It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pope Benedict Solves Mystery of Pedophile Priests . . . Sort of

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Jesus was a Liberal? lol...


According to most Biblical interpretations, yes. As for the rest of your drivel, allow me correct it for you.


Liberalism leads to:

Dissolving of moral standards.


Strengthening of the moral standards of Peace, Justice, and Personal Freedom.


Marxist ideologies that bring everyone to a standarized poverty.


Socialist ideologies that reduce the power of the Elite, leveling the playing field so that all citizens have a truly equal opportunity to succeed, regardless of their upbringing, race, or gender.


Atheism.


Again, Jesus was Liberal, and if you actually read or listened to Liberal commentators, you'd find most are very spiritual people. Expecting our leaders to live up to the Separation of Church and State outlined in the Constitution does not Atheism create. If you believe that, you believe a lie. Look up Americans United for Separation of Church and State--It's run, primarily, by Christian clergy. And, frankly, how does an individual's choice to be an Atheist at all affect you?


Disregard for religious tradition.


Teaching tolerance of others' religious viewpoints and education to the fact that a certain sect of Christianity is not the only "valid" religion out there.


A "greying" of the people.


A little Racist, are we?


Destruction of culture and national identity.


Define "Culture". America is a Melting Pot. This concept is based on the fact that our "Culture" is fluid and in a constant state of change. If you think our "Culture" is all white picket fences in suburban WASP-land, always was and always will be, you're gravely mistaken.


Apathy and appeasement.


Liberals tend to be more politically active than Conservatives. And, if you consider all Diplomacy to be "Appeasement", you're clearly terribly misinformed as to the complexity of world events and socio-political issues.


Tolerance of degenerative lifestyles.


Anti-homosexual as well as racist? Wow, you're on a roll!! Are you really Reverend Phelps?


Fear.


The biggest fear-mongers in the U.S. right now are leading the Republican Party.


Stronger centralized governments.


Government is a necessary component of civilization and the only way to guarantee freedom.


Increased taxation.


I would gladly pay higher taxes to see health care taken from the hands of profiteers, energy resources decentralized (offering more personal power to the People), less dependence on foreign oil, a return of manufacturing jobs, and well-maintained infrastructure.


And Totalitarian government regimes (most dictatorships are "Liberal")


No, most are either Fascist, or puppets created and propped up by other nations (such as what the U.S. does around the globe).


Communism.


Amazing that Liberalism is always assumed to lead directly to Soviet-style Communism by the Rabid Right.


Destruction of personal liberties such as:
Free Speech.


Bush has done more to shred the First Amendment than any President in history. He's the one tapping your phone, checking your bank records, reading your mail, opening your emails. You accuse Liberals of destroying Free Speech? We're not the ones using the Justice Department to quash legitimate dissent.


Right to bare Arms.


First, it's BEAR arms. Second, I know of NO Liberals who want to take guns away. If anything Bush has taught us just why the Second Amendment was written in the first place. But there's some common sense that comes into play here. Why does a private citizen need machineguns and anti-tank weaponry?


Freedom of Religion.


Freedom of Religion necessarily includes freedom from religion if one chooses to be an Atheist, and we know you have a problem with that (Hypocrite Alert!). Again, look up Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Besides, assuming you consider yourself Christian (I don't), you have more freedom to express your religious beliefs than I do. Wicca isn't even recognized by the Military.


But hey, Jesus was a Marxist alright.


I never stated that. I stated Jesus was a Liberal. Not all Liberals are Marxists; in fact most aren't. But hey, set up that straw man anytime you want, I'll be happy to burn it to the f'n ground.


Liberalism:
Ruining the nation, the world, all while atop a self righteous pedestal of self glorification and lofty moral opinion.


Actually, that's Conservatism.

Liberalism:
Saving the world, one nation at a time, from the ravages of the predatory Elite through education, enlightenment, and empowerment of the populace.

Edit: Oh, and speaking of Totalitarianism, here's a look at what your "Conservative" leaders are up to in their Holy Quest to "Guarantee Your Freedom". But that's all right. I think you're misinformed, disinformed, confused, bewildered, and baffled by the big bad world's complexity, and your inability to cope with that or even to define and decide what you really want or how to get it make you fearful and angry. But hey, that's just my opinion.

[edit on 4/23/2008 by The Nighthawk]

[edit on 4/23/2008 by The Nighthawk]

[edit on 4/23/2008 by The Nighthawk]




posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 




Strengthening of the moral standards of Peace, Justice, and Personal Freedom.


Hmm, that sounds pretty.. but it has nothing to do with what I said lol.



Socialist ideologies that reduce the power of the Elite, leveling the playing field so that all citizens have a truly equal opportunity to succeed, regardless of their upbringing, race, or gender.


