PDA

View Full Version : www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.c om



Phrost
26th April 04, 11:04 PM
http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.c om/

Seriously, haha.

Energiser
27th April 04, 12:15 AM
Not a bad read, even though i couldn't give a crap about american politics as such =p

Shorrtee McHeals
27th April 04, 06:31 AM
All these people who say ANYONE would be better than Bush need to wake the fuck up and look at Kerry's record.

Cybsled
27th April 04, 06:49 AM
Bush fucking sucks.

Even if Kerry sucks, at least Massachusetts would be more likely to get some federal lovin ;P

Kiko
27th April 04, 07:44 AM
Oh, we'd all get all sorts of lovin' if we let Kerry in so he can kiss up to the French, Germans and all, gut the military and let the terrorists do to us what they did to Spain... or just finish what they started on 9/11.

http://www.johnfkerrysucks.com/

Boanerges
27th April 04, 10:01 AM
I have never said Bush was the ideal leader and, to a small extent, I can agree to a few of his points. Bush is like the anti-Nixon as far as foreign policy goes.

That having been said, I still don't like Kerry. It seems, for the most part, that he's another Al Gore and that 2004 will be much like 2000's motto "Vote for me because you hate the other guy more".

I've actually listened to Kerry to draw my own conclusions beyond the hype but there's just not enough Kerry out there to really judge which is a major reason why he's been hammered in the polls so much. What little he has said either sounds like he's dodging the issue or trying to appear to be a "compassionate liberal" (the man has proposed serious tax cuts... he can't be a real Democrat).

The bottom line is the bulk of the site can be summed up in this one line from the one article that's up:

Now, the challenge at hand is to get George W. Bush out of office and retired permanently to his beloved ranch in Crawford. In order to accomplish this, Kerry will need absolutely every single vote he can get.

If we remove the BS and wring it out some we're left with

I hate Bush. Vote for Kerry

Nothing new there...

Phrost
27th April 04, 10:12 AM
I'd seriously vote for Bush if he wasn't cowtowing to the Christian wackos who are against stem cell research (sending the entire biotech industry overseas) and for media censorship (OMFG, A TITTY! IT'S THE SEVENTH SIGN!)

Keep your religion out of my face, thx.

imported_Driz
27th April 04, 10:18 AM
Wether you agree with Bush or not the one thing you have to do is respect the fact that even though a lot of what he believes in is very unpopular, he takes a position and sticks with it.

Gay marriage: Outright against it

National Defense: We don't need a permission slip to defend ourselves.

Terrorism: Let nation states know that if you sponsor terrorists or make us uneasy, we'll kick your door down and clean house.

I may not agree with alot of what he says, but I give him credit for not trying to straddle the fence on divisive issues. At least he takes a stance and sticks with it.

-Driz

Phrost
27th April 04, 11:24 AM
That's exactly why I'd vote for him. But keeping this nation #1 in the world going forward is more important than kissing the asses of wackos who believe in a magical Jew who rises from the dead and passes out free wine to the homeless.

Shorrtee McHeals
27th April 04, 11:29 AM
Sounds like someone needs to be saved! :p

Shalank
27th April 04, 12:00 PM
I agree with the religous thing, although I am devote in my faith and baptist as well, I don't think Bush should do as they say, or even half-heartedly listen. Of course when I say this in church, I get heat from it

Boanerges
27th April 04, 12:03 PM
I think Phrack needs some information...

The opposition is against EMBRYONIC stem cell research. The reason we don't NEED this research is that ADULT stem cell research (which doesn't involve making a whole class of humans to kill and harvest cells from) is already providing major advances in medicine RIGHT NOW. Embryonic stuff MIGHT produce the same results... someday. Of course once we let people manipulate embryos for those purposes what's to stop people from things like eugenics, cloning (does the world need more copies of people like Carrot Top, Yanni and Kela?) and who knows what else. We could find ourselves in the middle of Gattica in the not-so-distant future. More on what stem cells really are (http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PD02D5)

Next up, the idea that Bush is keeping anything out of the scientific realm is ludicrous. Congress, not Bush, passed the provision that FEDERAL dollars may not be spent on embryonic research. Private research still continues. Harvard announced last month that they had made new stem cell lines. Bush's role in all this was to interpret the law as it was written and uphold the ban instead of doing what Clinton did and still fund programs that used embryonic lines made privately.

As for the whole FCC hearings... heaven forbid we have a governmental agency being told by Congress to do its job. If the rest of the government ran like the FCC we would be in near totaly anarchy right now. Yes, Clear Channel stopped airing Howard Stern for good. That decision was made by Clear Channel, not the FCC or Congress. The point of the whole debate is that we have rules for what you can say or do on the air. Freedom of speech is not something absolute and these things are certainly NOT necessary for the freedom of speech to continue. At issue is that these rules were being routinely violated and nothing was being done. The FCC was beinding over backwards to NOT fine anyone. It got so absurd that they said it's ok to say "F***" so long as it's an adjective and not a verb.

Howard knew the rules and when they actually got enforced on him he howled. Janet tried to play the victim after what was undoubtedly an intentional act of nudity during a sporting event. It's kind of like complaining about the government restricting your freedom after you get a speeding ticket. Bush didn't write the rules nor did he make the FCC to enforce them. He was outraged and that's his perogative.

