Just remember the Repubs did this

So where the old and the new are in conflict... Id say you should go with the "update"!
 
I have never met anyone so hard-headed and stuck in his own perceptions and views, as you seem to always be. I've also never know someone so convoluted on what they believe and how it applies, depending on political party... The GC doesn't apply to John Kerry burning down Vietnamese villages, but it does apply to alQaeda terrorists being detained by Bush... John Kerry calling in close air support on an enemy village is not a violation of the GC.... and never has been...nor is manually setting fire to a village if said village is an enemy stronghold...and I have NEVER suggested that AQ terrorists are subject to the Geneva Convention. I have said that mistreatment of AQ terrorists or anyone else, for that matter, is a violation of intertional law - specifically the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which Ronnie Raygun signed and which you categorically refuse to ever even acknowledge the existence of.

You believe races are equal, but we have to maintain AA advantages based on race to make it all equal. I believe that all races ARE equal. I do NOT believe that all businesses who take federal tax dollars treat all races equally and AA ensures that they, at least must make an effort to do so

You don't want to see the middle east collapse into chaos and taken over by radicals, but you think we should leave because we should never have been there to begin with. I think we should leave because we are making matters worse.... my reasons for thinking we should leave have nothing to do with my reasons for thinking that we should not have been there in the first place

You supported Clinton's liberation and democratization plans for Iraq, but not the democratically elected Iraq Unity Government's. I supported the idea of providing assistance to the Iraqi resistance so that they could overthrow Saddam. I NEVER supported the idea of invading, conquering and occupying Iraq and then hand feeding (at gunpoint) democracy to the Iraqi people. You and Bush are just about the only ones who keep calling the farce in Baghdad the "Iraq Unity Government", by the way.... Sadr is holding Maliki by the balls and the "unity government" is not united on anything..and is completely incapable of stopping the spiralling sectarian bloodshed that WE set in motion by our hamfisted invasion. We are also completely incapable of stemming the tide of violence as well. Nice JOB, neocons!

You are a walking, talking, contradiction. You can spin my words to make contradictions where none exist, but it's spin without substance and you know it

It's uncanny, the resemblance to John Fucking Kerry! ...Only, you aren't as 'intelligent' as he, and have no 'significance' in politics, and didn't run for president, and didn't make his rankau contraire.... he never came close to making MY rank ;), and didn't win any purple hearts.... but we both know that I, at least, served MY country in uniform..... unlike you, you fucking yellow chickenhawk coward.
 
Jarod said:
"Spare the rod" vs. "Turn the other cheek"!
Click to expand...
Spare the rod is in relation to somebody misbehaving, turn the other cheek is in relation to somebody who attacked you. They are not the same thing....

If we were to all "turn the other cheek" there would be no laws, there would be no reason for them.... One does not "spare the rod"... Each child/person must accept the consequences of their actions.
 
Damocles said:
Spare the rod is in relation to somebody misbehaving, turn the other cheek is in relation to somebody who attacked you. They are not the same thing....

If we were to all "turn the other cheek" there would be no laws, there would be no reason for them.... One does not "spare the rod"... Each child/person must accept the consequences of their actions.
Click to expand...



Id say that someone attacking me is "misbehaving"!
 
Damocles said:
Spare the rod is in relation to somebody misbehaving, turn the other cheek is in relation to somebody who attacked you. They are not the same thing....




If we were to all "turn the other cheek" there would be no laws, there would be no reason for them.... One does not "spare the rod"... Each child/person must accept the consequences of their actions.
Click to expand...

Are those two items a bit in conflict ?
 
QUOTE=Jarod;44058]Id say that someone attacking me is "misbehaving"![/QUOTE]

Then you report it and they too face the consequences of their action. Turn the other cheek does not mean that there should be no more consequences...
 
Jarod said:
Id say that someone attacking me is "misbehaving"!
Click to expand...

Damocles said:
Then you report it and they too face the consequences of their action. Turn the other cheek does not mean that there should be no more consequences...
Click to expand...



I agree, but in the origional way Dixie was talking about violence was that he would beat me up and take my lunch money if we were on a school yard because I was being a bully, because he was not brought up to turn the other cheek.

I said I would then call the authorities.
 
Jarod said:
I agree, but in the origional way Dixie was talking about violence was that he would beat me up and take my lunch money if we were on a school yard because I was being a bully, because he was not brought up to turn the other cheek.

I said I would then call the authorities.
Click to expand...
It's vigilantism. He says that you were being the "bully" and he therefore would solve the problem himself rather than through other channels...

My mother would have said, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
 
Damocles said:
It's vigilantism. He says that you were being the "bully" and he therefore would solve the problem himself rather than through other channels...

My mother would have said, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
Click to expand...

I agree!
 
uscitizen said:
And conspiring to rise up in armed revolt against our legal govt IS treason.
Click to expand...
I don't think he was conspiring... It would be difficult to take that sentence and make it into some secret plan... Nor did he say that it would be against the government, just a specific group.
 
Damocles said:
I don't think he was conspiring... It would be difficult to take that sentence and make it into some secret plan... Nor did he say that it would be against the government, just a specific group.
Click to expand...

But the govt forbids such actions , so it would be rising up against the govt.

conspiracy, well no... as far as we know ......
So it would be just plain treason I guess. But then Dix would probably call it a civil war if only 20 of them were involved :)
 
uscitizen said:
But the govt forbids such actions , so it would be rising up against the govt.

conspiracy, well no... as far as we know ......
So it would be just plain treason I guess. But then Dix would probably call it a civil war if only 20 of them were involved :)
Click to expand...
Right, the government forbids you to take cocaine, therefore addicts are treasonous?

Come on... that's a bit ridiculous.
 
Damocles said:
Right, the government forbids you to take cocaine, therefore addicts are treasonous?

Come on... that's a bit ridiculous.
Click to expand...

HUH?

Shooting someone else with an AK47 is nothing at all like an individual taking cocane. The barium still workin on ya ?
 
uscitizen said:
HUH?

Shooting someone else with an AK47 is nothing at all like an individual taking cocane. The barium still workin on ya ?
Click to expand...
Of course not, you said that the government forbids the action therefore it is treason. It is a crime, not treason though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top