Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 18:04:09 GMT -5
You're missing the point. A lot of conservative Christians think homosexuals should be able to marry. By the media focussing on the ones that are against it the general public is left thinking all conservative Christians are like that. Take cops for example. Many probably think this country has a problem with racist cops killing unarmed black men because the media focusses on it. In the process good cops are being harmed because the media only focusses on bad ones. The converse is true BTW. Blacks are actually less likely to be killed by cops then whites. Most people in this country support gay marriage. That's why Hillary Clinton and Barrak Obama both changed their positions on it. Clinton's husband signed DOMA into law and Obama openly said he was against gay marriage when he was elected. Now that the majority of Americans are for it they've both flip flopped. That's not a story though. Conservative Christians not flip flopping is. Why? BTW, most Americans are Christians. So how are a majority of Americans for gay marriage when Christians are supposedly against it? The thesis that conservative Christians are against gay marriage just doesn't hold up mathematically. Personally, I don't care if the church loses its tax exempt status. I don't think anyone should be tax exempt. That doesn't mean that I don't think the government will go after it though. Of course they will. They didn't before, but before they didn't supposed gay marriage. Now they do. Why? They want that tax revenue. No one is going to overturn the gay marriage ruling because the country is for it. Just like the country is being programmed to think all conservative Christians are discriminatory. When the government goes after that tax money people will be okay with it. The government has a history of trying to force Christians to go against their own religion. You remember Obamacare don't you? Forcing Christians to pay for abortions. You remember that right? Of course forcing gay marriage is on their radar. I don't have to disagree with the government to see it coming. I just pay attention to what's going on. Think about it? If this was about equal rights then why did it take so long? Where do you get your news? Lol, where do you get your news from? I get it though, if I respond with the wrong source you'll try to discredit what I said. Maybe you should try debating one of the points I made instead? In answer to your question, I don't get it from any one source because I believe there's bias in the media. I absorb my news from all available sources and attempt to divine the truth. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 1:22:48 GMT -5
Where do you get your news? Lol, where do you get your news from? I get it though, if I respond with the wrong source you'll try to discredit what I said. Maybe you should try debating one of the points I made instead? In answer to your question, I don't get it from any one source because I believe there's bias in the media. I absorb my news from all available sources and attempt to divine the truth. I just want to know, because that whole "christians being forced to pay for abortions" thing is complete bs and not true at all, just made up by conservative media such as redstate and Christian today. Also the whole "if this is equal rights, why did it take so long" thing.. Exactly, why did it take so long?? Why was segregation still around for so long?? Why did women not get equal rights for so long??? Some alternative motive right? |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 5:18:25 GMT -5
With the internet I hate pop up ads and attention seeking idiots on Facebook that update it every second of their life about the most IRRELEVANT stuff people do not give a flying (trying to stop cussing) about...
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 7:38:37 GMT -5
Lol, where do you get your news from? I get it though, if I respond with the wrong source you'll try to discredit what I said. Maybe you should try debating one of the points I made instead? In answer to your question, I don't get it from any one source because I believe there's bias in the media. I absorb my news from all available sources and attempt to divine the truth. I just want to know, because that whole "christians being forced to pay for abortions" thing is complete bs and not true at all, just made up by conservative media such as redstate and Christian today. Also the whole "if this is equal rights, why did it take so long" thing.. Exactly, why did it take so long?? Why was segregation still around for so long?? Why did women not get equal rights for so long??? Some alternative motive right? Christian employers were required to provide their employees health insurance that covered the morning after pill. This is a matter of public record and was the basis of the Hobby Lobby case. It was not as you call it a matter of "conservative bs". What was bs was how the media spun the issue as conservatives not wanting women to be allowed to have birth control. That was a liberal media lie. It was never about birth control. Hobby Lobby did provide their employees health insurance that covered birth control before Obamacare. They just didn't want to pay for the abortion pill. So, as you can see, you've been misinformed. The government did in fact attempt to force Christians to pay for abortions through the implementation of Obamacare. I can also answer the question as to why it took so long. The answer is two fold. First, public opinion. We, the peasants, are now for marriage equality. Therefore it is politically safe for the politicians in charge to allow it to happen now. Secondly, the insurance companies have given the politicians permission to allow it to pass. Previously they didn't want to incur the extra liability so they prevented it from happening. As a reward for the government compelling the healthy to having insurance they don't need the insurance companies have permitted politicians to allow marriage equality become a reality. |
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Jul 5, 2015 14:05:51 GMT -5
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth with the tax issue. You began your post by saying that they should pay taxes and it end by saying that they govt. will force churches to shut down by taking away their exempt status. So which is it? As to whether or not someone will make an issue with a church refusing to marry them... that's just too bad for them. President Obama has already said that no one will be forced to do anything. Someone can try to make an issue of it but they won't win. Like I said, no Christian church is forced to marry Jewish couples so why would it be any different with gay couples? I find myself saying the same two things to you over and over again and I'm not sure why the information isn't getting through: 1. There is no liberal conspiracy in the mainstream media to make conservatives or Christians look bad. 2. When I say "this is what conservatives are saying" I'm taking about something that I have heard a conservative say directly. This isn't someone's interpretation of a conservative point. It is something directly from the mouth of a conservative, usually a Christian, person. In fact it is always from Fox News unless otherwise noted. I'm constantly telling you they this is what conservatives are saying and you're going "No, they are putting that in our mouths because they are against us!" No one is against you. There is no conspiracy. These are the beliefs and talking points of the party that you identify with. Being in denial of reality won't change that. No one has painted any entire group to be anything. I have never once said that all Christians are bad, however I have said that all Christians who say and do these certain things are bad. There is a world of difference there. I'm not talking out of both sides of my mouth. When I explain to you the conservative Christian point of view, I'm not speaking for myself, I'm just telling you how it is. The media is left leaning. I'm not suggesting there's a conspiracy, just that the most of the people in the media happen to be on the left. Same thing goes for the public sector and education system. That's just statistics. They can deny there's bias, but it's obvious to anyone with an open mind. Here's an article for you to read. www.mrc.org/media-bias-101/journalists-admitting-liberal-bias-part-oneJust so you know where I'm coming from, I don't self identify. I try to understand both point of views. I also enjoy talking politics, religion, philosophy, etc. conversations are boring when people agree, and you're fun to talk to. You shouldn't just assume that since I understand why conservative Christians are upset that I agree with them. I don't. I just get it. The Media Research Center is a right-wing group whose admitted goal is to find the liberal conspiracy in the media so us take whatever they say on the issue with a grain of salt. You say you identify with both sides but yet all I ever hear from you are regurgitated conservative taking points. Why is that? |
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Jul 5, 2015 14:16:57 GMT -5
I just want to know, because that whole "christians being forced to pay for abortions" thing is complete bs and not true at all, just made up by conservative media such as redstate and Christian today. Also the whole "if this is equal rights, why did it take so long" thing.. Exactly, why did it take so long?? Why was segregation still around for so long?? Why did women not get equal rights for so long??? Some alternative motive right? Christian employers were required to provide their employees health insurance that covered the morning after pill. This is a matter of public record and was the basis of the Hobby Lobby case. It was not as you call it a matter of "conservative bs". What was bs was how the media spun the issue as conservatives not wanting women to be allowed to have birth control. That was a liberal media lie. It was never about birth control. Hobby Lobby did provide their employees health insurance that covered birth control before Obamacare. They just didn't want to pay for the abortion pill. So, as you can see, you've been misinformed. The government did in fact attempt to force Christians to pay for abortions through the implementation of Obamacare. I can also answer the question as to why it took so long. The answer is two fold. First, public opinion. We, the peasants, are now for marriage equality. Therefore it is politically safe for the politicians in charge to allow it to happen now. Secondly, the insurance companies have given the politicians permission to allow it to pass. Previously they didn't want to incur the extra liability so they prevented it from happening. As a reward for the government compelling the healthy to having insurance they don't need the insurance companies have permitted politicians to allow marriage equality become a reality. Hobby Lobby gets all or