Where I stand... because this has apparently been confusing to people...

Marrige has always been a financial and political transaction. Poor people did not get married. Wealthy merged their powers. Brides were traded to create allies. Our idea of marriage is a recent iteration.
Gay marriage is about people acting as they were born. If you believe in god, he makes some people gay. They are asking the right to be as they were created without losing rights and being discriminated against. That is a fair request.
Women were the spoils of marrige in the past. They had no power. there are plenty of societies that still decide marriages for their children and often they are bought and sold.

We all have our views of what marriage was. The Traditional Marriage says it all. The Father takes the daughter (a useless basket weaver) and hands over 'ownership' to the Groom. Who, after she pledges to 'obey him', puts a ring on her finger and 'claims' her. The Husband is now responsible to feed and clothe the Wife (the Father has relinquished ownership and that responsibility).
Things have changed in the last hundred years, women aren't just considered 'useless basket weavers' anymore, they can do things and put food on the Table, they don't need men anymore.

I don't believe in Gods, but I support the LGBT Community in being recognized and having 'Marriage Equality' just like heterosexuals.

IMO, the 'fight' between Red Team/Blue Team is over the WORD ... marriage. The easy solution is to REPLACE the word with another word ... like Civil Unions. That WORD doesn't have 10,000 years of historical meaning behind it.

It's just an attempt at giving both sides what they want. both sides can 'win'.
 
Too often I read a, "I caught you! You're a republican, not a libertarian!" post. This isn't something I have ever hidden. While I am a small l libertarian, I have always been affiliated with the republican party.

However, if you don't care then don't ask a question. It's all good with me. I couldn't care any less if you are interested in what I think of something nor not.

Daesh actually thinks you're worse for being libertarian. :cof1:
 
For what it is worth, Damocles, I disagree strongly with your stand on capital punishment.

As for your party affiliation...anyone can make a dumb mistake.
 
I was so pissed off. i was in line in the mess hall...next in line, and I wanted to eat and then go back up to my room and watch the WS game and then they told us to get out and wait...and then I was last in line and there was no game to watch. Mother Nature sucks.
I was asleep. When I woke up to the ground shaking I thought it was a bunch of people somehow shaking the floor running down the hall... then I realized....
 
I was asleep. When I woke up to the ground shaking I thought it was a bunch of people somehow shaking the floor running down the hall... then I realized....


... and then I realized ... it was over.

Unlike a Hurricane, where you are freaked out 3 days before it ever reaches you.
 
It has come to my attention that even people who have known me since p.com days still don't understand that I affiliate with the republican party. Not just affiliate, I am an activist.

On the first days of p.com I registered on that board as a libertarian-leaning Republican. This is what I have always been. I believe in personal liberties and am a strong constitutionalist. Shoot when I was nine I hand copied the constitution and hung that copy in my room, along with hand written "The New Colossus" and (of course) the Declaration of Independence, many flags from the original with 13 stars to the current flag... I'm not kidding. This isn't something my parents did to me, it was something that I believed in...

When I say I believe in personal liberties it means I disagree with the platform on some issues, particularly:

I have always been for Gay Marriage, though I believe that the government should never have been involved with choosing your partners other than to ensure that nobody was victimized. Laws should be against involving minors in marriage (and no, "parental permission" is not good enough, children do not have the capacity to make these lifetime-altering decisions regardless of parental "permission"), or bigamy where one or more partners are unaware of the circumstances (married to two women/men, but the both or one of the women/men do not know of the other for instance). Laws shouldn't exist that give government gifts to one type of relationship over another, because it is none of their business and the constitution simply doesn't give the federal government that kind of power of the minutiae of our lives. This involves 1st Amendment freedoms as well, in that the government pretty much passed anti-bigamy laws to stop "Mormons" from taking more than one wife. If all involved are adults and know the circumstances it is not the place of the government to judge the worthiness of their relationship/s.

I am also anti-prohibition. I believe that such laws only generate the violence that always comes with black-market turf wars and that you should have the ability to wreck your own life if you are an adult. At best, government should involve themselves in helping people out of addiction, not cutting off safe and violence free supply while doing nothing about the demand side of the issue.

I am against the death penalty. I believe a lifetime in prison is enough without government directed murder. The simple reality that we have released so many prisoners since the advent of DNA should compel any intelligent being to understand that even with "confessions" innocents have been imprisoned and executed in the past. This isn't good enough.

While I do have some disagreements with the platform, I do not have the central disagreement that I have with the Democratic Party that cannot see an "issue" without trying to resolve it through laws and corrupted government bureaucracies. On this board, in my experience, and in political culture I see a fundamental divide with that party and my beliefs that cannot be overcome because in every circumstance the first reaction is to pass laws where less government would be the answer that I would work towards. For example, gay marriage... I believe that government shouldn't be involved at all as I explained before, but democrats work towards laws, court decisions, etc. that just add to a list of government-blessed specific and listed relationships. This conflicts with a central belief of mine that the government should not be involved at this level of my, your, or anyone's life.


This is all relatively simplified, but it should be enough to clear up any confusion of where I stand, have always stood, and have never hidden:

I am a Republican, albeit a libertarian (small l) constitutionalist Republican. I am an activist for constitutionalism, limiting the scope of the Federal Government (not to "bring back" any "good ole days" but because I believe that personal liberty is so valuable that it is worth some risk), and I will continue to be an activist for this particular belief. In this I supported candidates like Rand Paul when they are running. I did vote for Trump, but not because I like Trump but because I understand that the President appoints judges and justices and that no democrat will nominate a strict constitutionalist as a judge on any appeals court or as a justice on the supreme court and in no small measure because I could in no way support somebody who broke laws that would have had me still in prison had I taken the same action they did when I was a Russian Translator in the Navy.

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text. I haven't explained this often enough in the past if people I have "known" on this board are still confused as to what party I have always, from the beginning, affiliated myself with.

I can, of course, go more in depth when I have the time and inclination and will use this thread to go there. I hereby designate this as the "ask Damocles" thread where I will try to explain my stances. I promise you this: I will not denigrate or insult you, I will simply and directly try to answer your question honestly regardless of how you ask it herein.




Never gave a fuck, don't bother wondering with folks who need to link themselves to a club.
 
Too often I read a, "I caught you! You're a republican, not a libertarian!" post. This isn't something I have ever hidden. While I am a small l libertarian, I have always been affiliated with the republican party.
However, if you don't care then don't ask a question. It's all good with me. I couldn't care any less if you are interested in what I think of something nor not.

So -- you claim to be a "small govt." person. Are you in favor of a ban on abortion at either the federal or state level? Or are you in favor of Roe v Wade in that it is based on privacy issues; the privacy of course being the personal decision of the woman and/or her physician and/or her significant other?

I find your claim to be a small govt. person yet aligning with the Republicans to be an oxymoron. Republicans want govt. involved in our personal lives to a degree that other political parties do not. They would ban SSM, civil rights (i.e., anti-discrimination) laws protecting LGBT citizens, abortion, weed, insert religion into the public sector (teaching intelligent design in public schools, school prayer, Christian icons and symbols on/in govt. property, etc.). None of these things comport with a libertarian, small-govt. point of view.
 
The above question is probably the single most pertinent issue behind the 'Kavanaugh Circus'.
 
... and then I realized ... it was over.

Unlike a Hurricane, where you are freaked out 3 days before it ever reaches you.

Naw it lasted a good while longer. I got up, looked in the hall, saw it was empty and then had an epiphany. I then walked down the hall and out the door, stood there with the XO and a few others until it was over. Then we talked about it a bit and I called my mother to tell her that we were all fine.

Nobody tells you that the aftershocks hit for weeks following either. You almost never hear about that part.
 