Do you seriously think for a second that electing Kerry will let people say the "7 words" freely or let people run around naked on public airwaves?

Buzman
27th April 04, 12:12 PM
Just what we need, another political thread where no one changes anyones mind. Just STFU already with the Bush vs. Kerry BS.

Infuego
27th April 04, 12:17 PM
It's not always good to stick with an opinion.

SOMETIMES YOU ARE WRONG. SOMETIMES YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR OPINION WHEN YOU FIND OUT YOU ARE WRONG.

Phrost
27th April 04, 12:29 PM
I think Phrack needs some information...

The opposition is against EMBRYONIC stem cell research. The reason we don't NEED this research is that ADULT stem cell research (which doesn't involve making a whole class of humans to kill and harvest cells from) is already providing major advances in medicine RIGHT NOW. Embryonic stuff MIGHT produce the same results... someday. Of course once we let people manipulate embryos for those purposes what's to stop people from things like eugenics, cloning (does the world need more copies of people like Carrot Top, Yanni and Kela?) and who knows what else. We could find ourselves in the middle of Gattica in the not-so-distant future. More on what stem cells really are (http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PD02D5)

Yes, there are alternate sources for stem cells.

I have no qualms about qualified scientists experimenting on embryos, because I am not guided by Christian morality which directs Christians to breed more little Christians, and to prevent anyone else from slowing the birth rate on this planet.



Next up, the idea that Bush is keeping anything out of the scientific realm is ludicrous. Congress, not Bush, passed the provision that FEDERAL dollars may not be spent on embryonic research. Private research still continues. Harvard announced last month that they had made new stem cell lines. Bush's role in all this was to interpret the law as it was written and uphold the ban instead of doing what Clinton did and still fund programs that used embryonic lines made privately.


Bush is the figurehead for the Right-Wing, Fundamentalist Agenda. Without him, squashing more religion-driven legislation will not be as difficult.

Guess what bucko? Federal dollars are MY dollars. I WANT them to be spent on finding ways to regenerate organs and limbs, etc. I'd rather that, then feeding some crack-ho in Oakland with 6 kids.



As for the whole FCC hearings... heaven forbid we have a governmental agency being told by Congress to do its job. If the rest of the government ran like the FCC we would be in near totaly anarchy right now. Yes, Clear Channel stopped airing Howard Stern for good. That decision was made by Clear Channel, not the FCC or Congress. The point of the whole debate is that we have rules for what you can say or do on the air. Freedom of speech is not something absolute and these things are certainly NOT necessary for the freedom of speech to continue. At issue is that these rules were being routinely violated and nothing was being done. The FCC was beinding over backwards to NOT fine anyone. It got so absurd that they said it's ok to say "F***" so long as it's an adjective and not a verb.

Howard knew the rules and when they actually got enforced on him he howled. Janet tried to play the victim after what was undoubtedly an intentional act of nudity during a sporting event. It's kind of like complaining about the government restricting your freedom after you get a speeding ticket. Bush didn't write the rules nor did he make the FCC to enforce them. He was outraged and that's his perogative.

Do you seriously think for a second that electing Kerry will let people say the "7 words" freely or let people run around naked on public airwaves?

Another verbal sleight of hand game. "It wasn't Bush, it was Congress" (No, it was the fundy-sponsored Christian ass kissers in Congress for the most part, to be exact, of which Bush happens to be a supporter).

Now you're saying "Look over here at this hand, with Clear Channel in it... pay no attention to the FCC cracking down on those god awful titties and language that turns people into raving lunatics!

If the FCC wasn't pushing it, Stern would still be on the air.

I don't even like the Stern show. But you know what I do?

I change the fucking station.


No, I don't think electing Kerry will magically solve everything. But he's the lesser of two evils. I can grin and bear 4 years of a liberal pussy in office. I can't stomach the thought of 4 more years of someone trying to cram his religion and his values down my throat.

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 01:10 PM
damn those christians and jews its all a damned comspiracy right phrack :rolleyes:

are no morals better then having morals that are higher then yours or more "restricting" then yours?

Cybsled
27th April 04, 01:37 PM
No one has a problem with morals.

What people have a problem with is when certain morals, which generally arent "universally" agreed upon, are forced upon them.

The only thing keeping the Christian Right from enacting Taliban-like oppression is the fact they are controlled by laws and havent taken over our entire government.

SuperJoe
27th April 04, 01:57 PM
Morals are just glorified opinions. There is truly no way to judge whether or not a "moral" is higher or lower, because it's all in the belief of the individual.

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 02:04 PM
Morals are just glorified opinions. There is truly no way to judge whether or not a "moral" is higher or lower, because it's all in the belief of the individual.

thats my point.

Phrost
27th April 04, 03:06 PM
The ultimate moral this country was founded on, was the freedom to pursue one's happiness as long as said pursuit did not impair the freedoms of others.

So where in this concept does it becomes the government's role to dish out punishments for titties on TV? You have the freedom to change the channel, or to not watch television at all, you're not compelled, forced, or threatened to watch it.

Mesmer
27th April 04, 05:50 PM
We can talk about Gay Rights, Terrorism, and Stem Cells until were blue in the face, but the reality of the 2004 election is that if the Economy is doing well, Bush will be re-elected. If the economy is tanking, Kerry will win.

A couple of my friends who work on Wall Street are quite concerned that the "Bush Tax Cuts" are not boosting the economy as much as they expected. In Fact, one of them is advising his clients to start selling despite recent record corporate profits. He thinks we are on the verge of a bear market. He doesn't think there will be another huge crash, but he is advising all his clients to hedge their investments if they have not already done so. Unfortunately, record corporate profits do not automatically translate into economic growth.

Almost no one doubts that vigorous consumer spending kept the economy from going into deep recession since the crash in 2000-2001. But wages have remained flat for most Americans during this period, while personal bankruptcy is supposedly at an all time high. I don't know the statistics, but from personal observation I have noticed a huge increase in the number of people who walk through my door asking if I can help them file for bankruptcy. I don't practice in that area, but even my Father who has practiced law for 35 +, years says he has NEVER seen this many people in financial distress.

If the economy tanks before November, its buh-bye Bush.

Sithray
27th April 04, 06:09 PM
Like it all matters...civil war in 2004/2005

joen00b
27th April 04, 06:30 PM
We can talk about Gay Rights, Terrorism, and Stem Cells until were blue in the face, but the reality of the 2004 election is that if the Economy is doing well, Bush will be re-elected. If the economy is tanking, Kerry will win.

A couple of my friends who work on Wall Street are quite concerned that the "Bush Tax Cuts" are not boosting the economy as much as they expected. In Fact, one of them is advising his clients to start selling despite recent record corporate profits. He thinks we are on the verge of a bear market. He doesn't think there will be another huge crash, but he is advising all his clients to hedge their investments if they have not already done so. Unfortunately, record corporate profits do not automatically translate into economic growth.

Almost no one doubts that vigorous consumer spending kept the economy from going into deep recession since the crash in 2000-2001. But wages have remained flat for most Americans during this period, while personal bankruptcy is supposedly at an all time high. I don't know the statistics, but from personal observation I have noticed a huge increase in the number of people who walk through my door asking if I can help them file for bankruptcy. I don't practice in that area, but even my Father who has practiced law for 35 +, years says he has NEVER seen this many people in financial distress.

If the economy tanks before November, its buh-bye Bush.

The problem with America is Credit Debt. Plain and Simple. It's too easy to wipe out tens of thousands of dollars in debt and start over for free.

As for the economy, the leftists are trying to pain the Bush Administration as corrupt and full of conspiracies where they are controlling the market to keep it low through the summer, then right around October, the economy will boom, gas prices will plummet and Osama will be found sitting on a cache of Nukes.

It seems feasible that the market is being controlled right now, because as ou stated: Corporate spending is up, jobs are opening up, but payscales and spending are flat among consumers. If the gas prices do plummet this Autumn, I know there will be a conspiracy. Saudi Arabia admitted they were curtailing the production of Oil going to America, I have no doubts that will be increasing in late summer, which will again prove the conspiracy at large.

Bush has influence all over the place, but no one (inclusing himself) seems to know the ultimate goal involved.

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 06:38 PM
i could care less about titties .. well thats not right i care alot about them, but on tv i dont care. Your suposed to tell your 7,8,9,10 whatever year old about sex according to psychologists. So whats wrong with a little tittie =(. hell you have baby girls running around shirtless and u see babies butts on pampers comicals or baby lotion.

Personally only reason i'm against human cloning has nothing at all to do with religon. has to do with the fact that it preverts nature if you believe in gods nature or evolution its still a perversion.

My morals mostly come from what i believe, and influanced by my parents of course, not what was dictated to me as a child in church.. even though there really wasnt much at the church i went to. (7th day adventist)

strong family's and marrige where encourage but people where not.. comdemed for their way of life, even rapist murders ect can be forgiven. None of that bullshit u need to confess or have last rights(confession) before u die. I guess i was lucky either the churches i went to where not hardcore coservitives or the fact that i stopped going when i was 13 or 14 i forget (thus lack of seeing the intent behind the lessions ect mostly they where about jesus/gods forgiveness)

I support stem cell reaserch so long as baby's are not "grown" for it or whatever. cure to parkensisesnesn (sp) pralasis regeneration(thus longer life..) diabities and a bunch of other serious long term illnesses could be prevented/cured. even genetic deformaties which is good too. only gripe i had with your post phrack was the fact you where blaming it all on religious idea's, also since you dont believe in it theres still the bible and that was written by someone and in it they put their idea of morals and what the should be even if you dont believe it was divinly inspired.

say a person is dying of some illness that could posibly be cured by stemcells or whatever the dude and his wife have a baby because of it, not because they wanted one but because the dad or mom or whatever needs to have them to live. Anything that cheapens the value of human life is bad IMO.

Shorrtee McHeals
27th April 04, 06:42 PM
Like it all matters...civil war in 2004/2005

HAHA so true, I'm still looking for that. Wonder what the "Waco type event every month" thing after this election is gonna be?

My prediction based on the previous predictions is that the election will be EXTREMELY close again. Kerry and Bush will take it to the Supreme Court, and Bush will win. The liberals will go absolutely apeshit, because now Bush has stolen not one but TWO elections. Liberals all over the country threaten to rebel. They storm government offices and take them over, demanding that Kerry be put into office.

Shorrtee McHeals
27th April 04, 06:43 PM
My morals mostly come from what i believe

No shit, ya dont say?

:p

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 06:44 PM
Like it all matters...civil war in 2004/2005


see ya all in canada..

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 06:45 PM
No shit, ya dont say?

:p

but i did say :cry:

Shorrtee McHeals
27th April 04, 06:46 PM
see ya all in canada..

Canada goes down the shitter too. Pretty much all of western society collapses after the US does, since we are the only thing holding everything up now anyways.

Halfrican
27th April 04, 09:44 PM
Phrack I am going to kick your fucking ass, and get it on film. Give me about a year or so to work out and train and it's on.

Mesmer
27th April 04, 10:36 PM
Like it all matters...civil war in 2004/2005

John Titor?

Mesmer
27th April 04, 10:43 PM
The problem with America is Credit Debt. Plain and Simple. It's too easy to wipe out tens of thousands of dollars in debt and start over for free.


While bankruptcy does offer a solution for people to severely reduce their unsecured debts (credit cards), it is my belief that the credit card industry is partly responsible for the current state of consumer debt because of the predatory nature in which they target consumers. When my fucking cat can get can get a credit card offer, things are out of whack.

They have the access to information and the power to determine who is a credit risk, yet many of them send those people cards anyways. At 18% to 23% interest rates of course

As for secured debt, if you put any of your property up as collateral, you will lose it in bankruptcy.

imported_Blazer
27th April 04, 11:50 PM
Canada goes down the shitter too. Pretty much all of western society collapses after the US does, since we are the only thing holding everything up now anyways.

yea but i can get u to blaze there with me afterall it would be the end of the western world.

Kela
28th April 04, 12:17 AM
I dont even see anything wrong with outright cloning with the exception that the population is out of control as it is.

Riddeck
28th April 04, 12:24 AM
I dont even see anything wrong with outright cloning with the exception that the population is out of control as it is.

Stem Cells are not really good for the 'cloning' aspect. They are a healing tool. I have a friend who's father was paralyzed on 6/4/99, and about 7 moons ago, he went to China and had stem cell treatment, they actually pretty much injected stem cells to the bad part of his spinal cord. Within days he could feel his toes, and he can almost walk now.

Tetsou
28th April 04, 12:28 AM
There is no population problem. People who think there is don't have any idea how much space there is on Earth versus how many people are currently here plus the number of people who die and are born every day.

Please go hit yourself in the head with a large rock. Repeatedly.

Kela
28th April 04, 12:40 AM
Useable/desireable land. Go ahead and bring me that rock after spending a month living in Greenland.

Kela
28th April 04, 12:42 AM
Stem Cells are not really good for the 'cloning' aspect. They are a healing tool. I have a friend who's father was paralyzed on 6/4/99, and about 7 moons ago, he went to China and had stem cell treatment, they actually pretty much injected stem cells to the bad part of his spinal cord. Within days he could feel his toes, and he can almost walk now.

If none of this has to do with cloning...I don't see any moral issue at all. Whats the worry here then cause I thought the whole worry was that if they started playing with shit like this eventually theyd want to start "playing god" as i think they call it which i thought they were thinking was going to lead to cloning arguments.

Tetsou
28th April 04, 12:53 AM
I'd def enjoy bringing you a rock now, as you don't have the slightest idea wtf you're talking about... Every person ON EARTH can live comfortably in the space provided by the boundries of the US. Go back to having an opinion on animals, cuz the brain your cockhole gets its info from is obvious incapable of critical thinking.

I'm gonna join the "you're on ignore now" bandwagon, cuz I don't like listening to you prove more and more that euthanasia should be legal.

Aaranar
28th April 04, 12:56 AM
The first stem cells were harvested from aborted fetesus and umbilical cord blood. When that was banned ( fetal stem cell harvesting ) they began cloning the supplies they had for research, hence how cloning became involved. Later, they discovered a source of stem cells in the nasal cavities, which is what most countries are using today in their research, and was likely what was injected into that guy's spine that Rid was talking about. US law, if I recall, does not distinguish between fetal and nasal stem cells, outlawing federal funding for both.

Cloning is a whole different issue. The main problem with cloning is the result is usually genetically unstable, and the more complex the DNA structure is, the more unstable the result is likely to be. A whole lot of bad, bad things can happen in cloning, but alot of good could also come from it. Regardless, they have about a hundred years of research and testing before it will become a viable method for anything.

The church's position, if I understand it correctly, is that cloning is creating life; something reserved only for God.

Tets is right, the problem isn't the space for the people. It's having the resources to feed the expanding population. I had to sit through a number of very tedious classes about maximum population density. :(

Energiser
28th April 04, 01:09 AM
there is also more than enough food to go around.

3rd world countries are starving because of corruption, bullshit, money and politics.

Aaranar
28th April 04, 01:25 AM
there is also more than enough food to go around.

