Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 89101112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 148

Thread: United States of Racism

  1. -121
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,171
    vCash:
    37174
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Statler Waldorf View Post
    Why he made the statement is irrelevant, he said he had his facts wrong which he did.
    It was relevant to a lot of people.

    Constitutionally it does because they have a religious moral objection to doing so and the government cannot impose a moral code upon a religious institution that violates their religion. If Sandra has a problem with that she can go to a different institution. The Left needs to stop trying to impose their morals on everyone else. Paying for someone elseís contraceptives has nothing to do with workplace standards, itís all about getting free stuff.


    Should a Christian Scientist business owner be able to refuse to offer any health insurance, given they don't believe in doctors or medicine? Should a Scientologist business owner be able to refuse to cover psychiatric care, given that that goes against their beliefs?

    Heath care isn't "free stuff". You pay for it. All employers have to offer it. And the government gets to decide what constitutes an acceptable level and kind of health insurance. The law does not apply to explicitly religious institutions, like a church. But it does apply to schools and hospitals.

    Abortion is a human rights issue, not a reproductive rights issue (youíre no different than the slave owner who tried to claim slavery was a property rights issue rather than a human rights issue). However, even if it were, nice logical non-sequitur, someone having a right to do something does not mean they have a right to have it paid for by the tax payers. I have a right to own firearms, that doesnít mean that therefore the Government must pay for them. Nice try at that sort of liberal slight-of-hand, itís sad some people actually fall for it though.


    The debate over the merits of abortion is irrelevant to the discussion. Women don't agree with this and aren't going to be persuaded.

    Nope, actually it doesnít matter whether the issues are related or not, me being wrong about one point has no weight as to whether I am wrong about a different point. Thatís like saying because Florro correctly predicted the Packers game last week he is therefore right about next weekís prediction, thatís a complete logical non-sequitur.


    You say correlation. I say causation. Either way, your analogy is poor. Making correct predictions historically does not mean all of Florio's predictions will come true, but it does mean he is more likely to be right that someone who's predictions rarely come true.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -122
    Statler Waldorf's Avatar
    Bench Warmer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jun 2005
    Posts:
    1,262
    vCash:
    1284
    Loc:
    Oregon
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    It was relevant to a lot of people.


    No, itís irrelevant to the merits of our discussion, thatís the point.

    Should a Christian Scientist business owner be able to refuse to offer any health insurance, given they don't believe in doctors or medicine? Should a Scientologist business owner be able to refuse to cover psychiatric care, given that that goes against their beliefs?


    Absolutely and absolutely, If you have a problem with that, donít work for them.

    Heath care isn't "free stuff". You pay for it. All employers have to offer it. And the government gets to decide what constitutes an acceptable level and kind of health insurance. The law does not apply to explicitly religious institutions, like a church. But it does apply to schools and hospitals.


    Forcing all employees to offer health care is a violation of church and state, thatís the point. The Catholic Church in no way should have to subsidize Sandraís birth control when it is a clear violation of their religious teaching on the matter.

    The debate over the merits of abortion is irrelevant to the discussion. Women don't agree with this and aren't going to be persuaded.


    No, actually whether or not women are going to agree or be persuaded is what is irrelevant to the discussion. Slave owners not agreeing with slavery being a human rights issue was just as irrelevant.

    You say correlation. I say causation. Either way, your analogy is poor. Making correct predictions historically does not mean all of Florio's predictions will come true, but it does mean he is more likely to be right that someone who's predictions rarely come true.


    Correlation in no way proves causation, thatís just another logical fallacy. Even if it were valid your argument would still fail because I have correctly predicted 3 out of the last 4 elections, being wrong about the 2012 election, which was one many analysts and computer models were also wrong about doesnít mean much. The nation is still trending towards the right and thatís a very good sign.
    Total Depravity
    Unconditional Election
    Limited Atonement
    Irresistible Grace
    Perseverance of the Saints
    Quote Quote  

  3. -123
    EvilDylan's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2008
    Posts:
    3,169
    vCash:
    8101
    Loc:
    Huntsville, AL
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Statler Waldorf View Post
    Nope, I have one in Geospatial Science and one in Environmental Science, genetics donít interest me that much.
    Yet you continue to argue that you know what you're talking about. You used the term incorrectly, that is fact. Deal with it waldork.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -124
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,171
    vCash:
    37174
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Statler Waldorf View Post
    No, itís irrelevant to the merits of our discussion, thatís the point.

    Absolutely and absolutely, If you have a problem with that, donít work for them.

    Forcing all employees to offer health care is a violation of church and state, thatís the point. The Catholic Church in no way should have to subsidize Sandraís birth control when it is a clear violation of their religious teaching on the matter.

    No, actually whether or not women are going to agree or be persuaded is what is irrelevant to the discussion. Slave owners not agreeing with slavery being a human rights issue was just as irrelevant.
    Your claim was that the Obama won because women bought a phony notion that the Republican Party had initiated a "war on women". Your view as to the rightness of the positions on these issues is irrelevant to that claim. What is relevant is that women don't agree with the Republicans' stance on those issues... and aren't going to be persuaded. It's hardly necessary for the Democrats to invent the notion that Romney wants to cut funding for Planned Parenthood when he comes right out and says that he does.

