DescentBB

Do you guys get tired of this culture war?

We're all humans, in the end i just want to get along with & understand people to a level where i can accept (and cherish) them without judgement.

It'd be great if everyone wanted this
and we can all be happy.

Roid you've been fighting this battle to change the world with all your might and maim for years. We are absolutely opposed because you amass new \"thought\" that rails against all conviction and common sense that is opposed to any desire of anyone's foolish heart. The desire reigns supreme in your book, and there is no common sense that cannot be subjugated to it. If you want to stop waring be my guest, but do you think I was born yesterday to put my guard down and just get along with that for some reason? You know I get along with just about anyone, until they start calling wrong right or right wrong, or encouraging things that I know are harmful to the people that do them and to others.

What do you care about other people?

What exactly has roid said that will cause harm to people? You just blather on and on in a \"NOT TAKING MY GUNS\" sort of tone.

Pleading for capitulation won’t work.

If you think the other side is trying to change your world for the worse, would you surrender Roid?

Anyway, diseases are progressive too. Why let them progress?

Mjolnir wrote:What exactly has roid said that will cause harm to people? You just blather on and on in a "NOT TAKING MY GUNS" sort of tone.

Guns don't kill people. People kill guns. ^_~

ThunderBunny wrote:Anyway, diseases are progressive too. Why let them progress?

comparing the culture war to diseases is asinine at best, even if you were joking.

No Ferno... What I find funny is \"progressives\" seem to think their philosophy is avant-garde...above the fray...intellectually superior to all- and unquestionable. They claim \"open minds\" but they're so close-minded and hypocritical it's ridiculous.

Most follow OLD SCHOOL socialist ideals. Can you say 1914? 1918? They shout down and belittle people that don't follow the line or precepts set forth by \"progressive\" academia. They will fight, but never fair or with any thought of giving the opposition a fair hearing.

Progressives are so....20th century.

To pull a Null....

ThunderBunny wrote:No Ferno... What I find funny is "conservatives" seem to think their philosophy is avant-garde...above the fray...intellectually superior to all- and unquestionable. They claim "open minds" but they're so close-minded and hypocritical it's ridiculous.

Most follow OLD SCHOOL social conservatism ideals. Can you say 1814? 1818? They shout down and belittle people that don't follow the line or precepts set forth by "conservative" academia. They will fight, but never fair or with any thought of giving the opposition a fair hearing.

Conservatives are so....19th century.

Though I changed the dates for amusement and better accuracy.

ThunderBunny wrote:No Ferno... What I find funny is "progressives" seem to think their philosophy is avant-garde...above the fray...intellectually superior to all- and unquestionable. They claim "open minds" but they're so close-minded and hypocritical it's ridiculous.

what's really funny is: you're so alike these progressives you claim to hate it's almost uncanny.

are you sure?

well, he's a hater too. so...

you get the picture.

ThunderBunny wrote:No Ferno... What I find funny is "progressives" seem to think their philosophy is avant-garde...above the fray...intellectually superior to all- and unquestionable. They claim "open minds" but they're so close-minded and hypocritical it's ridiculous.

Most follow OLD SCHOOL socialist ideals. Can you say 1914? 1918? They shout down and belittle people that don't follow the line or precepts set forth by "progressive" academia. They will fight, but never fair or with any thought of giving the opposition a fair hearing.

Progressives are so....20th century.

Pot, meet Kettle.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:rails against all conviction and common sense that is opposed to any desire of anyone's foolish heart.
If you want to stop waring be my guest, but do you think I was born yesterday to put my guard down and just get along with that for some reason?
encouraging things that I know are harmful to the people

Spidey wrote:Pleading for capitulation

ThunderBunny wrote:surrender

ThunderBunny wrote:avant-garde...above the fray...intellectually superior to all- and unquestionable. close-minded and hypocritical
socialist ideals.
shout down and belittle people
fight,
never fair or with any thought of giving the opposition a fair hearing.

