gays VS Gas

Stu,
I've been following this thread for awhile now and I have to hand it to you. You stood up, took your licks and kept swinging.

I, like you, don't want big brother in my bedroom, in my bank account, or in my gun safe. I also don't want someone elses moral values inflicted on me.

There are an awful lot of things that I personally think are morally wrong and abherant (sp) behavior. Would I like to see them go away? Yes. Would I ammend the Constitution to make it so? No.

I'm pretty sure Sarah Brady thinks that removing guns from our society is the "morally right" thing to do. And PETA thinks that "protecting animal rights" is the morally correct stance to take also. They never use examples of safe, conscientious gun owners and hunters to make thier points. They use extreme, graphic, and sometimes untrue examples to make thier cases as do some others that would like thier moral values enacted into law, thereby restricting our freedoms in the name of "the greater good".

Let me give you a hypothetical argument. There is no way to take the guns away from the criminals. The only way to eliminate gun violence is to take away the ammo. So, in the name of "public safety", the government is going into the ammo business. You can buy ammo only at the range, where it has to be used and what isn't must be turned in at the end of your session. You will only be issued ammo for hunting when you have been drawn for a tag and then only three rounds. The unused shells must be returned and the used ones must be accounted for and witnessed. Etc., Etc., Etc.

Would this program reduce gun violence? Probably so. Would it lower our health care costs because there will be less gunshot victims in the ER's? Probably so. Would it be Constitutional? I dare say it might be.

So, how would all of us feel about it?

We'd be screaming bloody murder about having some mamby pamby chicken **** liberal gay ******* trampling our rights and inflicting their morals on us because they think they know what's best for us and the rest of society.

Just a little food for thought. Alright, bring on the flames (pun intended).
 
Tony, I'm tenacious, if nothing else /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

I'd just like to take a second to commend everyone in this thread. You all have kept this discussion from degenerating. Given the subject matter at hand, that's saying something.

We've managed to keep this pretty civil despite the contentiousness of the topic, and I thank you all for that.
 
Yellowhammer said:
My other point was: Society is not trying to impose its' will on homosexuals, they are trying to impose their will on it.
Exactly. I sometimes feel like people have already been "assimilated" by liberal speak and cannot grasp this. Government is an exertion of will, a controlling force, a power to be dealt. If it is only a bunch of nice ideas it is called philosophy, not government. Soooo, who decides what, when, where, how and why? There will be morals exercised through government, the ONLY question is which ones?

Our current system is under attack by lots of activist seeking to circumvent (or castrate) our constitutional process through judicial manipulation. Nothing new, just sharks being drawn by blood. It's been done in the past and they are doing it now so why not tomorrow?

I am constantly amazed at how we are so easily led by liberals to pointless lookout points. They are the ones trying to "re-write" the constitution, to subvert the constitutinally expressed will of the people.

Stu- I think you have may a problem with morals in government, but our government has them. Every government does because they are comprised of people. At some point and time, a vote is taken which expresses each persons will to either accept or deny a proposition. Each vote is a moral representation of whether the proposition in question merits(indicating an awareness of right and wrong)rejection or acceptance. Terms like harmful, restrictive, damaging, empowering, uplifting, productive, good, poor, fair, equal, just,evil, repressive, progressive, regressive, are based on morality.

The process we have is our original constitutional process. The one designed on a proposition that our founders had, that being that "most" men, most of the time, when confronted with the choice between good and evil will choose good. That of course depends on what your defintion of "good" is. (another moral standard) But they, being moral beings, believed that "most" would get it right "most" of the time. They anticipated that there would indeed be "wolves" about and so structured the balance of power in such a way as to afford "corrections" for the "seeds of evil" that would seek purchase from time to time, in our fertile soils of liberty. So, don't be afraid to call a weed a weed, or a deviant a deviant. We should spend more time sharpening and swinging our hoes than trying to figure out how to grow weeds side by side with corn.