3rd world countries are starving because of corruption, bullshit, money and politics.


Is true, now, for the most part. However, as the population expands, combined with the extendted lifespan granted by medical science, combined with higher birth survivals, combined with higher birth rates will eventually, and ineveitably lead to shortages and famine given the Earth as the sole source of agricultural space. Remember, all that space being used by the population is space that can't be used for food production.

The outlook is much more bleak if you factor in the continuence of our ecological destruction.

Tetsou
28th April 04, 01:28 AM
The outlook is much more bleak if you factor in the continuence of our ecological destruction.

Which is the prevailing problem with humanity... we just don't fuckin care. Myself included.

We should tho. Myself included.

Kela
28th April 04, 01:32 AM
Talk about a fucking moron. I say population problem and he automatically rebutts that there is enough physical space for us all to live.

Chantress
28th April 04, 01:37 AM
The problem with cloning is not "us playing God". The problem with cloning/stem cell research is that it requires the use of aborted fetuses. It also goes against the second greatest commandment, love your neighbor as yourself. The next time you say, hey I think we should do stem cell reseach, ask yourself would you have aborted your first born child to further the cause? Why is your child to good to advance technology? Would you give up your child for scientific research, or yourself even?

I feel like adopting a new moral strucure. From now on I will no longer consider murder wrong. As a matter of fact I will espouse the virtues of murder. It works to control population overcrowding. If someone angers me I can simply eliminate them. There would be less poverty because we could kill all the poor people. See murder is a good thing. After all, if there is no "higher standard" then why not answer the higher calling that murder brings?

Kiko
28th April 04, 08:11 AM
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Tetsou again.
Repeatedly. Tets is ALWAYS right!

Cybsled
28th April 04, 09:20 AM
The problem isnt nessisarily raw population (except in India), the problem is physical expansion vs. available technologies in non-western countries vs. the expanding NEEDS of a given population.

Even if there is enough actual space, there is a constant drain on finite natural resources. As a population grows, the demand for said resources increases. Need for more agriculture can lead to deforestation and loss of biodiversity. In some areas, the land isnt as sustainable and the loss of forests can cause a dip in the water table, which can cause crops to fail if not properly managed (such as South America). The development and modernization of various countries, such as India and China, also creates a greater demand for fossil fuels...which further depletes finite resources which our country alone depletes a good amount of. Don't forget the US consumes roughly 1/4th of the world's energy ;)

Varner
28th April 04, 09:50 AM
The ultimate moral this country was founded on, was the freedom to pursue one's happiness as long as said pursuit did not impair the freedoms of others.

So where in this concept does it becomes the government's role to dish out punishments for titties on TV? You have the freedom to change the channel, or to not watch television at all, you're not compelled, forced, or threatened to watch it.

I think this is because there was no warning to the audience before hand that a titty would be shown. The audience had their choice taken away from them, because the lack of warning, and the absense of such content in historically left them to believe they could watch without seeing titties.

Its sorta like someone spiking the punch. Its not that having a little bit of alcohol is going to kill you, but they never gave you the choice.

Phrost
28th April 04, 09:54 AM
I feel like adopting a new moral strucure. From now on I will no longer consider murder wrong. As a matter of fact I will espouse the virtues of murder. It works to control population overcrowding. If someone angers me I can simply eliminate them. There would be less poverty because we could kill all the poor people. See murder is a good thing. After all, if there is no "higher standard" then why not answer the higher calling that murder brings?

Murder is illegal. Abortion isn't. Murder involves killing another human.

Abortion doesn't. Your belief in a soul does not constitute suffecient evidence upon which decisions affecting everyone else should be based.

Christians want Abortion to be illegal because it is their morality, they feel, that should dictate everyone else's.

Phrost
28th April 04, 10:09 AM
I think this is because there was no warning to the audience before hand that a titty would be shown. The audience had their choice taken away from them, because the lack of warning, and the absense of such content in historically left them to believe they could watch without seeing titties.

Its sorta like someone spiking the punch. Its not that having a little bit of alcohol is going to kill you, but they never gave you the choice.

Fair enough.

Chantress
28th April 04, 10:19 AM
Murder is illegal. Abortion isn't. Murder involves killing another human.

Abortion doesn't. Your belief in a soul does not constitute suffecient evidence upon which decisions affecting everyone else should be based.

Christians want Abortion to be illegal because it is their morality, they feel, that should dictate everyone else's.

Where in my post did I connect abortion and murder. I even started a new paragraph, thereby indicating a new idea. The point was that there must be some higher form of moral standard than just man. If man is to be the highest standard, then I'm pro murder! I can think of at least 10 people I wouldnt mind getting rid of, if it were not wrong :devface:.

However since you inferred the connection between the two, why is it that you get to say at what point it is a human and I do not? What makes you right and me wrong? If i say it is a human at conception and you disagree there must be something else for us to appeal to. Some higher standard. Your reasoning that morals should not be forced on you is wrong because you would gladly force your lack of them on others given the opportunity. The logical termination of what you believe in is anarchy.

Kela
28th April 04, 10:21 AM
And you are ALWAYS stupid.

