|
|
Post by Maxflex on Feb 20, 2013 18:31:29 GMT -8
Silly question I know. Fair is different things to different people, and we all (at lest we think we do) try to be fair.
And yet, being fair can mean bending over backwards to let the other person have there say. But is that wrong? If you do not believe what a person is saying should you listen or even try to show them the error of there ways?
Or is being fair, also mean you be polite? Polite without giving up your point of view.
Some think being fair means not enforcing the law as it ism written. Just because a few think it is a bad law. And yet, is there not a system in place to change any law which seems wrong?
|
|
|
|
Post by jayohen on Feb 20, 2013 20:43:22 GMT -8
Silly question I know. Fair is different things to different people, and we all (at lest we think we do) try to be fair. And yet, being fair can mean bending over backwards to let the other person have there say. But is that wrong? If you do not believe what a person is saying should you listen or even try to show them the error of there ways? Or is being fair, also mean you be polite? Polite without giving up your point of view. Some think being fair means not enforcing the law as it ism written. Just because a few think it is a bad law. And yet, is there not a system in place to change any law which seems wrong? Yes indeed, what is fair? Should everything stay exactly that same because some don't care for (or can't handle) change? Is it fair to not correct someone's bad grammar or poor spelling? (which is forbidden on this board) ...because that's insulting the misuser of the language. Isn't that helping them? What's wrong with that? What about new ideas brought about from ongoing improvements in science- or knowledge in general? It's been proven that homosexuality is a biological fact, yet some insist on calling people who are born a certain way deviants-or 'queer'. Shouldn't they insist on left handed people getting labeled as freaks too? Yes, people have a right to be stupid, but they really shouldn't play the victim card when they get helped. And when they're wrong so often, why do they think they should run the country? |
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Feb 21, 2013 14:47:00 GMT -8
Silly question I know. Fair is different things to different people, and we all (at lest we think we do) try to be fair. And yet, being fair can mean bending over backwards to let the other person have there say. But is that wrong? If you do not believe what a person is saying should you listen or even try to show them the error of there ways? Or is being fair, also mean you be polite? Polite without giving up your point of view. Some think being fair means not enforcing the law as it ism written. Just because a few think it is a bad law. And yet, is there not a system in place to change any law which seems wrong? Yes indeed, what is fair? Should everything stay exactly that same because some don't care for (or can't handle) change? Is it fair to not correct someone's bad grammar or poor spelling? (which is forbidden on this board) ...because that's insulting the misuser of the language. Isn't that helping them? What's wrong with that? What about new ideas brought about from ongoing improvements in science- or knowledge in general? It's been proven that homosexuality is a biological fact, yet some insist on calling people who are born a certain way deviants-or 'queer'. Shouldn't they insist on left handed people getting labeled as freaks too? Yes, people have a right to be stupid, but they really shouldn't play the victim card when they get helped. And when they're wrong so often, why do they think they should run the country? Well yes, change happens, but when it comes to homosexually, I have yet to see where 2 guys or 2 gals have had a kid without outside help. So why is the Obama administration interfering with a states choice? Opponents of the Proposition 8 ban believe the president signaled his intention to file a brief when he declared in last month's inaugural address that gays and lesbians must be "treated like anyone else under the law." And yet they are treated the same as far as it goes. Marriage still means to me a man and a woman. Getting together to raise a family. So again, when did the change of 2 same sex couples change so they could have kids without out side help? So it it fair to force a change in the law or peoples view points? I think not. Is it fair to not correct someone's bad grammar or poor spelling? Hard one to answer, are you there teacher? Or do you correct when you have no valid points to make so you use it as a distraction? What about new ideas brought about from ongoing improvements in science- or knowledge in general? Not at governments expense or when it breaks the law.. Yes, people have a right to be stupid, but they really shouldn't play the victim card when they get helped. And when they're wrong so often, why do they think they should run the country? This one you would need to ask Obama. |
