If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RedState)   If the levers of State are to be wielded to enforce the commands of Scripture, such as not allowing gay marriage, then why the hell are we opposing Obamacare - which is the most Christ-like thing the government has ever done?   (redstate.com) divider line 523
    More: Interesting, obamacare, No Regrets, no compromise, protest vote, eternal life, same-sex marriages, Bob Dole, Biden  
•       •       •

4072 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Mar 2013 at 6:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



523 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-02 10:29:10 AM

vygramul: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.

OK, now that you've had a moment to think about the relative merits, both above statements are not necessarily true. Private charity and private philanthropy do work. And so do government handouts (in a manner of speaking). The psychological difference between the two is that the former is often accompanied by a self-righteous nagging which often has the effect of eventually getting the receiver to eventually do something to change their situation (stop drinking, etc.); the latter is often accompanied by venal self-aggrandizement and empire building, leading to larger and larger government. The former is arguably healthier for society.

The history of government and charity goes back farther than LBJ.


True, but the Great Society is when it really got stoked.
 
2013-04-02 10:32:17 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Organized religion is simply another power play. Marx was correct about one thing: it is indeed the opiate of the people.


When Marx said that, he meant that people turn to religion for solace and comfort, but that it does nothing to address the problems that caused discord and discomfort to begin with. But he wasn't saying that it was a bad thing. Remember, there was no American Drug War to besmirch the value of sedatives. It's like telling someone that having a beer at the end of the day to de-stress after work doesn't fix the fact that work is stressful, but it also doesn't say beer is bad.
 
2013-04-02 10:39:10 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.

OK, now that you've had a moment to think about the relative merits, both above statements are not necessarily true. Private charity and private philanthropy do work. And so do government handouts (in a manner of speaking). The psychological difference between the two is that the former is often accompanied by a self-righteous nagging which often has the effect of eventually getting the receiver to eventually do something to change their situation (stop drinking, etc.); the latter is often accompanied by venal self-aggrandizement and empire building, leading to larger and larger government. The former is arguably healthier for society.

The history of government and charity goes back farther than LBJ.

True, but the Great Society is when it really got stoked.


Private philanthropy and charity have tried fixing poverty a long time and have failed to do so. Government hasn't really been trying all that hard and for less than a century.
 
2013-04-02 10:43:09 AM

ox45tallboy: whidbey: Again, Obama was overwhelmingly elected despite the supposed (yeah right) "Americans not wanting Obamacare" disinformation.

So no, suck it haters.

For the record, I don't want Obamacare. I want single payer. But we're not going to get single payer, so I'd rather have Obamacare than what we've been getting since Nixon approved Kaiser Permanente.

"Medicare for all" can happen if we want it to. We're willing to pay for it.


OK, you're factually incorrect here. Kaiser Permanente was founded in 1945 by industrialist Henry J. Kaiser. Paul M. Ellwood, Jr. and then Ted Kennedy (in perpetual guilt-driven do-gooder mode) were the persons mainly responsible for the farked-up system of HMOs/PPOs, 3rd party pay, and sky rocketing costs that we have today.
 
2013-04-02 10:45:00 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: OK, you're factually incorrect here. Kaiser Permanente was founded in 1945 by industrialist Henry J. Kaiser. Paul M. Ellwood, Jr. and then Ted Kennedy (in perpetual guilt-driven do-gooder mode) were the persons mainly responsible for the farked-up system of HMOs/PPOs, 3rd party pay, and sky rocketing costs that we have today.


Good catch on Kaiser - but the responsibility for HMOs and 3rd party pay goes back to before Ted Kennedy was even born.
 
2013-04-02 10:52:22 AM

vygramul: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.

OK, now that you've had a moment to think about the relative merits, both above statements are not necessarily true. Private charity and private philanthropy do work. And so do government handouts (in a manner of speaking). The psychological difference between the two is that the former is often accompanied by a self-righteous nagging which often has the effect of eventually getting the receiver to eventually do something to change their situation (stop drinking, etc.); the latter is often accompanied by venal self-aggrandizement and empire building, leading to larger and larger government. The former is arguably healthier for society.

The history of government and charity goes back farther than LBJ.

True, but the Great Society is when it really got stoked.

Private philanthropy and charity have tried fixing poverty a long time and have failed to do so. Government hasn't really been trying all that hard and for less than a century.


Are you familiar with the Bell Curve? As someone said once, "The poor shall always be with us." The only way to eliminate that would be through enforced eugenics, and I don't think you want to go there. (Besides, it would not work. You would just end up with a higher Bell Curve.)
 
2013-04-02 11:06:57 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Are you familiar with the Bell Curve? As someone said once, "The poor shall always be with us." The only way to eliminate that would be through enforced eugenics, and I don't think you want to go there. (Besides, it would not work. You would just end up with a higher Bell Curve.)


I'm not intending to suggest there is a solution to poverty. Some people are just so dysfunctional that it's unavoidable. However, to the degree that it can be fixed, government can do a better job than private philanthropy and charity, even if, holding all else equal, we adopted universal health care.

To some degree we're off-topic. The premise of the thread is that we're basing our decisions on scripture, hence the focus on Matthew and voting in such a way as to comply with its directives. Its a criticism of selectively applying religion to governance, not an argument to expand religious governance to cover more things.
 
2013-04-02 11:56:05 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: OK, you're factually incorrect here. Kaiser Permanente was founded in 1945 by industrialist Henry J. Kaiser. Paul M. Ellwood, Jr. and then Ted Kennedy (in perpetual guilt-driven do-gooder mode) were the persons mainly responsible for the farked-up system of HMOs/PPOs, 3rd party pay, and sky rocketing costs that we have today.


Ummm.... no I'm not. While it's true that Ted Kennedy was the principle sponsor of the HMO Act of 1973, it was Richard Nixon that "approved it" by signing it into law. Which is exactly what I said.
 
2013-04-02 12:22:43 PM

skullkrusher: My wife is faithful, I am a lapsed Catholic/agnostic and we get along just fine.


That's fine. I personally would have difficulty being married to a person who genuinely believed in the whole "Jesus died for my sins, then rose to heaven to be seated at the right hand of the father" business. I understand the notion of admiring and even practicing the ideals professed by a religion, but not when that religion expects me to believe things that are demonstrably false, like Christianity does.


rohar: Uh, my wife's devoutly Christian. I'm honestly agnostic. Thanks for speaking for the rest of us, as if you have any idea how to be socially acceptable or how a society works.  /asshole


I wasn't intending to speak for anyone other than myself. And all I'm saying is that I have a hard time taking people seriously when I know them to be believers in mysticism. I'm not saying we should be rounding up Christians like the Romans did, I just resent how much time and energy and inertia our society wastes by constantly catering to their beliefs, most of which come from their bible, much of which has been debunked as primitive superstition.

If both of you really are agnostics married to Christian women, I have to imagine that much of your "getting along" involves not delving too deeply into the fact that your wives believe in magic. Because that's what it comes down to... you either believe that Jesus rose from the dead, or you don't. You either believe that Noah saved two of every animal on earth, or you don't. I consider the biblical story of God creating the universe in six days to be a charming example of ancient mythologizing, but to be a Christian, you have to accept it as literal truth.
 
2013-04-02 04:05:34 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Are you familiar with the Bell Curve?


lolwut

The 1990s called. They want their racist junk "science" back.
 
2013-04-02 05:36:53 PM

ox45tallboy: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: OK, you're factually incorrect here. Kaiser Permanente was founded in 1945 by industrialist Henry J. Kaiser. Paul M. Ellwood, Jr. and then Ted Kennedy (in perpetual guilt-driven do-gooder mode) were the persons mainly responsible for the farked-up system of HMOs/PPOs, 3rd party pay, and sky rocketing costs that we have today.

Ummm.... no I'm not. While it's true that Ted Kennedy was the principle sponsor of the HMO Act of 1973, it was Richard Nixon that "approved it" by signing it into law. Which is exactly what I said.


Could have sworn you said that Nixon was responsible for Kaiser.  "...so I'd rather have Obamacare than what we've been getting since Nixon approved Kaiser Permanente."

Maybe I don't have enough nuance on that?
 
2013-04-02 07:11:53 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: personal attacks, posting profile picture as an attack, posting profile pic without permission to do so


Yeah that really bolsters your argument.

Doesn't make your racist-tinged study any more law than it was before.
 
2013-04-02 07:15:20 PM
Whatever, dude.

*plonk* enjoy bothering anyone else dumb enough to take your meanspirited shiat seriously
 
2013-04-03 03:12:01 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.


*sigh*

img62.imageshack.us
 
2013-04-03 05:35:50 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: (Since I've already been accused of being a "Randite" allow me to paraphrase Floyd Ferris from "Atlas Shrugged": "Whatever else you do, make them feel guilty, like it is their own fault. If they believe it, you can do anything to them and they will accept it.")


To allay any presumptions that I am espousing the philosophies of some bargain bin, half-literate, gnarled out husk of an author, I will quote that author.  That should settle matters.
 
2013-04-03 09:21:28 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.

*sigh*

[img62.imageshack.us image 610x389]


Extracting what someone said out of context always helps when all you got are no arguments and pictures.
 
2013-04-03 09:23:03 AM

thamike: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: (Since I've already been accused of being a "Randite" allow me to paraphrase Floyd Ferris from "Atlas Shrugged": "Whatever else you do, make them feel guilty, like it is their own fault. If they believe it, you can do anything to them and they will accept it.")

To allay any presumptions that I am espousing the philosophies of some bargain bin, half-literate, gnarled out husk of an author, I will quote that author.  That should settle matters.


So... all you got is name calling? Whatever. Have an adequate day, dude.
 
2013-04-03 11:08:39 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: vygramul: Halli: Animatronik: What works is private philanthropy and charitable organizations, which are increasingly under attack by liberals because they do the job better without being under socialist govt control.

Are you really this deluded?

You really could have quoted the whole thing. It presupposes liberals want to raise taxes to pay for it rather than cut the defense budget, and it displays an astounding lack of historical knowledge because we had an era of small government, no income tax, and a large poor population, proving charity and private philanthropy doesn't work. At all.

Er...... Since LBJ, we've had a an era of big government, high income tax, and an even larger poor population, proving government handouts don't work. At all.

*sigh*

[img62.imageshack.us image 610x389]

Extracting what someone said out of context always helps when all you got are no arguments and pictures.


FWIW, poverty in 2013 is only JUST beginning to reach levels it saw before Medicare existed. If government hand-outs are at their peak in the last 50 years, your point about poverty is inaccurate.
 
2013-04-03 11:47:47 AM

CanisNoir: sugardave: Seriously? Does coveting a particular charitable action help or hinder your ascension to paradise?

You are completely missing his point, or purposefully trying to be obtuse. A "good" work cannot be "good" if it's forced. Christ and Christian teachings are about doing "good" works. Having the government force you to do it, takes it out of the realm of "good" works, so it's wrong to say that Jesus and Christians should support the Government forcing people to do it.


If you are shamed into donating to "charity" through the coercion of the "church" that's A-OK though, right? 
Just so you don't personally have to wash the feet of a homeless person, right?
 
2013-04-03 07:16:01 PM

skilbride: So, at a fundamental level, there's a very deep fear that is not well vocalized in the Christian faith that if government forces you to do all these things that Christ says you should do - you won't get into heaven - because not only was it not a sacrifice that you made willingly, for no personal benefit - but it's something that everyone else does as well.


I meant to reply to this earlier but got busy.  Basically, those people need to get the fark over it.  The opinions of your imaginary friend have no place in discussions of policy, nor do your fantasies about what will happen after you die.  I care about the provable outcomes of real-life actions taken by entities that demonstrably exist, and in the real world, people are making decisions that actively  harm millions ins order to kiss up to their imaginary friends, and I'm sick unto farking death of it.  I want to live a safe, healthy and reasonably prosperous life with my loved ones.  I want to reduce the amount of misery and human suffering in the world.  And there are real-life things that provably achieve those goals, one of which is a social safety net.  So fark those christians; they are doing deliberate evil in the service of a malevolent fantasy, and I have no respect for it.  Neither do I have any respect for your version, because you are enabling them even where you disagree.  You also insist that the opinions of your imaginary friend are significant and should be taken seriously, and once we're doing that, then we have to take everyone's imaginary friend seriously, because there's no evidence for any of it; it's all pulled out of someone's ass.  You can live your personal life according to the whims of an imaginary bully if you like, but stop dragging the rest of us down with you.
 
2013-04-03 08:02:59 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: thamike: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: (Since I've already been accused of being a "Randite" allow me to paraphrase Floyd Ferris from "Atlas Shrugged": "Whatever else you do, make them feel guilty, like it is their own fault. If they believe it, you can do anything to them and they will accept it.")

To allay any presumptions that I am espousing the philosophies of some bargain bin, half-literate, gnarled out husk of an author, I will quote that author.  That should settle matters.

So... all you got is name calling? Whatever. Have an adequate day, dude.


I was calling Ayn Rand names.  Jeez, for a non-"Randite" you certainly care about her mummified empty-headed feelings.  Sorry if that affected you, I had no idea you two had been close.
 
2013-04-04 12:40:56 AM

thamike: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: thamike: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: (Since I've already been accused of being a "Randite" allow me to paraphrase Floyd Ferris from "Atlas Shrugged": "Whatever else you do, make them feel guilty, like it is their own fault. If they believe it, you can do anything to them and they will accept it.")

To allay any presumptions that I am espousing the philosophies of some bargain bin, half-literate, gnarled out husk of an author, I will quote that author.  That should settle matters.

So... all you got is name calling? Whatever. Have an adequate day, dude.

I was calling Ayn Rand names.  Jeez, for a non-"Randite" you certainly care about her mummified empty-headed feelings.  Sorry if that affected you, I had no idea you two had been close.


Errr........ she's dead, dude, she doesn't have any feelings. Just how in touch with reality are you, anyway? Are you, like, one of those Xians with their invisible sky spirit? FYI, even if she were alive, I really wouldn't give a dingdong about her feelings, one way or another. Never met her (DID meet Nathaniel Brandon a few times; he's a total asshole). No, what I object to about your little response (little in several ways) is that I always hope that the human race will gradually improve it's argumentative skills over the level of ad hominem sandbox tantrums. It saddens me to see no progress.

Seriously, all ad hominem means is that you "gots nothun' else" in your little bag of tricks. You should be embarrassed. Other people are, after all, reading your golden words of wisdom, and thereby evaluating you.
 
2013-04-04 05:32:56 AM
 Does anyone have any insight on this?  I don't know what this guy is babbling about.
 
Displayed 23 of 523 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report