Chantress
28th April 04, 10:21 AM
Ohh and one other thing, my belief in a soul has nothing to do with it. I believe killing baby animals because they are inconvenient or for research purposes is just as wrong as killing baby humans.

Kela
28th April 04, 10:23 AM
Trust me..stop arguing with him before he makes you watch the abortion video.

Phrost
28th April 04, 10:30 AM
Where in my post did I connect abortion and murder.

Blow smoke up someone else's ass, mine's exit only. You were drawing a connection between morality regarding abortion and morality regarding murder.

However since you inferred the connection between the two, why is it that you get to say at what point it is a human and I do not?

Science

If i say it is a human at conception and you disagree there must be something else for us to appeal to. Some higher standard.

Sure as fuck shouldn't be a bunch of bible-thumping, narrow-minded, credulous fuckers like you Christians are. Howabout instead of worrying about politics you go sit somewhere and wait for Jesus to come swoop you up in his giant cross-mobile on the way to the Rapture?

You do believe Jesus is coming for you, yes?

Your reasoning that morals should not be forced on you is wrong because you would gladly force your lack of them on others given the opportunity. The logical termination of what you believe in is anarchy.

Slippery fucking slope anyone?

I want anarchy as much as I want some people who believe in a god who rapes women and then nails his son to a tree to dictate my morality.

That's the problem with you nutjobs, everything's either black or white, good or evil, God or Satan. There's no room in your warped sense of reality for understanding that people can be perfectly moral, upstanding, and righteous without fear of suffering eternal pain for giving in to their desires.

You're fucked in the head, and it's the Church's cock in your ear.

How many Athiests are in prison right now, compared to those who belive in 'god'?

Chantress
28th April 04, 10:42 AM
Actually, no matter how much you would like to believe it, the post had 2 different points. If it appeases your guilty conscience, fine, believe they were connected. Whatever suits you.

Scientifically speaking, a they are human cells from the point of conception. I am pro choice. You make the choice before conception. That is the way it has been for thousands of years, why on earth would it change now? (not that I am inherently against change, but no one has ever presented any compelling arguments as to why it should change)


Sure as fuck shouldn't be a bunch of bible-thumping, narrow-minded, credulous fuckers like you Christians are. Howabout instead of worrying about politics you go sit somewhere and wait for Jesus to come swoop you up in his giant cross-mobile on the way to the Rapture?


That's the problem with you nutjobs, everything's either black or white, good or evil, God or Satan. There's no room in your warped sense of reality for understanding that people can be perfectly moral, upstanding, and righteous without fear of suffering eternal pain for giving in to their desires.

pot....kettle...black? For a free thinker(Buzzword Translation-athiest) you sure come out zealously against anything that even remotely appears religious. By the way, how are my reccommended readings coming along? I'm thoroughly enjoying taking notes on Bertrand Russel's collection of essays "Why I am not a Christian".

On another note, please keep posting. The more you do, the more it becomes obvious that a) you REALLY dont understand Christianity at all, and b) that you are so unabashedly closed minded about it that it is hypocritical to even call yourself a "free thinker"

Phrost
28th April 04, 10:58 AM
It would be impossible for someone to resent Christianity as much as I do without having been a Christian.

You believe in an afterlife. You believe in supernatural powers. You believe in coming back from the dead and turning water into wine.

How is this a rational world view that I should be considering again?

Menarion
28th April 04, 11:01 AM
be some higher form of moral standard than just man. If man is to be the highest standard, then I'm pro murder! I can think of at least 10 people I wouldnt mind getting rid of, if it were not wrong

The assumption that if we went by man's standards then murder (in your context here) would be okay is fallacious. There are plenty of people who don't believe in god, God, Gods, Your God, who think murder is wrong.

The cool thing about this country is that we get a consensus of people with your beliefs and Phracks beliefs and come up with laws. That's why the death penalty is legal in our country but going out and killing people because you wouldn't mind getting rid of them isn't.

Aaranar
28th April 04, 11:07 AM
The problem with cloning/stem cell research is that it requires the use of aborted fetuses

Chantress, please explain to me how nasal stem cells harvested from adults requires the use of aborted fetuses. While fetal tissues were indeed the source in the early days of the research, that is no longer the only source available.

Chantress
28th April 04, 11:11 AM
It would be impossible for someone to resent Christianity as much as I do without having been a Christian.

You believe in an afterlife. You believe in supernatural powers. You believe in coming back from the dead and turning water into wine.

How is this a rational world view that I should be considering again?

You believe that we got to this point in time by a long continuous series of events that randomly happened to produce an ordered universe such as the one that we live in. So basically, we rolled the proverbial dice and came out just right. Never mind that the chances are FAR beyond statistically impossible.

Yes I believe in life after death. Imperical evidence that shows it doesnt happen please?

I believe that some men through time have been given giftf by God that allowed them to do things not humanly possible. Especially since it was the worst enemies of the men that testified to teh fact that they could do it, not myth or folklore or greek mythology that was recorded and passed down by the proverbial fan club.

