Tired_Old_Man

Of course the majority has to rule and in all "free" countries of the world, the majority does rule, BUT, the USA was and is supposed to be special, because besides majority rule, we also have "minority rights". The "minority rights" part is accomplished in two ways. If it were just majority rule, then if 218 US Representatives (one more than 50%) and 51 Senators say yes to a "no more pornography" bill, and the president signs the bill, then no more pornography. Right? Not in this country, because our founding father did not want that, so they put into the bill of rights, certain guarantees to allow freedom for other than the majority. That "no more pornography" will be struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court as a violation of “Free Speech”. So what can be done to get "no more pornography" into our social justice system. Well, if they can get 300 US Representatives (2/3's) and 67 Senators to say yes to a "no more pornography" Constitutional Amendment and then 38 States have referendums agreeing, then there will be "no more pornography", but that is a lot easier said than done. For laws that do not violate the Constitution, it still takes more than 218 US Representatives and 51 Senators to say yes , and for the president to sign the bill. It takes 218 US Representatives to bring the bill up for a vote in "The House", but it takes 60 Senators to bring the bill up for a vote in the Senate. That Senate rule is there to stop a simple majority from running ruff-shad over the minority. Many times the majority complains about that rule. Last year, the Republicans were threatening to remove the "60 Senators to bring the bill up for a vote" rule. If they had, then the once majority Republicans would not be able to stop the now majority Democrats from passing their anti-war agenda. The idea of minority rights stops abuse by the majority and smooths the political waves as one side then the other is a majority. Could you imagine if every few years every law was reversed? And there are Christians that vote against the particular type of Christians (Christian Right Political Movement Evangelicals), who try to push their beliefs into law.

Many of the rules of "The Church" that have to do with interaction between people are who do not consent to the behavior described in the rule are ok with me. Thou shalt no kill, bear false witness, steal, etc are fine with me, because their is a victim and victimizer in each of these statements. Thou shalt not kill means the victimizer should not kill the victim. But when it comes to what someone does on Sunday (or Saturday in some religions), or coveting my neighbors house or wife, or having consenting sex, then I am generally against the state putting those Church rules into effect. The positions that Tina and I use in bed are not the business of the state of Florida, nor the Federal government's business. If I want to look at a porno movie before going to bed; my business. If I want to cheat on my wife, with a female of male, as long as they are over 18, then it is only the business of Tina and I. If I want to worship a statue of a Golden Donkey, or tell my parents to "shove it", then the government should not be concerned.

While I agree with much of what you said, you may have inadvertently hit the nail on the head with the statement that I turned red above. It has been said that the main reason for religion is to subdue the masses in order to milk them. In the game of Chess, it is no accident that the Bishops are powerful pieces and are protected by the pawns who are sacrificed for the protection of the King, Queen and Bishops. The people who religion is aimed at may be represented by the pawns in the minds of many.

I agree with the vast majority of what you wrote. Today, with the Internet and TV Channels like the Science Channel, History Channel, National Geographic Channel, etc. available, it is a shame that MTV and similar junk are what children are watching. In the break room where I used to work, we had a TV. I wanted to watch the ABC World News and this other mechanic wanted to watch "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous". This happened almost every night, because that was when we normally got lunch. Sometimes I would get there first, so we would watch the news, sometimes, we watched the "glitz". One night when we were watching the news, this other mechanic was bitching and moaning, "same news every night" until the news anchor said, "after we come back from these commercials, star from the 40's remembered" (translation: Old Movie Star died), and then he couldn't wait to see who it was and to hear all the gossip. We have a nation of dummies because they are only interested in glitz. More people can name all 12 American Idol contestants than came name their 3 Federal Congressmen. Talking about FOX TV shows; has anyone seen "Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?" People who are stupid are competing for a $1,000,000 by answering questions on math and geography from the first through fifth grades. I wonder where they got their pool of applicants from and how did they keep away the Jeopardy and "Do you want to be a Millionaire" applicants out of the show's contestant pool?

Because they mentioned Benjamin Franklin by name. Even if they had not, they are supposed to be trained at "how to tell counterfeit money from real money" and would therefor be expected to have more knowledge than average people about money. Plus, it says Benjamin Franklin on the bill right under the picture.:faint:

Both tellers knew that Benjamin Franklin was the person on the $100 bill. I even said to one of them, I guess that the movie "Dead Presidents" has had a lot of influence. Note: For those unaware of the term, the movie was called "Dead Presidents", because that was how the thieves referred to the money they were going to steal; "Pictures of 'Dead Presidents'."

A minister has a right to say to his members that they must follow the 10 Commandments and that one of the commandments is "thou shalt not steal" and another is "thou shalt not kill". However, that minister has no right to say that, Rudy Giuliani is a strong "law and order" candidate and that Rudy's platform of long prison terms for criminals and treating child offenders like adults is the best way to make people follow the 10 Commandments, or that neither of Barack Obama's Liberal policies of building more recreational facilities (claiming that it will keep people away from temptation), nor putting better housing and more jobs into poverty neighborhoods will help people follow the 10 Commandments. He should also not say IMHO, that one candidate offers long prison terms for criminals and treating child offenders like adults while the other wants to build playgrounds. Who do you think will protect us from the violators of the 10 Commandments? Note: I do not know the policies stated for Giuliani or Obama are actually their ideas. They were just used as examples.

