Total posts: 2,193
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Fetus is not a citizen.Fetus is not an independent individual.Sperm is alive and has no brain.Egg is alive and has no brain.Sick-n-the-head people need to keep their _____g noses out of womens bodies unless woman gives consent.
Okay... well i agree. I thought from your last comment you were saying otherwise.
Edit*: But... i would disagree with this statement if you said, abortion should be allowed even when there is brain activity. By that time if the women hasn't gotten her act together... then, she should be forced to have the kid. She had enough time to do it before.
2Edit* Btw... brain activity that equals consciousness happens around 25 weeks... so i think the laws are way before that already so i'm fine with the state of abortions. The 14 week opinion of mine has to do with some other stuff, but i'm fine with abortion as it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
We are talking about consciousness. I don't think anyone would think twice stomping on bacteria. It's the same when a human has no brain activity... they are not conscious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Well you know the answer to that... procreate. That doesn't make it wrong in my opinion... but, i would be okay with calling it unnatural.
Created:
-->
@Castin
Well the way he define them he and you are saying it's not necessarily exactly what's written... if i can add definitions to them or take away ones, why can't i do that with the other one's? I'm just confused how i'm not all three of those top ones. I'm trying to figure out where a half lurker, casual, inbetweener, fits... unless i can fit into all three. No doubt he did a great job with the categories bc i can't think of any others... but, i feel you can be more than one of them.
Created:
-->
@Castin
If we are not using his definitions than most of them, at least that i am, fall under the same category. I would be an inbetweener, lurker, die hard casual, Religious / anti-religious cult, and sometimes (for good reasons maybe) a forum mod blaster. I'm just sad i don't see a category all for myself. I'm being selfish. But i am curious how you would separate the first three if not using his definitions.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
But that's completely not true. Or, the post twice a week part.They stir things up behind the scenes, live for PMs and don't use them for positive purposes at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Well, it has been growing.It is biological, but humans are able to override their natural instinct.The peer pressure to be PC is a powerful thing.
It doesn't affect me much in this situation. I've always felt as i have. So maybe i am being too objective through my own subjective experience. I can see what you mean that PC pressure could make some other's more malleable change.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm not any of those. I would call myself something on the lines of the stand away troll or the protector. Most of the time i am reading other peoples materials. That is what i do most the time anyways... i post less than i read. But then, if i see something i can either troll, be an intellectual or be someone's protector... i join the conversation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Unless the repulsion is something biological... i don't think it will grow and just remain as it's always been.Not me, that's for sure. But with pop media treating it like its a virtue, the number who can "handle" it will only grow.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I want to expand on this a little. Yes i might not be repulsed by lesbians having sex when i am watching them... but if you think about it, i only watch really hot chicks hooking up. If i were a bigot, i would be intolerant of lesbians i'm not attracted to. So, if you could say that you can only be intolerant of man but not women... i would say bigotry fills in all the blanks... where i would be intolerant of 'ugly' lesbians too.A bigot, to me anyways, is someone that is intolerant towards the group as a whole. Therefore, i would be intolerant of lesbians too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
A bigot, to me anyways, is someone that is intolerant towards the group as a whole. Therefore, i would be intolerant of lesbians too. But more so, i think it comes down to how this person acts. Yes he/she can be repulsed, but does that also translate to treating homosexuals badly (through actions or words). If the answer is yes, i would call that person a bigot bc they are trying to impose their views as correct. And that's another element. If said person goes around acting as if his/her repulsion should be how everyone feels. Those are the top elements that would turn it into bigotry in my opinion (off the top of my head).
Thanks for that honest and candid answer. I think your position would be pretty common in the general population.
Thanks... but i wonder how many in the public can handle tranny porn lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
One of the greatest prophets of our time. I hope he is a powerful superhero soaring through infinity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
2. Or can a person be repulsed (by the act, not the person) and not be a bigot at all?
Yes. You can be repulsed and not be a bigot.
