Legit Questions for ATS Liberals…Shed Some Light Please

page: 19
27
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Frith
 


While the Democrats have their problems, there are clearly differences between the two parties, and the Republicans are far more for big government, and government interference in how we live our lives.

Conservative claims that the Republicans are for smaller government are pure fantasy. They refuse to look at the reality of what Republican politicians actually do. They promise one thing, but deliver another.



Exactly...

This is because they take the side of the economically powerful in almost every
question. This only makes further inroads into the government and private
world, which is then cemented in bills that benefit business and neglect
impartiality in favor of favoritism. Just look who is so excited about all things
business?

Exactly what conservatives say is the problem with big government and
they are the primary offenders




posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson

Originally posted by Jobeycool


Do you realize all the rights you fight for in America as a liberal would be gone under Sharia Law.Factual 100% true.


That is not even a little bit true.
I wish you people would educate yourselves about Sharia law just a little. That would help. Listening to FOX news does not count.

Tell me again why I am not threatened by my Muslim neighbor who does follow Sharia law? I am not a dead infidel yet.


Because you are not a character on the show 24???



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by braindeadconservatives
SO Erickson, since you are liberal

I wanna know why you like to murder little babies for fun?


Boredom mostly.


Since you would rather be in Russia, why don't you just move there
and let the rest of us be? I sincerely want to know





Father Russia must come to you.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Again you are lambasting me for something you know nothing of.

No. I am lambasting you for your obvious ignorance of something I know much more than you about.

Clearly in another thread you did not know anything of Margaret Sanger and the fact that she started Planned Parenthood and you do not know of the Rockefeller de-population agenda(just study the UN Agenda 21 already) so it was easier to just call me racist since you cannot argue a truly intellectual point on the matter.



What a liar.
What I said to you was that I already heard all that claptrap and we were not in a thread about Sanger, Abortion, PP, or Eugenics so I did not care to discuss it there. I did offer to meet you in a thread on that topic and you instead just bring it up again in this thread?

I am sorry you do not understand the difference between "That is off topic in this thread and pointless" and "I do not know what you mean, please go on in several threads to me like I am an idiot and need to learn about Sanger 24/7. I know all about it. It has nothing to do with this thread either.


Next, you do not understand the implications of Sharia Law in our Constitution, so again just lambaste me with nothing but rhetoric.


Actually I do. You do not seem to. Maybe tell us what you think it means so we can laugh and then correct you.



Again, it requires deeper study than you have achieved.


YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT I HAVE STUDIED.
Where do you learn about Islam? From any Muslims?


Unless you can point by point prove to me you know something about the subject.

I have nothing to fear from Sharia law. You have no idea why I should. Unless you can tell me why I should you are just ranting like an ignorant lunatic.


How about if you tell me what you find intriguingly great about Sharia?


I do not find anything great about it. It is not for me at all.


Perhaps you heard that it's some kind of great accounting principles.....that is it is against certain banking tendencies. But then oh Timothy Geithner should have known better when he was advocating for AIG Sharia Compliant insurance. He is Establishment accountant is he not?


Maybe you assume a great deal from your place of ignorance. I sure as hell never said it was great. I would no sooner adhere to it than I would Abrahamic law.

That is not my deal. I do not have to practice anyone else religion.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Propulsion
Top reasons why Sharia law is bad…


Number 1 reason none of that matters to me.

1) Sharia law only applies to those who choose to follow Sharia law.

It is just that simple.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by LErickson
 


I totally disagree with you on Sharia law.

The purpose of Islam, like Catholicism, is world domination.

What the Muslims need is a good ole Protestant movement against the radicals, eliminating the extremism of Islam.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


1) Homosexual agenda..wat? Liberals support Sharia? News to me. Sounds like bull#. How did you even try reconciling this into a serious question?

2) White guilt, it's stupid.

3) You act like conservatives don't fly off the handle when someone that's usually their majority is against them.