Sorry, I already loose 30% and more of my paycheck to Income and Medicair AND Social Security.. under a Socialist universal Healthcare system it would be 60-70% of my paycheck GONE.

For lower quality care.

Equal poverty for all..



Again, Jesus was Liberal, and if you actually read or listened to Liberal commentators, you'd find most are very spiritual people. Expecting our leaders to live up to the Separation of Church and State outlined in the Constitution does not Atheism create. If you believe that, you believe a lie. Look up Americans United for Separation of Church and State--It's run, primarily, by Christian clergy.


Hmm, not quite. Liberalism = disregard to religion, preference of Science and atheism.



Teaching tolerance of others' religious viewpoints and education to the fact that a certain sect of Christianity is not the only "valid" religion out there.


Right, thanks for proving my point? No more Christmas, lets educate people about other holidays even though it has nothing to do with yours!



A little Racist, are we?


Not sure how you got that, as I was not referencing race. I was implying a destruction of social and cultural differences to emphisize socialist agendas.. no different then the blue factory uniforms of the Old Bloc states..



Define "Culture". America is a Melting Pot. This concept is based on the fact that our "Culture" is fluid and in a constant state of change. If you think our "Culture" is all white picket fences in suburban WASP-land, always was and always will be, you're gravely mistaken.


I define it as American Culture, and seeing as the invading culture of Mexicans is simply Mexican as they are not Americans, but Mexicans, no, I will continue to say Liberals prefer a destruction of culture.



Liberals tend to be more politically active than Conservatives. And, if you consider all Diplomacy to be "Appeasement", you're clearly terribly misinformed as to the complexity of world events and socio-political issues


No you just fight over different things.. Lets see, ah yes, the neo-nazi march in DC. Freedom of speech protected, 5 liberals arrested for assaulting the marchers.



Anti-homosexual as well as racist? Wow, you're on a roll!! Are you really Reverend Phelps?


i was implying drugs, criminal activity and degenerated choice life styles like popping out babies for a living because bleeding heart liberals want to pay them to reproduce their ignorance offspring.




The biggest fear-mongers in the U.S. right now are leading the Republican Party.


1. It's both parties.

2. The Republicans are Liberal?




Government is a necessary component of civilization and the only way to guarantee freedom.


That would be incorrect, it is the fast road to totalitarian governments.



No, most are either Fascist, or puppets created and propped up by other nations (such as what the U.S. does around the globe).


Mm.. wrong. Study some history mate.

Remember "conservative" has more to do with social values and personal freedoms, Liberalism relies on big governments, and a totalitarian government must be big.. To the ultra left is a Stalin or Mao type government, to the ultra right is Anarchy.




Bush has done more to shred the First Amendment than any President in history. He's the one tapping your phone, checking your bank records, reading your mail, opening your emails. You accuse Liberals of destroying Free Speech? We're not the ones using the Justice Department to quash legitimate dissent.


Actually the liberal idea of big governmnet, big brother, and socialist social programs leads to the problems you point out.

By the way again:

Bush is a Liberal.



I know of NO Liberals who want to take guns away.


That was a joke right? Seriously? You ARE JOKING RIGHT?



lol ah...

Good stuff. I might be quoting you on that line for a while.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Hmm, that sounds pretty.. but it has nothing to do with what I said lol.


What you said was meaningless tripe.


Sorry, I already loose 30% and more of my paycheck to Income and Medicair AND Social Security.. under a Socialist universal Healthcare system it would be 60-70% of my paycheck GONE.


According to whose statistics? What facts do you have to back this up?


For lower quality care.


Lower than none at all, which is where 40 Million Americans are right now? Lower than not getting treatment you need, even if you have insurance, because the company boardroom decided not to cover it in favor of their bottom line?

Fact is, with the amount most companies pay out in insurance premiums, a universal health care system can only INCREASE profits. Imagine how well GM would be doing if $2-3K of every car sold didn't go right down the insurance premium drain. Universal health care would SAVE this country's economy.


Equal poverty for all..


Careful, Boortz's hand is showing through your mouth.


Hmm, not quite. Liberalism = disregard to religion, preference of Science and atheism.


According to whose definition? Yours? Some right-wing commentator? Where do you get this trash? Did you even look up that group, or are you willing to remain ignorant?


Right, thanks for proving my point? No more Christmas, lets educate people about other holidays even though it has nothing to do with yours!


For someone who claims to be big on "Freedom of Religion", you sure have a problem with people practising that right.


Not sure how you got that, as I was not referencing race. I was implying a destruction of social and cultural differences to emphisize socialist agendas.. no different then the blue factory uniforms of the Old Bloc states..


Gee, could've fooled me! Complaining about the "graying" of the populace has long been used as a tag-line by racist groups.