nearly all of their inventory from China who has a well-known atrocious human rights record. Hobby Lobby is fine with China murdering all the babies they want just because they are undesirable girls but a pill to prevent pregnancy is an affront to God? That doesn't sound like conservative bs to you??? That ruling just might be the most damaging in all of American history. Seriously. Because that pill was proven to not be an abortion pill. That argument was a lie. Hobby Lobby's case basically was "We don't care what the facts are, we don't care what the science is; our religious belief is that this is an abortion, even if it isn't." Abs the Supreme Court ruled that religious belief, no matter how incorrect, trumps fact. That should terrify you although I'm sure it doesn't. And maybe I read the rest of your post wrong... I really hope I did... but did you actually say that the insurance companies allowed the legalization of gay marriage? |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 14:38:06 GMT -5
I'm not talking out of both sides of my mouth. When I explain to you the conservative Christian point of view, I'm not speaking for myself, I'm just telling you how it is. The media is left leaning. I'm not suggesting there's a conspiracy, just that the most of the people in the media happen to be on the left. Same thing goes for the public sector and education system. That's just statistics. They can deny there's bias, but it's obvious to anyone with an open mind. Here's an article for you to read. www.mrc.org/media-bias-101/journalists-admitting-liberal-bias-part-oneJust so you know where I'm coming from, I don't self identify. I try to understand both point of views. I also enjoy talking politics, religion, philosophy, etc. conversations are boring when people agree, and you're fun to talk to. You shouldn't just assume that since I understand why conservative Christians are upset that I agree with them. I don't. I just get it. The Media Research Center is a right-wing group whose admitted goal is to find the liberal conspiracy in the media so us take whatever they say on the issue with a grain of salt. You say you identify with both sides but yet all I ever hear from you are regurgitated conservative taking points. Why is that? Are you denying that there are more liberals in the media/ Hollywood than conservatives or do you believe that they are somehow able to not let their politics influence them? Because either way I'm sure you're wrong. The reason you see me "regurgitating conservative talking points" is because this forum has more liberals than conservatives on it. It wouldn't be much of a conversation if everyone just agreed with each other. That's not 100% true anyway. I've already posted on this forum that I support gay marriage. That became a liberal position after Obama got trounced during the midterms. So maybe you're just not paying attention or being selective with your focus. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 14:43:55 GMT -5
Christian employers were required to provide their employees health insurance that covered the morning after pill. This is a matter of public record and was the basis of the Hobby Lobby case. It was not as you call it a matter of "conservative bs". What was bs was how the media spun the issue as conservatives not wanting women to be allowed to have birth control. That was a liberal media lie. It was never about birth control. Hobby Lobby did provide their employees health insurance that covered birth control before Obamacare. They just didn't want to pay for the abortion pill. So, as you can see, you've been misinformed. The government did in fact attempt to force Christians to pay for abortions through the implementation of Obamacare. I can also answer the question as to why it took so long. The answer is two fold. First, public opinion. We, the peasants, are now for marriage equality. Therefore it is politically safe for the politicians in charge to allow it to happen now. Secondly, the insurance companies have given the politicians permission to allow it to pass. Previously they didn't want to incur the extra liability so they prevented it from happening. As a reward for the government compelling the healthy to having insurance they don't need the insurance companies have permitted politicians to allow marriage equality become a reality. Hobby Lobby gets all or nearly all of their inventory from China who has a well-known atrocious human rights record. Hobby Lobby is fine with China murdering all the babies they want just because they are undesirable girls but a pill to prevent pregnancy is an affront to God? That doesn't sound like conservative bs to you??? That ruling just might be the most damaging in all of American history. Seriously. Because that pill was proven to not be an abortion pill. That argument was a lie. Hobby Lobby's case basically was "We don't care what the facts are, we don't care what the science is; our religious belief is that this is an abortion, even if it isn't." Abs the Supreme Court ruled that religious belief, no matter how incorrect, trumps fact. That should terrify you although I'm sure it doesn't. And maybe I read the rest of your post wrong... I really hope I did... but did you actually say that the insurance companies allowed the legalization of gay marriage? Where Hobby Lobby gets their product from is a straw man argument. Life starts at conception. The abortion pill prevents a fertilized egg from attaching to a uterun wall after the baby has been conceived. That's science. I believe your opinion on this subject has been tainted by liberal spin. I did argue that insurance companies allowed the legalization of gay marriage. Are you denying corporate influence on politics? Bernie Sanders and I don't approve. |
|
|
|
Post by @.@ Hempsterdance @.@ on Jul 6, 2015 7:00:41 GMT -5
With the internet I hate pop up ads and attention seeking idiots on Facebook that update it every second of their life about the most IRRELEVANT stuff people do not give a flying (trying to stop cussing) about... But but but we must see what they had for lunch and how they took a poop right after lunch with details of the graffiti on the bathroom walls. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2015 12:52:49 GMT -5
I just want to know, because that whole "christians being forced to pay for abortions" thing is complete bs and not true at all, just made up by conservative media such as redstate and Christian today. Also the whole "if this is equal rights, why did it take so long" thing.. Exactly, why did it take so long?? Why was segregation still around for so long?? Why did women not get equal rights for so long??? Some alternative motive right? Christian employers were required to provide their employees health insurance that covered the morning after pill. This is a matter of public record and was the basis of the Hobby Lobby case. It was not as you call it a matter of "conservative bs". What was bs was how the media spun the issue as conservatives not wanting women to be allowed to have birth control. That was a liberal media lie. It was never about birth control. Hobby Lobby did provide their employees health insurance that covered birth control before Obamacare. They just didn't want to pay for the abortion pill. So, as you can see, you've been misinformed. The government did in fact attempt to force Christians to pay for abortions through the implementation of Obamacare. I can also answer the question as to why it took so long. The answer is two fold. First, public opinion. We, the peasants, are now for marriage equality. Therefore it is politically safe for the politicians in charge to allow it to happen now. Secondly, the insurance companies have given the politicians permission to allow it to pass. Previously they didn't want to incur the extra liability so they prevented it from happening. As a reward for the government compelling the healthy to having insurance they don't need the insurance companies have permitted politicians to allow marriage equality become a reality. I wasn't wrongfully informed, many insurance companies have covered birth control as well as emergency contraceptive or the "abortion pill." The employees should have the right to have their insurance cover their medical needs. Their old insurance probably covered it as, just needed to make flub about it one the aca was put into order. An employer shouldn't enforce they're beliefs on their employees and the employee insurance plan. Honestly, I'm not going to argue anymore about this. it's obvious where you stand politically and it's obvious where I stand. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2015 13:23:22 GMT -5
Christian employers were required to provide their employees health insurance that covered the morning after pill. This is a matter of public record and was the basis of the Hobby Lobby case. It was not as you call it a matter of "conservative bs". What was bs was how the media spun the issue as conservatives not wanting women to be allowed to have birth control. That was a liberal media lie. It was never about birth control. Hobby Lobby did provide their employees health insurance that covered birth control before Obamacare. They just didn't want to pay for the abortion pill. So, as you can see, you've been misinformed. The government did in fact attempt to force Christians to pay for abortions through the implementation of Obamacare. I can also answer the question as to why it took so long. The answer is two fold. First, public opinion. We, the peasants, are now for marriage equality. Therefore it is politically safe for the politicians in charge to allow it to happen now. Secondly, the insurance companies have given the politicians permission to allow it to pass. Previously they didn't want to incur the extra liability so they prevented it from happening. As a reward for the government compelling the healthy to having insurance they don't need the insurance companies have permitted politicians to allow marriage equality become a reality. I wasn't wrongfully informed, many insurance companies have covered birth control as well as emergency contraceptive or the "abortion pill." The employees should have the right to have their insurance cover their medical needs. Their old insurance probably covered it as, just needed to make flub about it one the aca was put into order. An employer shouldn't enforce they're beliefs on their employees and the employee insurance plan. Honestly, I'm not going to argue anymore about this. it's obvious where you stand politically and it's obvious where I stand. You are wrongfully informed if you believe the health insurance provided by Hobby Lobby before Obamacare covered the abortion pill. It didn't. You also seem a little misinformed in general about the Hobby Lobby case. It wasn't about Hobby Lobby attempting to force their beliefs on their employees. They weren't trying to prevent them from having abortions, they just didn't want to pay for them. In a round about way, you're giving into the original point I made which you initially disputed. I said the government has demonstrated that they are willing to force religions to do something they don't want to do, you disagreed. I gave you a concrete example of how they've done just that and now you're kind of arguing that it's okay. I think maybe you ought to clarify your position. You seem to be for the government compelling individuals to do something they don't want to do so as long as you agree with it. Am I right in that assumption? As for where I stand, I'm not sure it's as clear as you think as I haven't stated what I think about the subject, I'm merely stating the facts of what happened. Please don't confuse the facts with my opinion. I haven't offered an opinion yet. |
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Jul 6, 2015 15:18:21 GMT -5
kayfabe this is getting a bit disorganized so I'm going to put all my responses into one post. Hopefully you can still follow along because it's just going to be a bunch of random responses. What does Hollywood have to do with the media? And yes, I do believe that a good journalist can separate their personal opinions from their job. In fact, it's in their job description. Does this forum have more liberals? I think you just see liberals everywhere you go. Obama didn't get trounced in the midterms. There were far more votes cast for Democratic candidates nationwide. The only reason the Republicans won is because they rigged the system with their [should be illegal] voter suppression laws and gerrymandering. But even if that weren't true that election had the lowest turn out since the 1940's so I wouldn't say that the majority of the public made their voices heard. Hobby Lobby is anti-anything resembling abortion when Darky McDemocrat tells then to do it despite the fact that their entire business comes from a country with an official policy of killing babies and you think the two have nothing to do with one another? I'm not denying the corporate influence on politics, I just don't see the direct connection between the insurance industry and gay marriage. I would imagine they as an official policy, they don't care. Plus that comment came or of nowhere.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2015 15:46:00 GMT -5
kayfabe this is getting a bit disorganized so I'm going to put all my responses into one post. Hopefully you can still follow along because it's just going to be a bunch of random responses. What does Hollywood have to do with the media? And yes, I do believe that a good journalist can separate their personal opinions from their job. In fact, it's in their job description. Does this forum have more liberals? I think you just see liberals everywhere you go. Obama didn't get trounced in the midterms. There were far more votes cast for Democratic candidates nationwide. The only reason the Republicans won is because they rigged the system with their [should be illegal] voter suppression laws and gerrymandering. But even if that weren't true that election had the lowest turn out since the 1940's so I wouldn't say that the majority of the public made their voices heard. Hobby Lobby is anti-anything resembling abortion when Darky McDemocrat tells then to do it despite the fact that their entire business comes from a country with an official policy of killing babies and you think the two have nothing to do with one another? I'm not denying the corporate influence on politics, I just don't see the direct connection between the insurance industry and gay marriage. I would imagine they as an official policy, they don't care. Plus that comment came or of nowhere. When I use the term media I'm using it in its broader sense, as in all forms of media: the news, movies, television, books, magazines, basically anything one could consume. All of it shapes our attitudes and outlooks on the world whether we realize it or not. I want you to think about the premise of your argument for a moment. You discount a source I've provided by labeling it conservative and therefore unreliable. You them acquiesce to an extent that many journalists are in fact liberal but proceed to argue afterwards that it's okay because separating their politics from their reporting is their job. So let me guess, reporting is only bias when conservatives do it? Obama got trounced in both of his midterm elections. That's just what happened. That's just the facts of what happened. Sorry. To your point, not voting for the democrat speaks volumes. I've already made the point that the democrats have failed their constituents. In a round about way, by bringing up low turnout you're agreeing with me. Where Hobby Lobby gets their product has nothing to do with the government forcing Hobby Lobby to pay for someone's abortion. In order to dispute what I've said you need to show that the government isn't forcing them to pay for abortions. Since they are, you can't. Insurance companies are some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington. I mean, we all know big business controls politics, right? It's why we got that Medicaid expansion that pays for prescriptions under Bush and why we now have Obamacare. They're both big wet kisses to big Pharma and big Insurance. Now that everyone has to buy insurance no matter what, and that everyone has to buy the best insurance, then it doesn't really matter if extra liability is added. Hence, it's okay for gays to marry. |
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Jul 6, 2015 22:43:23 GMT -5