I attempted to illustrate how that there are already laws and a process in place which allows us to tend our American garden. If others want to plant weeds in their own garden while playing with their own hand-grenades, then go for it. However, they want to be planted in our garden, the same garden that has been watered with the blood of Americans who believed in our right to plant, tend and reap our garden as we see fit. Your concept of a fenceless, rowless, unplowed (cause it would hurt the soil), happen how it happens where we all just get along because we all are born free -garden- might be a nice sentiment, but it is not an American garden.
 
The process we have is our original constitutional process. The one designed on a proposition that our founders had, that being that most" men, most of the time, when confronted with the choice between good and evil will choose good. That of course depends on what your defintion of "good" is. (another moral standard) But they, being moral beings, believed that "most" would get it right "most" of the time. They anticipated that there would indeed be "wolves" about and so structured the balance of power in such a way as to afford "corrections" for the "seeds of evil" that would seek purchase from time to time, in our fertile soils of liberty. So, don't be afraid to call a weed a weed, or a deviant a deviant. We should spend more time sharpening and swinging our hoes than trying to figure out how to grow weeds side by side with corn.

I attempted to illustrate how that there are already laws and a process in place which allows us to tend our American garden. If others want to plant weeds in their own garden while playing with their own hand-grenades, then go for it. However, they want to be planted in our garden, the same garden that has been watered with the blood of Americans who believed in our right to plant, tend and reap our garden as we see fit. Your concept of a fenceless, rowless, unplowed (cause it would hurt the soil), happen how it happens where we all just get along because we all are born free -garden- might be a nice sentiment, but it is not an American garden."

Well put, even I can understand that. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif Excellent.
 
I have seen a lot of posts mentioning that amending the Constitution to regulate marriage is not what the Founders intended. I have also seen posts that said that this is just another increase in government.

I have a fundamental belief in personal liberty and freedom. I believe that our constitution and BOR embody that and are well designed for the purpose, and clearly were intended so based on the writings of the founders that I've read.

I think that our govt, at all levels, has gotten way too bloody big and intrusive. There are multiple reasons for this, but it seems to me that the biggest 2 are these...
Even though I agree that this is increasing government, I have to ask the question. Would you rather have Congress or the courts make the laws? If Congress doesn’t make law on gay marraige, the courts definitely will.

I prefer to have elected officials make the laws – even though it increases the size of government.
 
Stu~

Sorry, didn't mean you with the "bleeding" thing... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif More of how I react to stumbling upon a couple of people kissing who are the same sex.

SORRY!

For the record: I would never threaten anyone on this forum, period.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out how things have moved from "the basement" to our city streets.

I have always been one to let the neighbors do what they want...but when it is out in the open for my children to see, I draw the line.

Sorry for the misunderstanding and I will be careful in the future to ensure this doesn't repeat.

Regards,

Eric
 
Starliterancher - I think we are one the same page.

I've would add this:

I have often heard it said that "You cannot legislate morality". It is my contention that All Legislation is someone's morality. It is just a matter of who's morality is it.

This is very similar to your earlier statements.
 
Al VT,

I forgot to mention in my earlier post my opinion about the federal govt. and private enterprise...

I don't think the govt. should have any say in what a business charges for a service or product.

I also dont believe an employer should have to hire anyone if they don't want to, regardless of their reason.

If I don't want to hire a man because I don't like his color or his lifestyle, I shouldn't face a federal lawsuit.

Just for the record, I would hire anyone that is qualified for the job (except a woman). I am not the Archie Bunker type but I do believe that a woman's job is in the home and there aint a man alive that is qualified for a woman's job (we just can't hack it)

If you don't like the gas prices get a bike. The oil companies aren't in business to give us cheap gas, their in it for the money. AW
 
I already have a bike. I find it hard to ride it in 3 feet of snow! When is enough ,enough for the gas companies? They post their quartly profits at Billions! wouldn't Millions be enough? To bad gouging laws don't apply to them! At my business I do charge what I want , but I had to raise my cost because of the gas raise in price. I still drive the same distance but it costs more a week to get there. And just for the record..I killed a coyote this morning!!!he makes 26 oh wait..new year , hes just went down to #3!!
 
