Huckleberry takes another state!

[Jarod]

Also, I think saying that you would change the constitution to make it consistant with Gods Law is something different than merely proposing to change the law to ban gay marriage or abortion. Its the reasoning that is scary to me, not the result so much.

If thats your reasoning, you can ban anything!

 

[Damocles]

I did not equate anything with anyone I merely said what I would do!

You did equate it. It is disingenuous after arguing that exact same reaction to Huckabee that you would present that argument and then say, "I'm innocent, I didn't equate the two!"

That was weak.

 

[Damocles]

Also, I think saying that you would change the constitution to make it consistant with Gods Law is something different than merely proposing to change the law to ban gay marriage or abortion. Its the reasoning that is scary to me, not the result so much.

If thats your reasoning, you can ban anything!

Rubbish, it is stating exactly that. It was what the question was about, what he was answering when he made the statement. I begin to worry about you because equating the two is preposterous in a nation where those amendments have been propounded for decades. I fear what you would do because you equate the two in your mind.

 

[Jarod]

Rubbish, it is stating exactly that. It was what the question was about, what he was answering when he made the statement. I begin to worry about you because equating the two is preposterous in a nation where those amendments have been propounded for decades. I fear what you would do because you equate the two in your mind.

Its the reasoning that matters, if you want to ban abortion because you belive its murder, thats one thing. If you want to ban abortion because you belive your God disapproves... thats another to me.

 

[Damocles]

Its the reasoning that matters, if you want to ban abortion because you belive its murder, thats one thing. If you want to ban abortion because you belive your God disapproves... thats another to me.

They believe it is murder because of their religion. "It's the reasoning... "

The same argument has been made for as long as people have proposed it. That you fear it so much you equate it to Hitler makes me fear what you would do, because I know what I would do if Hitler were elected.

Your sky is falling mentality on this issue is preposterous, there is real evidence that there is nothing to fear.

 

[Jarod]

They believe it is murder because of their religion. "It's the reasoning... "

The same argument has been made for as long as people have proposed it. That you fear it so much you equate it to Hitler makes me fear what you would do, because I know what I would do if Hitler were elected.

Your sky is falling mentality on this issue is preposterous, there is real evidence that there is nothing to fear.

1) I never equated it with Hitler.
2) Murder is murder regardless of religen, if you need God to tell you that murder is wrong, you really need some help.
3)There is nuthing to fear, except that a majority of Republican voters in the South are willing to vote for a man who belives that his version of Christanity should dictate the laws we live under.

 

[Damocles]

1) I never equated it with Hitler.
2) Murder is murder regardless of religen, if you need God to tell you that murder is wrong, you really need some help.
3)There is nuthing to fear, except that a majority of Republican voters in the South are willing to vote for a man who belives that his version of Christanity should dictate the laws we live under.

1) You did, here in this thread it is disingenuous to pretend that the exact same reaction wasn't equating the two.

2) There would be no difference in the amendment whether god told them murder was wrong or another morality system did.

3) That is nothing to fear because you know and have direct evidence that those Amendments do not pass. That is direct fear mongering. Attempting to convince others to "fear" something you KNOW won't come to pass. So much so you equate it to Raising Hitler from the Dead and making him Dictator for life.

 

[Jarod]

1) You did, here in this thread it is disingenuous to pretend that the exact same reaction wasn't equating the two.

2) There would be no difference in the amendment whether god told them murder was wrong or another morality system did.

3) That is nothing to fear because you know and have direct evidence that those Amendments do not pass. That is direct fear mongering. Attempting to convince others to "fear" something you KNOW won't come to pass. So much so you equate it to Raising Hitler from the Dead and making him Dictator for life.

AGAIN, and AGAIN and AGAIN... its not the possable passage of the amendment that I fear. I fear the fact that a majority of Republican voters in many southern states are willing to support a canidate who is willing to subplant reason with his own version of God.

You used to be smart enough to understand something the first time I said it, I dont think you have grown stupid so I choose to belive that you are intentionally ignoring what Ive been saying!

 

[Damocles]

AGAIN, and AGAIN and AGAIN... its not the possable passage of the amendment that I fear. I fear the fact that a majority of Republican voters in many southern states are willing to support a canidate who is willing to subplant reason with his own version of God.

You used to be smart enough to understand something the first time I said it, I dont think you have grown stupid so I choose to belive that you are intentionally ignoring what Ive been saying!

I don't care what you fear, it is unreasonable and unrealistic to fear what will not come to pass even if a majority of Rs in some state voted for him for whatever reason. (Most didn't because of this, they did in spite of it to send a message that McCain isn't righty enough.)

However you said you "feared" him becoming VP because he could then promote these Amendments. Now you say, I fear them voting for him...

Whatever you fear your "fear" is unfounded and attempting to spread it to others using communication medium is fear mongering.

I understand what you say, what you are saying is that since I am not agreeing with you that I should "fear" this that I am no longer "smart", which is also rubbish.

Jarod, you have spent an inordinate amount of time attempting to convince me I should fear what will not come to pass, coming at it from an 'aside' type of argument, but it is what you have been doing. You used to be honest enough to do a bit of introspection, in this case you refuse.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

AGAIN, and AGAIN and AGAIN... its not the possable passage of the amendment that I fear. I fear the fact that a majority of Republican voters in many southern states are willing to support a canidate who is willing to subplant reason with his own version of God.

You used to be smart enough to understand something the first time I said it, I dont think you have grown stupid so I choose to belive that you are intentionally ignoring what Ive been saying!

Again and Again and AGAIN.... you assume they are not smart enough to realize that Huckabee is simply pandering to the RR. That he, along with you and I and everyone with any common sense, KNOW that the amendments won't pass.

People who realize this, may still vote for Huckabee because they like his populist rhetoric or because they like his fair tax.

Only a complete MORON cannot see that it is inconsequential that he spouts off about following his religiious morals. EVERYONE follows their own set of morals. It is not the big issue you want to make others fear. Why is that Jarod? Its because anyone with a brain can understand what it takes for an amendment to be added to the constitution. The ONLY way someones "Morals" get put into an amendment is if the vast majority of this country agrees with the particular "moral".

Now your fear mongering is associating Huckabee with Hitler. That is incredibly pathetic. Even for a lawyer.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I don't care what you fear, it is unreasonable and unrealistic to fear what will not come to pass even if a majority of Rs in some state voted for him for whatever reason. (Most didn't because of this, they did in spite of it to send a message that McCain isn't righty enough.)

However you said you "feared" him becoming VP because he could then promote these Amendments. Now you say, I fear them voting for him...

Whatever you fear your "fear" is unfounded and attempting to spread it to others using communication medium is fear mongering.

I understand what you say, what you are saying is that since I am not agreeing with you that I should "fear" this that I am no longer "smart", which is also rubbish.

Jarod, you have spent an inordinate amount of time attempting to convince me I should fear what will not come to pass, coming at it from an 'aside' type of argument, but it is what you have been doing. You used to be honest enough to do a bit of introspection, in this case you refuse.

Its also a bunch of bullshit.

 

[Jarod]

I don't care what you fear, it is unreasonable and unrealistic to fear what will not come to pass even if a majority of Rs in some state voted for him for whatever reason. (Most didn't because of this, they did in spite of it to send a message that McCain isn't righty enough.)

However you said you "feared" him becoming VP because he could then promote these Amendments. Now you say, I fear them voting for him...

Whatever you fear your "fear" is unfounded and attempting to spread it to others using communication medium is fear mongering.

I understand what you say, what you are saying is that since I am not agreeing with you that I should "fear" this that I am no longer "smart", which is also rubbish.

Jarod, you have spent an inordinate amount of time attempting to convince me I should fear what will not come to pass, coming at it from an 'aside' type of argument, but it is what you have been doing. You used to be honest enough to do a bit of introspection, in this case you refuse.

I dont care if you fear it or not, I am not trying to convince you of anything!

You are missing my point, What I fear are voters who are willing to support someone who so fundamentally misunderstands freedom of and from religen.

I do not fear it will come to pass, but that so many of these people exist in 2007 is frightning to me!

 

[Damocles]

I dont care if you fear it or not, I am not trying to convince you of anything!

You are missing my point, What I fear are voters who are willing to support someone who so fundamentally misunderstands freedom of and from religen.

I do not fear it will come to pass, but that so many of these people exist in 2007 is frightning to me!

It is nothing to fear. Most who vote for him realize he is pandering and look past that. Most who vote for him know he won't win the nomination but do it to send a message.

 

[Jarod]

It is nothing to fear. Most who vote for him realize he is pandering and look past that. Most who vote for him know he won't win the nomination but do it to send a message.

It is a bigger issue to me than many others, I understand that... But to me the fact that so many can vote for him dispite the fact that he is pandering on that issue, using relign to pander to a nieve group of people, is frightning.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I dont care if you fear it or not, I am not trying to convince you of anything!

You are missing my point, What I fear are voters who are willing to support someone who so fundamentally misunderstands freedom of and from religen.

I do not fear it will come to pass, but that so many of these people exist in 2007 is frightning to me!

The Constitution says we have a freedom OF religion. Again, you attempt to add the "from" that does not exist.

The Constitution allows for ANYONE to profess ANY idea and promote it to the general public as an amendment to the Constitution. Something that apparently they forgot to teach you in law school.

