Female

Chillicothe, OH

#82 Oct 5, 2012
Since Romney keeps moving away from the conservatives and right slingers, what do think about him now? He was just trying to snag your votes and now he is damn near liberal. The only contrast between him and Obama is color of skin and his lowering taxes for the rich (this will benefit him). Romney is a fake. He has repudiated his base right before the election.
Greatest Generation

Springboro, OH

#83 Oct 5, 2012
imagine2011 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong 'again'. I have no idea what political party my pastor voting for. In fact, he never comments on it, to the point of almost refusing to discuss it. He will never choose a candidate for the members, thats for sure.
I do think for myself.
You are the one that sounds like the MSNBC or CNN newcast parrot.
God bless you imagine.

These liberal, progressive megachurch "Christian" posters can't handle your hard core Southern Bible Belt truth. Jesus made people mad too and so did the Apostle Paul.

"Fight the good fight" and don't listen to all these liberals.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#84 Oct 5, 2012
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
Consensual vice? Any 'consensual' crime. Gambling, prostitution, drugs, etc... All these "Consensual Vices do not effect only the person participating in them.
Families have been destroyed by such vices. People in those families have been destroyed by those partaking in those vices.
If prostitutes were standing on your street corner soliciting, you'd be the first to complain. Same would apply to drug sales.
In fact you would probably say they are O.K. but we have to laws where and how individuals can sell themselves or their products.
If that be the case would you be imposing your personal views?
It's not the consensual acts that destroys the family in and of itself. There are many legal things today which you could falsely blame of doing the same. Alcohol, state run lottery and racetracks. Churches and religion can be blamed for breaking up families in the same vein. I know several couples who split because one suddenly became a religious fanatic.

Go to The Netherlands sometime and see how a common sense approach to 'vices' really works. There aren't sleazy street walkers or corner pushers. All of that has been moved off of the street, away from residential areas and actually benefits their society overall. Teen drug use is way down, compared to most other western nations.

By having regulated, legalized prostitution, issues such as transmittable disease are much more controlled.

It's kind of funny, you like to refer to the mentioning of the Creator in the Declaration of Independence but you wish to strip out all the words around it.

If permitting people the liberty granted them by the Constitution is a bad thing to you, than you're in the wrong country to begin with.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#85 Oct 5, 2012
Greatest Generation wrote:
<quoted text>
God bless you imagine.
These liberal, progressive megachurch "Christian"
Typically the progressives don't like the "megachurch" because they see it as one of the GOPs GOTV tools.(Note that this concern is never shared about the black church and its GOTV for the Dhims)

Most of them are more accurately Mainline Protestant, most denominations of which have thrown out substantial parts of doctrine in the way of PC.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#86 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not the consensual acts that destroys the family in and of itself. There are many legal things today which you could falsely blame of doing the same. Alcohol, state run lottery and racetracks. Churches and religion can be blamed for breaking up families in the same vein. I know several couples who split because one suddenly became a religious fanatic.
Go to The Netherlands sometime and see how a common sense approach to 'vices' really works. There aren't sleazy street walkers or corner pushers. All of that has been moved off of the street, away from residential areas and actually benefits their society overall. Teen drug use is way down, compared to most other western nations.
By having regulated, legalized prostitution, issues such as transmittable disease are much more controlled.
It's kind of funny, you like to refer to the mentioning of the Creator in the Declaration of Independence but you wish to strip out all the words around it.
If permitting people the liberty granted them by the Constitution is a bad thing to you, than you're in the wrong country to begin with.
Yes, that is the better way to do it. Vice should be taxed and regulated, that means my taxes should go down.

Drugs and Prostitution are not "granted" by the Constitution, it never discusses them at all, they are in the reserved powers or police powers of the state.

Each state by the 10th Amendment can regulate them as they choose, Kalifornia can hand out tax subsidized drugs, and Utah can ban them all.
Conservative

Cincinnati, OH

#87 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said anything about sinister? I merely pointed out that Gov. Romney's religion has about as much to do with Christianity as Islamism does. Except for Romney's has a lot weirder stuff added in.
The point was specifically addressed to another poster in response to a series of comments they have made.
Much has been speculated, especially by the poster I addressed this to, about Obama's own belief's or suspected one's.
On what basis are you saying that about Romney's religion? Have you had actual experience in the Church of Latter Saints.
Many religions have weird stuff and beliefs but I think you'd have to go some to beat the Muslims for weird. Cut off heads, hands, enslave the infidel, tax or convert, leave the religion is big trouble.

Jesus was a Jew yet held as the savior of Christians. Why aren't we Jews? I guess it could be argued that Christianity is the completed form of the Jewish Faith.
You have to look at the actions of the Church not any one or two beliefs they hold.

Has Romney done something to lead you to believe he's a poser as a Christian? Ones works and deeds are the test of ones belief.