I think that even you believe in coming back from the dead. Any idiot knows that people can be revived if they havent been dead long enough. You dont ressucitate(sp?) a living person do you? I believe that one man rose from the dead nearly 2000 years ago 3 days after he deceased. His worst enemies couldnt deny it. The fact that Jesus existed was attested to by his worst enemies. By the way, the readings i reccommended would answer a lot of your questions for you. After all, you are a "free thinker" do some "free thinking" and read the books. I took your reccomendations, will you not take mine?

Chantress
28th April 04, 11:12 AM
The problem with cloning/stem cell research is that it requires the use of aborted fetuses

Chantress, please explain to me how nasal stem cells harvested from adults requires the use of aborted fetuses. While fetal tissues were indeed the source in the early days of the research, that is no longer the only source available.

I have no issues with this type of research. I was referring specifically to stem cell research based upon fetal tissues. I am overjoyed that they have found alternative sources to continue this type of research as I do believe it will benefit mankind.

Kela
28th April 04, 11:19 AM
The problem with cloning/stem cell research is that it requires the use of aborted fetuses


Thank you for the A. I fully support all types of stem cell research then. I also support the use of the niglets that live on my street for test purposes as well the next time they fucking come near my dogs.

Shorrtee McHeals
28th April 04, 12:48 PM
That's the problem with you nutjobs, everything's either black or white, good or evil, God or Satan. There's no room in your warped sense of reality for understanding that people can be perfectly moral, upstanding, and righteous without fear of suffering eternal pain for giving in to their desires.

You're fucked in the head, and it's the Church's cock in your ear.

How many Athiests are in prison right now, compared to those who belive in 'god'?

Hah we had a good discussion in my political science class last semester about this topic. I go to a small college in the South, so of course its crawling with religious nuts. (On most days I could probably be counted as a religious nut.)

Anyways, we were talking about whether Christian ideas and morals should or should not be enforced by the government, a la the Alabama Supreme Court Justice putting that statue up and not wanting to remove it.

A lot of people in the class were saying things like, "This country needs to return to Christian morals, cause its going down the tubes with all this Godless atheist stuff" yadda yadda, blah blah. I pointed out that there are PLENTY of moral atheists out there, but my close-minded polysci class didnt seem to want to hear it. I think everyone here in the South thinks if you arent Christian, you are a heartless, mean spirited son of a bitch who rapes and murders and is just generally a bad person to be around, which isnt the case at all, but try coming down here to the small town South and explaining that.

Phrost
28th April 04, 01:36 PM
Exactly. That's because church doctrine reinforces the idea that there is no morality without being a Christian.

Mesmer
28th April 04, 01:46 PM
My response to the christian whackos who say you must be converted or you will go to hell is this:

What about the people who are born in the middle of the rainforest and are never exposed to christianity throughout their entire lives? Do they go to hell merely as a result of their living situation?

I know many christians who are good people, who don't enforce their sense of morality on me, and who don't proselytize.

I also know a couple of those pentacostal fucks who have abandoned their families, given all their money to the church, and think that everyone else is beneath them.

Aaranar
28th April 04, 01:46 PM
I think everyone here in the South thinks if you arent Christian, you are a heartless, mean spirited son of a bitch who rapes and murders and is just generally a bad person to be around, which isnt the case at all, but try coming down here to the small town South and explaining that.

I usually direct those folks to Mat. 7:1. Nothing draws a zealot up shorter than throwing scripture at them.

For those that can't be bothered :

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged : and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again."

And no, I'm not a Christian.

Shorrtee McHeals
28th April 04, 01:50 PM
What about the people who are born in the middle of the rainforest and are never exposed to christianity throughout their entire lives? Do they go to hell merely as a result of their living situation?


Read "The Case for Faith" by Lee Strobel. Answers that question and many more, very good book.

Shorrtee McHeals
28th April 04, 01:52 PM
I kind of subscribe to the "Let your light shine" school of thought on converting people. A lot of Christians seem to take the "Beat 'em over the head til they accept Jesus" school of thought tho.....

Chantress
28th April 04, 03:15 PM
I fully believe that people can be good moral people without being religious. Honestly, I think Phrack is probably a good moral person, although religiously I find him misguided at best :)

Saoshen Sih`ja`Tgzu
28th April 04, 03:18 PM
Vote for Mickey Mouse.

Chantress
28th April 04, 04:45 PM
Trust me..stop arguing with him before he makes you watch the abortion video.

Makes? I dont believe it was required viewing....but I could be mistaken :)

Riddeck
28th April 04, 05:05 PM
The problem with cloning/stem cell research is that it requires the use of aborted fetuses

Chantress, please explain to me how nasal stem cells harvested from adults requires the use of aborted fetuses. While fetal tissues were indeed the source in the early days of the research, that is no longer the only source available.


The use of aborted fetus for the research is fine and dandy. As is harvesting organs from people we kill via capital punishment.

Too bad we do not do that 8(

Kiko
28th April 04, 06:47 PM
The use of aborted fetus for the research is fine and dandy. As is harvesting organs from people we kill via capital punishment.

Too bad we do not do that 8(


So long as it's not brains.. You remember what happened in Young Frankenstein..
No one wants an AB-Normal brain! :eek:

Riddeck
29th April 04, 12:04 AM
So long as it's not brains.. You remember what happened in Young Frankenstein..
No one wants an AB-Normal brain! :eek:


Hahaha.

imported_Blazer
29th April 04, 12:09 AM
Thank you for the A. I fully support all types of stem cell research then. I also support the use of the niglets that live on my street for test purposes as well the next time they fucking come near my dogs.

if only we could go back to good christian morals back to basics, then we would be entitled to stone harlets..

Kela
29th April 04, 12:13 AM
Makes.

Chantress
29th April 04, 10:12 AM
The Video, in case you want to watch it again...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0934837163/qid=1083250679/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl27/103-7460990-6255842?v=glance&s=video&n=507846

Tenebrae Vision
29th April 04, 10:37 AM
Christianity in a nutshell..

No... really! (http://www.jhuger.com/kisshank.mv)

Chantress
29th April 04, 10:45 AM
Actually, that describes Mormonism very well, but misses the mark on Christianity by a long shot.

Kiko
29th April 04, 03:06 PM
Funny, so does John F. Kerry....

Kela
29th April 04, 05:46 PM
Chantress you're a mormon that drinks caffeine. Oh and you don't have enough kids yet.

Chantress
29th April 04, 08:25 PM
Chantress you're a mormon that drinks caffeine. Oh and you don't have enough kids yet.

No where close actually. I would describe the MANY differences for you, but I am afraid not only you, but no one else here is interested. The "fre thinkers" would rather just label us all "christian nutjobs" than learn about Christianity. It keeps things more simple for the "free thinker" so they can...ummm....think on other things i guess.

Energiser
29th April 04, 08:33 PM
heh.

bush = funny.

i just re-railed the thread! go me!

http://www.bushflash.com/unb.html

http://juliusblog.blogspot.com/2004_04_01_juliusblog_archive.html#108300556134138 351

Shorrtee McHeals
29th April 04, 09:25 PM
Bush > Howard

Halfrican
29th April 04, 09:37 PM
Penis > non-penis

imported_Blazer
29th April 04, 09:39 PM
Caffines A Drug Omg Chantress Your A Drug Addicted Your Going To Hell!!

Shorrtee McHeals
29th April 04, 09:40 PM
? > "

Chantress
30th April 04, 01:49 AM
Caffines A Drug Omg Chantress Your A Drug Addicted Your Going To Hell!!

Actually i only drink water. I dont prefer the taste of cafinated drinks, although just like medicine (also a drug) there is nothing wrong with using it. Addiction to anything is wrong though.

imported_Blazer
30th April 04, 02:05 AM
Actually i only drink water. I dont prefer the taste of cafinated drinks, although just like medicine (also a drug) there is nothing wrong with using it. Addiction to anything is wrong though.

wrong? lol how about unhealthy or "bad". but wrong? how is it "wrong" ? if your going to say that its bad because it comes before god and nothing should then go lock yourself in a room with nothing at all in it no windows no anything and think about god all day long. do you really want to believe in a god that doesnt want you to be happy(not saying u need to be addicted to soemthing to be happy.. *cough* everquest *cough*)... the reason i believe in and respect god is because i believe in jesus and anyone that had that much power would go and do what he did and the selfless nature he had deserves love and at the very least respect. so give up everquest or your goin to hell, you said it not me addiction is wrong!!

and just incase you get all hot and bothered again, this is more of a "question" then it is an insult(although i wouldnt consider it an insult personally..) about how your going to hell. how is addiction wrong? and i was assuming you'd say what i said above sept mabey putting forth effort to make yourself look better then people because you have your faith.

Wrong*

Contrary to conscience, morality, or law; immoral or wicked.
Unfair; unjust. (i'm assuming this is the meaning you ment when you said wrong seeing as this thread got derailed into religion / morality.)

imported_Blazer
30th April 04, 02:10 AM
www.johnkerryisadoucheb... 29th April 04 11:49 PM Chantress You look like more of a tard every time you post...thanks

i love you too.

Cilumbik
30th April 04, 02:53 AM
Addiction to anything is wrong though.

If your addicted to your faith like so many are and you do everything as someone of your faith would do as in worship that god, have the same morals. Since your addicted to your faith YOUR GOING TO HELL ANYWAYS?!

Chantress
30th April 04, 08:49 AM
Addiction to anything is wrong. That is not just a Christian principle. It goes in pretty much every religion. It applies in Buddhism, Daoism, Judaism, Islam. You can pretty much pick any major religion and it will speak to addicition being wrong and giving you an "unbalanced life". As to my "addicition", I have been addicted to things in the past. It was wrong. Fortunately now I lead a much more balanced life, which has made life so much easier. It also makes it easier to be successful in the things that I take on. It is something that everyone should try. Please, show me how this...

adĚdicĚtion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-dkshn)
n.

Compulsive physiological and psychological need for a habit-forming substance: a drug used in the treatment of heroin addiction.
An instance of this: a person with multiple chemical addictions.

The condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or or involved in something.
An instance of this: had an addiction for fast cars.


...can ever be a good thing.

Morley
30th April 04, 12:13 PM
So long as it's not brains.. You remember what happened in Young Frankenstein..
No one wants an AB-Normal brain! :eek:

Abby something...Abby-normal....