No matter WHAT the proposed amendment is, even if it goes completely against a current position taken by the Constitution, it is not unConstitutional to propose it.

Even if Huckabee said, "I want to amend the Constitution to eliminate the first and second amendments".... it would still be constitutional to propose it and try to enact the new amendment as long as they followed the established guidelines for doing so.

Your projected "fear" is complete bullshit and you know it. Even if he derives his morals from the teachings of God/Satan/Osama bin Laden.... whomever.... he is entitled to express them, propose changes to the Constitution based on them and others are allowed to agree with him.

The fact that I "fear" intolerant individuals like you as your type tend to lead us to conflict, doesn't change the fact that you have the right to be on here fear mongering.

Side note: again, you completely ignore the fact that many may have also voted for Huckabee to send a message to McCain that he better pay more attention to them.

 

[Jarod]

The Constitution says we have a freedom OF religion. Again, you attempt to add the "from" that does not exist.

The Constitution allows for ANYONE to profess ANY idea and promote it to the general public as an amendment to the Constitution. Something that apparently they forgot to teach you in law school.

No matter WHAT the proposed amendment is, even if it goes completely against a current position taken by the Constitution, it is not unConstitutional to propose it.

Even if Huckabee said, "I want to amend the Constitution to eliminate the first and second amendments".... it would still be constitutional to propose it and try to enact the new amendment as long as they followed the established guidelines for doing so.

Your projected "fear" is complete bullshit and you know it. Even if he derives his morals from the teachings of God/Satan/Osama bin Laden.... whomever.... he is entitled to express them, propose changes to the Constitution based on them and others are allowed to agree with him.

The fact that I "fear" intolerant individuals like you as your type tend to lead us to conflict, doesn't change the fact that you have the right to be on here fear mongering.

Side note: again, you completely ignore the fact that many may have also voted for Huckabee to send a message to McCain that he better pay more attention to them.

1) I was not making a constitutional argumetn. Do you not belive we SHOULD have the freedom to not be a part of a religen if we so choose?


I agree 100% he is entitled to espouse those ideas, I just fear those who support them!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

1) I was not making a constitutional argumetn. Do you not belive we SHOULD have the freedom to not be a part of a religen if we so choose?


I agree 100% he is entitled to espouse those ideas, I just fear those who support them!

All morals are derived from something. I could care less where they are derived from. I only care whether they are right/wrong, just/unjust.

Like I said, I fear people like you that are so intolerant of anyone expressing an opinion you don't like that you fear them. It is intolerant people like you that create the bulk of the problems in this world.

 

[Jarod]

All morals are derived from something. I could care less where they are derived from. I only care whether they are right/wrong, just/unjust.

Like I said, I fear people like you that are so intolerant of anyone expressing an opinion you don't like that you fear them. It is intolerant people like you that create the bulk of the problems in this world.

You are trying desperatly to make this something its not. One I believe we are Americans are protected by the Constitution from being forced to follow any particular religen at all.

Second, I have never said Huckleberry should not be allowed to say what he has said. I said I am embarrased he still garnered enough support to win some primaries, and that it makes me fearfull that someone who espouses such an opinion can win so many states.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You are trying desperatly to make this something its not. One I believe we are Americans are protected by the Constitution from being forced to follow any particular religen at all.

Second, I have never said Huckleberry should not be allowed to say what he has said. I said I am embarrased he still garnered enough support to win some primaries, and that it makes me fearfull that someone who espouses such an opinion can win so many states.

ROFLMAO.... seriously.... did you just type that first line with a straight face?

No one, not even Huckabee said anything about forcing anyone to follow any particular religion. No one.

As for Huckabees comments and your "embarassment".... AGAIN you ignore the fact that most people are not as ignorant as you seem to want us to believe you are. There are many reasons they may have voted for him.... but you want us to believe they did so because they supported his views on the amendment changes.

Like I said, the only people we have to "fear" are those that are as intolerant of others views as you are.

 

[Jarod]

ROFLMAO.... seriously.... did you just type that first line with a straight face?

No one, not even Huckabee said anything about forcing anyone to follow any particular religion. No one.

As for Huckabees comments and your "embarassment".... AGAIN you ignore the fact that most people are not as ignorant as you seem to want us to believe you are. There are many reasons they may have voted for him.... but you want us to believe they did so because they supported his views on the amendment changes.

Like I said, the only people we have to "fear" are those that are as intolerant of others views as you are.

You dont belive that changing the Constitution to reflect the will of your own God is a form of forcing a particular relien on the population? Thats what the whole marriage debate is about right? My God thinks its wrong, so you should not be allowed to do it!