Gun rights linked to pro-gay message on posters in Seattle. The left loses it.

[Blind Sniper]

Agnostic, lol.

I don't dabble to much in all the different religious sects, cause I don't really care.

'Cept them damn "baptist" yahoos from Florida. But I don't believe one bit they care about religion, god, sin, or anything else.

The word agnostic generally describes someone who still believes in a higher power, but who doesn't follow any particular religion. Generally, if someone says they believe in God, but that they don't belong to any organized religion, it's a safe bet they're agnostic

Inalienable rights cannot come from man or Govt. They cannot grant them

Oh really? And just why is that, hmm? I'm seriously asking, by the way, not trying to sound like a dick.

FWIW, that post of mine that you quoted was mostly a joke.

 

[Younggun]

IMO, these right we hold so dear are rights because they are.

I don't care what someone believes or why they believe that so long as they don't harm anyone following their beliefs.

I believe their is a huge lack of understanding of those who are atheists or follow non Christian religions.

Good morals are good morals, whether they come from the bible, Quran, or just something ingrained in a person from their parents or living life. They can also have the same urge to be free without being told their freedoms are granted by god.

 

[Blind Sniper]

IMO, these right we hold so dear are rights because they are.

I don't care what someone believes or why they believe that so long as they don't harm anyone following their beliefs.

I believe their is a huge lack of understanding of those who are atheists or follow non Christian religions.

Good morals are good morals, whether they come from the bible, Quran, or just something ingrained in a person from their parents or living life. They can also have the same urge to be free without being told their freedoms are granted by god.

Thank you for saying what I believe, and doing so much better than I could.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

What makes small/no standing army not a libertarian principle... Please enlighten me as to how Thomas Jefferson was wrong when he stated that a standing army is dangerous to the liberties of the people...

Not saying that it is a good idea to get rid of our armed forces right now, nor am I saying those who volunteer for military are bad (far from it). Just saying if we had remained isolationists we wouldn't have such a need for an army and hopefully someday we can return to that mindset.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Kinda think you missed my point, but that is ok.

1) TJ was of course right and it was that very thinking that led to the restrictions on our standing Army as outlined in the Constitution. Historically standing armies have been used against the people. Only a POTUS who with TOTAL disregard for our nations laws and Constitution and acting in the capacity of a dictator could or would turn our military against we the people...YES I known Obama could be the first one to do so!!!


2) Well you cannot have it both ways, you cannot be a major actor on the world stage and the worlds superpower and the worlds cop on the beat and live in isolation.

We are a big country with 315 M people, the worlds largest economy and its highest standard of living. Do you or anyone think we could maintain this without a major military and one that is the strongest in the world? Speak German, Russian or Chinese and maybe all of the above...YET?

​

 

[Younggun]

Kinda think you missed my point, but that is ok.

1) TJ was of course right and it was that very thinking that led to the restrictions on our standing Army as outlined in the Constitution. Historically standing armies have been used against the people. Only a POTUS who with TOTAL disregard for our nations laws and Constitution and acting in the capacity of a dictator could or would turn our military against we the people...YES I known Obama could be the first one to do so!!!


2) Well you cannot have it both ways, you cannot be a major actor on the world stage and the worlds superpower and the worlds cop on the beat and live in isolation.

We are a big country with 315 M people, the worlds largest economy and its highest standard of living. Do you or anyone think we could maintain this without a major military and one that is the strongest in the world? Speak German, Russian or Chinese and maybe all of the above...YET?

​

Lincoln did it, although IMO he actually invaded a separate sovereign nation.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Big difference between libertarianism and the Libertarian party. Big "L" vs little "l".

And even within that party there's different platforms by state. For example, Texas' Libertarian party is Pro Life for the reasons stated above.

 

[stdreb27]

Wait, what's wrong with prostitution?

Personally I'm hoping polygamy is the new gay.

 

[Jemplayer]

Personally I'm hoping polygamy is the new gay.

You must not be married. One wife is enough for me, how anybody thinks they can handle more then one woman at a time is beyond me.

 

[inceptor]

You must not be married. One wife is enough for me, how anybody thinks they can handle more then one woman at a time is beyond me.

+1

 

[inceptor]

If the current admin decides we have to be gay, I will choose to be a lesbian.

 

[M. Sage]

You must not be married. One wife is enough for me, how anybody thinks they can handle more then one woman at a time is beyond me.

Polyandry might be simpler. You'd have some bros to back you up.

 

[Acera]

Personally I'm hoping polygamy is the new gay.

Really!? How many additional mother in laws do you want crawling up your ass???

(Bet some think one is too many............)

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

You must not be married. One wife is enough for me, how anybody thinks they can handle more then one woman at a time is beyond me.

LOL, no doubt!

 

[stdreb27]

You must not be married. One wife is enough for me, how anybody thinks they can handle more then one woman at a time is beyond me.

It was a joke, referring to the Mormons who ended up supporting the "boy" scout reversal. Since they have a more recent history of poligamy.


That being said, what if they were born wanting more than one woman, who are we to stand in prejudice to them. It's poligamy phobia. You knuckle draggers. Who are we to stand in the way of love.... We should tolerate alternate lifestyles, it's the new normal....

 

[Bithabus]

Inalienable rights cannot come from man or Govt. They cannot grant them

Your mistake is in assuming agentism when none is necessary. In other words, rights do not have to be granted in order to exist. Privileges must be granted.

 

[M. Sage]

It was a joke, referring to the Mormons who ended up supporting the "boy" scout reversal. Since they have a more recent history of poligamy.


That being said, what if they were born wanting more than one woman, who are we to stand in prejudice to them. It's poligamy phobia. You knuckle draggers. Who are we to stand in the way of love.... We should tolerate alternate lifestyles, it's the new normal....

No, really. Why not polygamy? Serious question.

 

[inceptor]

No, really. Why not polygamy? Serious question.

It's hard enough to keep one woman happy. I'm not sure that 2 wouldn't drive me crazy(or crazier). Then you should consider how they will get along. Can't even imagine.

 

[matefrio]

No, really. Why not polygamy? Serious question.

Mormon here. By no way I'm speaking the opinions of my church. Just have had a while to think about it.

We can no longer practice, even where it's legal or get booted form the church. There are sects of my religion that allow it but are by no way associated.

I can see where it could change though, in the 30 and older group there are 10 women who are ardent Mormons for every 1 ardent man in our religion.

In sects that do practice polygamy there is a huge problem with supply and demand. Too few women, so they go young and boys have a good possibly of getting kicked out of the sect at the age of sexual maturity.

As far as society today I think the supply and demand would favor the wealthy and cause social inequality in breeding privileges. This type of root nature imbalance would spark a social war then shortly a physical one.

Honestly I could see, in the olden days polygamy how this solved homosexuality. Lesbians had other women in the house and were taken care of by a man and some men just went out and lived their own lives.

 

[M. Sage]

It's hard enough to keep one woman happy. I'm not sure that 2 wouldn't drive me crazy(or crazier). Then you should consider how they will get along. Can't even imagine.

Oh, there's no way I would recommend it. One is too many.

 

[M. Sage]

Mormon here. By no way I'm speaking the opinions of my church. Just have had a while to think about it.

We can no longer practice, even where it's legal or get booted form the church. There are sects of my religion that allow it but are by no way associated.

I can see where it could change though, in the 30 and older group there are 10 women who are ardent Mormons for every 1 ardent man in our religion.

In sects that do practice polygamy there is a huge problem with supply and demand. Too few women, so they go young and boys have a good possibly of getting kicked out of the sect at the age of sexual maturity.

As far as society today I think the supply and demand would favor the wealthy and cause social inequality in breeding privileges. This type of root nature imbalance would spark a social war then shortly a physical one.

Honestly I could see, in the olden days polygamy how this solved homosexuality. Lesbians had other women in the house and were taken care of by a man and some men just went out and lived their own lives.

Supply and demand are already whacked, and people who are rich enough already get as many women as they want. I really don't see how things would change.