So -- you claim to be a "small govt." person. Are you in favor of a ban on abortion at either the federal or state level? Or are you in favor of Roe v Wade in that it is based on privacy issues; the privacy of course being the personal decision of the woman and/or her physician and/or her significant other?

I find your claim to be a small govt. person yet aligning with the Republicans to be an oxymoron. Republicans want govt. involved in our personal lives to a degree that other political parties do not. They would ban SSM, civil rights (i.e., anti-discrimination) laws protecting LGBT citizens, abortion, weed, insert religion into the public sector (teaching intelligent design in public schools, school prayer, Christian icons and symbols on/in govt. property, etc.). None of these things comport with a libertarian, small-govt. point of view.

The largest reason I align with the republicans is because they are the only ones that will nominate judges like Scalia to either the Court of Appeals or the SCOTUS.

How do I feel about abortion. I think we should, as a people, work to solve the issue of unwanted pregnancy without a direct effort to kill. Basically, I think we should remove the fetus and attempt to incubate ex utero. This would make it so no woman would be forced to be an incubator, and it would, over time, create a second choice for all women (to allow them to choose to incubate in the womb or to incubate in an artificial womb).

We should also make it much cheaper to adopt. Unlike others I have adopted children, it is way too expensive and difficult IMO.
 
Naw it lasted a good while longer. I got up, looked in the hall, saw it was empty and then had an epiphany. I then walked down the hall and out the door, stood there with the XO and a few others until it was over. Then we talked about it a bit and I called my mother to tell her that we were all fine.

Nobody tells you that the aftershocks hit for weeks following either. You almost never hear about that part.

My experience with earthquakes is that they are usually over before you realize it's an earthquake. The 'after shocks' are even less noticeable. There's more panic in a Hurricane where everyone is running around acting like the world is coming to an end. Between the two, I'll take the Earthquake. (just move to an area where nothing falls on you) :)
 
The largest reason I align with the republicans is because they are the only ones that will nominate judges like Scalia to either the Court of Appeals or the SCOTUS.

How do I feel about abortion. I think we should, as a people, work to solve the issue of unwanted pregnancy without a direct effort to kill. Basically, I think we should remove the fetus and attempt to incubate ex utero. This would make it so no woman would be forced to be an incubator, and it would, over time, create a second choice for all women (to allow them to choose to incubate in the womb or to incubate in an artificial womb).

We should also make it much cheaper to adopt. Unlike others I have adopted children, it is way too expensive and difficult IMO.

I don't want to step on Owl's question, but do you approach this from a 'Religious' view?
 
The largest reason I align with the republicans is because they are the only ones that will nominate judges like Scalia to either the Court of Appeals or the SCOTUS.

How do I feel about abortion. I think we should, as a people, work to solve the issue of unwanted pregnancy without a direct effort to kill. Basically, I think we should remove the fetus and attempt to incubate ex utero. This would make it so no woman would be forced to be an incubator, and it would, over time, create a second choice for all women (to allow them to choose to incubate in the womb or to incubate in an artificial womb).

We should also make it much cheaper to adopt. Unlike others I have adopted children, it is way too expensive and difficult IMO.

I cannot even imagine a U.S. where the religious do-gooders would go along with your suggestion of an artificial womb, particularly if even a penny of taxpayer money went for R&D for such a thing. Let's say though that 50 years down the road, your invention is created and approved by the FDA. Who then is going to pay for the costs of incubating a fetus for the nine months it takes to grow to maturity? For that matter, who's going to pay to have the fetus removed from the mom? What happens after the fetus is born, who then provides for the child? Who will be his/her parents? The state?

There are plenty of kids waiting for adoptive parents. We don't need to add more to the crowd. We need to make it less expensive and less difficult. Bless you for adopting.
 
It has come to my attention that even people who have known me since p.com days still don't understand that I affiliate with the republican party. Not just affiliate, I am an activist.