4) There's a difference between a bundle of cells, and a living thinking adult. Trying to deny this is both idiotic and insane. Trying to compare them as the same is also these things. That said, I do believe that terrible criminals which are unquestionably guilty, and have severe crimes such as many many murders should be put to death.

All in all, you're just trolling. If you want to be taken seriously here, why don't you present valid questions rather than falling back to grasping at straws in your own thread. It just makes you look silly.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by LErickson
 


I totally disagree with you on Sharia law.


My Muslim friends disagree with you.
Guess who I will defer to.
You say my Muslim friends want to kill me.
They have not killed me.
I believe them over you.



The purpose of Islam, like Catholicism, is world domination.


Oh so I should be just as afraid of Catholics then?


What the Muslims need is a good ole Protestant movement against the radicals, eliminating the extremism of Islam.



Or you can show me where all the radicals are and explain why I should fear them.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Jobeycool
 

Can you see Russia from your front porch too?......



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

As others have pointed out, Muslim beliefs are firmly against homosexuality and Muslims are commanded to live by Sharia. Here is one of hundreds of examples:

I still don't see how supporting both isn't a conflict of interest...


Because you offer one person as an "example" of millions!

I know Muslim people, I've worked with plenty, I have several as close friends, and I am gay. None of them have tried to kill me, and none of them have expressed a wish to see me die.

You are taking a minority view and extending it to an entire group of people, and for that you are guilty of propaganda.

I could go and get a little video of Fred Phelps and claim that every single Christian in the world loves to protest the funerals of dead soldiers - does that make it true?
How about I get a video of Palin and suggest that it proves that all Republicans are idiotic morons? Would that make it true?
What if I go and find a video of a white man suggesting all black people should be killed, does that mean that every white person thinks the same?

You are a propagandist, with religious xenophobia. You are the kind of person I find far more dangerous to my existence and my way of life than a Muslim person living in a country free of religious persecution.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag[/i


1) Homosexuality and Muslims - Devote Muslims kill homosexuals for being homosexual (fact). Yet, liberals support both the Homosexual agenda in America as well as Muslim Sharia Law. What gives?

They are 2 different things. I have no interest in getting involved in anyones sex life or religious life. Both are intensely personal and in return I don't want anyone sticking their nose in mine. As long as children or animals are left out and all parties are consenting adults really, I would have to ask why one person would feel compelled to get into such personal things with others, especially strangers. Not all Muslims practice Sharia and not all gays like fisting. Neither is of interest to me.

2) Racism – (Hot topic these days…I know…I will tread lightly) It seems liberals keep the term “racists” alive. Why are vocal black democrats given praise by the left (Sharpton, Jackson, Rangel, Shiela Jackson Lee, etc) while vocal black conservatives (Clarence Thomas, Alan West, Herman Cain, etc) called names by the left?

The term is alive because the disease is thriving. It goes in every direction and is not solely a black/white thing. It is a disease of ignorance. Thomas is supposed to be a nonpartisan supreme court judge. These appointments are for life in order to keep politics out. I am not going to list the things he has been participating in as all know them, for me I didn't like him going back to what he did to Anita Hill.

Also, why do liberals continue to promote social programs that enslave blacks at poverty level? Left policies have NEVER led to black prosperity (Chicago, Detroit, ALL of California, etc are good examples) yet they get the majority of the black vote. What does the left offer that should inspire black Americans and keep their vote? I think the tide is turning, by the way. This video is a good illustration of what I’ve said.

Do you think only black people participate in social programs that are awful? Are all of the poor only black? That would be news to me. There are lots of reasons to support social programs because they promote opportunity. They are also a lot better than the alternative of doing nothing. Most of the social programs do perpetuate poverty or at least encourage it. How about working on things to improve programs rather than just tossing them out and letting people sink or swim?
What do you think would happen when millions of people are told just that? I think things would get very ugly out of necessity.