There are three groups in the USA that tend to vote as a block. One group is the Black people Another group is the Gay people And the last group is the Evangelicals I will not equate the reason for this voting as a Block, but here are Some Items to ponder: The vast majority of the first two groups vote Democrat. The vast majority of the last group votes Republican. Only a small minority, the so-called base, generally vote in Primaries and those that vote in Primaries tend to be further from the center than the average general election voter. Many members of the first two groups vote in the Primaries and they vote for the more Liberal candidates. Many members of the last group vote in the Primaries and they vote for the more Conservative candidates. The members of the first two groups believe that they are in those groups by nature (rather than nurture). In other words, "they were born that way". The members of the last group believe that they are in that group by nurture (rather than nature). In other words, "they chose (or learned) to be that way". Conclusion: I'll leave that up to you (everyone).

If Americans stopped coveting their Neighbor's possessions, either the US economy would fall apart (bad) or the people who live paycheck to paycheck would have to get off their "Credit Card Jones" (Good). OR BOTH!! Note: For those who don't know the vernacular; Jones = Habit (like in Heroin addiction)

Did they ask you? I have been asked political questions while on a plane by passengers and I always play dumb and politely refuse to answer. You see, some people have enough discipline and enough brains to know who they are and what they are at a given time. My company did not own me, but I owed them an obligation not to cause them any ill will from the public. This may be hard for many to understand, but General Pace is a public servant, paid for with the money of the US tax-payers. He has no right to insult any tax payers and/or citizens and should keep his mouth shut except when the president gives him permission to discuss a topic. And the president is also a public servant. King George was the ruler of the 13 colonies and when those colonies overthrew his rule, it was decided that the new nation would be run by men who worked for the people. Worship Jesus all you want. But do not worship the president. He owes you and me, and all the other citizens of the USA, respect for the rights guaranteed to us by the US Constitution. BuSh keeps saying that he swore to protect the USA when he became president. He (as usual) is wrong. The oath he took says. "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." He has not done that. He has tried to destroy the Constitution.

Get hold of the HBO documentary: "Hacking Democracy". Go to HBO's website and search for "Hacking Democracy". Al Gore got minus 16,022 votes in one county in Florida in the 2000 presidential election.

Last year for the first time in history, the state of Florida lost more people than it gained for a net drop in population. Same amount of homes, less people equals lower prices. Plus insurance has tripled in the 3 years since I moved here because of the hurricanes and taxes have doubled.

Jesus said "Blessed are the Peace-Makers" and invading a country as a pre-emptive strike on false intelligence is not the act of a "Peace-Maker".

It is not bigotry against Christians for Liberal not to get involved in Christian infighting (the Romney book) and it is not bigotry against Christians for people to object to a man wearing a uniform representing a government organization to say things that many (or most) people will accept as official government policy. Mr. Pace has a right to condemn Gays. General Pace has a no right to condemn Gays. When I was an aircraft mechanic, I was on board fixing last minute items many times while passengers were also on board. I could not tell them that being Gay was immoral. I could not tell them that being Gay was not immoral. Why, because I was representing my company when on board fixing the company's plane. If I met a passenger while off the airport, I could say anything I wanted to that person because then I was representing myself, not my company at that point. And one more thing. Jesus said "Blessed are the Peace-Makers". I hardly think that a general who controls and directs killing is a proper spokesman for Jesus. Jesus did not say, "Blessed are the Peace-keepers". Those who kill often think of themselves as peace-keepers. When Ronald Reagan could not get the MX missile through congress, he renamed in the "Peace-Keeper" and Jerry Falwell told his followers to write their congressmen to get the "Peace-Keeper" program funded.

Because Jesus would not have condoned the war in Iraq or the war on the poor in the USA, or the war on the environment (by the poluters and big business), but the leadership of the Christian Right politcal Movement does. They do not represent Jesus. They represent the money changers and the powers that control us.

You are correct with one slight correction on my part: you have less information then you do when you know someone's alleged religious affiliation.

Until the good Christians like you and I follow my advice, Christianity will suffer a bad reputation. The advice stated twice in this thread already is: "(W)hen are the believers in Jesus going to take back their church from the politicians masking themselves as "men of God"."

Will Hillary bang Kenneth Starr if she wins the election, just to get even with Bill?:faint:

Forget about proof. I have not seen any innuendo even o the right-wing blogs about that issue. They have tried to smear Obama about being a Muslim terrorist, and the usual stuff about Gore and Edwards being Rich, but nothing about adultery. Unless Hillary got even. Did Hillary bang Kenneth Starr?

Do you have any proof that either Hillary or Obama are adulterers? Or Edwards or Gore, for that matter?

She is referring to the book about Romney being a Mormon that the article's author is accusing Liberals of not complaining about.

I think the problem is not that Liberals or atheists would not vote for a Mormon, because to Liberals and atheists, a Mormon is just another flavor of Christianity, but it is the Evangelicals who object because Mormons and Evangelicals don't agree on some fundamental issues.

Of course you can, and I am debating you. Do not accuse me of always thinking I am correct, because I know of no one on this board who posts thinking that they are incorrect. I, in fact sometimes say the opposite of my true intentions and have sometimes been accused of bigotry by people who have only read that one sarcastic mocking post. Christians come in all shapes, sizes and types and they can be as different as night and day, as you and I often prove, but that is ok for as Paul said in Romans 12- 2: And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 3: For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. 4: For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: 5: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. You, Leatha and I do not conform to the same ideas of Christianity. When I and many others complain about Christianity, we are complaining about the people who have shaped Christianity as a political tool. I asked in another thread:

I needed to boast to enhance my macho male image.:eek:

But then the Roman Catholics will still fight the Protestants as in Belfast Northern Ireland, the Shiites will still fight the Sunnis as in Iraq and the Tutsi will still fight the Hutu as in Rwanda. We fight using religion or color as the excuse, but it is all about power and money.