Some questions for liberals

reply to post by theroguelion

I self identified SPECIFICALLY as a white man from the South. Read the post.

Okay, I went back and read it. You said:

What is the deal with you bigoted liberals? When has a "redneck" ever committed a mass murder/

You start off defending rednecks as if you consider yourself one. You did go on to say:

To be completely factual here, white men from the south kill FAR fewer people than any minority with guns

That to me reads, I consider myself and all white men from the south rednecks. You at no point differentiate.

Black people get mad when you call them 'n-word's, whether they fit the stereotype or not

Eh, there is an oppressive history behind that word, who has been oppressed while being called a redneck? Also, not all black people get riled up by it. You generalize a lot.

How did I paint minorities as dangerous with guns? I stated a FACT

.

Lol, did you really? Lets take another look at this statement.

To be completely factual here, white men from the south kill FAR fewer people than any minority with guns.

So the Chinese, West Indians, Trinidadians, Pakistanis, Japanese, Filipino, Indian, Native American, the list could go on forever, each as a separate category all kill more people with guns than all of the white males in the south? Doubtful.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Exactly. It is so ironic he uses redneck as an example when (fact) most gun crimes in America are committed by minorities. Another fact: most mass murders are committed by white people that live in cities. He just showed his ignorance and bigotry. James Holmes wasn't a redneck, a registered democrat I believe... It appears that a lot of liberals will use any opportunity to take a jab at southerners they can get when it comes to guns. Even though the facts easily show them to be ignorant bigots.

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
1. How would you secure the rights of a nation and of individuals without the right to bear arms? Would you just hold signs up and ask for democracy? Would you voice your opinions on the internet hoping that somebody who has the power would listen?

I'm not liberal, and I support gun rights.

2. Marriage is an vow between a man and a woman and marriage laws are their to protect families, which only a man and woman can create. If you feel strongly about allowing gays to marry, how would you feel about your own children if your marriage was called illegitimate and your children were declared by the state and adopted by gay parents?

Using your logic how would you feel about gays using guns to fight for there rights?

3. If you were to start a small business and have it be successful, how would you feel about being penalized for your success?

How do you feel about mega corporations not paying income tax? How do you feel about these same corporation receiving millions back in income tax?

4. The other day a pickup truck carrying 23 illegal immigrants into the state of Texas ran into a couple trees killing 14 people including small children. If you support illegal immigration, how do you feel about illegal immigrants who come into this country illegally of course that break additional laws resulting in the death of people and small children?

All populations have a certain percentage that are criminal, including the religious right.

reply to post by AQuestion


But wouldn't you be upset if the state took your children in the first place?

Also I don't necessarily subscribe to any such ideology, was that your question?

reply to post by LDragonFire


All points agreed and I am ok with gays baring arms.

Anyways. The $250,000 income bracket is a successful small business, not a mega corporation.

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by theroguelion

#1. I put the term redneck in quotes for a reason..... I thought that was obvious. But you sir, are very obtuse.

#2. I generalize a lot? how about the guy generalizing rednecks as idiots that are dangerous with guns? Thats okay, because its white people.

#3. Okay maybe not ALL minorities, but the big two: Hispanics & blacks. Most definitely. I myself am a victim of a gun crime by a black man. Really nit picky comment there.... not really what I meant to say...

#4. You still can't answer why he specifically used idiot rednecks as an example. There is simply no call for it when the facts show otherwise. He is a bigot, and you defending him makes you a bigot, end of story.

reply to post by thehoneycomb

marriage is a vow to protect families,

Protect families from what?

Couples that are married still get divorced, abuse one another, etc. Also, a family consists of extended families, as well, aunts and uncles, cousins and inlaws, and their families.

reply to post by theroguelion


Agreed, this is why I try to avoid linguistic fistacuffs with a liberal. No matter what you say the twist your words around in their own mind to mean somthing that is obviously not stated. And on the inverse, no matter what they say it is always ok because you are just an ignorant redneck, so they are automatically smarter than your lowly family values oriented lifestyle.

reply to post by windword


To protect families and other people from third parties as in governments or other people or organizations.

However that little piece of law has been severed for ages.

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
1. How would you secure the rights of a nation and of individuals without the right to bear arms? Would you just hold signs up and ask for democracy? Would you voice your opinions on the internet hoping that somebody who has the power would listen?

This makes no sense, last I checked the US is the most heavily armed nation in the world by multiples.
What are you sad about, go buy guns if you think they are a lack of guns.

2. Marriage is an vow between a man and a woman and marriage laws are their to protect families, which only a man and woman can create. If you feel strongly about allowing gays to marry, how would you feel about your own children if your marriage was called illegitimate and your children were declared by the state and adopted by gay parents?

This is silly, what the heck do you mean first of all? You are making stuff up and blaming it on other
people, that is called projection.

3. If you were to start a small business and have it be successful, how would you feel about being penalized for your success?

I thought people who got rich were being rewarded for their success, there isn't a lack of wealth in the US
as far as successful people go.

4. The other day a pickup truck carrying 23 illegal immigrants into the state of Texas ran into a couple trees killing 14 people including small children. If you support illegal immigration, how do you feel about illegal immigrants who come into this country illegally of course that break additional laws resulting in the death of people and small children?

edit on 25-7-2012 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)

Is seems clear after this question that all your thought is loaded with emotional bias and sentiment

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by AQuestion

 

But wouldn't you be upset if the state took your children in the first place?

You are making things up, 100%

What is the point for you?

In much of South Africa this is conservatism, and idealized heterosexuality (although it's slightly on the wane).

One man with six wives and over 20 children.

Other options may be respected, but seen as rather tragic in comaprison, like monogamy.


But who can come from another culture and say this is wrong?

How many wives did King David have in the Bible?

reply to post by thehoneycomb


The last liberal book I read was full of dogma about how it is essential to destroy the modern family unit, otherwise we won't feal alone in the world so we will never turn to the state for solace. However if you get to the kids young enough you can put the state in the leadership role instead of the parents. Can't remeber the name, it is only 3 years old, I will put up the link after I get the mental rolodex flipped that far back.

reply to post by inverslyproportional


Its either called the cloward piven strategy or the naked communist.

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by theroguelion

 

Agreed, this is why I try to avoid linguistic fistacuffs with a liberal. No matter what you say the twist your words around in their own mind to mean somthing that is obviously not stated. And on the inverse, no matter what they say it is always ok because you are just an ignorant redneck, so they are automatically smarter than your lowly family values oriented lifestyle.

This whole thread is twisted in it's inception.

The fellow is asking why liberals want the state to take away children and wondering why liberals
applaud dead children? If you don't want to be considered an ignorant person, don't flaunt it.

Look in the mirror people.

reply to post by halfoldman


The rothschillds and other royal families typically inbreed. Some like Jacob however were said to have many wives.

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by inverslyproportional

 

Its either called the cloward piven strategy or the naked communist.

Clearly your handbook is "Repeat the Lie Long enough!"

reply to post by pisssss


Not really, there is a common place for liberal issues.

This thread only questions the common place.

Originally posted by theroguelion
Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by theroguelion

 

#1. I put the term redneck in quotes for a reason..... I thought that was obvious. But you sir, are very obtuse.

#2. I generalize a lot? how about the guy generalizing rednecks as idiots that are dangerous with guns? Thats okay, because its white people.

#3. Okay maybe not ALL minorities, but the big two: Hispanics & blacks. Most definitely. I myself am a victim of a gun crime by a black man. Really nit picky comment there.... not really what I meant to say...

#4. You still can't answer why he specifically used idiot rednecks as an example. There is simply no call for it when the facts show otherwise. He is a bigot, and you defending him makes you a bigot, end of story.

edit on 25-7-2012 by theroguelion because: (no reason given)

1. Eh, quotes or not you got offended as if you are one, thats your personal problem.
2. The poster did not say rednecks are idiots. The poster said idiot rednecks. Which would mean a redneck who is an idiot. But again unless you count yourself and most of the white men in the south as rednecks or as an idiot redneck, you have no reason to be offended.
4. I explained why he used rednecks, because they are a caricature.

reply to post by pisssss


So being proud of growing up in the country with family oriented values is ignorance? You sir are the one that needs a look in the mirror.

I am far from ignorant about a great many things in this world. The things I am ignorant about I either find to be a non issue in the world I live in or am in the process of curing my ignorance through study.

I find your barely coherent psycho babble to be quite amusing, plz sir continue to prove my point for me.

I don't see the relavence of a couple of the questions myself, I was simply replying to the bigot who insulted my family and I with his igorance.

Putting a racial slur in brackets does not make its intentional use any more socially acceptable, it only makes you look silly that you pointed out. But I put it in brackets. I will remeber to use that the next time we all get together to burn a cross in my hispanic best friends front yard.