The reason Gas companies get what they want for gas is a simple supply and demand equasion. People are willing to pay the price. It would be differant if we were all driving very small vehicles and strickly using them for work. But the average american has a large SUV or 2 and puts as many recreation miles on their vehicles as they do work. We live in houses that are way larger than we need. So we have high heating bills. My grandparents house is about 900 square feet. My house we grew up in with three kids was 1100 square feet. My parents by themselves now have 2500 square feet. We are a country of excesses. Why shouldn't a buisness capitalize on that? If you don't like high gas bills do your part don't buy anymore than you absolutly have to. Down size to smaller more efficiant vehicles, use public transportation. Heat with alternative energy sources. Or enjoy what you have and don't whine about the cost. When supply outpaces demand the cost will come down.

As far as the gay marriage issue. It doesn't matter what your moral beliefs are these officials are breaking the law. They should be treated like the criminals they are. If they want the law changed they should go through the process. By ignoring or disragarding any law they have taken an oath to uphold they are setting a very dangerous presidence.

For what it's worth,

Scott
 
Sorry guys this thread is sooo long I just do not have the time to give it a complete read but in scanning over and digesting most of it a couple thoughts have not been stated. Hopefully I can verbalize a couple more thoughts for you all to give a good think too.

Stu, you said that the sodomites don't hurt the rest of us. Well, I beg to differ. In the 60's the use of drugs were embraced for the same lame reason as you mention (it doesn't hurt me if some pot head smokes a joint up on the hill) Well 30+ years later this country has a HUGE drug problem that exists all the way to our youth in elementary schools. Simple fact: excesses in a generation are magnified by their children. Look at our welfare system, crime, alcoholism, and every corner of our social behavior and you see this being played out. Apply that same equation to sodomites, and add mans depravity, and you will be hearing about some guy that wants to marry his sheep or God knows what else. A whole new can of worms will be opened. Look what Clinton did with this whole oral sex thing. Its everywhere on the large and small screen, on the hush to some degree but the insinuation is there. We just had 5th graders caught in a local elementary school going down on each other, and they got caught. Not exactly what we ought to be having going on in elemetary schools. The sex thing isn’t new either. Remember it (sex) was a 60’s thing too. The message of Sexual freedom was the pitch then, and yes we all see the results. Teenage pregnancy sky high. Babies being murdered daily so some poor innocent girl doesn't get inconvenienced. Don’t tell me that you cannot see that it (homosexuality)is the next step up (read indulgence)on that same path. Remember the excess equation mentioned earlier. Porn is another good example of that sexual depravity and lust for even more. People have not changed, or come up with new ideas and lifestyles since the world began, the world has seen empires fall many times before and they ALL have one thing in common, one of the very last steps of the journey was filled with deviant sexual living (sodomy, beastiality, etc) Yes, we do have the right, no obligation, to protect and build our society for a positive future. One that CAN procreate (through normal means) a future without destroying the intent of the natural design of this world and its creatures. On another quick note. Anyone who believes that a society can live without an absolute ‘moral’ code of right and wrong to be taught by parents and handed down to the generations is naïve at best. NOT one society has ever pulled that off. Why, you ask, because as you abd others mentioned in previous posts, each person has there own version of right or wrong. It MUST come from some place that is bigger than man himself. For us here in America it was our forefathers Judeo Christian values based on the scriptures in the Bible.
Hopefully I have given you all something to think on, whether you agree or not. I tried to keep it outside the scope of religion so that it is not blown off as just a religious zealot comment.
Now if anyone wants to discuss the behavior on it true merits as purely a sin from hell I am ready. Satin loves the Sodomites, they are his agents.
:eek:
 
Back
Top