Page 7 of 113 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 1123

Thread: Pesident Clinton

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    3,513

    Default

    Does anyone know Trumps stance on social issues? Gay rights, women's rights, religious rights, etc.
    If you mean special rights attributable to certain groups then I guess he may be vague. I certainly am OK with that.

    Europe's population continues to grow healthily - and it's beyond ridiculous to suggest a temporary influx of refugees who will then go home when the war is done
    You really believe they will go home voluntarily? What do you base this on? Regarding Europe, I'm open to some proof. What is the NATIVE population's reproductive rate per adult of each European country. For Germany, it's my understanding it is well below 2.

    I get "these lies" from the world bank and Wikipedia.

    http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN

    http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN

    When I see somebody saying that a pure free market system is the way to go I can't help but be arrogant. When I see someone saying everyone should just get what he worked for and nothing more then I can get salty. Because I know it doesn't work like that. It's like being around a kid with a 1 W laser pointer shining it around in people's eyes, claiming it is safe. Then I damn sure can get arrogant!
    I said you sounded arrogant as in condescending, as in a false sense of your own superiority. I did not say angry. Do you know what arrogant means?

    When I see someone saying everyone should just get what he worked for and nothing more then I can get salty.
    Why? What else is he entitled to? What is wrong with you?

    Trump terrifies me - we have no idea what he really believes.
    Based on your other points, this actually encourages me.

    The ones that do are sure determined to do so. There are thousands waiting on this side of the Channel, refusing to ask for asylum in France and Belgium because they hope to ask for asylum in the UK.
    Maybe other countries do have better welfare systems, maybe I was wrong to nominate Germany, but the point that generous welfare is provided to these Muslims acts as an attraction. These people are not a benefit to Europe. Socialism strikes again.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post
    #epic but not wrong.


    Trump terrifies me - we have no idea what he really believes. His speeches give so few details and there's no official policy - my great fear is everyone's been projecting what they imagine he'll do into it and should he get in there will be a lot of disappointed folk when they realise he's as establishment as it gets. His entire wealth and 'worth' relies on it.
    Interesting view from across the pond...

    Frankly, I agree with Rubio and Romney that Trump is a con man, phony and a fraud worthy to be lumped with scumbag televangelists like Creflo Dollar and Benny Hinn who are experts in scamming the sheeple, but that's my opinion. It makes me sick that these types have such a gullible following...

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    1,125

    Default

    40W RGB diodes just came out.


    I wished, that way politics wouldn't be discussed here. It's a no win conversation

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    1 hr from everything in SoCal
    Posts
    2,753

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dream beamz View Post
    I wished, that way politics wouldn't be discussed here. It's a no win conversation
    On one hand, I agree but on another, this is the Lounge and there is nothing wrong with healthy discussion. So far, the mud-slinging has been kept to a minimum and it is always good to see other points of view, even if they conflict with my own. To quote:

    "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted" --R.W. Emerson

    We just need to remember that and we'll be fine.
    If you're the smartest person in the room, then you're in the wrong room.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Thessaloniki
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post
    You asked for an example - trust me if you're a woman that's an example even if it doesn't bother you.
    Of course it bothers me, but that's not a *religious issue* example I asked for. It's a women's rights issue. And there reasoning is simple, not everyone who opposes abortion is against it for religious reasons.
    For me there are bigger issues than that. Doesn't mean it's not an issue, but for me the inconvenience of getting an abortion in another state can't be compared to letting ISIS continue murdering and raping women and girls, just an example.

    if you'd said "whatever you say next I'll assume it's the single issue you'd vote on" then I probably would have responded differently about how single issue voting is foolish and that I'd hope you wouldn't assume I was *that* naive, nor foolish enough to imagine I'll be able to vote for someone who shares all my views.
    Look, early on in this thread I asked people to explain exactly what made them oppose Trump. So far I've only heard that he's vague, as are others and abortion. If there are other issues, mention them, why aren't you?

    Play nice!
    Likewise

    @resunltd: who's quote is that?

    Quote Originally Posted by dchammonds View Post
    Frankly, I agree with Rubio and Romney that Trump is a con man, phony and a fraud worthy to be lumped with scumbag televangelists like Creflo Dollar and Benny Hinn who are experts in scamming the sheeple, but that's my opinion. It makes me sick that these types have such a gullible following...
    It's ironic to hear Romney say that, and I'm just being perfectly honest with you, it's even more ironic to hear someone listen to him and call others gullible.

    Quote Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post
    he's as establishment as it gets. His entire wealth and 'worth' relies on it.
    If he was he could at least secretly be sucking GOP's and not have the whole party tell America to not support him. So I see no logic in this assumption.
    Last edited by ghosttrain; 03-17-2016 at 01:39.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Guildford, UK
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by planters View Post
    If you mean special rights attributable to certain groups then I guess he may be vague. I certainly am OK with that.
    I'm sorry but what special rights?

    If you can't specify what is exactly 'special' about wanting the same rights as everyone else then certain of my assumptions may be wrong. Special != Equal. The different words are used for a reason.