I brought up sinister. I didn't see anything sinister.
Exactly what would your definition of Christianity be and who in your opinion exemplifies that image.

I think Baptist are weird and those Pentecostal's speaking in tongues, scary, freaky.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#88 Oct 5, 2012
Conservative wrote:
<quoted text>
What harm is there in displaying the 10 Commandments on a public building? Does the building not represent all the people or are you imposing your view?

The abortion issue is a secular issue as well as a religious issue. I agree with you on your point that abortion is murder that's why I choose to say I am opposed. How can anyone who believes that stand by and let it happen? If you believe it's murder would you stand by and watch a baby be murdered or would you stop it only because it had already been born?

There's a conflict here.

I believe the Federal Gov. has no role in the debate. If the SCOTUS overturned Roe vs. Wade the worst that would happen would be that it would be given back to the States for each individually, by a vote of the people, of that State to decide whether it would be legal in their State or not. Roe was a flawed decision and you are aware of it.

For either of us to decide that abortion is murder we have made the decision that there is life. Are you in favor of murder in any case, I think not but you are willing to allow others to decide when it is acceptable. Curious.

As far as deductions etc. there is nothing in the tax code that is not available to any and all taxpayers regardless of income level.

There is one I can't receive. The Earned Income Tax Credit. Signaling out a specific group for special treatment? The law is suppose to be applied equally.
The point about any religious symbol in or on a public building or facility is simply if you allow one's religious symbols to be displayed than you must allow all. By permitting none, the gov't is in compliance with the first amendment.

Falsely sending our troops to fight and die in places like Viet Nam or Iraq is murder just the same. You don't seem to get up in arms about that.

Roe is not a flawed decision, nowhere have I even come close to that. In a free society and especially in our nation, under our Constitution, it makes sense.

I've already answered your question. I won't ever have an abortion based on my views of it and the impossibility of me ever becoming pregnant. That's as far as my beliefs take me. I am certain enough of my faith that I can allow all others the liberty to make their own choices, right or wrong. We were given free will for a reason.

Something you fail to understand, with each law passed there is a limitation put on freedom. Constraint does not equal liberty, rather the exact opposite. It's hypocritical to use the very freedoms granted you in the Constitution to deny another the exact same freedoms.

Here's a good book you should read or have read to you sometime:

http://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-Y...

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#89 Oct 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. The Constitution is secular... people, not necessarily. The Constitution (and all of its derivative works) is ours, we are not its.
Great point Tony. I'm going to ponder this one for awhile but I think you're a lot closer than I am on this one.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#90 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
It's hypocritical to use the very freedoms granted you in the Constitution to deny another the exact same freedoms.
The Constitution does not grant freedoms.

Freedom is simply the right to choose your slavemaster.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#91 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
The point about any religious symbol in or on a public building or facility is simply if you allow one's religious symbols to be displayed than you must allow all. By permitting none, the gov't is in compliance with the first amendment.
Since the theoretical object is maximum freedom, I'd rather "allow any" than "prohibit all". "Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," would seem to me to INCLUDE public facilities, not exclude them.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#92 Oct 5, 2012
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution does not grant freedoms.
Freedom is simply the right to choose your slavemaster.
We ARE the slavemaster. Government is the slave.(that is the theory anyway.)

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#93 Oct 5, 2012
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
The Constitution does not grant freedoms.
Freedom is simply the right to choose your slavemaster.
You can twist the words however you wish.

You slam me because you don't have a clue what 'liberty' truly is and I fully support it. You seem to think that more laws equals more freedom, that's your first mistake.

I'm a Libertarian in the sense that I believe in liberty for all. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats favor such. Neither side gets close. You focus on a narrow economic issue but disregard the fact that I'm for your freedom as much as mine.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#94 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
You can twist the words however you wish.
You slam me because you don't have a clue what 'liberty' truly is and I fully support it. You seem to think that more laws equals more freedom, that's your first mistake.
Before NAFTA, trade was less free, than after NAFTA.

You said you opposed NAFTA.

You have also said you have no concerns with the freedom of the unborn being violated.

Ergo, you don't really believe in freedom.

I will admit I don't believe in it that much either. As I said, you get to choose your slavemaster, and I want you to choose the right one.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#95 Oct 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
We ARE the slavemaster. Government is the slave.(that is the theory anyway.)
Wrong, slavery is illegal in this country, you do not own yourself.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#96 Oct 5, 2012
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Since the theoretical object is maximum freedom, I'd rather "allow any" than "prohibit all". "Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," would seem to me to INCLUDE public facilities, not exclude them.
In this sense, in the public forum only, I see the prohibition of all as allowing any. It may sound oxymoronic but to me it makes sense. By not showing a preference to any one, which is what the 10 commandment issue is truly all about, they are allowing equal representation of all.

