Obama's pandering is really making me sick! Allows anti-gay activist to speak - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-06-2009, 10:35 AM   #91
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post

As I recall, the Civil War was fought over just these principles, and came to a different conclusion re: the primacy and limitations of state government.


phew! way to trot out slavery. what's next? Nazis? we're used to bestiality and incest, but this is certainly ratcheting up the hysteria.

still, it might be more appropriate than you think.

Jumping the broom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2009, 04:13 AM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 12:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
How do you feel about federal level gun control?
I believe in consistency between federal and state laws, and generally speaking, I favor more gun control, not less.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2009, 04:15 AM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 12:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
phew! way to trot out slavery. what's next? Nazis? we're used to bestiality and incest, but this is certainly ratcheting up the hysteria.
Quote me one post where I've resorted to such hysteria. Go ahead. I'll wait. In the meantime, the point I made stands undisputed.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2009, 09:12 AM   #94
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Quote me one post where I've resorted to such hysteria. Go ahead. I'll wait. In the meantime, the point I made stands undisputed.


it's this one Nathan:

Quote:
As I recall, the Civil War was fought over just these principles, and came to a different conclusion re: the primacy and limitations of state government.
how vague! how utterly foreign to the topic of marriage equality! in fact, the only parallel i could see would be if, somehow, after being granted freedom, the citizens of the US held a big vote on whether or not a freed slave was a full citizen and should be grated full rights. after all, the civil war was fought so that states could determine which of their citizens were deserving of all rights, and which of their citizens were deserving of only some rights, because the Civil War underscored the fundamental understanding that some citizens are better than others and thusly deserving of more rights than others. or, better, that we need to literally strip away rights given to a specific minority in order to make sure we know that we're better than they are.

i await the next wild, sloppy historical "parallel" you attempt to make as you try to turn this into some vague issue about "democracy" or "the right of the people to denigrate other people by voting about it."
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2009, 03:17 AM   #95
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Fascists masturbating authoritarians, I especially like this essay
Quote:
Shame on You, Rick Warren
Still more reasons to boot the huckster of Saddleback from the inauguration.
By Christopher Hitchens

It seems to have been agreed by every single media outlet that only one group has the right to challenge Obama's promotion of "Pastor" Rick Warren, and that group is the constituency of politically organized homosexuals. But why should that be? Last week, I pointed out that Warren maintains that heaven is closed to Jews and that his main theological mentor was a crackpot "end-of-days" ranter. Why is this not to count against him as well? Do we need our presidential invocation to be given by a bigmouth clerical businessman who is, furthermore, a religious sectarian? Let me add a little more to the mix. In November 2006, Warren made a trip to Syria and was granted an audience with the human toothbrush who has inherited control of that country and all its citizens. Bashar Assad, the dictator of Syria, is also a religious sectarian—his power base is confined to the Alawite sect—and in the intervals of murdering his critics in Lebanon, he does not expect to receive very many distinguished American or European guests. Of late, the most eminent I can think of have been David Duke, former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, and George Galloway of Britain's so-called Respect Party, and I believe only Galloway—an old fan of Baathism in all its forms—got an audience with the Grand Toothbrush himself.

Whatever time Warren managed to get with the dear bristled leader was not wasted—you should check out the hilarious parody of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza that accidentally results from the official photograph—and whatever hospitality he received from the Syrian authorities did not go unreturned. "Syria," he told his viewers back home by video, is "a moderate country, and the official government rule and position is to not allow extremism of any kind." This is a highly original way to describe a regime that is joined at the hip with the Iranian theocracy, that is the patron of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and that is the official and unabashed host of the fugitive Hamas leadership whose military wing directs massacre operations from Damascus itself. (One might also add that the Syrian Baath Party's veteran defense minister,* Mustafa Tlas, published a book under his own name that accused Jews of using the blood of non-Jewish children for the making of those ever-menacing Passover matzos. I suppose it depends how you define extremism.)

According to an undenied report from the Syrian state news agency, SANA, Warren followed his Assad meeting with another get-together, this time with a mufti. The resulting press communiqué read like this:
The Mufti called for conveying the real image of Syria, national unity and its call to spread peace, amity and justice to the American people which the US has distorted their image throughout the world. Pastor Warren expressed admiration of Syria and the coexistence he saw between Muslims and Christians, stressing that he will convey this image to his church and country.
(As one who has spent time in Syria, I can confirm that the official translations are indeed of that abysmal level. But Warren cannot wriggle out in this fashion, because most of the worst of what he said was recorded and transmitted in his own voice.) Our good pastor also found the time to tell his captive audience—if I may use such an unoriginal phrase in a literal way—that 80 percent of his countrymen opposed the administration's policy in Iraq. Assume yourself, dear reader, to be one of that possible 80 percent. Did you ever ask to be spoken for by Warren, who was a guest of a regime that sponsors al-Qaida infiltrators in Iraq, or to see him denounce the administration in front of an audience of Syrians that had no choice but to listen to whatever it was told? For shame.

