Originally posted by: dahunan
I am not sure who the BIGGER WHORE IS ... The Right Wing Republicans or The Religious Reight... you both Pimp each other so often it is hard to tell the difference between the two of you
Did you kiss your mother with that mouth?
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
I live in the town he practiced in and I think I was in his office at one time. I am pretty neutral about him in general. He made a speech today that had local coverage and made more sense than I expected. I don't think he will get the party nomination, but if he does, I will be forced to vote for him regardless of what my personal opinion is. A bad Republican is a better choice than an excellent Democrat!
Originally posted by: Condor
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
I live in the town he practiced in and I think I was in his office at one time. I am pretty neutral about him in general. He made a speech today that had local coverage and made more sense than I expected. I don't think he will get the party nomination, but if he does, I will be forced to vote for him regardless of what my personal opinion is. A bad Republican is a better choice than an excellent Democrat!
How about an even better Independant?
And again the ultimate problem with the 2 party system is revealed. No one has the balls to step outside the generalized ideas of what it means to be a Democrat or Republican and realize that it IS possible to be conservative about some issues, and liberal about others.
And people who make their decision on who to vote for by only considering their party affiliation and NOT their individual ideals are a bigger problem than those politicians who exploit their party's "base".
shira
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2005
- 9,500
- 6
- 81
He's a nutcase because he received a US district court order to remove the Ten Commandments display, yet refused to obey the court order. He lost at every level of appeal, all the way to the US Supreme Court, yet still refused to obey the court order. Ultimately, it was the other 8 justices on the Alabama Supreme court that overruled Moore and ordered the display removed.
Consequent to his actions, Moore was removed from office by the unanimous vote of the 9-member Alabama Court of the Judiciary.
Despite all this, Moore insists that his actions were correct. In other words, here is an ex-judge who believed and continues to believe that he was right to disobey court orders. In other words, he believes he's above the law.
Forget the specific issue in question here and consider the consequences of a public official who believes his own sense of right and wrong are superior to the legal system.
Moore is indeed a nutcase and totally unqualified to hold any public office.
That might be one of the worst/saddest statements that I have ever read. You are so party blind, that you would vote for a horrific Republican candidate over an "excellent" Democrat? You, sir, are what is wrong with this country. People that think that the letter beside your name matters more than what you can do for your constituants if elected astound me. You do not have a single right to complain about any law that is enacted because of your stupidity.
Truly pathetic. Please do everyone else in your district and the rest of the state/country a favor and just refrain from voting. You will probably do less damage that way.
QFT. What a sad statement to make.... You just ruined any legitimacy you had in P&N, how could you think like that? Basically you are saying that you are ignorant, that you are willing to vote for evil over good because of party affiliation? So if David Duke was running for governer as a Republican and the Democrats fielded a great candidate that was well respected, you would vote for Duke?
Originally posted by: CrazyShiz
Originally posted by: Condor
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
I live in the town he practiced in and I think I was in his office at one time. I am pretty neutral about him in general. He made a speech today that had local coverage and made more sense than I expected. I don't think he will get the party nomination, but if he does, I will be forced to vote for him regardless of what my personal opinion is. A bad Republican is a better choice than an excellent Democrat!
How about an even better Independant?
And again the ultimate problem with the 2 party system is revealed. No one has the balls to step outside the generalized ideas of what it means to be a Democrat or Republican and realize that it IS possible to be conservative about some issues, and liberal about others.
And people who make their decision on who to vote for by only considering their party affiliation and NOT their individual ideals are a bigger problem than those politicians who exploit their party's "base".
An independent vote is a null vote. Until there is more balance, I will stick to one of the parties that do the deciding. Before the great Democratic power grab when they showed their true motivation, I was a Democrat. I believed in the liberal principles. After seeing those same people and principles fail for thirty years, I decided that it was better to elect Republicans than to continue to feed the great desire for raw power I was seeing in Democratic leaders. Jimmy Carter was the last Democrat I voted for. I didn't vote for some years and switched parties when Clinton ran for re-election. When I was a Democrat, I thought I was doing the right thing for the world by selecting the person for my vote and didn't vote the party line, but did accept it's guidance. After seeing so many families ruined by the welfare state and finally realizing that people need pride and purpose more than they need a handout, I have rejected the same beliefs I once held dear. Now, I can't believe how stupid liberals are. Even I saw the light after twenty some years!
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
Roy Moore wasn't accused of enforceing the ten commandments in his courtroom. What he did was to place the ten commandments that are the foundation of the judaeo christian legal system that we have in this country in front ot the courthouse. From his speech, he isn't going to be a one issue candidate. His subject matter was pretty broad. It will take a lot more listening before I really put any trust in him.
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
Oh, if you have ever been in a courtroom or even have watched proceedings on TV, You have to know that they really do force their beliefs on everyone. Often that plays in your favor, sometimes, it doesn't. I got out of my first speeding ticket at 17 by petting the judges dog as I walked into the courtroom.
What a rant! Did you take your meds?
No, Democrats that tried to take over the country through crude legal manuevers and welfare state vote buying are whats wrong with this country. The rabble they lead are a close second.
Certainly! I can't see the Democrats fielding a great candidate in my lifetime. The last election was proof enough. I think the sole party platform was "Dump Bush!" You voted for that?
Legitimacy in P&N! Conjur and Dave have legitimacy in P&N. That's a lifegoal? Naw!
um i think most of us are glad we aren't there. in any event, aren't christians supposed to be humble and modest before God? so why whore out his name at every freakin opportunity? are you that desperate for converts?
unfortunately, as a resident of alabama and having witnessed first-hand how much people around here love this guy, i would honestly be pretty surprised if he does not get elected.
Originally posted by: Condor
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Yep, because you based your argument on at least one fallacy. First of all, judges don't 'force their beliefs' on anybody. They are supposed to 'interpret' the law. Law is made by your elected representatives. If you don't like it, then you have the ability to address your elected representatives about it. You can even vote for/against him/her in the next election. Apparently, there are enough of your fellow citizens that either approve of, or more likely don't care (which is the same as approve if you don't notify your elected officials) about the seatbelt law. You should apply your wrath to them. And, if you don't like it, why don't you run for office and do something about it?
Now, however, Roy Moore is doing the right thing by trying to get his beliefs accepted by running for office (although I don't agree at all with his stance on this issue). It would be interesting to see what happens next. To me, he's a one issue candidate, and a good opponent should grill him about what else is he going to do for the state besides tie them up in expensive legal knots for the next few years, none of which will likely be in the state's favor.
DanceMan
Roy Moore wasn't accused of enforceing the ten commandments in his courtroom. What he did was to place the ten commandments that are the foundation of the judaeo christian legal system that we have in this country in front ot the courthouse. From his speech, he isn't going to be a one issue candidate. His subject matter was pretty broad. It will take a lot more listening before I really put any trust in him.
the ten commandments are not the foundation of the american legal system.
The american legal system is a combination of english common law and roman law, with a few minor contributions from elsewhere. The 10 commandments had no influence at all. When it comes down to it, christianit yinfluenced the founders in what not to do.
cKGunslinger
Lifer
- Nov 29, 1999
- 16,408
- 57
- 91
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter