Started By
Message

re: How is this possible in 2016?

Posted on 6/22/16 at 5:18 pm to
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 5:18 pm to
Paranoia doesn't suit you.

quote:

1. No one ever thought that abortion on demand would be the law of the land; it is.


Abortion has been legal since 1973, 43 years. It has withstood challenge after challenge from the religious right wing. It will continue to do so.

quote:

2. Few would have guessed that gay marriage would also become the law of the land; it has.


It surprised only insular religious groups that gay marriage happened in the U.S. Anyone who was knowledgeable of world politics saw it coming years ago.

quote:

3. Literally no one would have thought that male transvestites who identify as females would be able to choose women's restrooms; they can.


Transvestites don't identify as females. That's transgenders who do.

Transvestites are heterosexual men who get sexual kicks from dressing as women.

quote:

4. Meanwhile you suggest that freedom of religion will never be compromised.


The freedoms to practice religion are quite specific in the Constitution. I can't see the Supreme Court ever attempting to compromise those freedoms.

The Constitution guarantees civil and religious rights as long as they don't trample on the rights of others.

quote:

5. And others think that the 2nd Amendment will never be compromised.



A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The purpose of the second amendment is to insure against tyranny by the government. There are no well regulated militias. Instead, we have as many guns in America as people.

The glaring differences in America then and now are the advanced technology of guns, the vast population now, the much bigger landmass of America, and political polarization that engages two hostile sides in perpetual conflict.

They used muskets then, we allow AR 15s now. There were less than 3 million people in America in 1776. We now have 320 million, not including illegal aliens. Also, here are the colonies when America gained independence (in red):



America today has more than 3.5 million square miles.

My point is that we live in a very different nation than the one in 1776. It's much easier to provide safety, the primary role of government, for 3 million people than for 320 million.

It's much more likely that 3 million people, especially a group as homogeneous as was the inhabitants of newly independent America, can control their government with citizen militias than can 320 million extremely diverse citizens. Maybe that's why there are no standing militias in modern America.

In effect, we've traded a fear of tyrannical government for a real fear of each other. Who knows when the next guy with a fragile mentality will snap and blow away a group of people?

It's not unreasonable to think that we need to reassess our safety that's the intent of the second amendment. No government can suppress 320 million people, especially when they're as diverse as Americans.

However, the constant, very real possibility of being killed by a mentally unstable individual does lend an oppressive feel to American society. That's what we need to be unified on, changing that threat.

Posted by Duke
Twin Lakes, CO
Member since Jan 2008
35610 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 5:18 pm to
quote:

1. No one ever thought that abortion on demand would be the law of the land; it is.


Did you know most Protestants didnt care when Roe was decided? Thats a more recent occurance. Also, "on demand"? Have you not seen the regulations many states have put on clinics to limit their numbers and abortion availability?

quote:

Few would have guessed that gay marriage would also become the law of the land; it has


Except for the millions who could see it coming a decade before SCOTUS made it happen. Numerous states had passes laws allowing it before the SCOTUS ruling.

quote:

Meanwhile you suggest that freedom of religion will never be compromised.


Except for thenlitany of court cases upholding the free excersise of religion.

quote:

And others think that the 2nd Amendment will never be compromised.


And the current direction of legislation is less restrictions on guns laws. A very active NRA.

The conservative brand of paranoia is apparent here.

Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46506 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 5:33 pm to
Applying 18th century definitions, a "well-regulated militia" is essentially just any male of fighting age who owns properly functioning firearm.
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 6:15 pm to
Well, okay. However, militia is plural and implies a group of like-minded people who are capable of taking up arms against the army of a tyrannical government.
Posted by olddawg26
Member since Jan 2013
24581 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 7:07 pm to
She spends a lot of time on the poli-board. I think they sometimes really forget that mixed opinions outside of that forum are real.
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 8:19 pm to
Gotcha. Moderates on this board get that kind of stunned reaction from both the left and right posters. It's sad that most people forget there's middle ground in almost every discussion.
Posted by olddawg26
Member since Jan 2013
24581 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 9:04 pm to
You need to definitely stay the frick away from the poliboard. Middle ground does not exist there.
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 10:27 pm to
quote:

Because 2016 is a number. It isn't some sign that we have progressed as a society


It's a bookmark to a reference in time that when coupled with other more progressive things going on, you wonder how these things can be happening together on the same planet, at the same time. Is that hard for you to understand? The date 2016 is a tool to use as a reference point. Is this coming into focus yet?
This post was edited on 6/22/16 at 10:30 pm
Posted by Kentucker
Cincinnati, KY
Member since Apr 2013
19351 posts
Posted on 6/22/16 at 10:38 pm to
Thanks for the tip. The OTB and tRant are the only boards that appeal to me.

I'm happy discussin' and cussin' with the crowd here. Polarized people bore me.
This post was edited on 6/22/16 at 10:39 pm
Posted by RaleighTiger
@ Booches, drinking a Stag
Member since Oct 2013
550 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 9:01 am to
quote:

That's not true at all.


13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.


LINK
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 10:07 am to
quote:

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.


There's no room today for people who can read this and agree with it. No matter if it's out of sincerity or ignorance.

That's in your bible, Sarge. You and other Christians claim to believe this by saying you believe every word of the bible.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 10:10 am
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 10:56 am to
Sarge, you're being summoned to review the bible verse in question and tell me you agree with it or don't agree with it.
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55257 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 12:53 pm to
If prefer and agree with the newer urban translation


"young girls should not be hos because there are consequences in life associated with this behavior and young men should never wrongfully accuse a young girl of being a ho for this too can have consequences"
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:00 pm to
Yes or no, do you agree with this verse from your bible?


quote:

Deuteronomy 22: 20-21
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.

This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 1:11 pm
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55257 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:10 pm to
My post is crystal clear
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:12 pm to
Sarge, if a girl can't prove she was a virgin when married, should she be stoned?
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55257 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:20 pm to
I'm sort of s libertarian so if she wants to smoke grass and its legal in her state, why not?
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:22 pm to
Sarge, yes or no. Are you disagreeing with the bible? Agreeing with it? Or saying you don't care and she can do what she wants to?


It sounds like you're disagreeing with it. Which you completely should. This book is no longer trust worthy when it's saying a woman deserves to be stoned for having sex before marriage, or if she isn't able to prove she hasn't (lol).
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 1:26 pm
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:26 pm to
Yes or No, should we stone woman for having sex before marriage as the bible tells us to?

Stop making a frick of yourself and tell me "NO!"

Don't lie to me and tell me you believe this shite, Sarge. I know you don't. You're a decent fricking person. If you saw a girl being stoned you'd stop it. You have to see how bad this is.
This post was edited on 6/23/16 at 1:38 pm
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55257 posts
Posted on 6/23/16 at 1:36 pm to
At some road intersections I encounter stop signs while driving, others have yield signs. The law changes and varies depending on where I am at in what circumstances are around me. There is more than one law that covers many similar but yet not identical instances. One must use discernment and apply wisdom to understand and interpret the law and its proper application .
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter