Politics

He's an individual with specific traits and preferences which sometimes don't align fully with the people he has connections with, and yet does not try to change the preferences of those other people.
You know, being mature about differences in opinion.

 

He's an individual with specific traits and preferences which sometimes don't align fully with the people he has connections with, and yet does not try to change the preferences of those other people.
You know, being mature about differences in opinion.

I'd argue that if you aren't a dick/don't ostracize homosexuals that you're supporting of homosexuality. It seems like it's a bit more of a grey area than I thought though.

Also this question was originally for Fatih so I don't see why you're all answering in Fatih's place, since I'm pretty sure Fatih will be able to give a more definitive answer here on their own thoughts.

 

I dislike homosexuality because I think it's not the way that nature has intended us to live for. But I won't do anything about it, because I'm just a guy with an opinion.

edit:ninja'd x2

edit2: They basically said it

 

Appeal to nature is a logical fallacy and as a cat on the internet I will use this statement to tell you how to live your life
not that I'm trying to advocate for the gays, but I believe it's important to have a strong basis for your argument against them such as "They are creating a glass floor in the dildo market"

 

I dislike computers and cooked food because it's not what nature intended.

 

I dislike computers and cooked food because it's not what nature intended.

Amen

 

I dislike homosexuality because I think it's not the way that nature has intended us to live for. But I won't do anything about it, because I'm just a guy with an opinion.

edit:ninja'd x2

edit2: They basically said it

Most species of mammal have some percentage of a homosexual population. There are gay lions and elephants. It's completely natural.

 

Can this thread not exist?

 

Are you kidding this is quality entertainment

 

Religion itself isn't in it's entirety the problem. It's people. Whether you are religious or not, you have those you dislike, and others you definitely are not fond of. The shooting may have resulted in the deaths of Christians and he may have targeted Christians but this is not always the case. Simply ridding of religion will not deter violence. In fact, most religions defer to peace first rather than violence. In some cases violence will never be the answer. I want you to think about Tibet. Point it out on a map for me...
That's right. It's part of China. Mao himself invaded Tibet to free the people (in his terms not mine) from "religious tyranny". The Buddhist religion is the most peaceful on earth. The Dalia Lama is the head of the most peaceful people on earth. Tibetans have been trapped in China for over 5o years and tortured and many refuse to result to violence. Rather they've taken other drastic measures on themselves, but nevertheless Buddhism is a perfect example of how religion is not the problem. It's people.

Whether or not I decide to pull that trigger, or use that knife isn't completely based upon religion. It's my feelings, my anger, the situation that would cause such an action. I personally believe, that restrictions, yes should be put into place to protect innocent people, but also the mentally ill from such dangerous weapons. If mental evaluations are cleared and the person is allowed to have a gun, fine.

Total relinquishment of gun rights is out of the question however. Our country (mine being the US), was founded on that exact principle. Without raising arms, I assure you, our country would not have become the country we are today, lest become a country at all had we not had proper weapons. If total gun control took affect and no one was allowed to be armed, we'd be in trouble. Time has proven again and again that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is if the good guy has a gun too. It's sad to resort to such a situation, but its what has to be done. The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is if the good guy has a gun to defend and protect others with as well.

* I actually thoroughly enjoyed reading all of this. Granted it's not related to CS (which is why its in the Satellite Lounge) but I love how it's sparked such intellectual thoughts, and solid based debate. (rather than people just immaturely bashing each other around.) And yes I do realize other questions were brought up too. I thought I'd start with Gun Control/why i believe such terrible incidents occur.

 

If anyone is wondering I moved the gun debate over here:
http://www.cavestory.org/forums/threads/american-gun-laws.6196/

 

Who else thinks Ron Paul is Husbu

 

Who else thinks Ron Paul is Husbu

I dislike conservative Republicans. Their opinions are usually bad/biased. The whole Eric Cantor and the "Young Guns" time period was a major disgrace to our country. Ron Paul was in on that.

 

I'm itching to discuss local state-level politics, but there are only ~2 members from the same country as me, and probably 0 from the same state. It would be pretty one-sided.

 

Their opinions are usually bad/biased.

politicians don't have opinions(except donald rump), they appease a demographic for personal and political gain.

 

politicians don't have opinions(except donald rump), they appease a demographic for personal and political gain.

*facepalm* I even said this in this thread somewhere. You are correct. Well, most of them are like that. There are a rare few who are not.

 

politicians don't have opinions(except donald rump), they appease a demographic for personal and political gain.

On rare occasion you do end up with someone who really believes in what they do and will make what they believe to be the right choices rather than simply the popular ones. It isn't very often that it happens, but they are the politicians that I respect.

except donald rump

I wouldn't try to judge anyone on that merit until they have spent time in office.

 

Ron Paul seems pretty legit in terms of actually believing in what he does

 

We don't exactly have any great candidates this time. I mean, there's Trump, Carson, and Clinton. We really need someone to save us...heres some things I've noticed:

1. The Republicans: Republican candidates always act on the common principal of "Make America Great Again." This is stupid. America is not in a "worse" shape than it was a hundred years...in fact, America is better than i ever was in terms of living conditions and what the average person can afford. People you are blinded by nostalgia!!!!! This "great" America that they speak of is most likely the generic image you see with people having cook outs or joining the army and whatnot. This is what people want america to be like:

Seems great right? Nope. I bet that the dad right there was a racist, the mom stayed at home cooking, and the kids learned that the earth was 6000 years old (ok maybe not THAT extreme but you get the point.) During this apparently "great" era, there was a huge amount of starving people. NOW, however, there is still poverty of course, but very few starving people. So, America never had some fall from grace like the Republican candidates want you to think.

2. The Democrats: I'm gonna focus on Hilary here. She is a lying scumbag who deserves to rot. She supports some good causes imo but not enough for me to support her. Everything about her screams that she is easily corruptible. For example, at the Republican debate Trump claimed that Clinton came to his wedding because he donated to her campaign. I don't like Trump, but I think he's telling the truth here. She gave a favor because he PAYED her. Come on, we all know that this means anyone with a million dollars and an agenda can get her endorsement.

 

are you just going to completely ignore the fact that bernie sanders exists
are you also on Time Warner's payroll