    It's interesting to me you don't seem to be able to grasp something so exceedingly simple.
    Quote Quote  

  5. -125
    Seasoned Veteran

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    5,985
    vCash:
    10854
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    It was relevant to a lot of people.



    Should a Christian Scientist business owner be able to refuse to offer any health insurance, given they don't believe in doctors or medicine? Should a Scientologist business owner be able to refuse to cover psychiatric care, given that that goes against their beliefs?

    Heath care isn't "free stuff". You pay for it. All employers have to offer it. And the government gets to decide what constitutes an acceptable level and kind of health insurance. The law does not apply to explicitly religious institutions, like a church. But it does apply to schools and hospitals.



    The debate over the merits of abortion is irrelevant to the discussion. Women don't agree with this and aren't going to be persuaded.

    Why on earth would it matter if they can be persuaded?? Pedifiles will never agree with laws that keep them from raping innocent children, should we honestly give a crap if they can be persuaded or not??
    Quote Quote  

  6. -126
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,171
    vCash:
    37174
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by KTOWNFINFAN View Post

    Why on earth would it matter if they can be persuaded?? Pedifiles will never agree with laws that keep them from raping innocent children, should we honestly give a crap if they can be persuaded or not??
    Women were 53% of the electorate in 2012 and the Republicans lost them by 11 points. So... it's up to you.

    Shocking that they'd vote that way given the pedophile and slavery comparisons, though.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -127
    Seasoned Veteran

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    5,985
    vCash:
    10854
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke View Post
    I have no idea why you're acting like this. Whether or not you agree with it, the fact is that unless you're black, calling a black person the N word is pretty much the most offensive thing you can do to them. It's just a fact. However, they took the word and began using it amongst themselves in a completely different way than it had been in the past. It is only appropriate for them to use it that way. Arguing the merits of it and trying to prove otherwise is like trying to argue than when it rains, it's not really water falling from the sky. It's fact that this is the linguistic use of the word. This is irrefutable. So trying to argue that a non-black person calling a black person the N word is not racist is the equivalent of saying 1 + 1 does not equal 2. You're smart guy Mo, I have no idea why you're taking such a ridiculous position on this topic...
    Could you explain to me what the word "racist" even means to you??
    rac∑ism (rszm)n.1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
    2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

    Let me ask you another question. If a homosexual calls another the "F" word does that mean it isn't an insult?? Can a woman call another "cun*"?? Your idea that one race can use part of the English language and it is not offensive but if anyone not of that same race, can't use the same word or it IS offensive, IS THE VERY DEFINTION of racist. The idea that one race is to be treated differently, or allowed different rights, that is what RACISM IS !!!!! Come on you have to be smarter than that. What do you think racist even means?? Give me your definition, please!! I am not trying to insult you, I just really want to understand what you are thinking.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -128
    Seasoned Veteran

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2005
    Posts:
    5,985
    vCash:
    10854
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    Women were 53% of the electorate in 2012 and the Republicans lost them by 11 points. So... it's up to you.

    Shocking that they'd vote that way given the pedophile and slavery comparisons, though.
    What are you not hearing?? No one cares how they voted, laws should be made based on what is right or wrong not what a certain group think. I would imagine you could go to any rehab center and find a group that thinks the gov. should give out free cocaine, pot, pills, and meth, right along with food stamps. Since that group wants free drugs should we pass that law??
    Quote Quote  

  9. -129
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,171
    vCash:
    37174
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by KTOWNFINFAN View Post
    Could you explain to me what the word "racist" even means to you??
    rac∑ism (rszm)n.1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
    2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

    Let me ask you another question. If a homosexual calls another the "F" word does that mean it isn't an insult?? Can a woman call another "cun*"?? Your idea that one race can use part of the English language and it is not offensive but if anyone not of that same race, can't use the same word or it IS offensive, IS THE VERY DEFINTION of racist. The idea that one race is to be treated differently, or allowed different rights, that is what RACISM IS !!!!! Come on you have to be smarter than that. What do you think racist even means?? Give me your definition, please!! I am not trying to insult you, I just really want to understand what you are thinking.
    No you don't. Because it's been explained.

    Do you have any siblings? I have a younger brother, and the way I and the rest of our family rib him is by calling him some combination or version of an emotionless, cold hearted, selfish weasel. My dad's nickname for him, which my mother hates, is "the evil one."

    That's all fun and games as long as it's us. But if someone else tries to call him that in my presence, they're waking up in a hospital, understand?

    The meaning of words change depending on who says them. Context matters. And EVERYONE knows it, so don't plead ignorance.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -130
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    9,171
    vCash:
    37174
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by KTOWNFINFAN View Post
    What are you not hearing?? No one cares how they voted, laws should be made based on what is right or wrong not what a certain group think. I would imagine you could go to any rehab center and find a group that thinks the gov. should give out free cocaine, pot, pills, and meth, right along with food stamps. Since that group wants free drugs should we pass that law??
    Which varies from group to group. The group with the most votes gets their version of what's right made into law. Tell me this isn't news to you.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Weird United States!
    By Skeet84 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-31-2007, 01:10 AM
  2. United States Army
    By Buddwalk in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 08-15-2006, 11:03 AM
  3. How I would change the United States
    By GlennFoley in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 02-15-2006, 03:55 AM
  4. United States vs. Cuba
    By iceblizzard69 in forum Other Sports
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-23-2003, 07:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •