Previous 31 - 40 Next
In response to:

G.W. was MIA

John148 Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 8:48 AM
I have my doubts Bush campaigning would have been a net positive,
In response to:

Did Freedom Win?

John148 Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 7:14 AM
Good article, John. It seems a lot of people in here don't want freedom any more than the progressives do. The Republicans pay lip service to limited government but seem to have no trouble asking for more of it when it's their own special interests. In that regard, the progressives are arguably more honest (though they are hardly honest themselves). "Limited government" should mean *limited* government. Domestically, at least, the government should be a referee, not a player. That works both ways, not just for the other guys.
In response to:

Did Freedom Win?

John148 Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 7:08 AM
Forcing morality on people doesn't make them moral, just compliant. Morality starts at home.
Different religions have different expectations of what marriage is. From a government aspect, marriage is a civil contract. The government cannot favor one religion's definition over another and cannot treat people unequally under the law when defining that contract so their definition of marriage is necessarily going to differ with that of a particular religion. The best solution is to remove "marriage" from government and call it something else that does not have religious/moral attachments to it. Also, it would be "a means to guarantee people could decide for themselves to BE MORAL *OR NOT*". If you do not include the "OR NOT", then there is no deciding and there is also no freedom, is there?
So are you saying marriage is a deviant behavior, then?
So are you saying marriage is a deviant behavior, then?
Both questions are irrelevant. The relevant question is whether or not it is constitutional to allow marriage and its associated *civil* privileges to heterosexual couples while denying it to others. The 14 amendment alone would seem to say the answer is no. However, the solution is not to put more government into marriage but rather to get marriage out of government.
In response to:

The Right To Choose... Rape?

John148 Wrote: Oct 12, 2012 10:21 AM
No. It's a dumb argument that won't sway anyone to his side and would more likely to cause someone on the fence to tune him out..
In response to:

Cash for Clunkers Fails Gasoline Goal

John148 Wrote: Sep 12, 2012 6:05 AM
More people are also working from home at least part of the week so that may account for a small part of it. I spend about half my week working from there now on average.
In response to:

All My Exes Live in Texas

John148 Wrote: Aug 21, 2012 7:44 AM
It may be both distasteful and immoral but I don't think that consensual sex between two *adults* should be a crime. They students are 18. They are old enough to vote and old enough to serve and die for their country. If they are old enough for that, then they are old enough to decide who they have sex with. Should she be fired for unethical behavior? Certainly. Jailed? No.
In response to:

A Debate About Debates

John148 Wrote: Aug 21, 2012 7:31 AM
They need to include the Libertarian candidate to show that there really is a party that supports truly limited government and personal liberty.
Previous 31 - 40 Next