And a shame, too, that on Inauguration Day we may also have to stand still—out of respect rather than fear, it is true—and listen to a man who is either a half-witted dupe, a hopeless naif, a cynical tourist who does favors for the powerful, a religious nut bag, a cowardly liar, or perhaps some unappetizing combination of all five. I personally think that the all-five answer is the correct one, because you cannot just find yourself in Syria, smirking into the face of the local despot and being treated like a treasured guest. The thing has to be arranged, and these things take time. So what was the motive? Listen again to Warren's driveling broadcast for the folks back home at the megachurch:

In fact, you know Saul of Tarsus—Saul was a Syrian. St. Paul, on the road to Damascus, had his conversion experience, and so Christians have been here the longest, and they get along with the Muslims, and the Muslims get along with them. There's a lot less tension than in other places.

I can absolutely see what Warren hoped to get out of this sordid little trip, the evidence of which he vainly tried to conceal when it threatened to become embarrassing. He wanted to be on video for his open-mouthed followers as he posed "on the road to Damascus." And he didn't care what deals he had to make, with Baath and Toothbrush Central Command, in order to bring off such a fundraising coup. But now it's the sandals of Obama that are being exploited by the same tub-thumper, and one has not merely a right but a duty to object to having as an inaugural auxiliary a man who is a pushover for anti-Semitism, Islamic sectarianism, "rapture" theology, fascist dictatorship, 10th-rate media trade-offs, and last-minute panicky self-censorship all at the same time. Is there nobody in the Obama camp who can see that this is not just a gay issue? And is there no gay figure who can say that Warren is objectionable for reasons that have more to do with decency, democracy, and the Constitution? The televised, Bible-bashing entrepreneur is perhaps the single most unattractive and embarrassing phenomenon that modern American culture has ever produced. It would be nice if we could begin a new era in the absence of this racket and these racketeers, and if enough people can find their voices, we still may be able to do so.
Still more reasons to boot Rick Warren from the inauguration. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

I quite like the concept of a secularist front; the only problem is that the atheists will invariable antagonise the liberal Christians and the secular humanists will be to politically correct.

I feel that the appeal to tradition which some posters have advanced is a piss poor justification, even if America was founded on biblical principles that doesn't make it alright to have religious ideas guide policy, or to give a stamp of approval.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2009, 03:25 AM   #96
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
phew! way to trot out slavery. what's next? Nazis? we're used to bestiality and incest, but this is certainly ratcheting up the hysteria.

still, it might be more appropriate than you think.

Jumping the broom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hey, I think we all know that the SA was riddled with fags, and the third reich was really about creating a national leather bar.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2009, 10:39 AM   #97
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
Hey, I think we all know that the SA was riddled with fags, and the third reich was really about creating a national leather bar.


to be fair, the homoeroticism on display in "Triumph of the Will," especially in the beginning when the young soldiers are splashing and washing each other at the trough, is really something to see.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2009, 04:35 PM   #98
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 12:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

how vague! how utterly foreign to the topic of marriage equality!...

i await the next wild, sloppy historical "parallel" you attempt to make
News flash Irvine: the article I commented on was about the issue of federalism and states' rights, and declared states' rights to be supreme. This is a direct line of thought that runs back 160 years, as any good student of history would know. The historical parallels are present; sorry if highlighting them is a problem for you. Despite your loud, vocal protests to the contrary, the issue of marriage equality raises some pretty significant issues that are inherent to the principles on which our country was founded -- both pro and con. Would you have us ignore them?
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2009, 04:46 PM   #99
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
News flash Irvine: the article I commented on was about the issue of federalism and states' rights, and declared states' rights to be supreme. This is a direct line of thought that runs back 160 years, as any good student of history would know. The historical parallels are present; sorry if highlighting them is a problem for you. Despite your loud, vocal protests to the contrary, the issue of marriage equality raises some pretty significant issues that are inherent to the principles on which our country was founded -- both pro and con. Would you have us ignore them?


i see nathan.

after posts and posts and posts of "5,000 years" and "biology" and "natural" law and other nonsense stuff like that -- stuff that was, of course, used to justify, say, slavery or stoning your wife to death -- you seem to think that this is really an issue about states rights or democracy? we have DOMA -- what happens in California need not affect Navada. cultural issues have a long, long history of falling under federalism (you know, like Loving vs. Virginia). any good student of history would know that.

what's a problem to me is that it's another smokescreen now being trotted out to disguise a refusal to countenance gay people and their relationships as equal. it's like with the Second Amendment. so many arguments are trotted out -- why not just be honest and say that one likes guns? likewise, let's drop the pretense and just come out and say that you think that there's something wrong with gay people and they do not deserve to be treated equally under the law.

what's much more of a threat to our democracy is that our courts affirmed an inherent right, and then the "people" of California were allowed to strip that right away from a specific, targeted, easily identified, historically despised minority.

again, nathan, i await your answer to the question: what specific rights must gay couples be denied?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2009, 07:55 PM   #100
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,338
Local Time: 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

again, nathan, i await your answer to the question: what specific rights must gay couples be denied?

I'm waiting as well. Good thing I'm not holding my breath.
__________________
martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2009, 09:28 PM   #101
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:22 AM
Homosexual men, dare I say all men, may not exist in a few centuries, so this debate may be pointless
Quote:
Mice created without fathers

Scientists have created two female mice without fertilising the eggs they grew from, the journal Nature says.
The eggs had two sets of chromosomes from two female mice, rather than one from the mother and one from the father as in a normal embryo.

The phenomenon, called parthenogenesis, never occurs naturally in mammals.

Some researchers say the procedures may be applied to stem cell research, but the scientists who carried out the work say it would not yet work in humans.

Mammal difference

Tomohiro Kono and colleagues switched off a key gene in the donor eggs which affected imprinting - a barrier to parthenogenesis in mammals.

"Insects can reproduce by parthenogenesis. Even chickens can be made to reproduce by parthenogenesis. I wanted to find out why mammals are different," Dr Kono, of Tokyo University of Agriculture, Japan, told BBC News Online.

His team injected the genetic material from immature mouse eggs into mature eggs with their own set of chromosomes. They then "activated" the combined eggs, prompting them to start growing as embryos.

By blocking expression of a gene called H19 in the immature mouse eggs, the researchers increased the activity of another gene called Igf2.

Igf2 manufactures a protein responsible for regulating growth in the developing foetus.

These genes are said to be imprinted. Imprinting means that some genes are working in maternal DNA but switched off in paternal DNA, or vice versa. They are unequally expressed.

The genetic manipulation carried out by the researchers gave the genes a more paternal character.

Low efficiency

But as a result of this modification, just two out of 598 mice embryos made it to full term.

"The efficiency of this technique is rather low. So it's not a technique that can be readily adapted for practical purposes," Professor Azim Surani, an expert in imprinting at the University of Cambridge, UK, told BBC News Online.

One of the surviving mice was used for testing, while another, which the researchers named Kaguya after a Japanese fairy tale character, was allowed to grow into an adult.

"To me it is striking that a relatively simple genetic modification, where they took away the gene and its regulatory sequences, allowed these embryos to develop," Marisa Bartolomei, associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania, US, told BBC News Online.

Researchers were quick to head off suggestions that the technique could play a role in fertility treatment, at least for the moment. And it is not even known whether it would work in humans.

'Not necessary'

"This is a very complicated thing. So no, It is impossible to do this experiment in a human. And I don't want to do it," said Dr Kono.

However, some researchers said the procedures could - in theory - have applications in stem cell research.

Dr Bartolomei suggested that making embryos without the need for fertilisation might allow researchers to circumvent political and ethical obstacles to using stem cells.

"I would expect that just because it's parthenogenetic, the public wouldn't discriminate between that and the more traditional way of doing it," said Dr William Colledge, of the University of Cambridge.

Professor Surani commented: "Parthenogenetic stem cells were made many years ago. This latest procedure is a very complicated one and it's not necessary for stem cell research."
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Mice created without fathers

That is from four years ago, its a very real possibility that we could end up with a Herland.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2009, 09:49 PM   #102
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
after posts and posts and posts of "5,000 years" and "biology" and "natural" law and other nonsense stuff like that -- stuff that was, of course, used to justify, say, slavery or stoning your wife to death -- you seem to think that this is really an issue about states rights or democracy? we have DOMA -- what happens in California need not affect Navada. cultural issues have a long, long history of falling under federalism (you know, like Loving vs. Virginia). any good student of history would know that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Strategy

Quote:
"You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

- Lee Atwater, Republican strategist and later National Committee Chairman under Reagan and Bush, Sr., in an "anonymous" interview in 1981 later revealed to be him posthumously in the 1990s
__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2009, 12:00 PM   #103
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:22 PM
"protect traditional marriage" = faggot burn in hell
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2009, 05:11 PM   #104
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Gay bishop to open inaugural weekend

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/17340
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2009, 08:30 AM   #105
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 06:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Gay bishop to open inaugural weekend

Gay bishop to open inaugural weekend - Yahoo! News
yeah i saw that before too.

how dare obama allow a gay bishop to speak! haha, i just the title of this thread.

now he's got both sides of the spectrum covered! i thought he was a liberal!

i'm yelling because i'm angry, but not really, not at all!
__________________

__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com