    I'm stopping there as I can't believe you made that post sober and of sound mind.

    Surely you understand 'Muslim' isn't a nationality or race.... That refugee and migrant are different words for a reason... right?
    Quote Originally Posted by ghosttrain
    Of course it bothers me, but that's not a *religious issue* example I asked for.
    They're denying women it for religious reasons.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Thessaloniki
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post
    I'm sorry but what special rights?
    Calm down man, it's just a term used when referring to rights given only to certain groups of people. An example are hate crimes directed to minorities, including sexual minorities. Sexual minorities in such laws are given "special" rights because they are the ones that law is protecting and others in the society don't have the qualities which would require them to be given those special rights. If you put a requirement in law that you must have certain percentage of women in the government that is also special rights given to women under the assumption that they do not have equal opportunities as men because of historical or cultural reasons. That's also special rights.

    They're denying women it for religious reasons.
    I just told you, not everyone is against abortion because of their religious beliefs that is why it's categorized under women's rights.
    We don't understand consciousness too well, nor is our knowledge on the biology complete. We don't know when consciousness arises, because heck, we aren't sure what consciousness is. And then some people throw self-consciousness into the equation. So even a die hard utilitarian might have a hard time deciding if a fetus in the later stages of development is just her mother's body or a conscious, morally significant agent.
    Last edited by ghosttrain; 04-24-2016 at 05:35.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Guildford, UK
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghosttrain View Post
    Calm down man, it's just a term used when referring to rights given only to certain groups of people. An example are hate crimes directed to minorities, including sexual minorities. Sexual minorities in such laws are given "special" rights because they are the ones that law is protecting and others in the society don't have the qualities which would require them to be given those special rights.
    I'd argue what's 'special' but it might just be semantics - everyone has the right not to be harassed and to live their life in peace as they wish if they're not harming others. The 'special' laws are only required because some people won't let others do that - they're for the offenders, they grant nothing extra to the aggrieved party - or in a few cases they correct where poor wording did award special rights to others. That might be what you meant anyway I'm not sure
    If you put a requirement in law that you must have certain percentage of women in the government that is also special rights given to women under the assumption that they do not have equal opportunities as men because of historical or cultural reasons. That's also special rights.
    I'm actually with you there - it should be purely based on talent and ability - the workplace should be sex-blind. I think it's just well-intentioned efforts to break a centuries old imbalance though which isn't all bad, but if that's possible would be an even larger tangent.
    I just told you, not everyone is against abortion because of their religious beliefs that is why it's categorized under women's rights.
    Aye you're right, it's not everyone but it's just one example as requested - there's an ongoing problem with employers who are required to give healthcare cover for their employees refusing to cover certain things for women on the basis of the owner's religion that's what I'm referring to. There are problems involving womens and religious issues, that's all I wanted to say and what was asked - the exact details are to an extent by the by.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Thessaloniki
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frostypaw View Post
    I'd argue what's 'special' but it might just be semantics
    It is just semantics. The "special" in the term "special right" is in the sense of "group-unique" right not "special-snowflake" right. Makes sense?

    I'm actually with you there - it should be purely based on talent and ability - the workplace should be sex-blind. I think it's just well-intentioned efforts to break a centuries old imbalance though which isn't all bad, but if that's possible would be an even larger tangent.
    Frostypaw, I'll be honest with you, I think you're reading my posts through a filter. Because I didn't show my position on this. I was just clarifying what special right means and what examples there are.

    Aye you're right, it's not everyone but it's just one example as requested - there's an ongoing problem with employers who are required to give healthcare cover for their employees refusing to cover certain things for women on the basis of the owner's religion that's what I'm referring to. There are problems involving womens and religious issues, that's all I wanted to say and what was asked - the exact details are to an extent by the by.
    Okay, I think I get the example now, I don't think it's an issue only affecting women. Correct me if I'm wrong, you're talking about the issue of whether individuals and legal bodies should also not be discriminatory like the government towards customers and employees, correct? Like a "no blacks allowed" sign and rule for a restaurant?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    My momentum is too precisely determined :S
    Posts
    1,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ghosttrain View Post


    Look, early on in this thread I asked people to explain exactly what made them oppose Trump. So far I've only heard that he's vague, as are others and abortion. If there are other issues, mention them, why aren't you?

    Again through my biased glasses, but he appears to be a climate change denier. That is not only very dangerous for the planet if he becomes president of one of the most polluting countries, but it also tells you he disregards science at will.

    Quote Originally Posted by planters View Post



    I said you sounded arrogant as in condescending, as in a false sense of your own superiority. I did not say angry. Do you know what arrogant means?



    Why? What else is he entitled to? What is wrong with you?
    My point is that nobody should go hungry just because he can't or is not willing to have a job, especially not in times where machines can do all the hard or menial work. I feel that as a species we are well beyond this point. I do think this view is superior to the randian "each for their own" view that you adhere, for the many reasons I mentioned earlier. So that makes me arrogant then, but there aren't many things I get arrogant about (I hope?) so I have no problem with that.

Posting Permissions

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