If a courthouse permits the display of the 10 commandments they need to make room for the 10 disciplines of Hinduism or maybe the 5, 8 or 10 precepts of Buddhism. What about the spiritual beliefs of the Natives? If the symbols of any one faith are adopted than the symbols of each and every faith must be accommodated as well.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

#97 Oct 5, 2012
Tim wrote:
<quoted text>
Before NAFTA, trade was less free, than after NAFTA.
You said you opposed NAFTA.
You have also said you have no concerns with the freedom of the unborn being violated.
Ergo, you don't really believe in freedom.
I will admit I don't believe in it that much either. As I said, you get to choose your slavemaster, and I want you to choose the right one.
You either ignored, didn't bother to read or couldn't comprehend what I had to say about NAFTA. The only point I made with regard to it was that it took a lot more Republicans than Democrats to get enacted and that blaming it solely on Bill Clinton was erroneous.

Once again for the reading impaired. The day I can set up a trust fund for a potential grandchild one of my children may be expecting is the day that you can stretch all rights to that fetus. In the eyes of the government it can't exist until it is a separate being.

The problem is the Right slavemaster in your eyes may be the incorrect one overall.
Tim

Wellington, OH

#98 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again for the reading impaired. The day I can set up a trust fund for a potential grandchild one of my children may be expecting is the day that you can stretch all rights to that fetus. In the eyes of the government it can't exist until it is a separate being.
The problem is the Right slavemaster in your eyes may be the incorrect one overall.
The government charges the murder of a pregnant woman beyond a certain date as double murder. Roe v Wade officially said no third trimester abortions which is a de fact admission that the government sees a fetus as a person prior to birth. They said that government could restrict second trimester abortions, first trimester abortions were not considered people, yet the science book says they are...

The right slavemaster is the one who's organization is run the best. Fruits of the tree...
imagine2011

United States

#99 Oct 5, 2012
Female wrote:
<quoted text> When I said that USUALLY most choose a religion that their parents have chosen or where in the world (their culture) they are born. That is not 100%. I was just stating WHY we choose a certain religion.
I will agree with that. They don't always stay with their familys faith though. I only asked what you thought of a Christian that came from a family with no faith. How would you say something like that could happen?
imagine2011

United States

#100 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, let's break this down, shall we.
If we were going to deliberately lie regarding that treaty, why bother to have it ratified in the Senate? There was no 'media' to speak of back then, no internet, no 24/7 coverage. No Al Jazeera. They would have had no way of knowing.
Which leads to my next question. If, officially lying to other nations and entities is ok in your book and if Romney is such an honest man, wouldn't he be the wrong man for the job? Since you favor lying as an accepted practice of government, wouldn't you prefer the best liar?(you do support the best liar in this case, you just won't admit it)
The seas are no safer today than they were in 1789. What the Barbary Coast pirates did is no different than what the Somali pirates are doing today.
There is a difference in lying to your enemy (Muhammeds robots) that we obviously have been fighting since the beginning of this nation. Other nations have been fighting them since they were first formed.
Conservative

Cincinnati, OH

#101 Oct 5, 2012
Kosmik wrote:
<quoted text>
You either ignored, didn't bother to read or couldn't comprehend what I had to say about NAFTA. The only point I made with regard to it was that it took a lot more Republicans than Democrats to get enacted and that blaming it solely on Bill Clinton was erroneous.
Once again for the reading impaired. The day I can set up a trust fund for a potential grandchild one of my children may be expecting is the day that you can stretch all rights to that fetus. In the eyes of the government it can't exist until it is a separate being.
The problem is the Right slavemaster in your eyes may be the incorrect one overall.
Generally speaking, there are no strictures as to who may be a beneficiary of a trust; a beneficiary can be a minor, or under a mental disability (in fact many trusts are created specifically for persons with those legal disadvantages). It is also possible to have trusts for unborn children, although the trusts must vest within the applicable perpetuity period.

I guess the unborn owe their rights to you, Uncle Kosmik

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 15 min Duke for Mayor 4,974
African American Male Initiative seeks to help ... 2 hr Truthful 22
Marriage Vows 3 hr Mandy 1
COPS lives MATTER 4 hr Police Crimes 227
Critics ignore benefits of cameras 5 hr zep 11
Who do you side with in New York and why? 8 hr d pantz 27
Mana s Skeleton Found In Woods In Central Ohio 8 hr Big Johnson 1
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:21 pm PST

Yahoo! Sports 1:21PM
Ravens claim AFC playoff spot with win over Browns
Bleacher Report 1:28 PM
Ravens Clinch Final AFC Playoff Spot
Yahoo! Sports 2:03 PM
Ravens into playoffs, Bucs to have first pick in draft
NBC Sports 2:26 PM
Haslam says Browns won't tolerate "irresponsible" players
Bleacher Report 2:26 PM
What to Expect from Ravens in Postseason