3. Is repulsion at the homosexual act a learned response or is it biological?
It is biological in my opinion, but it can be a little of both when it comes to "repulsion." My family always talked about homosexual acts as disgusting, so i think that kinda made a difference. But never the less, i don't think even if they didn't do that i wouldn't still be repulsed by it. It's disgusting thinking of two men together. Now... watching a trans man that is now a women have sex with a guy isn't repulsive in my opinion which leads to the last point.
4. If a man is repulsed at the sexual act between two men, but feels attracted at the sexual act between two women, is that bigotry?
No. I naturally like women and everything that has to do with women. Even if a guy is a convincing enough women, even if he/she still has a wee wee, i don't find it disgusting. Well sorta... i can get turned on by watching a tranny, but not enough to have me time while watching trans sex. I just don't find it disgusting if the man looks enough like a women. This is also why i don't think it's learned and more so biological. I like everything that has to do with women and i hate everything that has to do with men, sexually and aesthetics wise. Note... i don't think i would ever hook up with a tranny. In the end of the day, it's still a guy... and the thought of that ultimately turns me off in doing any sexual act. It only has to do with watching it not being repulsive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I don't know. We should do it. Then you can have a bunch of teenage boys jacking off to every girl sound they hear in the bathroom with them. Girls will have to have a silence code when entering bathrooms lol. Be quiet or some horny teen will jack off to their voice. It takes very little to set a horny ass teen off. Man... that would be so awkward. I don't know why any women would ask for equality in the bathroom... unless they are aspiring future porn stars. This all besides the point it will be much easier for sick men to rape / sexually abuse women. In any case... it isn't illegal, at least in California i'm sure, that says a guy can't use women's bathroom or vice versa. It's just frowned upon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
That's a sick beat. And... 'till I cum in these nuns," Lol... sick line. You are making me want to write a rap. I usually do poetry, but i guess it's not too different. I'mma have to go into the man cave, take a drink of absinthe, and paint the walls black once insanity has taken grip ;) ...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
I've never heard of him or read his material. I would be interested to read about intelligent universe theories bc i find them to be interesting implications of infinite space and time. Plus, the ramblings of mad scientists are often the most interesting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Yeah... let me know if you find it. You'll probably have an easier time locating it than i would since i'm not read up on anything by Fred Hoyles.Have you read Fred Hoyles Intelligent Universe? Fuller mentions Boltzman in Synergetics but forget how it references Boltzman to Synergetics geometry, which he does. I can try and find it if we stay engaged on this issue of Abiogenisis
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
I agree with this statement, and i don't think you are saying with this that it is impossible that there is intelligence beyond us, just no evidence for it so i agree there. I think there is intelligence beyond human intelligence. So... that's just a belief or a hunch. I"m not sure, but to me it is impossible that there isn't. Given seemingly infinite time and space... there is no way we are the one and only intelligence that's ever been. A hunch in the end of the day.Yes, everything Ive stated is concievable with human intelligence ergo there is no evidence of any intelligence "beyond" intelligence humans access on regular basis. Human intelligence attempts to understand and comprehend inherent inteligence of Universe.
You my need to read Fred Hoyles 1990's book 'The Intelligent Universe' to better understand what is meant by intelligence of Universe,
Have you ever heard of a Boltzmann Brain? If so, is that what the intelligent universe means? If not, i'll check it out online to see what i can find about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I've actually had a long conversation with Eric Dubay and another one of his people that make Youtube videos. I don't buy there is no such thing as gravity. And i didn't buy some of the other things i forget at this time that were counter intuitive to our current understandings. The conversation i was having with them more in detail had to do with greed. I believe people are greedy and everyone wants to be famous or make it to the top in one capacity or another. If this was true... we would know about it. Someone would want to take all the glory that would come with it. Plus, i highly doubt an entire worlds full of people are in on a conspiracy that the earth isn't round. That would be the most idiotic conspiracy to be in on ... it would be a troll conspiracy. This is besides the logical things that would disprove flat earth such as directions and flight paths etc.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Say what you can here... if i ask something that requires pm we can go there. Just keep it to forums for now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Abortion?Sides with - the killer of defenseless babiesAgainst - Defenseless innocent babies
Considering being alive requires brain activity... we aren't killing innocent anything seeing that we don't do abortions at that time. Although, i personally don't think there should be second trimester abortions.... or if anything, a cutoff at 14 weeks. So how do i side with ultimately... i'm "side with" here... call them killers, whatever... they're not, but okay.
Death Penalty?Sides with - The murdering criminalAgainst - The innocent victim
The death penalty is more expensive in the long run so i'm against it until we turn the death penalty back into ropes and firing squads... then i'd be for it again... but only if the evidence is video taped or recorded and/or clear and couldn't be mistaken. There needs to be a new 'red handed' clause to death penalty cases... then i'd be for it even now.
Immigration?Sides with - The law breaking criminalAgainst - The law abiding citizen
I'm against illegal immigration. "illegal" being the key term. I'm for immigration when it's done right and even more... there should be an easier path to citizenship for people that become a part of our society as active members.
Homosexuality?Sides with - Disease and deathAgainst - Abstinence and life
Wtf... i don't care who wants to have sex with who or where people stick their body parts... Side with "Disease and death" lol okay...
Euthanasia?Sides with - DeathAgainst - Life
Death is precious... i'll always side with death. It's the grand escape from this life. Suicide should be legal. If one doesn't want to be here, they shouldn't have to be here. It's not anyone else's decision.
Illegal Drugs?Sides with - Overdoses and deathAgainst - Sobriety and life.
Depends on which drugs. I think they should be legal and regulated. Better than they currently are bc the biggest drug dealers are doctors. Actually, there is very little true drug dealers. Most drugs are from doctors. If we legalize them and have a stamp system where you can only stamp once a month to get whatever you want we will do a lot more good than are current system which is killing millions due to greedy doctors. I'm well versed with this issue having coached addicts and being one myself. There is no such thing as "sobriety and life" for those that have this demon.
Islamic Terrorism?Sides with - Muslim and deathAgainst - Christian and life
I'm against all extremist religion's and further against fundamentalist religious people... they are insane and only wish for end of this beautiful earth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I am very skeptical of people in power and do believe they lie left and right. But, i do not see an incentive to lie about earths shape.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
If you'd like too... i don't think i will hear anything i haven't heard unless you have different reasons. I already took a lot of time investigating both sides' claims. I came to the conclusion one side is being deceitful and willfully ignorant to the available evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
There is intelligent design only insofar as there exist eternally existent phenomena inherent to high pressures found in Universe.
By "intelligence" i am indicating a human type intelligence and above. Is that the kind of intelligence you are referring to as well?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Great. I just wish i knew the current method of optimizing pages so i can help you get this up on front. I just talked to a marketing guy helping the lawyers at my work... he said there is a new way to do it but we didn't go into detail. Maybe i can get him to spell the beans next time i see him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
But on the subject of massacres inspiring massacres, do you think the shooter was aware that survivors of the Las Vegas shooting frequented that bar?
It's really hard to tell. I wouldn't put it passed him to have known, but i don't know. Overall i'm pretty confident most these shooters either fantasize past shooters or watch them for encouragement / learning. This guy seems more of the just insane type that would have snapped and done it either way. plus, since he was a marine and probably a pretty good shot... i don't think he really needed to go learn what to do. I think this guy just snapped and went on a rampage. In the end of the day... who knows why crazy acts crazy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's simple... money. They don't care about people. They look down on anyone that isn't in their status. They're a bunch of narcissists that like the sound of their own voices.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Yeah in the age of social media it's hard to keep things on the down low. But i do think the media can do something different than what they are in publicizing these murders. They just won't bc it's good money.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
You are talking about insane people. Insane people are of any kind. The mobs and protesting like the op is showing is coming exclusively from the left. This doesn't mean no one else does it. If i saw crazy right wing people doing it i would call that out too. I'm centrist and don't care for any partisan bs. But, i can honestly say the left is being unhinged. They are acting like a mob of lunatics in a larger number and frequency then i see from the right.
Edit: When i saw the right protesting doctors for abortion... i said the same thing. Or crazy religious people. It's not like they don't act like fools either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Oh so violent people that are insane and kill other people are all conservatives; they have the monopoly on mental illness...I learn something new everyday.Nah, the conservatives just shot, stabbed and sent pipe bombs to people
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Why do high profile mass shootings seem to be becoming more frequent.I hate that I'm used to it.
