FromtheThread
- Thread starter FromTheSouth
- Start date
Lulz at Zero using the "You're a mod" argument against FTS. If that were true, FTS and I would disagree with every wrestling idea ever because we disagree on our interpretations of the Constitution.
FTS <3
Oh, and history is a good time. Everyone should learn it. It offers a great insight into whatever religion your practice, or lack thereof as the case may be.
FTS <3
Oh, and history is a good time. Everyone should learn it. It offers a great insight into whatever religion your practice, or lack thereof as the case may be.
Pepe Silvia
Occasional Pre-Show
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
As I would pee in your.
Hey! Am I a homophobe.
Let's analyze my anti homosexual statements.
I have said repeatedly, they should be able to adopt, pass on estates, and visit in hospitals. I just said I didn't care if they could marry or not and I wouldn't be in favor of changing the law just for the sake of changing it. In Sid's world you're either a gay rights advocate or a homophobe and nothing in between I guess.
Hey! Am I a homophobe.
Let's analyze my anti homosexual statements.
I have said repeatedly, they should be able to adopt, pass on estates, and visit in hospitals. I just said I didn't care if they could marry or not and I wouldn't be in favor of changing the law just for the sake of changing it. In Sid's world you're either a gay rights advocate or a homophobe and nothing in between I guess.
Pepe Silvia
Occasional Pre-Show
FTS is awesome.
DirtyJosé
Best angle of all: retirement
FTS, for the record, I've never taken you for a fanatical zealot. We disagree, but you tend to have reasons for your beliefs and opinions based on reality, which is good enough for me.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
Honestly, though. Sometimes people don't get along. It's usually because one is a homophobe....no questions asked.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
Same to you buddy. Sometimes I come off like an ass though. It's usually sarcasm, but comes off as aggression being that I have never learned to type with a vocal tone or inflection.
Minor League Brian
Master of the Legendary Triple Post
I think there's only been one time where I couldn't see where FTS would draw certain ideals, but mostly I can understand where he's coming from.
I think it was something about Tea Baggers or Sarah Palin. Course, it was probably about Obama.
I think it was something about Tea Baggers or Sarah Palin. Course, it was probably about Obama.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
There have been a few times I have made a point for the sake of the debate that I don't necessarily believe. Debating is about skillful argumentation, not about constantly repeating your opinion at the top of your voice.
Minor League Brian
Master of the Legendary Triple Post
Well, I think it was something that you had just gotten sick of so you were being sarcastic but its so hard to really tell if its not blatant that I wasn't sure. Most of the time I hate reading arguments with you because I like to see myself as more Liberal (Okay, I lie. I just like Obama.) but I can't help but see your side of every argument.
Tis irritating how no one else can seemingly find the middle ground when I can see the merits of both ideals. I think it was something you said about Dems wanting to help people and Repubs wanting to help themselves. Stuff like that just makes me wonder why both can't work.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
The democratic party should be for the people, and the republican party should be for the republic, and there should be balance between the two. I just believe that when the two are in conflict, it's best to do what's best for the republic, not the individual.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Yes but what about when the vast majority of individuals are suffering because of the republic being strengthened/helped?
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
The alternative is fiddling while Rome burns.
FTS has never came across, to me, as anything other than strong in his beliefs.
Whether he supports gay marriage or not is his choice. Personally, I am not for or against it. I am just completely indifferent to it. It doesn't concern me and probably never will. That being said, I hope that people wouldn't consider me a homophobe because of it because I am simply not. I just don't care enough to formulate an opinion.
Whether he supports gay marriage or not is his choice. Personally, I am not for or against it. I am just completely indifferent to it. It doesn't concern me and probably never will. That being said, I hope that people wouldn't consider me a homophobe because of it because I am simply not. I just don't care enough to formulate an opinion.
Minor League Brian
Master of the Legendary Triple Post
That's leaning far to much towards facism for my taste, but only the last bit. I think a healthy medium can be achieved with both doing what they feel is right. The problem is the bog down we receive from the two trying to agree on shit.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Which is what Congress does when the majority (allegedly) is ready to make the move that their constituents (allegedly) want but the minority blocks everything.
What's right or wrong is immaterial at that point. In this country, the majority rules and the minority is stopping the majority. If the majority is unpopular, there is a way to fix that in November. However, by just blocking every vote, the government is crippled. A lack of government is not a government.
Note: I would say the same thing verbatim if the roles were reversed.
What's right or wrong is immaterial at that point. In this country, the majority rules and the minority is stopping the majority. If the majority is unpopular, there is a way to fix that in November. However, by just blocking every vote, the government is crippled. A lack of government is not a government.
Note: I would say the same thing verbatim if the roles were reversed.
Minor League Brian
Master of the Legendary Triple Post
I'm honestly kind of against Gay Marriage. Only because I believe Marriage is a religious union and religion tends to be against Gay Marriage. At least, in their founding texts.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
Only when in conflict. The good thing about our government, is that every two years, we get to decide if those judging when there is conflict are doing a good job, so we can't creep into fascism. The electorate will always keep the country close to the middle.
klunderbunker
Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
Yes we do get to decide every two years, but shouldn't the party that has the majority be allowed to govern without the minority blocking nearly every single piece of major legislation? All that does is keep us with nothing and there is little room for compromise.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
That's the way it is going to be for a while. Politics goes in cycles. We get a few years of stagnation, and then we get a time like 1965-1975 where everything changes at once, then goes back to static. It has happened time and again. The Civil War, The Westward expansion, World War I and II, the sixties/seventies - these are all times where the 20 previous years of work to make change force themselves upon America.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
But what good is it to shift wildly from one side to the other? Both parties do it, and eventually, everything gets done.
