Go to Why Liberal Societal Views Are Wrong
- Add a comment
- Go to The Massachusetts Seventeen
RSM, I'm not mocking the Bible at all
I'm being honest about it.
I have never defend anyone stoning people to
death. The Muslims are using the same idea from the same old testament you
follow to justify such acts. After all stoning is easier to justify from the
Bible than say marriage. God DEMANDS you stone people to death, yet he NEVER
defines marriage anywhere. It is not mockery to honestly talk about what is
actually written in the Bible. If anything it is more mockery to claim that the
Bible says things it does not,
You seem to be a very confused person on so many
levels. I mean to be upset with those who actually want to fix the problems by
making peace and finding some way to work it all out in a manner that does not
kill thousands. We have already seen that Bush's way of just going in and
blindly starting a war DOES NOT WORK. Only the most foolish and blind of people
would say what has taken place in Iraq was the right way to do that. Also, you
obviously are a true and full racist since you seem to believe that all Muslims
are evil terrorists and that we should never try to work with them for a better
world, just because they have differing religious ideas than you do. You are
aware that a century ago the Muslims were actually a very peaceful people. The
became they way they are today because of what 'Western civilizations' did to
them. For the most part the abuse of them during the cold war is one of the
biggest reason as to why they are as full of blind hate as you and others like
you. Their religion really has nothing to do with it. If they were all
Christians down there we would still most likely have all the same problems,
since it would be as easy as it gets to take the Christian Bible and find
passages that defend terrorist tactics.
There is no contradiction. I have studied the
bible, obviously much more than you have, and I have examined the ideas of God
and Jesus, obviously once more much more than you have, and I openly talk about
what I see and the flaws in those idea. Just because I am an atheist does not
mean it is wrong for me to do such.
Is it a contradiction for you to be a blind sheep
with no original thoughts of your own (Basically a modern American conservative)
and to criticize liberals? Once more you really show yourself to be a
hypocrite. You can get away with certain things, but if someone who does not
share your views tries that same kind of thing, they are wrong in doing
such.
I have never once defended the Muslims. In fact
since their God is the Christian God for the most part, any time I talked about
'believers' they would be by all logic included in that category. As for the
reason I might not focus on Muslims as much as I do Christians, that is because
the Muslims in this country are NOT the part of the greater problem that is
holding us back unlike a great many Christians, such as yourself, who are doing
all they can to destroy our society from the inside. If the Muslims ever got as
out of control and dangerous as the Christians are here in the USA, I would be
focusing on them more.
I really wish you would stop making yourself look
so foolish by talking all this mindless gibberish that has nothing of value in
it and is more or less you just blindly attacking because you have nothing that
proves me wrong.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
June 28, 2008
at
7:41 PM
| |
reply
Re: RSM, kingmi
No, actually the whole stoning people to death is what Islam practices, you know, the terrorist who you and other liberals including Obama want to "talk to" about the situation. I am so tired of your mockery of the Bible. Why is it that you contradict your own self daily on here? Why is that? You are a self proclaimed ahteist but yet you acknowledge the Bible, Jesus, God everything religious every day. Your words tell us that indeed you are not an atheist but just simply enjoy attacking God and religion unless it is something like Muslim. Why is that Akook?
posted by
RedStatesMan
on
June 28, 2008
at
6:44 PM
| |
reply
RSM, kingmi
An abomination? That is going a little far really.
Do you guys even know what an abomination is? Although you do realize that
technically these are all bastards and you guys need to get your acts together
and follow the Bible and stone them all to death. Now that kind of action would
be an abomination. Any book that suggest that such actions are justifiable
should be viewed as an abomination. Girls having kids that young is just a sad
mistake they made.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
June 25, 2008
at
7:58 PM
| |
reply
Re: RSM, Children having and raising children is an abomonation.
Yes that is true! It is also statutory rape as well, then again liberals do not bother with such minor laws due to their desire to support the criminal, not the child, right Rep. Fagan?
posted by
RedStatesMan
on
June 25, 2008
at
6:23 PM
| |
reply
RSM, Children having and raising children is an abomonation.
posted by
kingmi
on
June 25, 2008
at
6:00 PM
| |
reply
RSM, do you really want to look that stupid?
Robbrian there was very clearly saying that the
reason the girls felt hopeless and felt they needed to have babies in order to
have some one to love them was because of where our country is thanks to all
that Bush has done. After eight years of Bush bringing us down, many people are
going to feel hopeless.
At no point did I see anything in his comment that
seemed to suggest that the girls doing this was a good thing in the
least.
You obviously wrote your reply to Robbrian based
off of your blind conservative views and did not try to understand what was
being said.
You ignorance is in full display here. Instead of
actually reading what someone wrote, you assume they are a liberal and ignore
all ideas they present and just attack them for being a liberal. No wonder you
have yet to ever prove me wrong.
Just like this post, your comment has nothing of
value to it, no substance and no facts to back it up. It is just a bunch of
your mindless ramblings that are filled with blind ignorance and undirected
hate.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
June 23, 2008
at
10:45 AM
| |
reply
Re: How Do Liberal Views Survive 20 years + of Reagan-Bush-Bush???
"Were there parental failures that led to these choices or were the choices solely made by these children; both male and female?"
Most likely cause for their errant behavior may lie within the family, you state! My above sentence in the first paragraph asked this very question. Maybe you should read more thoroughly.
The reason why liberals still exist is simple:
There is a sucker born every minute!
So do you know how many suckers have been born in 20+ years? Many! Plus you have adults that never grow up and actually never 'get it' so there you have the reasons why liberals exist after Reagan/Bush.
I just love how you liberals abandon your own beliefs and principles. You stated how the girls 'saw the writing on the wall' where there only hope is to marry rich. I thought your party was the party for supporting women. Why can't these girls have the same right for a future that includes being president? Your argument here is so CONTRADICTORY as liberalism is all the time that I will feature this statement in a new blog. You really gave these girls hope, you really believed in them didn't you? Liberalism is so damn worthless. You can not even stick by your own party's stances on issues and beliefs. Do your homework next time liberal.
posted by
RedStatesMan
on
June 22, 2008
at
7:41 PM
| |
reply
Robbrian, very well said
posted by
kooka_lives
on
June 22, 2008
at
4:22 PM
| |
reply
How Do Liberal Views Survive 20 years + of Reagan-Bush-Bush???
These girls may have seen the handwriting on the wall. Under Conservative governments, they see no real future unless they marry rich, since the Neocons have all but dessimated the American Middle Class. Or, perhaps they are victims of free-market thought embraced by Conservatives which leads them down the path buyer beware and they bought into practices that government can't control.
It's so naive to point the finger at broad social/political concepts when the most likely cause for their errant behavior may lie within the family.
posted by
Cebes
on
June 22, 2008
at
4:16 PM
| |
reply
RSM you might want to get your facts straight
There were 17 girls at the school who were
pregnant, but not all 17 were part of the pact to begin with. Just over half
were.
You've made a whole lot of assumptions in
this post. All that you've said here is 100% purely your own opinions, with
nothing to back them up.
We have no idea why they decided to do this. The
article does however talk about the girls had no direction and felt lost. That
alone is something we could debate for ages as to what kind of thinking causes
such feelings.
According to actual data, schools that teach
accurate (Not the BS abstinence only) sex education are more likely to have less
teen pregnancies.
The real problem is still coming from
the conservative need to control and limit the education and ability to learn of
so many of our youth. The liberal ideas you so blindly attack with no evidence
to back you up have been shown to NOT be the problem. We are the most conservative of the
'civilized' nations and we have the highest number and percent of teenage
pregnancies. That alone would seem to go completely against your views
here.
posted by
kooka_lives
on
June 21, 2008
at
11:03 AM
| |
reply
posted by
__Purple_Mermaid11__
on
June 21, 2008
at
3:23 AM
| |
reply
Copy (or write down) this comment's web address (URL), which is:
Next, go to the email or web page where you want to link to this comment, and paste
(or type) the web address.