How did you get all that from OP?
OP was a call for mutual understanding.

So then, you were just stating the obvious?

Yea, it would be nice if we could just all get along.

Where did I hear that before…

And then we have this guy. Nice of him to re-stoke the fires of the Culture War. Even though he apologized the next day, the damage was done, and I doubt he's really sincere with his apology anyway.

Christian Warrior

Spidey wrote:So then, you were just stating the obvious?

Yea, it would be nice if we could just all get along.

Where did I hear that before…

?

I read that article, TC, and then the original, and it leaves me wishing I could hear the entirety of what was really said, and what lead up to it, because the way it's presented just sounds odd.

Explain what damage you're referring to.

I get tired of people buying into the premise that there is a culture war (thereby constraining their own potential to improve the culture as a whole) instead of realizing if they followed the money they would spot the bastards that benefit from polarizing the majority of the population into picking a side in their \"war\" and fighting it instead of fighting the bastards...

So what do the Republicans do when they get into power in the House? Fix the economy? Create jobs? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Dredge up the abortion issue!

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Republ ... ortion.htm

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01 ... e-abortion

Back to the Culture Wars of Newt!

Sergeant Thorne, if I happen to be an Alabama citizen who's not a Evangelical Christian, tell me how his statement includes me in his governing agenda during his tenure, when he considers \"non-believers\" not of his \"family\"? Don't you think he has just a little bias towards those who are not of his faith? Christians are no different than Muslims when it comes to non-believers, infidels are infidels.

Will, I agree with you 100%! Those \"bastards\" using a Culture War to pull the wool over everyone eyes may be valid, but there will still be winners and losers in any \"battle\", and many people are short sighted and don't want to lose, even if they are losing the war in the long run. So I say keep my eyes on the ball and win one battle at a time to win the whole war. If they lose one battle, they'll lose more.

Americans should really be worried about THIS war going on right under our noses:

5 Billion Dollar Man

Is this one man even contributing to society to warrant this much money? He's just a gambling thief lining his pockets! He's sure not making anything for the rest of us that's tangible, like repairing infrastructure, helping to fix health care, creating new products or new jobs with all those ill gotten gains.

tunnelcat wrote:...
Will, I agree with you 100%! Those "bastards" using a Culture War to pull the wool over everyone eyes may be valid, but there will still be winners and losers in any "battle", and many people are short sighted and don't want to lose, even if they are losing the war in the long run. So I say keep my eyes on the ball and win one battle at a time to win the whole war. If they lose one battle, they'll lose more.
...

You say you agree, you describe how people can be short sighted to allow themselves to be manipulated in such a way, then you firmly declare your membership in their ranks!!
Well done member of the D army! Your commander is no doubt very proud of you!

As for the hedge fund guy, he's earning a profit by manipulating the system at the little guys expense and it is totally legal because the bastards take his bribes offered to keep it legal so don't focus on the player, focus on the keepers of the game itself!
But you can't do that if you have surrendered yourself to serve as one of their defenders which you do without fail.

Maybe that guy thinks he is making money the \"legal\" way, but I see him, and our elected officials who enabled him, as a part of the problem. This is endemic with any human behavior, the temptation to take too much of something, power or money for example, for one's own self, without considering the impact on the whole. It seems every human social group that forms over time always gets a little power crazy or greedy and they always drift towards self preservation and self-centeredness when they deal with outsiders. Clan rule is always enforced, the outsiders either join, become subjugated, or die.

I'm of the opinion that I should fight any and all comers for any reason when they try to impose their will, or take from me unfairly. If you don't nip a power or greed grab in the bud, the war will be lost to the victor through slow attrition. War is a sum of it's small battles, so why is one lone battle any different from the rest? Several battles can be fought on different fronts, they're all part of the same war, who gets supremacy. In this country, common desires have begun to coalesce between Christian interests and wealth or money interests. They have found a common calling to unite, freedom equals wealth and the worship of only their God, all others don't apply, so any battle fought against this unholy alliance is worth fighting.

