- 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
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:18 am to Toddy
Russia meddling in US affairs bad.
US meddling in other countries affairs good?
US meddling in other countries affairs good?
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:20 am to Toddy
I think you should take some of your homosexual buddies to those countries and protest.
Let us know how that goes.
Let us know how that goes.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:21 am to Old Hellen Yeller
God y'all are clowns
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:21 am to Toddy
Well, we can see that Toddy has renewed his membership in the "Useful Idiots Union".
A little hint to people of ALL ideologies: Any time you see a headline that seems too "out there" to be believed, it probably is. In this case, it is clear that talking points have been passed out, because a simple Google search for headlines in the past week would have you believe that Toddy's version of this story is correct, and is the full story. The UN passed a resolution that condemned using the death penalty as a punishment for same sex relations. It does in fact do this, in item # 6, on page 4, of the actual resolution.
What none of these UIU members are telling you is that the resolution was a GENERAL resolution dealing with the death penalty, and included many other provisions, including:
Now, I would argue that most of this is typical bureaucrat crap with little objective standard, i.e., it creates a regulatory burden where the interpretation of whether someone has met the requirements is left to someone with little defined criteria other than their own standards. Who defines "arbitrary"?
I really don't have a problem with anything the resolution is trying to accomplish. My objection is that it is really just a weapon for someone to enforce their own, subjective standards, without any real measure of accountability.
None of that matters to the issue at hand, though. The issue is that the Useful Idiots are out there parroting a dangerously simplistic platitude that (as it usually does) waters down and neuters the actual issue in the name of a pet cause. As a result, everybody misses the worthwhile argument (the death penalty as a whole) in favor of just trying to make it look like Trump hates figs.
Toddy: Your turn.
A little hint to people of ALL ideologies: Any time you see a headline that seems too "out there" to be believed, it probably is. In this case, it is clear that talking points have been passed out, because a simple Google search for headlines in the past week would have you believe that Toddy's version of this story is correct, and is the full story. The UN passed a resolution that condemned using the death penalty as a punishment for same sex relations. It does in fact do this, in item # 6, on page 4, of the actual resolution.
What none of these UIU members are telling you is that the resolution was a GENERAL resolution dealing with the death penalty, and included many other provisions, including:
quote:
Calls upon States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that it is not applied on the basis of discriminatory laws or as a result of discriminatory or arbitrary application of the law;
quote:
Urges States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that the death penalty is not applied against persons with mental or intellectual disabilities and persons below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, as well as pregnant women;
quote:
Also calls upon States to undertake further studies to identify the underlying factors that contribute to the substantial racial and ethnic bias in the application of the death penalty, where they exist, with a view to developing effective strategies aimed at eliminating such discriminatory practices
quote:
Calls upon States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to make available relevant information, disaggregated by gender, age, nationality and other applicable criteria, with regard to their use of the death penalty, inter alia, the charges, number of persons sentenced to death, the number of persons on death row, the number of executions carried out and the number of death sentences reversed, commuted on appeal or in which amnesty or pardon has been granted, as well as information on any scheduled execution, which can contribute to possible informed and transparent national and international debates, including on the obligations of States with regard to the use of the death penalty;
Now, I would argue that most of this is typical bureaucrat crap with little objective standard, i.e., it creates a regulatory burden where the interpretation of whether someone has met the requirements is left to someone with little defined criteria other than their own standards. Who defines "arbitrary"?
I really don't have a problem with anything the resolution is trying to accomplish. My objection is that it is really just a weapon for someone to enforce their own, subjective standards, without any real measure of accountability.
None of that matters to the issue at hand, though. The issue is that the Useful Idiots are out there parroting a dangerously simplistic platitude that (as it usually does) waters down and neuters the actual issue in the name of a pet cause. As a result, everybody misses the worthwhile argument (the death penalty as a whole) in favor of just trying to make it look like Trump hates figs.
Toddy: Your turn.
This post was edited on 10/3/17 at 11:29 am
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:22 am to Toddy
quote:
Toddy
You are a moron. Clearly the US voted against this because as Trump has said, and as MILLIONS of Americans believe, the US should not be in the business of dictating morals to other countries. It really has nothing to do with gay, it has to do with a principle.
Of course, you being a liberal, no one expects you to understand a principle, but it's true just the same.
The UN's core mandate is not telling other countries how they should conduct their internal affairs.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Toddy's gone
he gets these totally biased stories from pink news and his LGBT groups on social media and tries to "gotcha" the board and when confronted with actual discussion, leaves. he will only come back when he's copied the responses/questions to him in this thread to those outlets and gotten their responses
Toddy is nothing more than a drone whose next original thought will be his first
yup
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:24 am to Toddy
Click bait......Toddy, you know and everyone else here knows that you are not going to be convicted for being gay.
Go smoke a pony baloney to your heart's content and butt ranch until it falls off in a public bathroom in a large city park
Go smoke a pony baloney to your heart's content and butt ranch until it falls off in a public bathroom in a large city park
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:26 am to Toddy
The US does not need the UN passing laws about what counties do.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:29 am to Toddy
Then they have nothing to fear.
There is no 'sex' between same sexes.
No intercourse with the potential of mixing gametes occurs.
All that happens with gays is hedonistic massage involving sex organs. But not real sex.
There is no 'sex' between same sexes.
No intercourse with the potential of mixing gametes occurs.
All that happens with gays is hedonistic massage involving sex organs. But not real sex.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:31 am to TrueTiger
Wait. Is op mad that he can still suck all the male appendages he wants?
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:47 am to MSMHater
No response from toddy yet
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:48 am to Toddy
quote:
Give me one reasonable reason why they would vote against this and align themselves with some Muslim shitholes and china.
they no likey queers?
me no likey queers either!
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:49 am to Toddy
no message
This post was edited on 10/3/17 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:50 am to tedmarkuson
There is absolutely no reason to use Toddy's sexual choices as a basis for attacking him. He's an idiot who happens to be gay, if he was straight, he'd still be an idiot.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:52 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
There is absolutely no reason to use Toddy's sexual choices as a basis for attacking him. He's an idiot who happens to be gay, if he was straight, he'd still be an idiot.
Agreed. This is just like the Useful Idiot crap, but (honestly) more offensive to me. You actually do "hate figs"? Fine, but keep it out of the political discussion if you want me on your side.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:55 am to Toddy
quote:
Good to know that Trump thinks it's ok if I'm killed
If you're killed by Muslims, yes.
Posted on 10/3/17 at 11:57 am to Toddy
What else was in the resolution?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News