DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted October 6, 2007 Report Share Posted October 6, 2007 America has the hardest job taking care of the needs of every special interest group because we have so many cultures and so many possible human pursuits of happiness and what ever. No other country has to deal with this volume of diversity and differentiated needs. It can never be perfect for everyone, unless everyone became more unified and less differentiated. We use to be called the melting pot where we were all part of the stew. But now too many of the ingredients are trying to jump out of the pot back on the table so they can be massaged with personal attention. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- by HydrogenBond : 09-26-2005 at 08:16 PM. Canada seem to manage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inter.spem.et.metum Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 I am in complete support of our freedom of speech, but let me be the devil's advocate for a moment. Do you think that too much freedom of speech will one day cause the destruction of the the ideals that it was created for?:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted October 9, 2007 Report Share Posted October 9, 2007 I am in complete support of our freedom of speech, but let me be the devil's advocate for a moment. Do you think that too much freedom of speech will one day cause the destruction of the the ideals that it was created for?:)I think people are taking the "Freedom of Speech" issue a little too far at times. I think the concept can be better described as "Freedom of Opinion, and Expression Thereof", rather than "Freedom of Speech". Literally going the "Speech" route will paint you into corners with the old argument of yelling "Fire!" in a packed theatre. That is clearly not an expression of opinion, and not what's intended by the concept. I think "Freedom of Opinion" is more fitting and apt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDMclean Posted November 5, 2007 Report Share Posted November 5, 2007 The only law we need are the 9 commandments, the bill of rights, and the constitution. (laws pertaining to adultry would be a stupid move so minus one) There is a thread that I fail to remember the name of but I trust that someone else will know what I am talking about. The above was at one time reduced to the two commandments that really matter here on Hypography when someone put the ten to the grindstone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted November 5, 2007 Report Share Posted November 5, 2007 Two sounds right to me: thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inter.spem.et.metum Posted November 6, 2007 Report Share Posted November 6, 2007 But ignoring the other commandments allows for those two commandments to be broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zythryn Posted November 6, 2007 Report Share Posted November 6, 2007 That is non-sensical.Just which commandment is it that doesn't allow someone to break those two?If you are going to allow yourself to break those specific commandments, why not break the ones you are saying prevent you from breaking the others? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inter.spem.et.metum Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 The other commandments were put in place to stop conflict. The result of such conflicts is violence and revenge. Killing and stealing were used at the time as ways to compensate for a "wrong doing". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 1. no other gods 2. don't make or worship idols in any form3.don't use the lords name in vain4.remember the sabath and keep it holy5. honor your mother and father6. don't murder anyone7. no adultery8.don't steal9.don't lie 10.don't be jealous ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^There's all 10... WTH are you talking about!! But ignoring the other commandments allows for those two commandments to be broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inter.spem.et.metum Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 I don't understand your question. If everyone followed the ten commandments, there would be less conflict. I'm not saying that not following them will cause conflict. I said ALLOWS, ignoring them makes more conflict possible. And I'm not trying to push the ten commandments validity either, only their purpose in the setting they were generated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted November 8, 2007 Report Share Posted November 8, 2007 I don't understand your question. If everyone followed the ten commandments, there would be less conflict. I'm not saying that not following them will cause conflict. I said ALLOWS, ignoring them makes more conflict possible. And I'm not trying to push the ten commandments validity either, only their purpose in the setting they were generated But ignoring the other commandments allows for those two commandments to be broken. I fail to see how the "ignoring" of the other commandments has anything to do with breaking #6 & #8. And Yes if everyone did the same thing there would in fact be no conflict of anykind whatsoever. Life would be EXTREMELY dull though. Imagine every painting the same, every game the same, every book the same, all music exactly the same, as well as every movie, conversation, dream, etc.etc.etc....IF THEY EXISTED AT ALL!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted November 11, 2007 Report Share Posted November 11, 2007 Mike C- from the thread-clinical depression -This is an example of republicans accepting corporate corruption. Our Constitution has been reduced to nothing but 'window dressing'. (bold underline and italics applied by me.):Exclamati What can I say?...Pretty much exactly what I have been trying to convey with this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFINITLYDISTRUBD Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 The judicial and legislative branches.Congress has tried to stop the administration on lots of stuff and the admin either slithers its way out of it (this for example), or it doesn't have enough congressional support.The supreme court has, what is it, 3 Bush-appointed justices. Not much luck there I suppose... Is this the begining of the end?A sign of the times?Are we totally boned?Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayra Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Do anything you please so long as it does not impinge on anyone else following the same commandment. Hmm.. lots of loop holes in that one I think. Could you base an entire governemnt on that?An entire religion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Yesterday, in Okinawa, a fourteen year old girl was raped by a white guy. By historical precedent and general demographics, it's seems likely that the rapist was a US military man. Okay so far, but in these situations, the US military want to deal with such crimes internally, as a military matter rather than a civil matter. I find that both inappropriate and insulting. Also, most US war criminals, apropos Vietnam, are now dead, I think the US should, at least, posthumously execute them for those war crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaurieAG Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Yesterday, in Okinawa, a fourteen year old girl was raped by a white guy. By historical precedent and general demographics, it's seems likely that the rapist was a US military man. Okay so far, but in these situations, the US military want to deal with such crimes internally, as a military matter rather than a civil matter. I find that both inappropriate and insulting. Also, most US war criminals, apropos Vietnam, are now dead, I think the US should, at least, posthumously execute them for those war crimes. Hi Ughaibu, AGAIN! Didn't two 14 year old Okinawa girls get raped around 10 years ago and it took 6 years before the US military handed over the culprit? Okinawans should't feel that their 14 year old daughters are being targetted exclusively by the US military, it's also US military women who are being raped and the US military refuses to do anything about it. And the Okinawans can feel lucky that their 14 year old daughters are being left alive after being raped. What about the two girls in South Korea who were (as the military story goes) side swiped by a Jeep and left for dead in a ditch, or the two young girls in England who were found dead in a ditch outside a US air force base? And not forgetting the 3 young Iraqi girls who were found raped and murdered in Baghdad after the invasion and the others raped and gunned down in cold blood by a revenge patrol. It's not surprising that the South Korean people think that the US is more dangerous to them than North Korea. The US military leaders should realise that they are doing to their own what they are doing to others, and bring a bit of integrity back into their jobs instead of being the protectors of rapists, pedophiles and murderers, along with all the decent hard working US military people who should be their first priority. The best place for the perverts would be Guantanamo bay (the offenders or their protectors or both). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted December 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 I love this land hate the government. Gotta take the good with the bad I guess.But I cannot understand why americans would rather live their lives wearing blindersand ignore the many ways our government which is sworn to protect the rights guaranteedby our Constitution and the Bill of Rights instead eliminates, modifies, or just plain tramples them whenever it suits the govts. agenda. ... mmmm....tasty! :shrug: Sometimes, our government & those we hire to run it, do stand up to those who would impose a religious agenda on everyone whenever it suits them. For example like...oh, I don't know....Christmas? OK; got yer attention so now to the goods. :) Atheist display at Capitol in Olympia creates national firestorm - Breaking News From Oregon & Portland - Oregonlive.comAtheist display at Capitol in Olympia creates national firestormThursday December 04, 2008, 8:30 AM A lighting ceremony for a holiday tree at the Washington Capitol at 6 p.m. Friday may draw more attention than usual. That's because of a sign also displayed in the Rotunda at the request of the Freedom From Religion Foundation that calls religion "myth and superstition." That has outraged Bill O'Reilly of Fox News who has been asking his viewers to call the governor to complain. O'Reilly says displaying the sign with the tree and a Christian nativity scene is "political correctness gone mad." Gov. Chris Gregoire says a federal lawsuit forced the state to allow displays regardless of views. Heres the hating, narrow-minded, religious-zealot dissenting view. :) Bill O'Reilly: Bill's ColumnJust in time for the Christmas season, the Governor of Washington State, Christine Gregoire, has insulted Christians all over the world. Inside the state capitol building in Olympia, there is a traditional holiday display featuring a tree and the Nativity scene-perfectly appropriate since the Christmas federal and state holiday celebrates the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem. But this year, Governor Gregoire decided to add another item to the display. Standing alongside the baby Jesus is a giant placard designed by atheists that reads, "There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds." You read that correctly. The governor of Washington State has permitted an attack on religion to be displayed in her office building as part of a Christmas presentation. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.