Bc they are being publicized. It's plain and simple. This one was just a crazy guy which the past also had.. but most get pumped up after seeing another kid do it and then they do it. If you do anything creative, like play a game, sports... what pumps you up the most? Watching a youtube video or someone else doing it right? The media is teaching these people how to do it and they are also contributing to making sick people feel like they will also get this weird "glory" from the media that's in their sick heads.
How many people do you think try to assassinate politicians or even the president? You would think none right? You never hear of it or see it on the news. Why? Bc they don't want to teach other would be assassins what works and doesn't... and they also don't want to encourage it. Weird huh? They only care about people in power. They only care to pad their own pockets. I can't blame them i guess... if i was getting a million dollars for being on tv i might be the same piece of garbage... Who knows. But i'm glad i'm not and wouldn't try to be.
Moral of the story... it's greedy narcissistic people with no empathy for human life contributing to these murders. Of course there are other elements, but i would say the increase is in large the media coverage these people get.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Oh... i caught that. I was being a smart ass too... for other readers lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Nope...did you see the conservative riots over the lost elections?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
One of the comments on the video says it best: Terrorists - unlawfully using violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Arrest them all!" ...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Especially this one right? Happened in California where we have universal background checks, ten day waiting periods, assault weapons ban, handgun roasters, magazine restrictions, very restricted concealed carry, etc. etc. So, what else can you do to stop a person intent on harming others? Maybe if one person had a gun, the death toll would be lower... just maybe. But no... considering getting rid of gun free zones and concealed carry isn't an option. Making more laws that people will break when they want to kill and break a bunch of laws in doing so... is considered common sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Even if we had 5 round magazines... changing them takes a second. Even shotguns can be loaded in seconds if they are one shot. When someone starts shooting... the most logical thing to do is distance yourself, not go at the shooter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Science can only answer "how", it can never answer "why".Certainly "intelligent design" might be "true", but it is not within the realm of science.That's all I'm trying to say.Abiogenesis is about science and not metaphysics/gnosis
I completely understand that. Science is a way to get to the "how" which requires the study of reality as is... i agree. The "why" isn't in it's purview. Abiogenesis is tricky however imho... I believe it's tricky bc this may be the only point in time ID played a factor. In that initial spark setting motion life. Other than that, i don't think it plays a factor and if it does play a factor in our reality... it only does so through human consciousness and/or humans in general. I often times look at it as a video game analogy. But the characters in the video game are as conscious as we are. What would they have to find in order to prove to themselves how their reality started? That's why i don't favor creationism... their reality didn't just pop into existence... it was designed into existence. Examples and ideas like that make me favor ID. In regards to abiogenesis however... i am ambivalent. It could have happened naturally in some freak amazing occurrence, or was set in motion by something else. The something else is just more attractive in my opinion but i don't discount the latter as maybe being the case too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Science is the quantifiable, in-game, shared reality space.
Whatever science is, it's in its infancy if max adolescence. So i don't think alternative theories that may sound supernatural should be written off. However, that is one big problem i see in the current method of science we have... it is a tool for understanding "our" reality. Or at least at this point, our reality is what it tests best. Do we have any measures to test for an eternal intelligence that is beyond our reality? Maybe we will, but i don't think we do. It's like telling a video game character to test for us... the question comes down to... could it ever?
You're trying to explain gnosis.This would be a category error.Abiogenesis is not - about "ultimate (spiritual/philosophical/gnostic) reality".Abiogenesis is - about quantifiable, scientific, observable, verifiable reality.
