Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2012, 04:07 PM
 
Location: on the edge of Sanity
14,268 posts, read 19,068,075 times
Reputation: 7983

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
But blacks and Hispanics voting in vast majorities to reelect the failed policies of Obama is a good thing for the nation?
Really? So that's what happened?

Let me ask you this. Do you know which states have the highest percentage of Black people?

Mississippi - Red State - 37.3% Black
Georgia - Red State - 31% Black
Alabama - Red State -
Arkansas - Red State
Louisiana - Red State

..and the list goes on.

So let's look at the states with very low percentages of Blacks.

Vermont - Blue State (1.1% Black)
Maine - Blue State (1.3% Black)

I'm not going to look them all up on the US Census, but you get my point.

Yup, only people of color voted for Obama. Of course that means we can't count the 55% of women across the country who voted for Obama over Romney. He got the majority of the Jewish vote. How many Hispanics and African-Americans do you know who are Jewish?

The Republicans keep spreading this garbage because they're sore losers. Period. They're angry White guys who cannot accept the fact that they're not running the country any more.

 
Old 11-15-2012, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
37,629 posts, read 19,605,233 times
Reputation: 15105
Quote:
Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
The values evangelicals champion were pretty much universally accepted in America from Plymouth rock to the late 1960s. Only since the 1960s has evangelical Christianity become increasingly taboo. The problem for Republicans is evangelicals have not changed with the times, most importantly become accepting of once taboo sex practices that are now mainstream. We have a younger generation that hates traditional religion and hates evangelical Christianity who vote pretty solidly Democrat. They vote for policies that will destroy this country because they have such a hatred for Christianity they cannot possibly vote for a candidate that has the support of the evangelical community. Why the hatred for Christianity? Perceived homophobia is probably the most significant.

Bottom line its not evangelicals who doomed America. They have simply held to tradition. It's today's socialist liberals have have universal support from young people who vote for them only because they approve of their sex preferences. End of story.
The evangelical so-called "Christian Right" has done more to destroy Christianity than any other entity in 2,000 years, and may be directly responsible for the outcome of the election.

The younger generation by and large are not bigoted nor prejudiced and recognize that homosexuality is a birth trait like race and gender and is hard wired in, e.g. part of the temperament installed by The Creator. They despise "traditional religion" because they are appalled at the greed and hatred of the evangelicals and their willingness to let the poor starve in the streets while they build multi-million dollar churches to "worship" a simple man who never asked for money for Himself during his ministry on earth and pile up personal wealth while the sick die without help.

In short, the younger generation finds evangelicals to be hypocritical, self-serving, and totally without humanity. Perhaps the evangelicals should read their Bibles instead of using them for clubs to beat the less fortunate.

If you don't believe what I'm saying, find a twenty-something and ask them directly. That's what I have done with my children's friends and got an earful. Some of what I wrote is almost verbatim from them. And yes, they DO vote Democrat, and will continue to do so.
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:09 PM
 
Location: The Other California
4,254 posts, read 5,647,229 times
Reputation: 1554
Quote:
Originally Posted by justNancy View Post
He was also talking about married couples. Yes, I disagree. You don't think people had sex way before birth control pills were available? My mother was very old fashioned and a prude, to put it mildly. But I know she used a diaphragm after she gave birth to 3 children. Should she have denied my father sex because they didn't want more children? Also, when I was younger I took the pill and wasn't having sexual relationships, although it really was my personal business. Women use birth control for a lot more than just sex. My periods were so long and so heavy that I couldn't work! When I was a teenager, I missed school because I didn't have those options.

Anyway, by saying you are giving someone "a license to do" this or that, you are also saying by prohibiting it you are taking away a person's right to choose. Santorum wasn't only talking about children. He was talking about responsible adults and, in case you forgot, God gave us free will. If politicians like Rick Santorum got their way and used his extreme religious beliefs to control the masses, there would be no free will. His arrogance is not very Christian. He believes he has the right to tell others how they should speak, pray, even love each other in the privacy of their own homes. The Bible warns of false prophets. They come in all sizes, colors and professions.
All of this is very interesting (and way too much information), but the bottom line is that Santorum NEVER said he wanted to make BC illegal. On the contrary, he has said repeatedly that he wants it to be legal, and that he has even voted for it as a senator. It's one thing to disagree with Santorum and make your case. It's another thing to LIE about what he has said.

What is it with you liberals and the Eighth Commandment, anyway?
 
Old 11-15-2012, 06:27 PM
 
2,677 posts, read 2,634,564 times
Reputation: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
All of this is very interesting (and way too much information), but the bottom line is that Santorum NEVER said he wanted to make BC illegal.
"One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country."

"Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that’s okay, contraception is okay. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." -Rick Santorum

It's hard to run from facts.
 