kayfabe this is getting a bit disorganized so I'm going to put all my responses into one post. Hopefully you can still follow along because it's just going to be a bunch of random responses. What does Hollywood have to do with the media? And yes, I do believe that a good journalist can separate their personal opinions from their job. In fact, it's in their job description. Does this forum have more liberals? I think you just see liberals everywhere you go. Obama didn't get trounced in the midterms. There were far more votes cast for Democratic candidates nationwide. The only reason the Republicans won is because they rigged the system with their [should be illegal] voter suppression laws and gerrymandering. But even if that weren't true that election had the lowest turn out since the 1940's so I wouldn't say that the majority of the public made their voices heard. Hobby Lobby is anti-anything resembling abortion when Darky McDemocrat tells then to do it despite the fact that their entire business comes from a country with an official policy of killing babies and you think the two have nothing to do with one another? I'm not denying the corporate influence on politics, I just don't see the direct connection between the insurance industry and gay marriage. I would imagine they as an official policy, they don't care. Plus that comment came or of nowhere. When I use the term media I'm using it in its broader sense, as in all forms of media: the news, movies, television, books, magazines, basically anything one could consume. All of it shapes our attitudes and outlooks on the world whether we realize it or not. I want you to think about the premise of your argument for a moment. You discount a source I've provided by labeling it conservative and therefore unreliable. You them acquiesce to an extent that many journalists are in fact liberal but proceed to argue afterwards that it's okay because separating their politics from their reporting is their job. So let me guess, reporting is only bias when conservatives do it? Obama got trounced in both of his midterm elections. That's just what happened. That's just the facts of what happened. Sorry. To your point, not voting for the democrat speaks volumes. I've already made the point that the democrats have failed their constituents. In a round about way, by bringing up low turnout you're agreeing with me. Where Hobby Lobby gets their product has nothing to do with the government forcing Hobby Lobby to pay for someone's abortion. In order to dispute what I've said you need to show that the government isn't forcing them to pay for abortions. Since they are, you can't. Insurance companies are some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington. I mean, we all know big business controls politics, right? It's why we got that Medicaid expansion that pays for prescriptions under Bush and why we now have Obamacare. They're both big wet kisses to big Pharma and big Insurance. Now that everyone has to buy insurance no matter what, and that everyone has to buy the best insurance, then it doesn't really matter if extra liability is added. Hence, it's okay for gays to marry. You have a very bizarre idea of what the word fact means. I discounted you using the MRC as a source because their stated propose for existence is to find liberal bias. Just like the issue with Fox News, I didn't label then as anything. They labeled themselves. When you want to find something you're going to find it if you look hard enough, even if there isn't anything there. How you can compare that an actual journalist is beyond me. That's like looking for a legitimate contest at WrestleMania. I never said that many journalists are liberal. I didn't say a word ant the political leanings of anyone. I simply said that whatever their personal beliefs may be, it is their job to not let that bias get in the way off their reporting. In other words, they have to act like adults. There were over 5 million more votes cast for Democratic candidates than Republicans in the last midterm alone. Those are the facts. I went looking for facts to back up the claim I made above and not surprisingly I also found articles proving the same thing happened during Obama's first midterm too. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-03-19/republicans-win-congress-as-democrats-get-most-voteswww.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/11/09/house-democrats-got-more-votes-than-house-republicans-yet-boehner-says-hes-got-a-mandatewww.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/19/steny-hoyer/steny-hoyer-house-democrats-won-majority-2012-popu/That should make the point that people actually are voting for democrats in higher numbers than republicans but those are probably just more liberal lies, right? I was young to find some information about the two pills in question in the Hobby Lobby case but I found something far more interesting. According to documents that Hobby Lobby filed with the Department of Labor, that while they were suing the government over their religious liberties while heavily investing in companies that make the very pills they claimed to be against. This had nothing to do with religion, liberty, insurance, contraception or abortion. This is Hobby Lobby playing politics. If you can't see the hypocrisy here then there is something seriously wrong with you. www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-401k-discovered-to-be-investor-in-numerous-abortion-and-contraception-products-while-claiming-religious-objection/And speaking of you having absolutely no idea what you ate talking about... The two pills in question are the morning after pill after the week after pill. They are emergency C O N T R A C E P T I V E S. They do not cause abortion. They prevent conception, and that is not the same thing. ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecabt.htmlI've noticed a pattern of behavior from you. You have a habit of making these wild claims and providing virtually no evidence to back up anything you say. The one time you provided a source it was from a group that openly admits to being biased. Meanwhile you dismiss anything you don't want to hear as liberal lies. Everything you don't like just so happens to be a lie from the left. It's very convenient how that works out for you so often. You never accept being wrong. The possibility that you might be wrong is never an option. Never. Ironically, nearly everything you say is wrong. You live in a world of lies. EDIT: Forgot to touch on your Obamacare nonsense. The insurance industry fought hard and spent a lot of money to prevent that from becoming law. So you're wrong there just like you're wrong about the insurance companies having anything to do with gay marriage. That doesn't even make any sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Jul 7, 2015 0:48:57 GMT -5
My mom believes a lot of stuff she gets in emails that isn't true My mom falls for stuff she gets in the mail or on the phone. She'll get letters that either have an eagle symbol or say FEDERAL insurance/bank/credit/medical and she'll think it's something from the government. Same with phone calls. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2015 4:43:31 GMT -5
When I use the term media I'm using it in its broader sense, as in all forms of media: the news, movies, television, books, magazines, basically anything one could consume. All of it shapes our attitudes and outlooks on the world whether we realize it or not. I want you to think about the premise of your argument for a moment. You discount a source I've provided by labeling it conservative and therefore unreliable. You them acquiesce to an extent that many journalists are in fact liberal but proceed to argue afterwards that it's okay because separating their politics from their reporting is their job. So let me guess, reporting is only bias when conservatives do it? Obama got trounced in both of his midterm elections. That's just what happened. That's just the facts of what happened. Sorry. To your point, not voting for the democrat speaks volumes. I've already made the point that the democrats have failed their constituents. In a round about way, by bringing up low turnout you're agreeing with me. Where Hobby Lobby gets their product has nothing to do with the government forcing Hobby Lobby to pay for someone's abortion. In order to dispute what I've said you need to show that the government isn't forcing them to pay for abortions. Since they are, you can't. Insurance companies are some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington. I mean, we all know big business controls politics, right? It's why we got that Medicaid expansion that pays for prescriptions under Bush and why we now have Obamacare. They're both big wet kisses to big Pharma and big Insurance. Now that everyone has to buy insurance no matter what, and that everyone has to buy the best insurance, then it doesn't really matter if extra liability is added. Hence, it's okay for gays to marry. You have a very bizarre idea of what the word fact means. I discounted you using the MRC as a source because their stated propose for existence is to find liberal bias. Just like the issue with Fox News, I didn't label then as anything. They labeled themselves. When you want to find something you're going to find it if you look hard enough, even if there isn't anything there. How you can compare that an actual journalist is beyond me. That's like looking for a legitimate contest at WrestleMania. I never said that many journalists are liberal. I didn't say a word ant the political leanings of anyone. I simply said that whatever their personal beliefs may be, it is their job to not let that bias get in the way off their reporting. In other words, they have to act like adults. There were over 5 million more votes cast for Democratic candidates than Republicans in the last midterm alone. Those are the facts. I went looking for facts to back up the claim I made above and not surprisingly I also found articles proving the same thing happened during Obama's first midterm too. www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-03-19/republicans-win-congress-as-democrats-get-most-voteswww.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/11/09/house-democrats-got-more-votes-than-house-republicans-yet-boehner-says-hes-got-a-mandatewww.