100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Ron Paul | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Sat 04/04/09 10:51 PM
|
|
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics? I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires? All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different? He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time. Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc..... Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again? You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful. The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood? He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before. Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore. This is but one example by the way. How would you represent the average american on this matter? Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example. Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority. I meant as a leader? Would you discourage people from saying Merry Christmas? And how is it you represent the majority but Ron Paul doesn't? I thought 60% or more Americans were still christians... Is that not the majority? Nifty thing about Ron Pauls views, you'd be allowed to say Happy Holidays, and another person could say Merry Christmas. Would this not make more people happy? Or do you think people would be happier being pressured or forced to say Happy Holidays? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
yellowrose10
on
Sat 04/04/09 10:38 PM
|
|
i have yet to see anything wrong with him....even the anarchist would vote for him lol
 fear
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
here is a topic for boo. why does Ron Paul dislike the current administration. are you pro Paul or anti-Paul? debate  I am pro-Paul. Funny thing about him is the fact that he was just as against McCain, and the Bush administration as he is the Obama administration. It's Not the name he single's out, put the political philosophies and shadey legislation practices that he picks on. To put it simply, Dr. Paul is a constitutionalist, who believes small government, fiscal responsibility, he wants the states to have more responsibility, and he believes firmly in civil liberties. The current administration is almost axactly like the old one on every matter. They believe the constitution can and should be overridden at times (overriding civil liberties), they believe in big government with lots of controls and regulations,and they believe in lessening the state's powers and lots of rediculous spending. Thats this administration, not necessarily Obama himself. Yep, if I were to vote...Ron Paul would have had another vote, but I'm anarchist so I don't vote. Win or lose anymore we still get the same thing, no one really looks at the write-in candidates I wouldn't be surprised if most didn't even know what one was. I'm an anarchist and I know that... Don't see you around often...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Sat 04/04/09 10:40 PM
|
|
Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. The above was a quote^^^^ Are you really saying what I think you are? Preserving the Constitution and bring back our Bill of Rights are things that are stuck in the mud and need dispelled?? Hundreds of thousands of people have sacrificed so you could make that statement. In my humblest of opinions, you have just disrespected and dishonored them to the nth degree. No worry, your precious Obama will take you away from all those liberties, rights and freedoms you currently enjoy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drivin, Yellow!
Don't come around these parts often, but I'm always watching these threads. Interesting stuff comes out of here, and once in awhile I have something to say on the matter. Ron Paul would have made a great President, he had the best views of all the candidates and the best policies. He holds great policies in his current status in office, I can only imagine that humility would follow him to the Presidents seat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Sat 04/04/09 11:22 PM
|
|
Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. The above was a quote^^^^ Are you really saying what I think you are? Preserving the Constitution and bring back our Bill of Rights are things that are stuck in the mud and need dispelled?? Hundreds of thousands of people have sacrificed so you could make that statement. In my humblest of opinions, you have just disrespected and dishonored them to the nth degree. No worry, your precious Obama will take you away from all those liberties, rights and freedoms you currently enjoy. ______________________________________________________________________ No, you cannot twist what I say into the old rhetoric of the stale republicans. I did not say anything of the sort. I said that the American people have out grown the old stuck in the mud rhetoric of the republicans. Our constitution and bill of rights will grow and change as they should along the way of the evolution of man. And it is time for it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics? I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires? All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different? He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time. Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc..... Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again? You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful. The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood? He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before. Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore. This is but one example by the way. How would you represent the average american on this matter? Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example. Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority. I meant as a leader? Would you discourage people from saying Merry Christmas? And how is it you represent the majority but Ron Paul doesn't? I thought 60% or more Americans were still christians... Is that not the majority? Nifty thing about Ron Pauls views, you'd be allowed to say Happy Holidays, and another person could say Merry Christmas. Would this not make more people happy? Or do you think people would be happier being pressured or forced to say Happy Holidays? If you are addressing others who you have no idea what their religion might be, you should say Happy Holidays, it doesn't exclude your Merry Christmas and it includes all others in the statement. It is all inclusive, respectful. I can always tell those who cannot or will not see others in a respectful light and those people insist on saying Merry Christmas to all as though they are going to push their beliefs on them and have no regard for the other person. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what if someone doesn't celebrate the holidays at all?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Sat 04/04/09 11:39 PM
|
|
