Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
fightthetheocracy!
Published Letters: 1591 Editor's Choice: 27
The kind of America you are trying to create doesn't sound any less oppressive then the others you complain about. Instead of banning things becuase "the state" doesn't like them, you try and ban them for religious reasons. Proposition H8 is a perfect example. Gay marriage is no one elses business but the gay communites. They had every right to take their grievences to the courts as American citizens. Instead a bunch christain hate mongers decided somehow they should stick their nose in it. A democracy is a governemt where the people pick thier leaders, "God" has nothing to do with that. If the "The People" as you put it, decided they wanted more affordable healthcare, and the state could provide it, that was their choice. I find it hard to beleive a just god would have a problem with that. But since you brought the subject up, let's see you even prove that "God" actually exists.
First you claim that "God" is necessary for democracy (while doing a lousy job of explaining why) and then in another post you claim that you are not a christian and that you wouldn't pray to God but a "Creator" (which is different from a god how?). Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?
And Salty Dawg, please, by all means, explain how Iraq is the dems fault, thanks!
That never happened. It was a lie pereptuated by right wing radio.
I prefer to think of it as a "Too Dumb to Vote" list.
Since all opponents of gay marriage do indeed hate gays. All those who say they don't are lying.
The senate had no business asking about his sex life in the first place because it had nothing to do with running the country. Oh, and please point to where he said that Saddam had connections to AL-Queda, thanks. Not that I don't beleive you, it's just that your a conservative and, well, you guys never tell the truth.
For sticking your noses into other people's realtionships in the first place.
Well, Bush said Iraq had WMD's and it didn't. He said there was a connection to AL-Queda and there wasn't. Now, what exactly is she wrong about?
I knew we were all in trouble way back in 2000 during the republican primary when he was asked who his favorite philosopher was and he responded: Jesus Christ. In a rational society, this kind of blatant pandering would be seen for what it was and booed off the stage. In America, we carry you into office for it. It's questionable how many other philosophers Bush had read up to that point anyway but the fact that no one bothered to ask that question is another argument for why we deserved to get stuck with this guy.
After that, anything that happened to us we were asking for. If a country elects it's leaders based on their faith rather then their policies, they do not deserve to survive and certainly do not deserve the status of super-power. Yes, he lied, cheated, stole, and killed. He was elected based on his faith. Competent leaders don't need to do that. To be certain, Clinton helped him along by going along with the sex witch hunts instead of saying "None of your fucking business!" like the rest of us would have. He fell into the religious puritan trap as well. This is the problem, we let symbolism trump necessity. As a result, we get stuck with the worst possible leaders.
This happens all the time. Remember the flap over Obama's lack of a flag pin? The fact that "story" got any air time at all shows how little we've actually learned since 2000. How many incompetent republicans are still in office because they ran on the bottemless gold mine of gay marriage and abortion, two issues that don't even affect the people who vote based on them? Sarah Palin anyone?
We on the left can say it's not our fault and that we don't deserve to live with the bad decisions of others mistakes but how many assumed that Prop. 8 would fail in California just because talk radio has painted it the most liberal state in the union? How many assumed that Kerry would win hands down in 2004? How many beleived that Clinton would usher in a new era of tolerance and change back in 1992? We keep giving our fellow citizens the benefit of the doubt no matter how many times they prove us wrong. We need to wake up to the realities of the world around us and just how dumb our fellow citizens really are.
It is easy to say that if Gore had won in 2000 that America would not be as polarized as it is today. I respectfully disagree. The mentality that put Bush in office in 2000 would still be out there. Yes, I am glad he is leaving, but to say that we have learned from his disasterous presidency is niave. In 1998, after the impeachment of Clinton fell through, many commentators said it was the death of the culture wars. Two years later we all know who won, don't we?
I don't have the solution. I don't know how to make people beleive in evolution given all the evidence for it that is already out there. I don't know how to convince that family on the verge of poverty that their pastor really doesn't have their best interest in mind when he tells them that gay marriage is the most important issue to vote on. I just know we need to stop assuming that one election victory means people have woken up. It is a long, hard, fight and we still have a long way to go.
And what terrorist groups was Saddam actually working with? (pointing to some line bin Laden said about Iraq doesn't prove they actually had a REALTIONSHIP)Thanks! Oh and BTW: your Clinton Derangment Syndrome is showing! Moonbat.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
