal. The wisest thing to do would be to make it as safe as possible for those women who do make that difficult choice. A return to the back alley clinics would be a bad move don't you think?

Anti death penalty.
I don't agree with sanctioning the government to murder it's citizens. I also don't agree with an eye for an eye. A little too close to that Sharia law you hate so much.

So you justify abortion because you don’t feel comfortable making a decision about a woman’s property? So the fetus is her property? Is my 5 year old daughter my property too? Is it OK if I decide to throw her in a dumpster tonight because I want my freedom back and the expenses associated with raising a child are cutting into my budget?

I’m not trying to be inflammatory and obviously this is just an example but that argument about ‘not making a decision for a woman’ is a bit wimpy, really. If you were consistent you would make the same argument for the life of that child as you do for the convicted murderer facing the death penalty.

THE WHOLE POINT of my thread was to highlight the inconsistencies in liberal positions and maybe find out how liberals justify these positions.

reply to post by seabag


I agree, with your point about the constitution. The point I am making is that you already have religious courts in America with the Beth din. The sharia courts do the exact same thing. Neither supersedes the law of the land or the constitution. As an atheist I would do away with all religious courts, but thats just not the reality of the situation and so I will tolerate these things. There is a big difference between the sharia courts we have in the west and sharia law in the middle east. The will be no take up of sharia law by none muslims in our western societies, so I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

With regards to abortion. I think my best answer is this. Women will have abortions whether you and I like it or not. To make the practice illegal, just means those women who do and will choose to have an abortion will have to go to the dodgy back alley surgeries which are dangerous and a are best left in the pages of history.

With regards to you other points, we are all guilty of hypocrisy, whether we are on the right or left of the political spectrum. To accuse only liberals of hypocrisy, is in itself hypocrisy.

I have a problem with many liberals, neo-liberals in particular. They can be their own worst enemy, just as the many conservatives we see here on ATS.

I just try not to get too hung up about peoples sexuality or that kids are taught about such things. The gay right's movement is actually a very interesting part of American history. You should look at the Stonewall riots documentary. It's great to see how far gay people have come since it was illegal in 1969, not even a generation ago

reply to post by woodwardjnr

With regards to abortion. I think my best answer is this. Women will have abortions whether you and I like it or not. To make the practice illegal, just means those women who do and will choose to have an abortion will have to go to the dodgy back alley surgeries which are dangerous and a are best left in the pages of history.

With all due respect that argument has no spine. You could say the same thing about a number of unacceptable things people do. Some people are going to shoot up heroin so should we just make it legal and provide clean needles? Come on!

With regards to you other points, we are all guilty of hypocrisy, whether we are on the right or left of the political spectrum. To accuse only liberals of hypocrisy, is in itself hypocrisy.

Delfection!

I have a problem with many liberals, neo-liberals in particular. They can be their own worst enemy, just as the many conservatives we see here on ATS.

I don’t have a problem with anyone. If someone wants to dive in it (many have on this thread) than go for it. To each his own…

I just try not to get too hung up about peoples sexuality or that kids are taught about such things.

Then you must not have kids and don’t give a crap about other people’s kids either IMO.

The gay right's movement is actually a very interesting part of American history. You should look at the Stonewall riots documentary. It's great to see how far gay people have come since it was illegal in 1969, not even a generation ago

Movement?? I thought there was no gay agenda now you’re promoting the Gay Rights Movement? What’s the point of a movement if you have no agenda?

I don’t have a problem with liberals pursuing a gay rights agenda though I disagree with some of it. As long as the population gets to vote on these matters then it’s fine. They are simply exercising their constitutional rights. You cross the line when you start promoting this agenda in public schools to a captive audience of children. That’s BS! How would you like it if I made ‘Bestiality 101’ a mandatory class? Would you have a problem?

reply to post by LErickson

My Muslim friends disagree with you.
Guess who I will defer to.
You say my Muslim friends want to kill me.
They have not killed me.
I believe them over you.

Didn't say Muslims want to kill you.

If they were plotting to kill you, do you think they would give you advanced notice? See how they act if you start hitting on one of their sisters, that's when you find out what kind of friends they are.

And like you are the only person who knows someone who is Muslim? What! you don't think I know anyone who is Muslim in White Town in the middle of know where, where of course I live. My cousin's brother's uncle's sister knows a Muslim person, I seen em once.

In this day and age, IMO you should only fear a Catholic if that Catholic is a priest, and you are an alter boy, depending on which way you swing.

You need to sort out your own fears, I suggest a professional.

This is going to be fun. I identify as a liberal 98% of the time.

1) Homosexuality and Muslims - Devote Muslims kill homosexuals for being homosexual (fact). Yet, liberals support both the Homosexual agenda in America as well as Muslim Sharia Law. What gives?

First of all, I do not support Sharia Law. I also do not believe that there is a homosexual agenda in the U.S. I am personally an atheist who could care less about all religions. I believe that homosexuals deserve the same rights as anyone else. I also feel that in the U.S, Muslims are unfairly type-casted as terrorists.

2) Racism – (Hot topic these days…I know…I will tread lightly) It seems liberals keep the term “racists” alive. Why are vocal black democrats given praise by the left (Sharpton, Jackson, Rangel, Shiela Jackson Lee, etc) while vocal black conservatives (Clarence Thomas, Alan West, Herman Cain, etc) called names by the left?

I have no praise for any of these people that you have listed. Sharpton and Jackson have too many skeletons in their closets. Clarence Thomas is a womanizing creep and Alan West is totally out of his mind. I don't know enough about the rest.

Also, why do liberals continue to promote social programs that enslave blacks at poverty level? Left policies have NEVER led to black prosperity (Chicago, Detroit, ALL of California, etc are good examples) yet they get the majority of the black vote. What does the left offer that should inspire black Americans and keep their vote? I think the tide is turning, by the way. This video is a good illustration of what I’ve said.

Is there any evidence to prove this point? You could include a broad swath of Americans who use social programs and then see if your point holds up or not. I believe that most social programs are not glamorous like some like to believe.

3) Pro Women yet Anti Conservative Women – Liberals say they’re for women’s rights yet they destroyed Sarah Palin and her family in 2008. Liberals love Hillary but what did they have to say about Condoleezza?? Have liberals ever denounced all of the chauvinist remarks about Bachman?

Sarah Palin was never qualified to be a vice presidential candidate in the first place. Palin is the extreme opposite of some of the things that I believe in. If anything, it was an election year with plenty of shenanigans. As for Hilary, I have no love for her. The problem with people like Palin, Rice and Bachmann has nothing to do with their sex and everything to do with what they believe in. Condi is certainly the most intelligent of all three, which leaves the backwards nature of Palin and Bachmann.

4) Pro Abortion yet Anti-Death Penalty – Need I say more on this issue?

I don't think that anyone is ever "pro-abortion". I acknowledge that abortion is not pretty and not an easy choice for a woman to make. However, I will defend a woman's right to choose for as long as I live. This is America, the land of the free and home of the brave. Since when is it the right of the religious right to decide what people can and cannot do with their lives?

The death penalty is a draconian form of punishment that actually spares the killer the pain that he/she inflicted upon their victim(s). They get a quick death via injection. If they're lucky enough, their death might even make them a martyr! The death penalty does not bring back those who died. Two wrongs do not make a right. We can argue about this until the cows come home but it is what it is.

reply to post by poet1b


I think the whole intention of the "Stand Your Ground" laws were to CREATE racial tensions in the first place.

I actually read the law, and the "devil is in the details" -- it basically turns self defense on its head and you have to give anyone who says; "I felt threatened" the benefit of the doubt. This gives the DA and the Police the ability to CHOOSE not to prosecute.

What happens when you give police a choice whether to do paperwork or just pass it by? It becomes selective enforcement. If they identified with the victim, and didn't like the shooter - they would have prosecuted.

>> That's why the NRA and the "ALEC" group (if I've got the lobbying organization's name right) are pushing both Voter ID and Stand Your Ground. It's inevitable that people feel alienated, and that the white people who make it their life's work to "feel persecuted because of Affirmative action, or someone got an extra cookie" will rise to the bait. The MEDIA, will of course do the rest of the work, and hype whatever gets the most gnashing of teeth.

As the jobs situation gets worse, and the pepper spraying by police becomes more of a routine -- there will inevitably be a NEED to crack down. Even though we are in a 40 year low in "street" crime (and a 40 year high in white collar unprosecuted crimes), ever harsher crack downs will be rationalized by increasing anger of the populace. It's a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Might as well be in "how to make a police state 101" -- did we mention they hired the jerk who helped bring the police state to Eastern Germany? I wonder what talents he brings to the table, eh?

reply to post by seabag

Some people are going to shoot up heroin so should we just make it legal and provide clean needles?

In fact yes. That is a great idea. Take the money out of the black market and divert it into drugs awareness education, while providing clean needles and clean heroin. No more spreading diseases with needles and no more over doses. The education may also turn people away from taking drugs.

reply to post by seabag

With all due respect that argument has no spine. You could say the same thing about a number of unacceptable things people do. Some people are going to shoot up heroin so should we just make it legal and provide clean needles? Come on!

Yeah, that's exactly what I think we should do. They are going to do heroine if they want to, and I don't see why I should be paying taxes in order to incarcerate people in order to protect them from themselves.

So you would prefer homosexuality be kept in the closet, I understand that is the way Catholic priests prefer things as well.

And you claim you are for smaller government, when you are for the nanny state more than any liberal on this thread. Yep, you are a conservative.

reply to post by woodwardjnr


Not to mention save a lot of tax money, reduce the size of government, restore a great many of our rights taken away as an excuse to fight the war on drugs.

Once again, Conservative say they want smaller government, but in reality they are all for the Nanny State.

reply to post by braindeadconservatives


Thanks for handling the responses -- I really didn't want to talk to this person anymore -- especially when he doesn't REALLY want to listen.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


I had though the stand your ground law sounded like a good thing, but you bring up some very good points.

Personally, I think affirmative action has ran its course, and having been in a position where I could be discriminated against by minorities, I know full well it happens. Through immigration, young people, black and white, have been excluded from many entry level positions where they could work their way up the corporate ladder. The whole affirmative action process has actually been turned against black Americans, or any Americans who have the audacity to speak up for their rights as workers.

Yeah, the effort is on to start some sort of race war, pump up the paranoia. Most people don't realize how much crime rates have dropped in this country over the last two decades, and if you tell them, they don't want to believe you.

They also work on the black community, pumping up the hatred, encouraging the blaming. There seems to be a real effort to crank up the heat on the ghetto crime cooker. Most people don't know that the whole ghetto welfare situation was created under Nixon, for obvious purposes.

they hired the jerk who helped bring the police state to Eastern Germany?

Was that done under Dubya? Funny how close a relationship Conservative admins have with communists.

reply to post by poet1b

Yeah, that's exactly what I think we should do. They are going to do heroine if they want to, and I don't see why I should be paying taxes in order to incarcerate people in order to protect them from themselves.

This statement makes me wonder what kind of world liberals want to live in. Nobody can do any wrong in this utopia. How can you do wrong when everything is legal? Whatever makes individuals happy, huh?

So you would prefer homosexuality be kept in the closet, I understand that is the way Catholic priests prefer things as well.

I never said anything even remotely like that. You're making stuff up now. And I have no idea about what catholic priests want. 

And you claim you are for smaller government, when you are for the nanny state more than any liberal on this thread. Yep, you are a conservative.

Please explain how you drew that conclusion. You're getting yourself all worked up over things I never said. What posts are you reading before you reply to mine??

reply to post by seabag


How are you going to stop people taking heroin? How are you going to stop women having abortions? The only solutions you offer is make them illegal. Now, this has not worked in the past and will not work in the future. Why punish drug addicts more? Why punish women even more when they have an abortion?

What should be the right punishment for women who have abortions? What punishment should there be for the heroin addict?

reply to post by woodwardjnr

How are you going to stop people taking heroin?

By enforcing current law!

How are you going to stop women having abortions?