On the first days of p.com I registered on that board as a libertarian-leaning Republican. This is what I have always been. I believe in personal liberties and am a strong constitutionalist. Shoot when I was nine I hand copied the constitution and hung that copy in my room, along with hand written "The New Colossus" and (of course) the Declaration of Independence, many flags from the original with 13 stars to the current flag... I'm not kidding. This isn't something my parents did to me, it was something that I believed in...

When I say I believe in personal liberties it means I disagree with the platform on some issues, particularly:

I have always been for Gay Marriage, though I believe that the government should never have been involved with choosing your partners other than to ensure that nobody was victimized. Laws should be against involving minors in marriage (and no, "parental permission" is not good enough, children do not have the capacity to make these lifetime-altering decisions regardless of parental "permission"), or bigamy where one or more partners are unaware of the circumstances (married to two women/men, but the both or one of the women/men do not know of the other for instance). Laws shouldn't exist that give government gifts to one type of relationship over another, because it is none of their business and the constitution simply doesn't give the federal government that kind of power of the minutiae of our lives. This involves 1st Amendment freedoms as well, in that the government pretty much passed anti-bigamy laws to stop "Mormons" from taking more than one wife. If all involved are adults and know the circumstances it is not the place of the government to judge the worthiness of their relationship/s.

I am also anti-prohibition. I believe that such laws only generate the violence that always comes with black-market turf wars and that you should have the ability to wreck your own life if you are an adult. At best, government should involve themselves in helping people out of addiction, not cutting off safe and violence free supply while doing nothing about the demand side of the issue.

I am against the death penalty. I believe a lifetime in prison is enough without government directed murder. The simple reality that we have released so many prisoners since the advent of DNA should compel any intelligent being to understand that even with "confessions" innocents have been imprisoned and executed in the past. This isn't good enough.

While I do have some disagreements with the platform, I do not have the central disagreement that I have with the Democratic Party that cannot see an "issue" without trying to resolve it through laws and corrupted government bureaucracies. On this board, in my experience, and in political culture I see a fundamental divide with that party and my beliefs that cannot be overcome because in every circumstance the first reaction is to pass laws where less government would be the answer that I would work towards. For example, gay marriage... I believe that government shouldn't be involved at all as I explained before, but democrats work towards laws, court decisions, etc. that just add to a list of government-blessed specific and listed relationships. This conflicts with a central belief of mine that the government should not be involved at this level of my, your, or anyone's life.


This is all relatively simplified, but it should be enough to clear up any confusion of where I stand, have always stood, and have never hidden:

I am a Republican, albeit a libertarian (small l) constitutionalist Republican. I am an activist for constitutionalism, limiting the scope of the Federal Government (not to "bring back" any "good ole days" but because I believe that personal liberty is so valuable that it is worth some risk), and I will continue to be an activist for this particular belief. In this I supported candidates like Rand Paul when they are running. I did vote for Trump, but not because I like Trump but because I understand that the President appoints judges and justices and that no democrat will nominate a strict constitutionalist as a judge on any appeals court or as a justice on the supreme court and in no small measure because I could in no way support somebody who broke laws that would have had me still in prison had I taken the same action they did when I was a Russian Translator in the Navy.

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text. I haven't explained this often enough in the past if people I have "known" on this board are still confused as to what party I have always, from the beginning, affiliated myself with.

I can, of course, go more in depth when I have the time and inclination and will use this thread to go there. I hereby designate this as the "ask Damocles" thread where I will try to explain my stances. I promise you this: I will not denigrate or insult you, I will simply and directly try to answer your question honestly regardless of how you ask it herein.

I disagree with you on the death penalty. We can eliminate mistakes by requiring at least two credible witnesses or DNA evidence.
 
My experience with earthquakes is that they are usually over before you realize it's an earthquake. The 'after shocks' are even less noticeable. There's more panic in a Hurricane where everyone is running around acting like the world is coming to an end. Between the two, I'll take the Earthquake. (just move to an area where nothing falls on you) :)

This one was huge and lasted quite some time. My experience with earthquakes is much different than yours, though you are right to prefer earthquakes to hurricanes.
 
Back
Top