Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 8:16 PM
Um. . . Does loving someone not include being nice to then?
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 7:11 PM
So then your saying that Lincoln was a slave driver by drafting hundreds of thousands of citizens to fight in the Civil War?
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 6:35 PM
I don't know what RVN70USMC thinks. That's why I asked. I'm not trying to be a smartass.
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 6:27 PM
Touching comment. Nice to know that you believe the freedom of speech is absolute. I guess that means you support a persons right to say something like, i don't know, maybe: "there is no God but Allah! Death to America!" If you don't believe someone has the right to say that, then you don't think freedom of speech is absolute. This would turn the conversation into where we draw the lines.
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 5:56 PM
why not?
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 5:51 PM
If Taxes to fund social services is "theft", then was the draft during the Vietnam War murder?
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 5:50 PM
As far as the offered examples go, how about one of a ration, logical idea with merit that has been rejected wholesale by academics without any reasoned debate for the purpose of preventing that idea from being discussed throught the use of campus speach rules? Asking you guys not to make fun of Michele's dress doesn't count. (personally, I don't care what other people think about her dress) A specific example please. Name the idea. Explain why it is rational and logical. Describe who refused to discuss it, and how they were being irrational. Connect that instance with campus rules of discourse.
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 3:51 PM
No. I'm telling you I want an example of an idea being tun away from irrationally, without any discussion.
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 3:49 PM
Sure, but there are still rules regarding what you can do with that 'property', such as: it is federal crime to destroy money, laundering is not allowed, you can't use it to commit bribery, or loan sharking, or bookmaking, We have already established that the government can tell us what we can't do with any of our 'property'. Why is it such an outrage for the gov. To tell us what we must do with some of it? Especially since we are supposedly a christian nation, rather than a free nation?
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 3:41 PM
If there truly is a problem, then you should have no trouble identifying it. The first step in solving problems is identifying them. So, please, give an example of this first problem that was spoken of in this article.
In response to:

The Truth in Love Police

Skwach Wrote: Feb 11, 2013 3:37 PM
Way to miss the point. But, okay. . . I give time to service projects aimed education and job training. For the purpose of helping people who need help. And amazinglingly enough, those people end contributing to GDP and paying taxes of their own. The point is this: there is a finite amount of money in circulation. when individuals are allowed to amass unlimited amounts of a finite supply, a system of exploitation arises. Rich people can't be rich without creating exponentially more poor people. Calling people who manipulate a public monetary system 'hard workers' and victims of that manipulation 'lazy poor people' is a cop out.
Previous 11 - 20 Next