Abortion is legal…

The only solutions you offer is make them illegal. Now, this has not worked in the past and will not work in the future.

It works just fine. It’s a deterrent to those with half a brain. The other half are locked up.

Why punish drug addicts more? What punishment should there be for the heroin addict?

Why punish women even more when they have an abortion? What should be the right punishment for women who have abortions?

First of all, running around getting high is not a punishment and neither is having a child. There IS a punishment when you break the law. If you are in possession of illegal drugs you’re breaking the law.

I don’t have sympathy for drug addicts. Drug abuse is a CHOICE and so is having unprotected sex. Deal with it! Have you ever heard of personal responsibility? I know it’s becoming a thing of the past but some of us would like to see it return.

reply to post by The Sword

Is there any evidence to prove this point? You could include a broad swath of Americans who use social programs and then see if your point holds up or not. I believe that most social programs are not glamorous like some like to believe.

Come on! Democrats have always been keeping black Americans down yet they call republicans racist. They opposed everything positive that’s ever happened. Although corny, this video has some good info (and it’s short).



Here is another one that's very informative:



Best for last…GO GETT’EM, WEST!!.

reply to post by poet1b


I just heard today that some Neo-Nazi group is now "patrolling the streets" with their semi-automatic weapons, to "defend against angry mobs" -- apparently inspired by Zimmerman or pepper-spraying cops.

All TPTB need to do to get a good race war going is;
1) Create arbitrarily enforced laws, so that Cops or whomever can selectively mete out justice. Maybe they LIKE Latinos more than Muslims today -- or they like Bankers more than Teachers. Just keep whatever violent, out of control jerk on the force -- maybe promote him. So you create copy-cats and send the message that it's OK to hurt others.

2) Drop a bunch of weapons. Make violence quick and easy.

3) Hype every incident, and use power not to maintain piece but to disenfranchise and protect people FROM justice.

>> Can't wait to see how persecuted the Ditto heads are going to feel once black kids start patrolling THEIR neighborhoods with guns. Expect to see a lot of "I told you so" as if this happened in a vacuum. The New Black Panthers (all three of them) are their best frenemies.

reply to post by seabag


Here comes the tit-for-tat race to the bottom.

Self righteous outrage from both sides is a good weather indicator -- like looking for dark clouds before a rain storm.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


No, I do not think that the First Lady runs the WH, just Hillary. Her hubby was too busy not inhaling and sleeping with ugly chicks to run the country right. We all know that Hillary wears the pants in that family. Also, I have no issues with women in power, I have issues with idiots in power (ie: Sarah Palin). As I said, if Condolezza Rice would have ran for POTUS, I would have voted for her.

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by aries377

 

That said; I think most Liberals looked at Hillary and Bill as a "two for one." We aren't offended by a "pushy lady". The difference with Nancy Reagan running things (I always figured it was H W Bush -- but whatever), is that this lady doesn't know much of anything and consults a mystic for any hard questions. Reagan was senile MOST of his time in office. Either Bill or Hillary had the hutzpah to run things, but neither Nancy nor mentally challenged Ronny could do much more than sound thoughtful for a camera.

Yeah, what most republicans/conservatives don't know or choose not to remember is that Reagan, for most of his second term, had to be re-introduced to his entire cabinet every day. He couldn't even remember people that he appointed to positions of power. Yeah, Nancy did help to run the country quite a bit, and not very good I may say. "Trickle Down Economics" Really??? Just a way for the PTB to make more money for themselves, and screw the every day working class man/woman.

Originally posted by seabag


This statement makes me wonder what kind of world liberals want to live in. Nobody can do any wrong in this utopia. How can you do wrong when everything is legal? Whatever makes individuals happy, huh?

Some Conservatives (whatever the hell that really means) would say you are a Neocon
due to the fact that you want to interfere with people and their personal business.
I personally think many things should be legal in the personal realm, but I do not go as far
to say everything should be legal, or the "conservative/RINO/neocon" (i can't keep track)
many things should be illegal. I think Marijuana and prostitution should be legal... Those two
things would reduce incarceration tremendously and save society a bundle.