Which Party promoted the KKK? THE DEMOCRATS!

Aborted fetus' are a race now? This could be a new angle to get Roe Vs Wade overturned!

Edited by oldpbnoob - 30 September 2010 at 1:42pm

FreeEnterprise wrote: Godwin's law shows its ugly head again.

^^^^ Good to see that you still have not grasped the concept of the genetic Eve that is discussed in the article.

Please point to any part of what I said indicates race. If you are assuming that I am speaking of minorities, than you sir are the racist, not me.

agentwhale007 wrote: FreeEnterprise wrote: agentwhale007 wrote: FreeEnterprise wrote: oldpbnoob wrote: brihard wrote: oldpbnoob wrote: I also find it ironic that FE is pissing and moaning about 49 million less potential welfare recipients. Can you imagine how much higher our taxes would be with an influx of 49million unwanted children that would in all probability turn into leaches on the system? From hospital bills that would have to be absorbed, to foster care, medicare costs, to public assistance later on in life?  And than the potential 100 million more that they would have produced? Think about it. Oh wow.   Reported for racist statements. I guess I can see how you could be so racist... But to write it down, and trumpet it over and over... Godwin's law shows its ugly head again.     wow is right...       Yeah, that's not what a Godwin's Law is.  Like, at all.      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics   "Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century, but has fallen into disfavor after having become associated with [COLOR="#0645ad">Nazi Germany[/COLOR">. Since the [COLOR="#0645ad">postwar[/COLOR"> period, both the public and the scientific communities have associated eugenics with [COLOR="#0645ad">Nazi[/COLOR"> abuses, such as enforced [COLOR="#0645ad">racial hygiene[/COLOR">, [COLOR="#0645ad">human experimentation[/COLOR">, and the [COLOR="#0645ad" size="3">extermination[/COLOR"> of "undesired" population groups. However, developments in [COLOR="#0645ad">genetic[/COLOR">, [COLOR="#0645ad">genomic[/COLOR">, and [COLOR="#0645ad">reproductive technologies[/COLOR"> at the end of the 20th century have raised many new questions and concerns about the meaning of eugenics and its ethical and moral status in the modern era."     <span ="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 2px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 2px; ">Yeah, that's not what a Godwin's Law is. </span>

Correlation and Causation

FreeEnterprise wrote: I read an interesting article today that touches on some of the discussion listed in the previous page.   http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/247917/ruling-ways-interview?page=2   "Stop being nice to the Left; after all, they’re never nice to you. Stop caring what they think. Stop trying to get along. You’re not going to get along. In fact, the only way you can get along is for you to abandon your bedrock principles and become a kind of Lefty Lite. Remember this simple mantra: Principles, Not Programs. But do mock them; as Luther said, the devil cannot stand to be mocked."

Before I point out again the flaws in your connections, and before I point out that you have YET AGAIN ignored a thought-out and well-articulated post for no real reason, I'd like to point out that the statements quoted are irrevocably childish, immature, and will contribute more to the downfall of any society than anything you or OS has ever voiced concern about.

You see, it's public deliberation and thoughtful/useful contention of ideas that allows for a society to be governed by reason to the highest degree possible. If only one side was to voice their opinion, then we would be led astray in the way that only blind adherence to something can cause.

You weren't here for it, but at one point in time, this forum was a rather (neo)conservative place, where the majority of posters were moderately-to-far-right, and there were around five members who would argue on the moderate to liberal side. Through a bunch of threads that would easily go for ten or more pages and were oriented on a plethora of political and social issues, the forum, as a whole, shifted to a more moderate position to where we are now.

And we are in an excellent place now. Not because most people lean slightly to the side that I would agree with, but because REASONABLE people on both sides of our mainstream political spectrum can talk about things like the problems with student debt, abortion policies, energy sources, the war, immigration, etc., and exchange ideas, come up with favorable solutions (and sometimes write a formal letter to our representatives elucidating the solution we came up with as a response we would like to see them implement), and in the end still respect each other and hope to meet up and go shooting together some day after having a free meal at their place of business (not that I have anyone specific in mind). Hell, USAF and I, disagree though we do about many things, considered at one point trying to enlist and enter BUD/S at the same time.

The sort of apathy and disregarding of those whom you disagree with, as advocated by your quotes, is not at all conducive to a healthy society, and is completely counter-productive in almost all ways imaginable. I understand it can be frustrating dealing with people who disagree with you so vehemently and with no perceived logic backing up their claims, but just as it would be wrong to disown your brother for disagreeing with you, it's wrong to do the same with your countrymen. Remember, "BUT THEY DO IT" isn't a defensible reason to take an action or act a certain way.

EDIT: Further thoughts on your post continued in the next post. Stay tuned.

oldpbnoob wrote: FreeEnterprise wrote: oldpbnoob wrote: Please point to any part of what I said indicates race. If you are assuming that I am speaking of minorities, than you sir are the racist, not me. Perhaps I should report you for racist posts?     Too late... You must have forgotten, I've been on the front page of newspapers representing the TEA party...     And we all know about THEM (or is it US)... It definitely is not us. Quite the contrary to your opinion, I am not racist.