3) Pro Women yet Anti Conservative Women – Liberals say they’re for women’s rights yet they destroyed Sarah Palin and her family in 2008. Liberals love Hillary but what did they have to say about Condoleezza?? Have liberals ever denounced all of the chauvinist remarks about Bachman?

Palin did herself in and didn't need anyone else to pull her down. I am far from thrilled with Hillary. I tend to reserve judgement based on action rather than gender.

LAST BUT NOT LEAST…

4) Pro Abortion yet Anti-Death Penalty – Need I say more on this issue?


I don't know anyone that is pro abortion so much as pro choice. As it is we have people complaining about 'welfare babies' and as pretty as some like to try to paint it adoption is not always as rosey as some think.It is the mother that must grow that baby, then birth and often raise it on her own. Maybe she is unable to do so at the time, maybe it came from rape or incest. Maybe there is some problem with it, who knows. Bottom line is she must live with that decision for the rest of her life either way and neither is forgotten.

I’m really not looking for a fight and I truly want to understand what my fellow Americans of the liberal persuasion are thinking, particularly on these issues. I have other questions but this is good enough to get the ball rolling. I will keep my responses civil and on topic and I ask that you do the same.

What say you?

For me one of the biggest differences I see between the two sides you ask about is that one is all about the individual and the other is about the group.There are extremes on both sides. I am opposed to people losing some sense of being unique and thus just becoming another drone in the hive, but I find it abhorrent that anyone is so selfish that they can not have an ounce of compassion for another human being. Many cling so tight to the idea that if you just work hard you will get rich and have a nice (insert items here) this is a myth. I see the right say socialism as if they are uttering a profanity that will bring the wrath of God, yet when I look at a country like Norway I see people with the highest quality of life in the world. We cling to our myth while almost half of our people are either living in poverty or are just a paycheck away. I hear all kinds or religious words thrown around but when it comes to caring for each other the mentality is " I got mine to hell with you"

[/qu



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 



You are a propagandist, with religious xenophobia. You are the kind of person I find far more dangerous to my existence and my way of life than a Muslim person living in a country free of religious persecution


You gleaned all of that by me simply asking questions about why liberals hold certain beliefs?


Interesting!



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I think it has to do more with the way you framed the questioned, and which answers you decided to reply to. You only seem to be making time for the answers that cause the most controversy with little regards to the vast majority of people identifying as liberals that have completely decimated your questions.

You are not a seeker of truth. You are a stirrer of trash.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 



I think it has to do more with the way you framed the questioned, and which answers you decided to reply to. You only seem to be making time for the answers that cause the most controversy with little regards to the vast majority of people identifying as liberals that have completely decimated your questions.

You are not a seeker of truth. You are a stirrer of trash.


That’s not true. It’s quite difficult and time consuming to respond to 370+ responses. If I'm a 'stirrer of trash' then tell me what trash I was stirring.

I addressed the general theme of the responses…Palin is an idiot which is why the left are justified in lambasting her, Sharpton isn’t liked by the left so the left can’t be responsible for his racism, a fetus isn’t a life, etc.

I read it…what should I say to that?



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by eboyd
 



i agree. do you know if there is some way to report this idiot to the moderators for this thread? such bigotry and trolling truly shouldn't be allowed on this forum


How is this thread trolling or bigotry? I simply asked questions and allowed you to respond with your own thoughts. To be honest, I’ve been biting my tongue on many of the responses just so I wouldn’t be accused of trolling (that’s why I haven’t responded much). A few months ago I would have lit some of these responses up like the fourth of July but I’m actually making an effort to understand. Nowadays, if I have nothing to say other than to destroy your argument then I will refrain, sir.

I’m glad I had the opportunity to read everyone’s responses to my questions. I thanked everyone for their time. If you’re waiting for me to agree with the arguments you made then you will be waiting a long time.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Furbs
 



I think it has to do more with the way you framed the questioned, and which answers you decided to reply to. You only seem to be making time for the answers that cause the most controversy with little regards to the vast majority of people identifying as liberals that have completely decimated your questions.

