The Fall of the United States

[Erich]

well gents I fit that description literally..........with what few red hairs I have on the back of my neck. Geezo what do you think presides in my land of the Platonic Sphere with an equal blend of the opposite.

Rippin it up

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Using the logic of Delusional here, since we have a Hispanic Heritage month and a African American History month we might as well have a Irish American History Day, German American History Day, hell lets have a White History Month as well...

Hell since women seem to get into all male schools lets let men enroll in all women schools too!

Where the hell is my Mens History Month????

Come on Delusional, how far are we going to take this?

[Erich]

I'll take the Irish/German combo. anyone else ? how about an option : Red-haired month ?

where have we gone and what have we become ?

Schlaft im Himmelishe Rühe comes to mind, no worries

[Nonskimmer]

How about "Hug a Canadian" month?

[Erich]

ok skim step up, heres a big huggie from the southland

[Nonskimmer]

Uh oh. Think I've bitten off more than I can chew here.

[Erich]

not really man, you can see even huggies in America are warped, the nature of the beast during our time on this planet we call earth

[timshatz]

You guys have it right. Everybody is a minority in the US. So what's the point in pointing it out to have your special day/week/month? Seems like an attempt to get benefits beyond those conferred by the Constitution at the expense of the great good.

[Delusional]

"Should your Bi-friend be granted Bi-rights? Have one husband and one wife? Then that person will be a polygamist right? See the problem here?"

Bisexual individuals have never asked for the right to marry a man and a woman at the same time. It's clear that the U.S. does not allow polygamy in any of its forms, so I don't see the problem at all. Case closed.

"Let me ask you something - lets say you get into an altercation with someone (their fault). You defend yourself. You go to court and then suddenly you're adversary claims they're gay and you committed a hate crime - what do you do????"

This is simple. The court would not consider it a hate crime unless the altercation had something to do with sexuality. If you were simply arguing over a parking space or something like that, than your adversary has no defense. It would be handled just like any other claim of a hate crime.

How about the professors who agree with the gay movement and other liberal ideas (and teach them every day in their lecture halls)? Haven't they lived in the real world? Wouldn't you consider them enlightened, considering they all have Ph.D.s?

"You know I think that if Gays did not run around in pink boas and other outwardly women stuff (the shemale in the relationship) and stop acting like women there would not be that bad of a problem
To be honest I dont care if someone is gay or not. It is there right and choice but I sure as hell dont need to see them acting all prissy and like a woman."

First of all, this is a complete stereotype. A gay couple does not usually think of themselves in terms of who is the man and who is the woman in the relationship. That's a mindset that only straight people think in, considering in a straight relationship, there is one man and one woman. The vast majority of gay men do not dress as women. And the only reason "acting like women" is considered such a bad thing is because in our sexist society, acting like a woman is debasing. It's considered an insult to be or act like a woman. And again, you should not be allowed to tell that person how to speak, dress, and act. If you don't like it, it's your problem. Just like if a gay man doesn't like something you do or say, it's their problem. You are allowed to live how you see fit, so let the gays do the same. They should not have to censor themselves for the uneducated.

"Come on - what's w/ the redneck comment? That's just unnecessary... and also derrogatory. What is your exact definition of a "redneck?" Many of my best friends who I serve with are likely what you would thumb you nose at and call "rednecks," and these are great people that help keep you and your family safe."

First of all, that term went back to an earlier post. Second of all, I apologize if the term offended you or anyone else. Third, if you met my family, I suppose that they could easily be labeled as rednecks. We even own a farm, so I guess that I never thought of that word as closed-off. My apologies. That said, rednecks are, by definition, an uneducated bigot or reactionary from the rural working class. And by redneck, I'm refering to someone with extreme prejudices (by definition). Perhaps your defintion of a redneck is more all-encompassing than mine, but my definition refers to only those who show extreme prejudice. My definition does not extend to irrelevant factors like where one lives or what job one holds.

"Even those who you claim do not go to Church or Mass still overwhelmingly base their belief system on the Bible."

These people base their belief system on others' interpretations of the Bible, considering they have probably never read the Bible from cover to cover.

"I think you misunderstood what I meant. I'm saying the non-gov't open borders/immigration lobby is stronger than the non-gov't lobby to secure borders and strictly control immigration."

I think this is difficult to judge. Clearly, the non-government movement for open borders/immigration is more vocal and visible for several reasons. 1) A liberal media. 2) Governmental action is against their movement, so they are going to protest and lobby a lot more (you don't see protests from groups whose interests the government is serving). That doesn't mean that one side has more support than the other.

Just because I'm not a Christian now doesn't mean that I never was. I've seen it with my own eyes, as an insider, if you will, and I stand by my comments about the state of Christianity in the U.S.

You clearly argued for going against the Constitution when you said, "You can't have different states shooting off in different directions. this is a serious issue that the federal gov't NEEDS to step in and resolve." Again, gay rights is a state issue, and the federal government stepping in on this issue would violate the tenth amendment.

"You dont like the laws in the United States. You dont like the principles of the United States. You dont like the morals of the United States.

I have a quick solution....

....Go find a better place to live then."

Wow, talk about putting words into one's mouth. I love my country, not that I have to defend my patriotism to you. I am simply debating the laws of our nation; one of the great things about our nation is that everyone has the right to do this.

"there are no moral standards to live up to"

Whoever said that? Just because I don't base my morals on the Bible doesn't mean that I have no morals.

"Using the logic of Delusional here, since we have a Hispanic Heritage month and a African American History month we might as well have a Irish American History Day, German American History Day, hell lets have a White History Month as well...

Hell since women seem to get into all male schools lets let men enroll in all women schools too!

Where the hell is my Mens History Month????

Come on Delusional, how far are we going to take this?"

Once again, putting words into my mouth. We weren't even talking about ethnicities and races or men and women. You're just being ridiculous, because I have not even talked about these things, and I'm certainly not going to now, considering it is way off-topic.

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by Delusional

You clearly argued for going against the Constitution when you said, "You can't have different states shooting off in different directions. this is a serious issue that the federal gov't NEEDS to step in and resolve." Again, gay rights is a state issue, and the federal government stepping in on this issue would violate the tenth amendment.

Please allow me to restate the dilemma again. One state formally bans gay marriage by law. A second state legalizes gay marriage. Now you have reciprocity of marriage licenses. Does the one state where gay marriage is illegal recognize the marriage from the other state? What happens. I am not arguing going against the US Constitution; as it reigns supreme - you won't find that language of mine in any post. I said the federal gov't needs to step in - which was the reasoning behind the marriage amendment - which would not be going against the Constitution because it would become part of it. What would be your solution to that matter?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Delusional

"Should your Bi-friend be granted Bi-rights? Have one husband and one wife? Then that person will be a polygamist right? See the problem here?"

Bisexual individuals have never asked for the right to marry a man and a woman at the same time. It's clear that the U.S. does not allow polygamy in any of its forms, so I don't see the problem at all. Case closed.

Until someone sues over it - it's just a matter of time...

Originally Posted by Delusional

"Let me ask you something - lets say you get into an altercation with someone (their fault). You defend yourself. You go to court and then suddenly you're adversary claims they're gay and you committed a hate crime - what do you do????"

This is simple. The court would not consider it a hate crime unless the altercation had something to do with sexuality.

And it's their world against yours - all they have to do is say we fought because that person hates gays and then you're finished especially if a news paper get a hold of it and it won't matter if its over a parking space or your purse. The biggest flaw in the gay movement is there is no "real" test to prove one is gay when in front of a judge - that's my point! If I have a chance to sue you for $100,000 then you're see the biggest flamer since Liberace dragging you through the court system - and again it's their word against yours!