I'm talkin about how the social progressives and the social conservatives want to live in different cultures to one another.

And it seems to be mutually exclusive for some reason. I don't understand why that should be the case.
If you want to sit back in your front porch with your gun listening to bluegrass music - Social Progressives want you to be free to do that!
But if you want to have sex, Social Conservatives don't want you to be free to do that.

I just don't understand why Social Conservatives can't just backoff and let people be free. It's getting in the way of a healthy and free society, which is what i thought America was all about?!

I just hate all of this stupid Authoritarian ordering people around nonsense: \"you do that! you do that! I'm going to stop you from doing that! i'm going to force you to do that!\".
It's not just the political Right that do it, i've seen some Authoritarian Communist assholes who want to order people around and certail social/personal freedoms just as much!

The middle ground is obviously to just let people do what they want - maximise liberty, personal and social freedoms, let people be free.


Now, i hate the culture war, i think it's stupid, we should all be able to just get along without Authoritarians stepping on our toes and knocking down our doors. Authoritarians are the problem.

Even though i hate the culture war, it goes onwards, and the social progressive's side has been winning for a while. Homosexuality is legal in more and more places, also women can vote, have sex, and work.
And in another hundred years if this all goes the same way we'll hopefully all have even more freedoms.

I just hate the conflict is all. Progress is inevitable, why do these Social Conservative Authoritarians have to get in the way and try to stop people from being free. Why can't they just step off it.
Is women voting bad?
Is sex bad?
just WTF world, wtf.


If Social Conservatives would just stop trying to tell the rest of us how to live our personal lives, WE'D ALL BE ABLE TO GET ALONG JUST FINE.

Social Progressiveness is perfectly compatible with Social Conservatism, the progressives want you to be able to do whatever you want to do. If your a Social Conservative and you don't want to do much, ok that's perfectly fine and the progressives want you to be able to do exactly that!

Roid wrote:Is sex bad?

Yes.

Sorry I have so little to work with. If everything going on in this world that is done to the destruction of the parties involved, for pleasure, is only going to be described as "sex" then I'm afraid it has to be bad. People dying of STDs are forced to admit its bad. Women forced to raise children alone may begin to consider its bad. Children raised without the necessary attention and guidance of a mother and a father may not know that they have "sex" to blame. "Sex" is the cause of so many problems in this world, and your new favorite word is "Authoritarian". Idiot.

To "maximize liberty" to the destruction of society is very foolish and wrong.

roid, controlling morality is all about power, especially the sex lives of others. Sex is power. It's a hardwired trait that you will find in nature. Humans are no different. It's all about alpha males and dominance. Control who has all the sex in a society and that male's genes will be dominant and persist. It's a subliminal desire. Why do preachers rail on about adultery, all the while doing it themselves.

Sergeant Thorne, if we didn't have sex, we would go extinct, STD's and unwed mother's aside. If you hide something behind prudishness and don't teach children and people about it so they won't make mistakes, they will explore on their own anyway. Hormones are powerful, unless you advocate removing everyone's reproductive organs. Sex is a personal bodily function that should not be controlled by some \"authority\", be it the government or the church. For crying out load, people don't even want the government controlling their health care!

I think Thorne’s point may be…you should be in control of your own sexuality, not the government.

Sex is good

Unrestrained sex in not.

As far as morality goes…the left just has their own version to shove up everyone’s nose.

tunnelcat wrote:If you hide something behind prudishness and don't teach children and people about it so they won't make mistakes....

@ "Children AND people!" Like one excludes the other.

My point is that society has the right, and actually the duty to set boundaries for sex.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:My point is that society has the right, and actually the duty to set boundaries for sex.

Why ?

Spidey wrote:I think Thorne’s point may be…you should be in control of your own sexuality, not the government.

No, this is the OPPOSITE of Thorne's point.
FFS people

Not quite.

I was thinking in terms of self discipline, he meant societal limits. (not government)

secks is for the birdz (and the bees) -.-