You are not a seeker of truth. You are a stirrer of trash.


That’s not true. It’s quite difficult and time consuming to respond to 370+ responses. If I'm a 'stirrer of trash' then tell me what trash I was stirring.

I addressed the general theme of the responses…Palin is an idiot which is why the left are justified in lambasting her, Sharpton isn’t liked by the left so the left can’t be responsible for his racism, a fetus isn’t a life, etc.

I read it…what should I say to that?


I am aware that it is time consuming to respond to 370+ response. The trash you are stirring is the blatant bigotries you continually assert even though a vast majority of the answers to your questions paint a completely different picture of 'liberals'.

Sarah Palin is an individual that some people do not like for reasons that are their own.
Al Sharpton is an individual that some people do not like for reasons that are their own.

You have implied a sexist agenda for the former and a racist agenda for the latter. Neither of which are backed up by evidence on your part. People -repeatedly- have told you that race and gender have nothing to do with why they like or do not like these people and you continually support the idea that 'liberals' are doing just those things.

This is why you are a muckraker and a stirrer of trash.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I was kind of hoping you would have responded to my answers to your questions. I appreciate it's a big thread, but I took the time out to answer your points and never got a response. I thought you would have at least challenged one of the point s I made. Maybe you agree with my answers so felt no need to reply.



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Furbs
 


You’ve completely missed my point, sir.


Sarah Palin is an individual that some people do not like for reasons that are their own.


As I said before, I understand that liberals have serious issues with her ideology; I get it. My point is that she gets berated with all kinds of sexist remarks and that seems to be completely acceptable by the left. However, when those of us on the right didn’t like Hillary’s policies we were ‘anti-women’ even though her sex wasn’t even brought up by the right. Why the double standard. Why can’t liberals disagree with Sarah Palin without sexist comments?


Al Sharpton is an individual that some people do not like for reasons that are their own.


Again, when he and others are called out on their political views it’s said to be ‘because they’re black’ rather than just a disagreement. Do you remember the names Clarence Thomas was called by the left? How about the names Herman Cain was called? These were hatful, racist remarks and they went unchecked. Why can’t people disagree with a black liberal without racism being brought?

Maybe the reason so many have gotten their panties in a bunch over my questions is because they simply don’t understand the question or they are oblivious to the inconsistencies and double standards in play??

edit on 10-4-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
Why can’t liberals disagree with Sarah Palin without sexist comments?


The vast majority of us can and do. Are you responsible for every idiotic thing that someone identifying as a conservative says? I do not hold you to that standard. You will notice that I am not calling you out for anything anyone but you have said. When you are speaking to others, it is common courtesy to do the same. Do not judge all liberals based on the actions and comments of a few. To do that is to play into propaganda, and I would like to believe you want better than to do that.



Again, when he and others are called out on their political views it’s said to be ‘because they’re black’ rather than just a disagreement. Do you remember the names Clarence Thomas was called by the left? How about the names Herman Cain was called? These were hatful, racist remarks and they went unchecked. Why can’t people disagree with a black liberal without racism being brought up yet racism is the first thing brought up when a conservative disagrees with a black liberal?

Maybe the reason so many have gotten their panties in a bunch over my questions is because they simply don’t understand the question or they are oblivious to the inconsistencies and double standards in play??


Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas were not called names by the left. Liberalism is an ideology, and has no form of action on it's own. I openly condemn anyone that calls anyone a racist or sexist epithet. I am the first to stand up when someone calls any person of any color a crude name. I do not take part in that.

Again, are you to be labeled as someone who does is a racist or a hypocrite because of something other conservatives do? Would that be a fair assessment?

Do not judge a philosophy by it's abuse. - Saint Augustine
edit on 10-4-2012 by Furbs because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-4-2012 by Furbs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Double

Post
edit on 10-4-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join