Old 11-15-2012, 11:28 PM
 
Location: The Other California
4,254 posts, read 5,647,229 times
Reputation: 1554
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss View Post
"One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country."

"Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that’s okay, contraception is okay. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be." -Rick Santorum

It's hard to run from facts.
But you, sir, are running from the facts. The facts are: 1) Neither of these comments propose making contraception illegal; 2) Santorum has stated numerous times that he wants contraception to remain legal; 3) Santorum has personally voted to fund contraception programs.

If you think that conservatives like Santorum propose that everything that is morally wrong should be criminalized, you don't understand conservatism. As for talking about the dangers of contraception as President, the office of the presidency is a bully pulpit. Presidents talk about lots of problems without suggesting that bad behaviors be criminalized. For instance, President Obama has often talked about the problem of fatherlessness, but nowhere has he proposed banning single motherhood. Why aren't liberals screaming that Obama wants to ban single motherhood?

A president could - and should - do much to discourage the use of contraception without making it illegal. That's what Santorum says he would do as president, and to claim otherwise is frankly despicable.
 
Old 11-15-2012, 11:37 PM
 
27,624 posts, read 21,278,003 times
Reputation: 11097
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
...and six million evangelicals voted for obama...
I suoppose that this was a portion that places common sense before religious dogma and fear laced propaganda.
 
Old 11-16-2012, 01:00 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,094 posts, read 26,191,481 times
Reputation: 6130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenyo View Post
Their holding to tradition is why they've doomed themselves. The country is moving forward without them. Either change or slowly fade away.
You need to read the New Testament. It makes very clear that your way of thinkng is wrong - and is an example of false propecy.

The LORD will prevail - despite the puny efforts of man.
 
Old 11-16-2012, 07:05 AM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,805,376 times
Reputation: 5136
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald View Post
The evangelical so-called "Christian Right" has done more to destroy Christianity than any other entity in 2,000 years, and may be directly responsible for the outcome of the election.

The younger generation by and large are not bigoted nor prejudiced and recognize that homosexuality is a birth trait like race and gender and is hard wired in, e.g. part of the temperament installed by The Creator. They despise "traditional religion" because they are appalled at the greed and hatred of the evangelicals and their willingness to let the poor starve in the streets while they build multi-million dollar churches to "worship" a simple man who never asked for money for Himself during his ministry on earth and pile up personal wealth while the sick die without help.

In short, the younger generation finds evangelicals to be hypocritical, self-serving, and totally without humanity. Perhaps the evangelicals should read their Bibles instead of using them for clubs to beat the less fortunate.

If you don't believe what I'm saying, find a twenty-something and ask them directly. That's what I have done with my children's friends and got an earful. Some of what I wrote is almost verbatim from them. And yes, they DO vote Democrat, and will continue to do so.
Interesting to hear how you feel, but it's all opinion and error.

1) The "younger generation"...is broad brush. You might have said "the liberal younger generation" but that still wouldn't make the rest of the sentence true. They can "recognize that homosexuality is a birth trait" but it doesn't make it so.

2)..."They despise 'traditional religion' because they are appalled at the greed and hatred of the evangelicals and their willingness to let the poor starve in the streets".
FALSE. Another broad brush. No Christian is willing to"let poor starve in the streets", and you surely must know that.

Maybe you should read the Bible. Jesus had a treasurer. That means the group had some money. Did you think Judas carried marbles in that money bag? They didn't need a lot of money, btw. They had a Miracle Worker among them who could feed thousands from a poor boy's lunch box. Today, churches spend their money on ministries to both believers and non-believers. Where do you think the money comes from, if not from members who write their checks for these ministries. It goes to maintenance of food pantries, distribution of holiday dinner baskets, winter coats and boots, school clothes for kids, heat for the elderly. I've seen church members pitch in and pay for a new roof for a widow's house, donate their labor to clean up streets and inner city lots, and volunteer in schools (public schools, mind you).

It's the liberal education system that is feeding this claptrap to our youth. They are being misled and posts such as yous are spreading the anti-church sentiments. I'd call that hate speech, though you may not agree,
but it certainly does engender hate.

You don't have to like Christianity, nor churches, nor any religion but please try to be more honest and less judgmental.
 
Old 11-16-2012, 08:48 AM
 
2,677 posts, read 2,634,564 times
Reputation: 1491
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim View Post
A president could - and should - do much to discourage the use of contraception without making it illegal.
This is crazy talk.

Why in the world would you endorse not using contraception?? The only time it should NOT be used is when a couple is intentionally trying to conceive.

Sex. It's not just for babies any more.
 
Old 11-16-2012, 09:06 AM
 
Location: The Other California
4,254 posts, read 5,647,229 times
Reputation: 1554
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss View Post
This is crazy talk.

Why in the world would you endorse not using contraception??

Why is contraception immoral?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top