|
|
|
Post by jayohen on Feb 21, 2013 17:21:11 GMT -8
[/quote] And yet they are treated the same as far as it goes. Marriage still means to me a man and a woman. Getting together to raise a family. So again, when did the change of 2 same sex couples change so they could have kids without out side help? So it it fair to force a change in the law or peoples view points? I think not. '...marriage means to you...' several recent polls indicate over 50% of American will accept gay marriage, that's change and you probably ought to brace yourself because it will happen. Is it fair to not correct someone's bad grammar or poor spelling? Hard one to answer, are you there teacher? Or do you correct when you have no valid points to make so you use it as a distraction? I believe this started when a sentence was so butchered that the point being made was unintelligible. (and it's their, not there teacher) What about new ideas brought about from ongoing improvements in science- or knowledge in general? Not at governments expense or when it breaks the law.. not quite following your point on this one Yes, people have a right to be stupid, but they really shouldn't play the victim card when they get helped. And when they're wrong so often, why do they think they should run the country? This one you would need to ask Obama. ~chuckle~ I can always count on you for this... the Obama derangement continues. No other answer so slam Our president. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Feb 21, 2013 17:47:22 GMT -8
And yet they are treated the same as far as it goes. Marriage still means to me a man and a woman. Getting together to raise a family. So again, when did the change of 2 same sex couples change so they could have kids without out side help? So it it fair to force a change in the law or peoples view points? I think not. '...marriage means to you...' several recent polls indicate over 50% of American will accept gay marriage, that's change and you probably ought to brace yourself because it will happen. Change does happen, but not all change is good. 50% … In part this is because of the hounding done by liberals to the right, and the right being willing to try and be fair. And I did look, some sites said as high as 54%. But I know that polls can be worded to give the targeted answer you want. Then there is plus minus part of the poll. Which could bring the number below 50%. Of course I have never been polled for my views on this. I wonder just how narrow the target of people polled truly was. believe this started when a sentence was so butchered that the point being made was unintelligible. (and it's their, not there teacher) And yet, you seem to have understood it. Hum … distracting others again I guess. not quite following your point on this one Yes, people have a right to be stupid, but they really shouldn't play the victim card when they get helped. And when they're wrong so often, why do they think they should run the country? This one you would need to ask Obama. Aww, guess you are having trouble understanding I do not believe the government should be into research. ~chuckle~ I can always count on you for this... the Obama derangement continues. No other answer so slam Our president. Well perhaps I am being a bit unfair. But he is such an easy target. He is not a leader. In his first term he got the funding he wanted and yet we still went downhill. Hum … No Budget, hum … Blowing money we do not have on vacations, hum … |
|
|
|
Post by jayohen on Feb 21, 2013 20:03:17 GMT -8
Change does happen, but not all change is good. 50% … In part this is because of the hounding done by liberals to the right, and the right being willing to try and be fair. And I did look, some sites said as high as 54%. But I know that polls can be worded to give the targeted answer you want. Then there is plus minus part of the poll. Which could bring the number below 50%. Of course I have never been polled for my views on this. I wonder just how narrow the target of people polled truly was. Max, you can filibuster this topic all you want, you love to call in to doubt all sorts of polls, you're never quite trusting of most people on most topics, of course you took a few rusted mustard gas canisters in a scientist's yard in Iraq as proof that Saddam had WMDs, so whatever's convenient to you seems to work. Throw all the smoke up at this topic you want, blame liberals, proudly tell me how tolerant conservatives are; just be ready to face this simple fact, Gay marriage will be a reality. Aww, guess you are having trouble understanding I do not believe the government should be into research. You didn't say it, I'm not a mind reader, what do you want? I understand it now that you've said it. I suppose going to the moon was a bad idea...where do you draw the line? Would you rather have no food inspections either? We could have horse meat in our beef like the Brits are getting, maybe nobody would ever know who let Salmonella into Peanut Butter- oh wait, figured that out with food inspections too. Well perhaps I am being a bit unfair. But he is such an easy target. He is not a leader. In his first term he got the funding he wanted and yet we still went downhill. That is a two lies: he did not get what he wanted, he got some of what he wanted- and despite the right's obstruction he pulled us out of recession and got some modest growth in the economy he's announced he's holding off until the sequester situation works itself out- why make a budget for a situation that isn't happening? Blowing money we do not have on vacations, hum … Oh cut this crap out, He pays his own way as legally required, the security comes with the job, I suppose you'd prefer he have no vacation and work all the time, sort of a slave to you, eh? |
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Feb 22, 2013 2:26:12 GMT -8
I must have really hit a nerve with you. Claiming I am “filibuster this topic “ ~chuckle~ I asked what is fair and you seem to have gone on the attack trying to force others to a different point of view. How, like many liberals when you can not make your case, you try the shotgun tactic, which is to sling as much mud as you can and see what sticks. ~chuckle~ Yes, polls are target for selected responses. Also toward selected people. To know this simple fact all you have to do is read the polling questions. ~chuckle~ Silly, I know (and just where did this come from?) Saddam had WMD. We gave them to him when he was our friend. And thanks for admitting he did have WMD. Thanks for the smoke, but no need to make anymore. Most people can see the truth. Truth being a few people play on others just to get there way. Such as homosexually rights. Funny, never knew marriage was a right. And now down in Florida with 3 "parents" listed on a birth certificate I expect the meaning of marriage to change once again. And yes, I know some small groups believe in as many wife's as you can support. That is not the norm, and not the law in most states. Hum … not a mind reader, and yet you often take off on what you think before asking questions. Going to the moon, not on the governments dime. It is not why we pay taxes. Food Inspections, it a part of why we pay taxes. ~chuckle~ since his party helped put us into the recession , and he kept the ball rolling by trying to spend our way out of it. While not making great strides under Bush, we were staying afloat, until Bush cave in by not vetoing the plans of the newly elected Democrats who wanted to bail out there buddies. And buy votes by granting loans to people who could not pay them back. It is not the governments place to give loans or bail out a company which is failing. I doubt if Obama had all this free time for vacations before he stole the election. ~chuckle~ But he has a job to do and from where I sit he has not been doing it. He is not a leader. But if we want to speak about slaves, we, the people have become slaves to the government by allowing the government to grant there own raises, by not giving better oversight to what government does in office. If government waste was cut out, we would not be in the hole so deep. So yea, I must have really hit a nerve with you. ~chuckle~ Then again I have 2 co-workers I hit the same nerve with. And I see it as sad when my fellow co-workers only laugh at them behind there backs due to there views. |
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Feb 22, 2013 3:01:22 GMT -8
I suspect the economy is recovering despite Obama's policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by msguide on Feb 22, 2013 11:38:42 GMT -8
Max, you can filibuster this topic all you want, you love to call in to doubt all sorts of polls, you're never quite trusting of most people on most topics, of course you took a few rusted mustard gas canisters in a scientist's yard in Iraq as proof that Saddam had WMDs, so whatever's convenient to you seems to work. Hold the phone just a minute. If there were no WMDs, then what exactly was used on the Kurds in the mid-late 80s? Thousands were killed outright. Tens of thousands were sevrsy injured, and the rest all have residual health problems like infertility, birth defects, and obscure cancers. Be real careful how you answer that. Nashville has the largest Kurdish population in the US. A lot of conservative Christians stepped up to the plate to find housing, furniture, and jobs for them, and helped them make the transition to life in the IS. |
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Feb 22, 2013 17:29:08 GMT -8
Of course Saddam had WMDs & used them on the Kurds & Iranians. The real mystery seems to be...what happened to them? Exported to Syria? (Might find out soon if they were) On Iraqi ships reportedly sialing aimlessly in the Indian Ocean(No reports on them at all). Secretly destroyed? Egypt used gas/chemical weapons of some sort in Yemen in the 50s or 60s, what happened to those?
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Feb 24, 2013 5:35:03 GMT -8
|
|