I don't know what you mean so if you can clarify. I'm not putting anything into categories i think. It's just one other category i feel should be looked into since the latter category we don't even have conclusive proof. I would even bet on natural means being the case bc that is what it should look like in an ID scenario. All i'm saying is that ID can't be counted out just bc it is supernatural in nature. I'm agnostic in the end of the day so i can't push for it like others might... i just think ID is something that can be true. More so than creationism, a lot more so... but even that could be true. But unlike creationism... ID has i would say pretty good evidence going for it. Ultimately, it could be neither and some kind of matrix set up. All i'm saying in relation to what you asked earlier... there are other platforms that can explain life. Just bc we don't know them doesn't mean anything. Bc in relation to my first answer... we really have no way to test these other ideas since they mostly all would be some kind of alternative reality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Dude... how long does it take for google to optimize this site... You're still not on the first 4 pages of results for "debate sites" ...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@linate
Where did i say gun control doesn't have an effect on murder? Please show me.you think gun control has no effect on the murder rate, despite the scientific consensus, so don't talk to me about who is being willfully ignorant. plus all the loads of other corroborating evidence in that link
With that said, there is a lot more to homicide than gun control, duh... Once you can tell me why Switzerland or let's get closer Vermont have such low intentional homicide rates despise having lax gun laws vs. other places (and vice versa)... i'm not convinced you know what you're talking about.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Every possible answer is less coherent than, amino acids formed chains, which formed proteins, which formed cells, which formed primitive life forms.
Why does this only have to be possible here? And why does this only have to be possible with these specific forces? Why can't there be an entire universe that is conscious?
Plus, i can't say any of that is wrong either... bc i believe that is, in one form or another, exactly how it happened. However... life, human consciousness, being real... has some crazy implications in what seems like an infinite platform... It just seems impossible to me that there isn't other forms of consciousness / intelligence.
That still sounds like life from non-life.
Yes. But we are physical life. This source consciousness wouldn't be physical. It technically can even be construed as non-life. For i don't think it's living (it's kinda both). Everything exists in it... therefore, everything is simultaneously known. Your beginning, your present, your end... all at the same time times infinite other characters and things. It's not living really... living is what we are doing here... and i would call living life. So what we come from is both life and non-life.
How does hypothetical scientific evidence of reincarnation "prove" an "intelligent designer"?
It would be a part of evidence. I don't think we will ever truly prove this platform. How can we? We are talking about finite entities (us) proving a infinite entity (source of everything) ... that is quite the entity if it's true. All we can do is piece together evidence to see what we can get to. All i'm saying is we haven't even begun looking deeper out the human mind. We look at it from the outside and not inward. We know what it's made of... but most everything else that makes us pretty exceptional we have no clue. (*Edit: I shouldn't say no clue... we just don't look into it enough).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
In order for "intelligent design" to be considered "scientific" it must be testable (falsifiable).Can you conceive of any possible way (even in your wildest imagination) to scientifically test "intelligent design"?
If you follow the implications of such a platform, one thing that would be possible in this platform is reincarnation. I'll just skip ahead and tell you instead of explain why. If reincarnation is true, this is one thing that we might be able to test. I say might bc people aren't suppose to know prior experiences bc it would mess with your current experience. Plus, i think some prior experiences of people go into fantasy. However, i believe there are some people, interestingly religious people, that would reincarnate into this life most often. If your interested in why i can explain. So, the people that may have passed lives may be able to bring it up. In eastern tradition, people that are experts in meditation say that they can go a level deeper beyond their selves here. It takes years however. So, if we were to test this. We would have to get willing participants that will put in 5 to 10 years of hard meditating to try and go deeper into their conscious. And through the journey we can test it and observe them. And ultimately, we can see if they can bring up past live memories that would be good enough to qualify as evidence. I would say there already are some examples of past live memories... but nothing scientific and observed in a scientific setting. So... maybe this is one thing we can do. The problem with science is that they have just conceded consciousness at this point. I can't think of too many that are really trying to test our minds. We only look at it from the outside, never test it from the inside.
Any way you slice this "intelligent design" pie, you still end up with a reductio ad infinitum.If an "intelligence" created the first "life", how was that "intelligence" created (isn't it also alive)?Who is the "mother of god"?