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics? I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires? All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different? He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time. Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc..... Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again? You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful. The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood? He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before. Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore. This is but one example by the way. How would you represent the average american on this matter? Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example. Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority. I meant as a leader? Would you discourage people from saying Merry Christmas? And how is it you represent the majority but Ron Paul doesn't? I thought 60% or more Americans were still christians... Is that not the majority? Nifty thing about Ron Pauls views, you'd be allowed to say Happy Holidays, and another person could say Merry Christmas. Would this not make more people happy? Or do you think people would be happier being pressured or forced to say Happy Holidays? If you are addressing others who you have no idea what their religion might be, you should say Happy Holidays, it doesn't exclude your Merry Christmas and it includes all others in the statement. It is all inclusive, respectful. I can always tell those who cannot or will not see others in a respectful light and those people insist on saying Merry Christmas to all as though they are going to push their beliefs on them and have no regard for the other person. So, as a leader you would make that law, or would you just make it easy for someone to sue for such a deed? If you visited an Indian Resevation and they had a ceremony to honor your presence that would be wrong? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics? I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires? All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different? He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time. Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc..... Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again? You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful. The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood? He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before. Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore. This is but one example by the way. How would you represent the average american on this matter? Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example. Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority. I meant as a leader? Would you discourage people from saying Merry Christmas? And how is it you represent the majority but Ron Paul doesn't? I thought 60% or more Americans were still christians... Is that not the majority? Nifty thing about Ron Pauls views, you'd be allowed to say Happy Holidays, and another person could say Merry Christmas. Would this not make more people happy? Or do you think people would be happier being pressured or forced to say Happy Holidays? If you are addressing others who you have no idea what their religion might be, you should say Happy Holidays, it doesn't exclude your Merry Christmas and it includes all others in the statement. It is all inclusive, respectful. I can always tell those who cannot or will not see others in a respectful light and those people insist on saying Merry Christmas to all as though they are going to push their beliefs on them and have no regard for the other person. So, as a leader you would make that law, or would you just make it easy for someone to sue for such a deed? Do you travel much? If you visited an Indian Resevation and they had a ceremony to honor your presence that would be wrong? As a leader I would not write the crap Ron wrote and I would be respectful to all religions. I would not show favor to one over another. My only complaint with Obama has been his Christianity shown publically as our representative. If I went to an Indian celebration in my honor, would I do what? Say Happy Holidays to them? Of course I would if it was a Holiday time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Sat 04/04/09 11:48 PM
|
|
So the fact that he wants people to be allowed to freely express their religion means that he is bringing religion into politics? I ask, should muslim children not be allowed to pray at school when his or her religion requires? All Ron Paul was asking for is tolerance. Did anyone else see anything different? He is not asking for tolerance, he is asking for us to go back in time to a time of religious majority because he thinks it is a "better" time. Republican equals stuck in the mud of old times not allowing for the changing humanity. We are not what we used to be any more and good riddance as far as I am concerned. There were way to many prejudice ideals in the old ways, too much religious dogma, etc..... Ron Paul equals old stuck in the mud ideals that we have outgrown and need to dispel. What specificly made you think he wanted us to use religion as a way of life again? You see i got the impression that he was just promoting tolerance. Like allowing the muslims to pray when they need to. Allowing Christians to say merry christmas, etc. Instead of exercising a Phobia of religion by being forced to be religiously neutral. Wouldn't it be culturally educating to let people practice his or her own religions openly? As long as you are respectful. The problem is they monopolize the holiday as if it theirs. They want Christmas stuff up but do put up ALL RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS OF THE HOLIDAY at their public displays. If you are respectful to ALL you have to include ALL, if not there can be nothing so that all religions are respected, understood? He was not teaching tolerance, he was bashing those who will not allow the Christians the cart blance they are used to. You notice he states that " THE OLD TRADITIONS AND FEELING OF THE HOLIDAY ARE GONE". We have allowed Christianity too much power in this country and it has taken too much advantage of it and now feels put out by not being given the complete power they had before. Ron Paul buys into this and it doesn't represent the average American anymore. This is but one example by the way. How would you represent the average american on this matter? Because I know that all people have different beliefs I gladly wish all Happy Holidays to make sure they are covered in my message. I believe most Americans are at this point of intelligent understanding. Just for example. Ron Paul does not believe this way and it is not representative of the majority. I meant as a leader? Would you discourage people from saying Merry Christmas? And how is it you represent the majority but Ron Paul doesn't? I thought 60% or more Americans were still christians... Is that not the majority? Nifty thing about Ron Pauls views, you'd be allowed to say Happy Holidays, and another person could say Merry Christmas. Would this not make more people happy? Or do you think people would be happier being pressured or forced to say Happy Holidays? If you are addressing others who you have no idea what their religion might be, you should say Happy Holidays, it doesn't exclude your Merry Christmas and it includes all others in the statement. It is all inclusive, respectful. I can always tell those who cannot or will not see others in a respectful light and those people insist on saying Merry Christmas to all as though they are going to push their beliefs on them and have no regard for the other person. So, as a leader you would make that law, or would you just make it easy for someone to sue for such a deed? Do you travel much? If you visited an Indian Resevation and they had a ceremony to honor your presence that would be wrong? As a leader I would not write the crap Ron wrote and I would be respectful to all religions. I would not show favor to one over another. My only complaint with Obama has been his Christianity shown publically as our representative. If I went to an Indian celebration in my honor, would I do what? Say Happy Holidays to them? Of course I would if it was a Holiday time. You didn't answer either of my questions. To qlarify the question about the Indians, i meant would it be wrong for them to celebrate your presence by their own religious ceremony? Now i have a couple more. So, if the grudge you have against Ron Paul is the same you have against Obama, doesn't that make Obama a religious "right winger" in your book? And wouldn't that also mean that you think there is no place for Obama either? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Driven, I am starting a new one so it doesn't get so long.
No, I would not make it a law that all people have to say Happy Holidays but as a law maker I would represent by example and keep my religious beliefs private as they should be. As for the celebration of my presense by any type of human, no there would not be a problem. I would not show a favor to their type of celebration or my type of celebration to respect all types of celebrations. Obama and Ron are different in that Obama has not shown the stuck in the mud philosophy of the old days are the best days. I have an issue with the public display of Christianity because it bolsters their existing feeling of superiority in this society. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Would the greeting you get in Hawaii, where the natives place leis around your neck also be inappropriate?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Drivinmenutz
on
Sun 04/05/09 12:00 AM
|
|
Driven, I am starting a new one so it doesn't get so long. No, I would not make it a law that all people have to say Happy Holidays but as a law maker I would represent by example and keep my religious beliefs private as they should be. As for the celebration of my presense by any type of human, no there would not be a problem. I would not show a favor to their type of celebration or my type of celebration to respect all types of celebrations. Obama and Ron are different in that Obama has not shown the stuck in the mud philosophy of the old days are the best days. I have an issue with the public display of Christianity because it bolsters their existing feeling of superiority in this society. Good idea! So, religion aside. What exactly is this stuck in the mud philosophy? And How is it harmful? Can you give a example? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Driven, I am starting a new one so it doesn't get so long. No, I would not make it a law that all people have to say Happy Holidays but as a law maker I would represent by example and keep my religious beliefs private as they should be. As for the celebration of my presense by any type of human, no there would not be a problem. I would not show a favor to their type of celebration or my type of celebration to respect all types of celebrations. Obama and Ron are different in that Obama has not shown the stuck in the mud philosophy of the old days are the best days. I have an issue with the public display of Christianity because it bolsters their existing feeling of superiority in this society. Good idea! So, religion aside. What exactly is this stuck in the mud philosophy? And How is it harmful? Can you give a example? Religion cannot be put aside on this level because it is a big issue but on the other levels of stuck in the mud, I will give a brief explanation because I am off to bed here in a minute. Our constitution and bill of rights is designed for a country of lessor population and diversity. We have a more diverse type of people now and more of a population to deal with. Smaller government is not a possiblity with the larger population. This is one stick in the mud along with the religious issue. There needs to be consideration in this constitution to include all peoples, gay and straight, religious and non, non gun carryers, etc.... So the constitution must actually grow to include all, it cannot regress nor can we go back to the basics on it. Good night driven. I will check back into here tomorrow. Be well. I must read up some more on this man so I can be more specific next time too. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
TJN
on
Sun 04/05/09 05:01 AM
|
|
If your so against saying Merry Christmas to people, in fear of you might offend their religious beliefs, then why not just say good morning, good afternoon, or good evening to people no offense would be taken reguardless of their religion, unless they were having a bad day then some offense could be taken.
As for saying happy holidays to everyone what if you say it to an athiest? wouldnt that offend them? In my line of work I see people of differernt religions, I say good morning or afternoon or evening to them. I know Jewish and Muslim people who wish me a Merry Cheistmas because they know I'm Christian. It all boils down to having respect respect for all relgions or those who arent relgious. If people could show respect for one another without believing they deserve respect before they will give respect this world would be a better place. JMO Sorry  I dont know enough about Rep. Paul to pass judgement either way on him but what I've read in this thread makes me want to do some research on him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If Dr. Paul saw the way that his platform of peace, liberty and obediance to the Constitution gave way to partisan bickering and a article about tolerance, becoming an issue of religion, he would just shake his head sadly and walk away.
Dr. Paul operates in the Republican party, because his ideas come from the Historic platform that the Conservatives have forgotten or allowed NeoCons to brush aside. For years now, he's been warning this country that we were going to face a huge monetary crisis which very well might end up with the end of the dollar and here we friggin' are. Dr. Paul is, for the most part, the only politician I believe. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You right.
Every day, we are losing rights. Those in power study ways to make us more depend ant on Gov. The language is also changing from referring to the Gov. as Gov. and now calling it the Corporation. Some folks even believe the changes being made to the Constitution are for the betterment of society. When I hear statements like, Stuck in the Mud, I hear Obama quotes, not personal investigation. They just take the word of BHO as holy gospel. So far, he's the only one who is pointing out where the BS is and what the individual can to to have their voices heard. Ya' gotta' know Paul is seen as a real threat when, just having his sticker on your car gets you investigated. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i still see nothing wrong with him. i'd vote for him
|
|
|
|
|