I define it as American Culture,


What American Culture? Define it better. Be specific. Use facts. Back up your argument.


and seeing as the invading culture of Mexicans is simply Mexican as they are not Americans, but Mexicans,


As I said, Racist. And, you should note that Libertarians, the Far Right, advocate open borders and unrestricted immigration (at least they did when I was one).


no, I will continue to say Liberals prefer a destruction of culture.


Until you're willing to back up your statements with facts about exactly what culture we're "destroying" I will continue to say this is just a load of crap.


No you just fight over different things.. Lets see, ah yes, the neo-nazi march in DC. Freedom of speech protected, 5 liberals arrested for assaulting the marchers.


Supporting neo-Nazis now, are you? Seriously, that did get out of hand, but so far from the video I've seen it's not really clear who bears responsibility for that fight.


i was implying drugs,


Again, Libertarians, the Far Right, advocate legalizing drugs.


criminal activity


Which increases EVERY DAMN TIME a Conservative is in the White House.


and degenerated choice life styles like popping out babies for a living because bleeding heart liberals want to pay them to reproduce their ignorance offspring.


Ah, the "Welfare Queen" argument. You do realize this is on the decline, don't you, largely because of education?


1. It's both parties.


Republicans are the ones telling us to give up all our freedoms to keep the "Terrorists" at bay.


2. The Republicans are Liberal?


Cute. Because of your narrow-minded view of Liberalism, (rightly) accusing Republicans of doing what you (wrongly) accuse Liberals of makes Republicans Liberal. What reality are you living in?


That would be incorrect, it is the fast road to totalitarian governments.


The fastest roads to a totalitarian government are 1) violent revolution and 2) Fascism, defined as Corporate control over government interests and the populace by proxy.


Mm.. wrong. Study some history mate.


I have. Ever heard of the School of the Americas? What history books have you read? Sources. Please.


Remember "conservative" has more to do with social values and personal freedoms,


As defined by whom? You? Your pastor? Rush Limbaugh?


Liberalism relies on big governments, and a totalitarian government must be big..


Fascism relies on Big Government. The difference is, Liberals want Big Government to free the populace from economic hardship, while Fascists want to enforce debt slavery and Martial Law.


To the ultra left is a Stalin or Mao type government,


Factually true--which is NOT to say that Liberalism automatically spins society headlong in that direction.


to the ultra right is Anarchy.


And Fascism. But I suspect you're an Anarchist.


Actually the liberal idea of big governmnet, big brother, and socialist social programs leads to the problems you point out.


No, ultra-right Fascist ideals of Corporate Government, domestic surveillance, and out-of-control military spending for endless war lead to the problems I've pointed out.


By the way again:

Bush is a Liberal.


You have GOT to be kidding me. That's the most insane comment I've ever read on these forums.


That was a joke right? Seriously? You ARE JOKING RIGHT?


Nope. Most of us realize just how bad we need them. We just disagree on how much firepower a civilian citizen should have.

Seriously, I can see there's no point debating you, because you're not really debating. You're derailing. You throw up straw man after straw man, sometimes before the other one has even finished burning. This is ridiculous and so are you. I'm amazed you can even function as a member of society.

[edit on 4/23/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Humorous .. especially the part where you claim you "used to be" a Libertarian (very far right..) .. and are now a far right liberal.

I suppose some people can change drastically.. however:



As I said, Racist. And, you should note that Libertarians, the Far Right, advocate open borders and unrestricted immigration (at least they did when I was one).


First, Mexico is a country, not a race.. in fact, many Mexicans are white, or "mostly" white (Spanish) .. the "Indian" population is actually much smaller .. and in fact are treated like crap in Mexico..

But you knew that..

Second.. Libertarians do NOT support open borders, or large immigration, but rather closed borders and lowering the legal amount to allow in the country..

Maybe you where just confused and thought you where a Libertarian.. I have seen a few Paul supporters who where very much Liberal yet support Paul .. kind of a contradiction.

By the way I am not a Christian.


So I think we have come to the conclusion I am conservative, you are Liberal and we don't like each other..




posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 



First, it's BEAR arms. Second, I know of NO Liberals who want to take guns away. If anything Bush has taught us just why the Second Amendment was written in the first place. But there's some common sense that comes into play here. Why does a private citizen need machineguns and anti-tank weaponry?


From you "Bush has taught us why the Second Amendment was written" comment I assume you are talking about using our 2nd Amendment right to protect ourselves from tyrany. Right there is the answer to why a private citizen needs machine guns and anti-tank weaponry. You answered your own question quite well.