Originally Posted by Delusional

How about the professors who agree with the gay movement and other liberal ideas (and teach them every day in their lecture halls)? Haven't they lived in the real world? Wouldn't you consider them enlightened, considering they all have Ph.D.s?

Having a degree or PhD doesn't make you enlightened and 3/4 of the ones I dealt with went straight out of college and back into the classroom, maybe they took a 2 week world tour of the 3rd world so they're a leading authority!

Originally Posted by Delusional

"
"You know I think that if Gays did not run around in pink boas and other outwardly women stuff (the shemale in the relationship) and stop acting like women there would not be that bad of a problem
To be honest I dont care if someone is gay or not. It is there right and choice but I sure as hell dont need to see them acting all prissy and like a woman."

First of all, this is a complete stereotype.

So was your comment about rednecks!

Originally Posted by Delusional

"Come on - what's w/ the redneck comment? That's just unnecessary... and also derrogatory. What is your exact definition of a "redneck?" Many of my best friends who I serve with are likely what you would thumb you nose at and call "rednecks," and these are great people that help keep you and your family safe."

First of all, that term went back to an earlier post. Second of all, I apologize if the term offended you or anyone else. Third, if you met my family, I suppose that they could easily be labeled as rednecks. We even own a farm, so I guess that I never thought of that word as closed-off. My apologies. That said, rednecks are, by definition, an uneducated bigot or reactionary from the rural working class. And by redneck, I'm refering to someone with extreme prejudices (by definition). Perhaps your defintion of a redneck is more all-encompassing than mine, but my definition refers to only those who show extreme prejudice. My definition does not extend to irrelevant factors like where one lives or what job one holds.

So you're for Redneck Rights?

Originally Posted by Delusional

Once again, putting words into my mouth.

It seems that way because many of us have been in those idealistic social causes you talk about and have found they cater to special interest and the "loony." As I said earlier many of us are children of the 60s - while your brand of Liberalism seemed righteous and good natured, it eroded the fabric of American society because many took (and continue to take) advantage of the "system" under the guise of being a minority, whether that's under the guise of racial or sexual orientation.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Delusional

First of all, this is a complete stereotype. A gay couple does not usually think of themselves in terms of who is the man and who is the woman in the relationship. That's a mindset that only straight people think in, considering in a straight relationship, there is one man and one woman. The vast majority of gay men do not dress as women. And the only reason "acting like women" is considered such a bad thing is because in our sexist society, acting like a woman is debasing. It's considered an insult to be or act like a woman. And again, you should not be allowed to tell that person how to speak, dress, and act. If you don't like it, it's your problem. Just like if a gay man doesn't like something you do or say, it's their problem. You are allowed to live how you see fit, so let the gays do the same. They should not have to censor themselves for the uneducated.

NO that is not a stereotype. Look at the damn pictures below.

Again I have nothing against gay people. I have had friends that were gay and you know what...I had no problem with that. The difference was, they acted like normal people. They did not try and stand out like the people in the picture below. They acted like men...

Oh and acting like a women is not a bad thing, if you are a woman. I would not want my wife acting like a man...

Originally Posted by delusional

Wow, talk about putting words into one's mouth. I love my country, not that I have to defend my patriotism to you. I am simply debating the laws of our nation; one of the great things about our nation is that everyone has the right to do this.

First of all I am not doubting your love for your country. I am talking about as a whole. If people dont like the way this country is governed I am sure there are plenty of places to go to that will suit them better.

Originally Posted by delusional

Once again, putting words into my mouth. We weren't even talking about ethnicities and races or men and women. You're just being ridiculous, because I have not even talked about these things, and I'm certainly not going to now, considering it is way off-topic.

No actually it is on topic because according to you, everyone deserves special treatment.

[mkloby]

You know - those over the top parades do more damage than good for their cause... it just seems to turn the stomach...

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I agree and that is what I am talking about.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by mkloby

You know - those over the top parades do more damage than good for their cause... it just seems to turn the stomach...

Truer words were never spoken