|
|
|
|
|
This image has expired.
Final Stats:
| Total Votes |
6 |
| Average Score |
7.00 |
| Verdict |
Bad
|
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=36539 |
|
| Comments: 157 (Read/Post) Favorites: 1 (View) |
Submitted
on: 11-01-2004
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Off-topic |
|
|
Description:
WHEEE!!!!! |
Showing page: 8 of 8
[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ]
 |
| #142 |
11-09-2004 @ 08:08:49 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#141, That was sarcasm. I'm just playing to the idea of people so eager to blame Bush for trivial things.
Like rigging the 2004 election again using wiccan/pagan mental tactics to change people's minds into voting for him.
|
|
| #144 |
11-09-2004 @ 08:12:35 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#143, "But seriously, Hillary was actually a good lay. :P"
Hey - it's you dick.
|
|
| #145 |
11-09-2004 @ 11:24:16 PM |
| Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#135, Also, there is no law that prevents people from using faith or religion to influence how they vote, there is also no law against public figures making appeals of faith or religion to win votes from the public
The only thing the 1st amendment does is makes it impossible for the government to either by law or action, outlaw any particular religion, nor by the same stroke, declare 1 religion to be that of the land. There is nothing at all saying that all acts of government or it's members must act in a faithless manner
|
|
| #146 |
11-09-2004 @ 11:27:08 PM |
| Posted By : Biohazard |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#145, There may be no law against it, but I do feel that it is morally wrong to declare that Bush was ordained by God to run the country.
|
|
| #151 |
11-12-2004 @ 03:20:02 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
A little late to the party, but I want the throw in my 2 cents. Or a few bucks.
Supporters of the Patriot Act constantly use the bail-out "Well, I haven't lost any rights that I miss". Once the feds come to your front door, knock over everything and slice open your mattress and sofa because they suspect you of dealing with terrorists, you might change your tune. You're supposed to stop loss of rights before they directly effect you.
They also labor under some form of misapprehension that "if you don't do anything naughty, they won't get you". Well, suppose they make a mistake? Suppose they search you for making some off-hand comment on the internet? I don't give a damn what they say, nobody deserves to be dishonored like that.
I have quite a few problems with Bush, but another off the top of my head is his bullshit stance on population control. He's against abortion, yet he constantly pushes to end sex education, passed a bill in June of this year which would include (cont.)
|
|
| #152 |
11-12-2004 @ 03:29:47 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
(cont from #151), "abstinence education" in schools, and banning any imagery that could be considered "sexually obscene". This includes textbook diagrams of sexual organs. The bill also makes it clear that all materials which discuss condoms must include “the lack of effectiveness of condom use” in preventing STDs. Bush has also backed "conscience clauses", which inables phramacists to refuse to fill perscriptions for birth control. Let's not even get into his opposition to welfare and head start programs. Apparently life begins at conception and ends at birth, and you're having children, whether or not you want them or can afford to have them.
#136, Separation of Church and State is an important principle in this country, and yes, it's real. Without it, government action could be dictated by religion, which makes for a theocracy. Freedom of relgion is impossible in a theocracy. It's "freedom of religion", not "freedom of religion as long as religion X gets government endorsement."
[Edited by Skid on 11-12-2004 @ 03:31:35 PM]
|
|
| #153 |
11-12-2004 @ 03:43:47 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#152, Dammit, "inables" should be "enables". Bloody five minute rule.
|
|
| #154 |
11-12-2004 @ 11:38:01 PM |
| Posted By : Mathias |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I agree 100% skid, but these guys are hopeless, I gave up a few pages ago. And yet they have continued along without me :P
|
|
| #155 |
12-09-2004 @ 08:14:54 AM |
| Posted By : musclecarnut711 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#152, uh, we never officially HAD separation of church and state.
edited to add offiically
[Edited by musclecarnut711 on 12-09-2004 @ 08:17:20 AM]
|
|
| #156 |
12-21-2004 @ 08:10:08 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#155, Yes, we have and we do. Please explain to me how we can be religiously free with a national religion.
And don't give me any lines about "We don't have a national religion, but we can have faith this and faith that in our government". When your government is endorsing a particular religion and operating off the principles of a particular religion, that's a national religion.
|
|
| #157 |
12-21-2004 @ 09:07:57 PM |
| Posted By : 427 Vette |
Reply | Edit | Del |
eh, I'm not going to bother reading these long posts, that's why I stay away from politics.
:P
|
Showing page: 8 of 8
[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
