Previous 21 - 30 Next
Well, I wonder about that version of history. Source please? Even if it's exactly how you say it is, I wonder if the APA is biased against Christian understandings of morality and human sexuality and has been for decades. Just from a medical and emotional standpoint alone, homosexuality is far different than the Madison Avenue-Hollywood manufactured line that is sold to Americans on a daily basis. Decorum and time prevents me from going into much detail here. Tried to read After the Ball; got through a lot of it but the authors have realized much of their agenda within their lifetime. I know society loves to pay lip service to having open discussions about everything, but the reality that translates to these days is dismantling traditional Christian mores in favor of their new, godless or quasi-Christian counterparts. The desired conclusions are baked into the discussion so much that one side is shouted down and marginalized before the discussion ever begins. In the meantime, those of us in the trenches of the world see the human wreckage left by these new (in reality, ancient) notions of morality.
And when they come over here, ala 9/11? When should we be proactively against evil and when not? If we are proactive, how much? No easy answer, but sticking our heads permanently in the sand invites more evil in the world. Technology has made the world too small to ignore every threat on the horizon. Supposedly, ISIS has about 100 American followers on their side. It only took 19 to bring down the WTC.
Want to re-post this in response to Flattus below, because I've heard the specious arguments in it way to often, to not start pushing back, in my own way. I was a corporal (then lance-coolie) who fought in that war. I always wondered if the updated Vietnam hippie types would openly spit on the troops of today, if given the opportunity. Now, I realize y'all have just gotten smarter, because the troops wouldn't exactly sit back and take it, and neither would the rest of the country. Instead, you undermined the mission at every opportunity. To a troop, that's the ultimate insult- to be given a mission and then have the country, or at least the current political masters blow that mission and make all that sacrifice in vain. SO SPARE ME THE *^%&* SUPPORT, IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE MISSION!! We had that country on lock- it was as stable as one could reasonably expect. All the current CNC had to do, the One, the guy with the halo and your Second Coming in '08 was negotiate a simple Status of Forces Agreement. And spare me the nonsense that he just carried out what the Bush admin negotiated before he left office. I question the veracity of that, and even if it were true wouldn't the "smartest man EVAH!!!" have the foresight to see what a precipitous withdrawal would bring? Oh, and the last sentence, 1st paragraph is priceless: "A country that's "stable" because an invading army remains to rule is not "stable". It is "UNstable". By that definition, South Korea, Japan, and Germany are unstable, third world backwaters, right? And our troops are there to "rule" aren't they? Careful, the liberal mask is slipping... Tell us what you really think about the average troop? Do it, c'mon!!!
I was a corporal (then lance-coolie) who fought in that war. I always wondered if the updated Vietnam hippie types would openly spit on the troops of today, if given the opportunity. Now, I realize y'all have just gotten smarter, because the troops wouldn't exactly sit back and take it, and neither would the rest of the country. Instead, you undermined the mission at every opportunity. To a troop, that's the ultimate insult- to be given a mission and then have the country, or at least the current political masters blow that mission and make all that sacrifice in vain. SO SPARE ME THE *^%&* SUPPORT, IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE MISSION!! We had that country on lock- it was as stable as one could reasonably expect. All the current CNC had to do, the One, the guy with the halo and your Second Coming in '08 was negotiate a simple Status of Forces Agreement. And spare me the nonsense that he just carried out what the Bush admin negotiated before he left office. I question the veracity of that, and even if it were true wouldn't the "smartest man EVAH!!!" have the foresight to see what a precipitous withdrawal would bring? Oh, and the last sentence, 1st paragraph is priceless: "A country that's "stable" because an invading army remains to rule is not "stable". It is "UNstable". By that definition, South Korea, Japan, and Germany are unstable, third world backwaters, right? And our troops are there to "rule" aren't they? Careful, the liberal mask is slipping... Tell us what you really think about the average troop? Do it, c'mon!!!
Not my CNC, so I can say this: Why did you "de-authorize" leaving a residual force in the region, vis-a-vis negotiating a simple SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) that would have prevented this garbage in the first place? Hope that still-handicapped golf swing was worth all those nearly wasted American and Iraqi lives! Maybe we can salvage this situation, but it's definitely the 4th quarter and looking more and more like we'll end up like last season's Broncs. Really, as a former USMC corporal, I want to type in all caps, but it looks crazy...
In response to:

Liberals Come Late to the Pot Party

p18 Wrote: Aug 06, 2014 4:52 AM
A small bump in the long road of our ever increasing national decline. Probably should be a state issue. I just wish we didn't have a federal government willing to prop up blue state failures with red state resources, so it would become more apparent to more people which laboratories of democracy really work. I'm not giving up but I often wouldn't mind an amicable divorce, so we gauge the superior set of principles. Thy kingdom come... Soon, I hope.
In response to:

Still Kicking Around Nixon

p18 Wrote: Aug 06, 2014 4:21 AM
Meet the god formerly known as liberalism, aka progressivism, more accurately known as regress. Even the godless tend to gravitate towards something larger than themselves.
In response to:

Texas Shows the Way on Abortion

p18 Wrote: Aug 05, 2014 5:59 AM
Yup, we throw roadblocks in the way of adult murder too, but some people manage to get around them anyways because they're just so darned determined. And yet, I'll go with the "roadblocks" strategy anyways- I believe you would call them "laws."
In response to:

Texas Shows the Way on Abortion

p18 Wrote: Aug 04, 2014 12:01 PM
Ironically, 100% of abortion supporters are able to do so because their mothers chose life.
In response to:

Finding Joy Amid World’s Chaos

p18 Wrote: Aug 04, 2014 11:59 AM
In regards to Flattus, et al below: Just one question: if we all go to oblivion when we die, then "what difference does it make" how we live? The efforts of a Hitler or a Mother Theresa amount to the same thing, so why not live however you want? But that's probably the question at the heart of the matter. What if belief in God is more reasonable than belief in nothing? (After you set the mockery aside, and look at the evidence dispassionately it is). Then, the God of the Bible becomes a very uncomfortable proposition, because He is intimately interested in the lives of His creation. And that would mean we can't do whatever we want, to whoever we want whenever we want, without consequence. Seems to me that's what's really at the heart of the matter, and intellectual sophistry and mockery is really a smokescreen. Many don't WANT God to be real.
Ironically, 100% of abortion supporters are able to do so because their mothers chose life.
Previous 21 - 30 Next