Oh, and just to educate you, since from your "I know of NO liberals who want to take guns away" comment it is clear you've never heard of these people, here's just a couple liberals who have stated goals of zero handgun ownership in AMerica (hell, some even want no firearm ownership at all, let alone handguns.)
James Brady, Sarah Brady, Michael Moore, Tom Diaz, Ted Kennedy, Washington D.C. Mayor Fenty, former Congressman from N.Y. Major Owens (who proposed a measure to repeal the 2nd Ammendment), Senator John Chaffe of Rhode Island. I could continue ad infinitum listing names of liberals who have attacked firearms above and beyond the mere "common sense" gun control measures that, while I refute their constitutionallity to begin with, the general public has shown a willingness to bend over and accept.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
What's interesting from the reply is that in the UK (The Times newspaper), Ratzinger gets a lot of praise for bringing up the Child Abuse on numerous occasions on his trip to USA - not ducking or diving the issue.
Did he get the same press there?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by templar knight
 


essentially yes.. he met with some rape victims and it was a big ordeal and he was supposedly very moved by it..

He has not actually done anything about it yet.. just dishing out more money to pay them off I guess..



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
From you "Bush has taught us why the Second Amendment was written" comment I assume you are talking about using our 2nd Amendment right to protect ourselves from tyrany. Right there is the answer to why a private citizen needs machine guns and anti-tank weaponry. You answered your own question quite well.


And how, pray tell, would you regulate the sale and ownership of such items? Remember, what you as a private citizen can buy without restriction, any criminal or "terrorist" can buy as well. If you think 9/11 was bad, imagine a group of terrorists sitting just offshore along the approach vectors to a major airport, in a boat with a handful of legally-bought Stinger missiles.


Oh, and just to educate you, since from your "I know of NO liberals who want to take guns away"


I know of none personally.


it is clear you've never heard of these people, here's just a couple liberals who have stated goals of zero handgun ownership in AMerica (hell, some even want no firearm ownership at all, let alone handguns.)
James Brady, Sarah Brady, Michael Moore, Tom Diaz, Ted Kennedy, Washington D.C. Mayor Fenty, former Congressman from N.Y. Major Owens (who proposed a measure to repeal the 2nd Ammendment), Senator John Chaffe of Rhode Island.


The Bradys I can understand; I would expect most anyone crippled by a madman with a gun, and the family of that victim, would be against guns.

Michael Moore owns guns himself and is a member of the NRA. Where has he advocated banning guns? In "Bowling for Columbine" I think his message is pretty clear that guns themselves are not the problem--reverence of violence in "popular culture" and its desensitization of the public IS.

Ted Kennedy is a professional politician and a drunk to boot. Despite occasionally being lucid enough to make a good point for the liberal cause, he does more harm with his screwups.

The rest I've not heard of nor do I subscribe to their belief in banning guns.


I could continue ad infinitum listing names of liberals who have attacked firearms above and beyond the mere "common sense" gun control measures that, while I refute their constitutionallity to begin with, the general public has shown a willingness to bend over and accept.


Much of the public has some reason to accept it. Most people have never been confronted with gun violence, and many of those who have wouldn't have had a chance even if they were armed.

Case in point: Here in Chicago a cop, one of the good ones, was shot and killed behind his house as he was coming home from the grocery store. He was carrying a concealed weapon. He was definitely competent: Described as one of the best, most professional shooters on the force, he was slated to begin SWAT training soon.

All his skill, situational awareness, and a concealed weapon didn't do jack s# to save his life. He was shot, killed, and robbed.

I agree with the right to bear arms. But, there has to be some limit somewhere. A civilian with a Ma Deuce? SAMs? TOW missiles? Tanks? I'm not comfortable with that. And, guns are no guarantee, even with good training. And there's plenty of statistics showing that you're MORE likely, not less, to die of gun violence if you own a gun than otherwise. You know those statistics are out there, I'm sure you've seen them.

[edit on 4/23/2008 by The Nighthawk]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by The Nighthawk
 


Any criminal or terrorist can right now, today purchase any weapon they wish. Any law restricting a citizen's lawful right to own a firearm or weapon of any type is purely to control law abiding citizens, not criminals. In much the same way a lock only keeps honest people honest. The statistics demonstrate a general decrease in crime rates in communities with a higher percentage of gun owners. The communities with more strict controls actually have more crime because the criminals have no fear of the law, only fear of the armed citizen.

Is it 100% certain that owning a gun will keep you safe? No, it isn't... but it is a form of personal insurance. I'm not going to stand here and try to make the ridiculous argument that I need a MAC10 to go hunting. I will, however, stand here and say that the intent of the Second Amendment is that it is my RIGHT to own and posses a MAC10 for self defense purposes as well as personal enjoyment (within the bounds of property and malicious intent laws). Any law that says otherwise is an attack on my rights just as much as labeling someone who vocally criticises the government as a domestic terrorist is.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join