• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The fruits of propaganda of sodomy by the example of the United States


There you go, typing way to many words and saying absolutely nothing. That's good old gagingcatenate personally.
 

You have failed to prove anything, since your position was dumb and non-analogous. Seems to me that you STILL don't understand the difference between war and murder. Perhaps the issue is deeper than I thought; not only did you present an inaccurate analogy, but you don't seem to understand the basics of this issue and present everything with a host of logical fallacies. This may be why you are making these false declarations of winning; since you don't understand the issue, you can't understand how badly you've lost. That's OK. I'll keep reminding you.
 

I have already explained, time and again, how the only real difference between what you call "war and murder" is that the folks in the South had guns, which is just another affirmation of the American right to own and bear arms. That you do not or cannot understand that is, well, not something that I have not attempted in all manner to cure, but you seem terminal on the point. That you also do not even seem to understand the economic nor the political aspect, well that speaks volumes. You speak of logical fallacies but have failed to point them out at any time, you just go into your now infamous declarations/proclamations mode, which as I am sure you are, or at least should be, aware, is no argument at all... seem only youthful statements, youthful in one of the few bad ways.

I hereby pull the plug, your arguments were on life support but we have decided to do the honorable thing. Wish you had had a living will on this though, we could/should have put this down a whole lot earlier.
 
I have already explained, time and again, how the only real difference between what you call "war and murder" is that the folks in the South had guns, which is just another affirmation of the American right to own and bear arms.

And you've been wrong, repeatedly on this matter as I have shown. The conflicts were completely different.


The issue here seems to be your lack of understanding AND your inability to correct your errors. Now, perhaps this is more because you have dug yourself into an untenable hole and instead of just admitting you were wrong, you have chosen to dig your heals in. Your stubbornness is admirable, but your adherence to a position shown to be wrong is not.


I have pointed out the logical fallacies, clearly. Your ignoring of this is your problem, not mine.

I hereby pull the plug, your arguments were on life support but we have decided to do the honorable thing. Wish you had had a living will on this though, we could/should have put this down a whole lot earlier.

So, you still have nothing, eh? It must suck to lose these kinds of debates, especially when you came in all full of bluster, but perhaps you have learned to not make dumb statements that you cannot back up and then refuse to admit you are wrong when it is proven so. If I have taught you that then my job here is done.
 

All that is pure, uncut fluff. There are only the subtle hints of your lemons in all that meringue pie. I ll keep checking back in to see if you have any substance, in the meanwhile...


Tap tap tap, I ' ll be waiting....
 
All that is pure, uncut fluff. There are only the subtle hints of your lemons in all that meringue pie. I ll keep checking back in to see if you have any substance, in the meanwhile...


Tap tap tap, I ' ll be waiting....

Still nothing. Let me know when you have any substance that either supports your position or opposes mine. Thus far, you've had none.
 

I remember when I tried to make the point that if gays win SSM, their success would inspire NAMBLA to try to win the same level of success. Now, I never said that pedophilia had anything to do with homosexuality, yet the usual suspects demanded that I explain what pedophilia had to do with homosexuality.

Well Agent J, Captain Courtesy, Agent J, and to all the others who responded to my post, there’s the answer to the question you asked about a statement that I never made.
 

That is the most absurd load of hogwash i have ever heard.

That is like saying because we push for legal protection when we use deadly force in self defense that it opens the door for "honor killings." Its absolutely absurd ramfel.
 
That is the most absurd load of hogwash i have ever heard.

That is like saying because we push for legal protection when we use deadly force in self defense that it opens the door for "honor killings." Its absolutely absurd ramfel.

Why do you think the members of NAMBLA don't want to succeed at their goal?
 
Of course they do, but to say that allowing homosexuals to get married will all of the sudden make child molestation okay?

You see? That's what I'm talking about. I didn't say that.

I could Just as easily said that the tactics used by gays would inspire the "Benevolent Order of the Elks" in their goals.

Thanks for paying attention.
 
You see? That's what I'm talking about. I didn't say that.

I could Just as easily said that the tactics used by gays would inspire the "Benevolent Order of the Elks" in their goals.

Thanks for paying attention.

paying attention? To what this dishonest diversion or what you said originally in which you are now back peddling from?
 
This thread can be summed up in one song

 

And the answer to your question STILL is that your position is absurd and you don't know what you are talking about. This is consistent with everything you say on this topic.
 
You see? That's what I'm talking about. I didn't say that.

I could Just as easily said that the tactics used by gays would inspire the "Benevolent Order of the Elks" in their goals.

Thanks for paying attention.

So, why don't you post EXACTLY what you are talking about so I can easily refute it.
 
OK, captain, I will. But in order to avoid confusion, I'll rephrase it.

The techniques used by homosexuals in order to gain Same Sex Marriage can be employed by other organizations.

Happy?
 
The point is everytime you change things, you open the doors for other changes you MAY not like.
The best government is small and non intrusive.

We had it under Eisenhower.
 
OK, captain, I will. But in order to avoid confusion, I'll rephrase it.

The techniques used by homosexuals in order to gain Same Sex Marriage can be employed by other organizations.

Happy?

Good JOB. And guess what? Based on exactly what you posted above, I AGREE WITH YOU.

See? When you are clear and don't add in erroneous crap, you and I can actually find some common ground.
 
You see? That's what I'm talking about. I didn't say that.

I could Just as easily said that the tactics used by gays would inspire the "Benevolent Order of the Elks" in their goals.

Thanks for paying attention.

You're trying to equate two consenting adults with child rape. Yes, forcing yourself on a child is the same as two consenting adults making a contract together.

You will literally say anything to support your hate of gays, won't you?
 
The point is everytime you change things, you open the doors for other changes you MAY not like.
The best government is small and non intrusive.

We had it under Eisenhower.

What? No, we didn't. The Federal government reached its apogee of power under Ike, from the 90% corporate tax rate (which, granted, relatively few businesses paid in full owing to loopholes) to the use of the National Guard to enforce desegregation. In none of the five decades since has the Federal government been as overtly powerful as it was in the 1950s, not even under Johnson's Great Society. This is particularly true of our defense policies - the "military-industrial Establishment" Eisenhower both loved and hated was at its pinnacle in the 1950s.
 

You should get your facts straight!

Little Rock Nine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"National Guard blockade[edit source | editbeta]Main article: Arkansas National Guard and the Integration of Central High School
Several segregationist councils threatened to hold protests at Central High and physically block the black students from entering the school. Governor Orval Faubus deployed the Arkansas National Guard to support the segregationists on September 4, 1957. The sight of a line of soldiers blocking out the students made national headlines and polarized the nation. Regarding the accompanying crowd, one of the nine students, Elizabeth Eckford, recalled:

They moved closer and closer...Somebody started yelling...I tried to see a friendly face somewhere in the crowd—someone who maybe could help. I looked into the face of an old woman and it seemed a kind face, but when I looked at her again, she spat on me.[10]
On September 9, the Little Rock School District issued a statement condemning the governor's deployment of soldiers to the school, and called for a citywide prayer service on September 12. Even President Dwight Eisenhower attempted to de-escalate the situation by summoning Faubus for a meeting, warning him not to defy the Supreme Court's ruling.[11]

Armed escort[edit source | editbeta]Woodrow Wilson Mann, the Mayor of Little Rock, asked President Eisenhower to send federal troops to enforce integration and protect the nine students. On September 24, the President ordered the 101st Airborne Division of the United States Army to Little Rock and federalized the entire 10,000-member Arkansas National Guard, taking it out of the hands of Faubus."
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…