- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/6/20 at 11:50 am to Ag Zwin
Gay republicans are fine, but there is no such thing as a Trans Republican. Don’t fall for the lies.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 11:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:We can make any policy we want made for any reason we want so long as it doesn't violate constitutional rights. We're talking about motive here, and the religious aren't supposed to be excluded from public discourse simply because they are religious.
in America? we are not supposed to make policy based on religion.
quote:I beg to differ. Perhaps "religion" generally isn't, but I believe that only the biblical worldview can provide a basis for intelligibility in all areas of life. You have no objectivity in secular relativism, which is what we have in our society today.
also, religion isn't really a rational or objective analysis system, so purely by the methodology used it's a bad way to do business. you also open the door for all sorts of other religions to do the same and that's chaos
Atheism provides no rational basis for discourse or truth and secularism is practical atheism.
That said, all arguments and policies should be up for debate and no arguments should be excluded simply because people want to be bigoted (see how that word can be reversed?) against the religious.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 11:55 am to Dale51
quote:
*who cares what bathroom they use??? Golly!..I don't know..maybe the other people using the bathroom??*
Log Cabin Republicans aren't pushing trannies in the lockerroom.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
sure, but i can do that without it being based purely in religious beliefs and give objective reasons why it's bad
No, you can’t. “Bad” is a value judgement; it’s inherently subjective.
Everybody, you included, wants laws based on their values. Your values are not somehow more valid because they aren’t described by you as “religious”.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:37 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
This thread is about precluding one group from having effective input in the debate ABOUT the party platform, by denying them a place to present their views on the premises of the convention.
Since there is apparently some sort of application process, this is undoubtedly not the first group to be denied. What’s special here? Am I wrong; has every group who’s ever asked been given space to push their views?
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:39 pm to Flats
quote:The fact that it was publicized?
Since there is apparently some sort of application process, this is undoubtedly not the first group to be denied. What’s special here? Am I wrong; has every group who’s ever asked been given space to push their views?
I can speak for no one else, I would ask exactly the same questions regarding the exclusion of any other group of Republican voters.
This post was edited on 2/6/20 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:48 pm to rooster108bm
quote:
No I'd call it some brave stance by some liberal ****s that are trying to destroy conservatism.
ok boomer
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:50 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
How fricking stupid. The loon evangelical wing of the GOP will always be there to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
They are our cross to bare. :sigh:
Posted on 2/6/20 at 12:56 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
The fact that it was publicized?
You could have just admitted that you don’t know the answer to my question. I doubt just anybody who claims to be a Republican is given floor space and I doubt this is the first group that’s been turned down. You may believe that any belief under the sun merits a venue, but I suspect that’s a minority opinion.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 1:19 pm to sumtimeitbeslikedat
quote:
and if you read the Bible, it won’t take long for you to find where it says homosexuality and perversion of ones body is an abomination to God
So you support the GOP outlawing divorce?
Posted on 2/6/20 at 1:21 pm to Ag Zwin
Stand for what is right! Truth and light will always prevail over evil and darkness!!
Posted on 2/6/20 at 1:39 pm to Esquire
quote:I would be in support of banning no-fault divorce.
So you support the GOP outlawing divorce?
Posted on 2/6/20 at 1:47 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
I would be in support of banning no-fault divorce.
How wonderfully small government of you.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 1:54 pm to Esquire
quote:
So you support the GOP outlawing divorce?
This makes no sense.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 2:00 pm to Esquire
quote:Can you please provide your definition of small government? Are you talking about the size (number of agencies, employees, etc.) or the scope (number of laws, impact of laws, etc.) or both? Please let me know where the threshold is from small to big government while you're at it.
How wonderfully small government of you.
No-fault divorce wasn't even allowed by law in the US until the 1970's (starting with Reagan in California, actually).
Posted on 2/6/20 at 2:07 pm to Dale51
quote:
This makes no sense.
Divorce and homosexuality are abominations to God, but the evangelicals only care about the latter because 40% are divorced already.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 2:09 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Can you please provide your definition of small government?
Supporting more government intrusion by restricting divorces is not conservative or small government. It's just evangelical bullshite.
quote:
(starting with Reagan in California, actually).
An actual conservative.
Posted on 2/6/20 at 2:21 pm to Esquire
quote:
Divorce and homosexuality are abominations to God, but the evangelicals only care about the latter because 40% are divorced already.
You mentioned "outlawing divorce", when no one had advocated making either against the law.
This post was edited on 2/6/20 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 2/6/20 at 2:21 pm to Esquire
quote:
It's just evangelical bullshite.
According to Wikipedia NY was the last state to allow no-fault divorce, changing their laws in 2010. I had no idea the evangelicals had such a stranglehold on NY.
Your slip is showing, but you’ve got plenty of company.
This post was edited on 2/6/20 at 2:24 pm
Page 11 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News