There are a couple ways but they are all leaps. One way could be that it's just always been. Another way could be that it woke up. First there was nothing, and then there was something. All this mind would have to do is become conscious. Another way is that everything in this universe has always existed in every universe (if there's more). And, from a certain mix of particles an entire universe became conscious. This is a Boltzmann Brain idea. My favorite is the second. It's sorta like virtual particles. One minute its not there, then it is (becomes conscious / alive). But ultimately, it could be a mixture of all of the above. Space, time, energy, etc.. have always been. They arranged and from just them came a mind that woke up. The cause being time and space giving it a platform to manifest. Which way it happens i can't be sure... but, i can still conceive how it can happen, and i don't see the problem ad infinitum in a eternal mind manifesting. Actually... i think possibly, the only thing that can break many of the infinite paradoxes and problems is an 'eternal' incorporeal mind and or everything being a eternal consciousness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I agree. Now you can see even in the full picture how ironic their aspirations are.full ban would be bloody and the end of the U.S. as we know it, would be a prime time for invasion by a foreign country.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
What is your preferred hypothetical alternative to abiogenesis?Abiogenesis is, after all, merely a hypothesis.
Although i think creationism is bogus, i don't think intelligent design is as bogus. ID would even stay consistent with life coming from life. The question would be what kind of platform would best describe how ID could happen. Real quick though... creationism is manifesting 'things' through thought, will, basically popping them into existence without any real formula. ID i consider would have a formula through manipulating either particles or the laws of physics to manifest 'things.' Therefore, i find ID to be much more probable than creationism since you are right... nothing just pops into existence. However, there is proof of ID as humans do create 'things' intelligently.
Imho, if it is possible to create, i don't see why there cannot be forces beyond us that can also create. My favorite ID platform is that of what most eastern philosophies believe in. "Oneness" or "Non-dualism." That everything is from one mind. Imagine this mind is a sea of sand... i know you have a problem with the word infinite, but lets say i mean endless when i say it... infinite sand. In this sand everything exists. For it to actualize, you create a sandcastle. But when that sandcastle is gone, it becomes one again with the infinite sand. I believe an infinite consciousness ("source") of this analogy is possible. We would simply all be characters and 'things' that already exist in this source. We manifest into the physical to experience. Just as a sandcastle would have to be created to be observed and experience as it is. So i believe "life" comes from this source.
Since this source is also infinitely intelligent, the design or ID comes in the form that either it can create you one atom of a time... or my next favorite is that we have individualized within this source... therefore, you create you. You decide to manifest as whatever character you will play. An experience to be had just like the next movie you decide to watch.
I find this to be attractive bc it also makes sense out of evolution... actually, it answers almost every question you can throw at someone with a metaphysical belief. You would manifest into this life, but what is life? It is a bunch of random experiences. Therefore, it needs to evolve to allow other characters to play their experience (movie of sorts).
So, i don't think ID should be easily discounted. And when i said it is the source to life... i mean it is what brought life here. Once it is here, there is no other proof of it other than what that life does. The proof of it to me is that we are also conscious, living experiences, can create, and imagine beyond the future. Since that is obviously proven and possible... i don't see why something greater than us can't be the source of it. Once it manifests life... then that life takes off. At that point it will conform with evolution and so forth. The spark however, or bringing life here, i believe comes from a higher life form.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
I don't debate formally on these sites, but that sounds like a good idea.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Unless he truly wants a full ban lol.mostly I was pointing out to the o.p. to get what he really wants he'd have to vote for the opposite party, I love good irony.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I'm not necessarily a one issue voter, but guns are a big issue for me. So if a candidate seems to be hyper-focused on guns i don't vote for them. Of course, most on the left have a bad view in my opinion on gun laws, but not all of them have it as their main focus. For instance, i think Bernie would focus on other issues rather than guns. Of course he has dumb views on guns too... but i don't think it would be front and center. Whereas Newsom seems to focus a lot on guns and is why i am really not happy he is governor now. I didn't like Cox either bc of all the religious belief crap he wanted to do... but, i'd rather have him than Newsom which is likely going to shit in Cali's gun laws even more now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I normally vote either or - who i find most qualified... but if it is bw Dem and Rep and the Dem is campaigning on "tougher gun laws" ... i immediately don't trust said person and vote Rep. Guns are a losing issue in my opinion. I believe we already have common sense laws and all we should do is strengthen them and focus on some non-gun issue policies such as punishment and mental health.so if you are anti gun, vote Republican
Created: