Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

All for 3%

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by redrover View Post

    Since you offer no cure for homosexuality except social repression why don't you leave them alone until you have something positive to offer them other than the approval of your imaginary god/?
    I am pretty sure that once it was dropped from the list of mental illness, all research and treatment stopped. That is how it works, which you know. We lost decades of research which might have found an effective way of allowing these people to join in with the dance of life, procreation, one of the first laws of the survival of life. Procreate! Or it could have ended up like trying to treat and cure sociopaths and psychopaths. But it would be nice to know. I like the truth, no matter where it leads.

    ?


    • Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

      I am pretty sure that once it was dropped from the list of mental illness, all research and treatment stopped. That is how it works, which you know. We lost decades of research which might have found an effective way of allowing these people to join in with the dance of life, procreation, one of the first laws of the survival of life. Procreate! Or it could have ended up like trying to treat and cure sociopaths and psychopaths. But it would be nice to know. I like the truth, no matter where it leads.
      I have a hunch that some of the people who are so militant on the subject may have some latent tendencies and it scares them' Why else would anyone care about the sex life of a bunch of abstract strangers?

      ?


      • Originally posted by redrover View Post
        Since you offer no cure for homosexuality except social repression why don't you leave them alone until you have something positive to offer them other than the approval of your imaginary god/?
        I have no reason to worry about what they do. I would encourage their behaviour no more than I would encourage people to start smoking crack or shooting heroin though

        If you take enough interest and study the statistics about these people at the CDC you'll learn why.

        Who said God is imaginary ? ..and who told you He was mine ?

        Originally posted by redrover View Post
        I have a hunch that some of the people who are so militant on the subject may have some latent tendencies and it scares them' Why else would anyone care about the sex life of a bunch of abstract strangers?
        So what are you defending them for ???? LOL

        ?


        • Originally posted by redrover View Post

          Since you offer no cure for homosexuality except social repression why don't you leave them alone until you have something positive to offer them other than the approval of your imaginary god/?
          I have no cure for adultery, theft, murder, etc. That doesn't mean the government should endorse them as normal.

          ?


          • Originally posted by redrover View Post

            I have a hunch that some of the people who are so militant on the subject may have some latent tendencies and it scares them' Why else would anyone care about the sex life of a bunch of abstract strangers?
            . Perhaps it is the latent homos who support it? Now that makes more sense than what you offered up. So democrats are all closet homosexuals. They want homosexuality normalized so they can slip away from their wives and get them a man to lay with, easier. Kinda like down here we have dry counties. No booze allowed to be sold. It is the drinkers who want that law changed, not the non drinkers. And many of these drinkers do it on the sly so their fellow church members dont know it. Perhaps this is the same with democrats and gay normalization. ha ha

            Gays just creep me out. I don't like being around them. At least in the old days, when you didn't know a dude was gay you could still have a normal relationship with him, see him as one of the guys. But as soon as I know someone is gay, I have nothing in common with him. I wish they had stayed in the closet. It inhibits socializing with people, and anything that does that is a problem. A subtle effect on human societies, which is negative.

            So show me a man who is fine with homosexuality, and I will show you another homosexual. 9 times out of 10. A true heterosexual has a natural revulsion to it.
            Last edited by Blue Doggy; 09-19-2017, 11:14 AM.

            ?


            • Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
              . Perhaps it is the latent homos who support it? Now that makes more sense than what you offered up. So democrats are all closet homosexuals. They want homosexuality normalized so they can slip away from their wives and get them a man to lay with, easier. Kinda like down here we have dry counties. No booze allowed to be sold. It is the drinkers who want that law changed, not the non drinkers. And many of these drinkers do it on the sly so their fellow church members dont know it. Perhaps this is the same with democrats and gay normalization. ha ha

              Gays just creep me out. I don't like being around them. At least in the old days, when you didn't know a dude was gay you could still have a normal relationship with him, see him as one of the guys. But as soon as I know someone is gay, I have nothing in common with him. I wish they had stayed in the closet. It inhibits socializing with people, and anything that does that is a problem. A subtle effect on human societies, which is negative.

              So show me a man who is fine with homosexuality, and I will show you another homosexual. 9 times out of 10. A true heterosexual has a natural revulsion to it.
              Radical gay people have used this;

              "You don't support gay 'marriage,' so you're probably a closeted gay."

              insult to try to silence people who will point out & talk about the problems with 'gay marriage,' for a long time.

              It's the same kind of childish crap we've seen from liberals forever. The most recent example being that everyone that doesn't think like they do is a bigot or a nazi...

              ...


              There was a time when words like "bigot," "racist," Nazi," "fascist" or "whateverphobe" were serious things to charge someone with.

              Today, these words are used against anybody that doesn't accept or believe in the trendy "new" beliefs or ideas in our culture. These trendy "new" ideas that come faster and faster and we're all supposed to be happy and cheer about them because 'change' is 'good.'

              and yet

              These words are used to incite hatred and even violence against others ! By people who say they're against hatred and violence.

              People are being hurt financially, taken to court, for upholding their Christian beliefs.

              "...today, slurs are the currency of public discourse. And labels are only the first step. Censorship and economic persecution inevitably ensue."

              "Today, seventy-year-old florists, small Christian wedding chapels, and mom-and-pop bakeries are the economic canaries in the cultural mineand its happening here in America. The BDS (Boycott, Divest, and Sanction) movement on the left is targeted to shame and economically ruin anyone unwilling to tow the leftist line. As mega-corporations become social engineers, companies like Google charge more if youre a Christian rather than a secular non-profit. It seems were in the stage of labels and soft, but hardening, persecution."


              ------------------------------------

              A friend who attends Oxford University reports that the Christian scholarly publication 'First Things' has been moved to a rack at the library designated as hate speech.

              Already in 2017, weve seen numerous incidents like the student riot at Middlebury College where a conservative scholar, Charles Murray from the American Enterprise Institute, was invited to speak. The sponsoring professor was taken to the hospital with an injury, and Murray barely made it away in his battered vehicle. YouTube has censored sensible arguments by conservative Dennis Prager on abortion, Israel, Islam, and America. Trigger Warnings on campuses allow students to report any speech that makes them fearful. Twenty years ago, these moves would have been politically outrageous, even among liberals. Today, these reports are wallpaper. And Christians are increasingly the target.

              Christians, it seems, are haters. As Rod Dreher put it in his new book, The Benedict Option, Christians who hold to the biblical teaching about sex and marriage have the same status in culture, and increasingly in law, as racists. Just as Stalin labeled twenty million political dissenters as psychotic, which landed them in mental institutions and then re-education camps (gulags), the label becomes reality. Mark Lilla, a professor at Columbia University, was called a racist and linked to the KKK after he wrote on identity politics in The New York Times. His response to his detractors: thats a slur, not an argument. But today, slurs are the currency of public discourse. And labels are only the first step. Censorship and economic persecution inevitably ensue.

              A refugee-immigrant friend of mine who suffered under the persecution of Christians in the Ukraine tells me how his family was forced to support itself on a very small acreage under the communists. His uncles made a makeshift tractor from truck parts at a junkyard. Soviets promptly confiscated it. By the 1980s when this event occurred, the communists knew that economic, educational, and speech-related persecution would do what the gulags could not. Today, seventy-year-old florists, small Christian wedding chapels, and mom-and-pop bakeries are the economic canaries in the cultural mineand its happening here in America. The BDS (Boycott, Divest, and Sanction) movement on the left is targeted to shame and economically ruin anyone unwilling to tow the leftist line. As mega-corporations become social engineers, companies like Google charge more if youre a Christian rather than a secular non-profit. It seems were in the stage of labels and soft, but hardening, persecution.

              But today, slurs are the currency of public discourse.

              For Christians, we have a more concerning problem. 36% of millennials now have no religious a affiliation, up from just 17% of baby boomers. Protestant Christianity has declined from 52% of the population to 30% over the progressive time-period. Our youth are turning their backs on God as they literally turn their backs on the speakers at colleges. Why? Because we are bringing up children who do not have the skills to engage in intellectual discourse, who believe only in themselves, and whose deepest theological thought originates in their own mind. And, their minds are not sharpened or formed by scripture, or historic Christian thought. In fact, historic texts are so hateful they are off limits. Even most of the ugly rhetoric of the left has been replaced by no rhetoric at alljust shame for anyone who dares to think Christianly.

              Reversing this trend requires more than evangelical outreach, missionaries, a clever Sunday school teacher, or a cool youth leader. Cultural flows are too powerful for well-intentioned, obvious, and easy fixes. We cannot heal this wound lightly (Jer. 6:14). If the Christian school separates the truth and beauty of Christ from our understanding of the world He has made, we will create a ghetto culture where students graduate with a Bible category and an other stuff category embedded deep in their souls. Once an egg is separated, its easy to throw out the yolk.

              But there is good and beautiful rhetoric. Amid the rapidly shifting culture, we Christians have an opportunity. John Chrysostom was a fourth-century Christian nicknamed The Golden Mouth for his ability to speak beautiful truth into the ugliness of Roman barbarism. He, like his contemporaries St. Augustine and St. Ambrose, was classically and theologically educated. This training in wisdom sustained their voices above the screeching dissent. It is time for classical Christian education to help Christendom reclaim this tradition. We seek truth, goodness, and beauty. And, we cultivate hearts and minds who love these things, and their neighbors. Watch just a few seconds of the ugly chants at Middlebury College on YouTube. Then, take a few minutes to watch a speech or two by students at classical Christian schools (our Chrysostom Award winners). We have a rare opportunity to raise a generation that can effectively speak into the darkness.


              http://www.classicaldifference.com/w...e-good-way-is/

              at

              www.ClassicalChristian.org

              ?


              • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                I think there primary goal is to offer an alternative to the Trump experiment in anarchy. A real government is looking pretty good to me right now.
                Uh, really? Trump has been President since January, the Democratic Party has been around since LONG before that. What exactly do you understand the "stated goals" of the Republican and Democratic parties to be respectively?

                ?


                • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                  I have a hunch that some of the people who are so militant on the subject may have some latent tendencies and it scares them' Why else would anyone care about the sex life of a bunch of abstract strangers?
                  Well, because they belief it to be sinful or deviant, and while they may be perfectly content to leave sinners to their sinning, they would argue, quite rationally based on their belief value judgement about it being sinful or deviant--that the government not rationalize, condone, or facilitate it.

                  It is also a matter of process. I don't really care one way or the other about gay marriage. What I am vehemently opposed to is courts taking it upon themselves to rewrite our constitution and to impose it from on high, stepping beyond their appropriate role. I feel the same way about abortion, I am not particularly passionate about it (though if pressed I suppose I would be more inclined to support laws that largely proscribe it save for instances where the life or physical well being of the mother required it); however, it is NOT an issue for the courts, particularly not the federal judiciary. It is a matter left by our constitution for the people of each state to decide as a matter of policy.

                  I suspect that if a bunch of Republican justices ruled that the progressive income tax violated the equal protection clause, and basically imposed a flat tax by fiat, Liberals would be screaming like pigs transitioning into bacon....and so would I. Because, even though I strongly support a flat tax as a matter of public policy, it would be an assault on the Constitution and a violation of their oath of office for judges to impose it as a matter of constitutional taffy-pulling.

                  ?


                  • Originally posted by Marcus1124 View Post

                    Uh, really? Trump has been President since January, the Democratic Party has been around since LONG before that. What exactly do you understand the "stated goals" of the Republican and Democratic parties to be respectively?
                    When in doubt why don't we just obey the law. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/us...pagewanted=all

                    ?


                    • Originally posted by redrover View Post
                      When in doubt why don't we just obey the law. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/us...pagewanted=all
                      Yes, let's do that.

                      Obey the law(s).

                      This means that illegal immigrants will be considered illegal immigrants NOT "undocumented migrants." They need to be deported - all of them - and if they wish to come back, do it the way the law allows.

                      Since you're suddenly a big fan of obeying law.

                      ?


                      • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

                        Yes, let's do that.

                        Obey the law(s).

                        This means that illegal immigrants will be considered illegal immigrants NOT "undocumented migrants." They need to be deported - all of them - and if they wish to come back, do it the way the law allows.

                        Since you're suddenly a big fan of obeying law.
                        Why don't we compromise and deport all the illegals who are homosexuals. Why don't you look on the Brightside. Homosexuals don't need abortions.

                        ?


                        • Originally posted by redrover View Post

                          Why don't we compromise and deport all the illegals who are homosexuals. Why don't you look on the Brightside. Homosexuals don't need abortions.
                          Then you would not deport many of the illegals. Good Catholics especially hispanics are too busy procreating to have time to be queer. You probably have the same low rates with this group as you do with muslims. I imagine most professed homos are democrats and white. The same race that has the highest suicide rate. In my area, I have never heard of a single black person committing suicide. A black friend of mine said it was the crazy white folks who kill themselves. So we as white people are more apt to kill ourselves, think we are the opposite sex, or become sexually attracted to the same sex. But since my ancestors owned slaves, I probably have enough black genes in me to protect me from the white people craziness.

                          ?


                          • Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post

                            Then you would not deport many of the illegals. Good Catholics especially hispanics are too busy procreating to have time to be queer. You probably have the same low rates with this group as you do with muslims. I imagine most professed homos are democrats and white. The same race that has the highest suicide rate. In my area, I have never heard of a single black person committing suicide. A black friend of mine said it was the crazy white folks who kill themselves. So we as white people are more apt to kill ourselves, think we are the opposite sex, or become sexually attracted to the same sex. But since my ancestors owned slaves, I probably have enough black genes in me to protect me from the white people craziness.
                            Where are we to our faith/? In Trump or God? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brenna..._14480198.html

                            ?


                            • Originally posted by redrover View Post
                              Where are we to our faith/? In Trump or God? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brenna..._14480198.html
                              I believe the US had borders and laws against illegal entry long before Trump.

                              ?


                              • Originally posted by Brexx View Post

                                I believe the US had borders and laws against illegal entry long before Trump.
                                We have.

                                We've just been "choosy" about enforcing our laws. Which makes one wonder, why law if the 'authorities' only enforce law when they "feel like it" ?

                                If they're going to be so choosy about enforcing law, why enforce a supreme court decision that allows us to kill the unborn, or allows to gays to get married or allows some prev to dress like a woman so he can go into a womens restroom to look at little girls go pee ?

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X