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/19/steny-hoyer/steny-hoyer-house-democrats-won-majority-2012-popu/That should make the point that people actually are voting for democrats in higher numbers than republicans but those are probably just more liberal lies, right? I was young to find some information about the two pills in question in the Hobby Lobby case but I found something far more interesting. According to documents that Hobby Lobby filed with the Department of Labor, that while they were suing the government over their religious liberties while heavily investing in companies that make the very pills they claimed to be against. This had nothing to do with religion, liberty, insurance, contraception or abortion. This is Hobby Lobby playing politics. If you can't see the hypocrisy here then there is something seriously wrong with you. www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-401k-discovered-to-be-investor-in-numerous-abortion-and-contraception-products-while-claiming-religious-objection/And speaking of you having absolutely no idea what you ate talking about... The two pills in question are the morning after pill after the week after pill. They are emergency C O N T R A C E P T I V E S. They do not cause abortion. They prevent conception, and that is not the same thing. ec.princeton.edu/questions/ecabt.htmlI've noticed a pattern of behavior from you. You have a habit of making these wild claims and providing virtually no evidence to back up anything you say. The one time you provided a source it was from a group that openly admits to being biased. Meanwhile you dismiss anything you don't want to hear as liberal lies. Everything you don't like just so happens to be a lie from the left. It's very convenient how that works out for you so often. You never accept being wrong. The possibility that you might be wrong is never an option. Never. Ironically, nearly everything you say is wrong. You live in a world of lies. EDIT: Forgot to touch on your Obamacare nonsense. The insurance industry fought hard and spent a lot of money to prevent that from becoming law. So you're wrong there just like you're wrong about the insurance companies having anything to do with gay marriage. That doesn't even make any sense. So basically what you're saying is that how the big cities vote is how the whole county should go? That the liberal elite in their ivory towers should dictate the direction of the whole country? Just because liberal strong holds can hook minorities on government dependency then bus them to the polls and threaten to shut down the gravy train if they don't vote democrat doesn't mean Obama didn't get trounced. It just means regular people aren't as easy to buy as politicians. 5 million more votes in New York, San Francisco, and the like means nothing to the rest of the country where people like to fend for themselves. Also, you haven't really done anything to show that the media isn't left leaning. You've just kind of said they aren't because it's their job not to be. Maybe you don't see it because you're left leaning and you just agree with them so you figure they're reporting the unbiased facts. I can watch the same news story covered different ways by different outlets and see how one organization over the next is trying to shape my perception of the story. Just because I can see that outlets like CNN and MSNBC are in the tank for the democrats and you deny it doesn't mean they're not. It just means you have blinders on. And how about that movie Tomorrow Land. Please tell me that movie didn't try to forward a liberal agenda. You get how 401ks work right? Please tell me you believe that Hobby Lobby instructed the person handling their 401ks to invest in pharmaceutical companies that developed abortion pills because they wanted their employees to be able to retire off of the profits of dead babies. Like, as a society, we can't believe they were legitimately upset about being forced to pay for abortions. Did it ever occur to you that maybe they didn't consider China's politics when they bought product from them? That the product was just cheap? Or that they didn't know what the companies they were investing in were doing? They just wanted their workers to be able to retire? It's more of a stress to believe what you're saying then it is to just process what happened at face value. You argue that reporters are just doing their job but then use stories with an obvious agenda to try and make a point when arguing your claim. I also don't need a lecture about how the abortion pill works. Hobby Lobby is okay with the insurance they provide preventing pregnancy. Heck, even new Pope is okay with that. What they aren't okay with is measures that go into effect after the deed is done. It's against their religion. They're telling us that. It would be like if a Muslim refused to eat turkey bacon. Then you're going to swoop in and tell them their wrong because turkey bacon isn't really pork. Well, obviously you're not going to do that because you're a liberal and liberals don't challenge Muslims, but you get my point. I live in the real world with real people. I don't live in the fantasy world of Harvard lounge liberal Utopias where the only thing people need to worry about are those mean, old, rich, white, republican, Christians. Obama lied, people died, mostly babies. |
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Jul 7, 2015 7:17:16 GMT -5
My mom believes a lot of stuff she gets in emails that isn't true My mom falls for stuff she gets in the mail or on the phone. She'll get letters that either have an eagle symbol or say FEDERAL insurance/bank/credit/medical and she'll think it's something from the government. Same with phone calls. Many years ago a friend of mine got a car key in the mail saying if this key opens up this car at a dealership you win the car. I told her it was a fake key. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2015 10:32:23 GMT -5
I wasn't wrongfully informed, many insurance companies have covered birth control as well as emergency contraceptive or the "abortion pill." The employees should have the right to have their insurance cover their medical needs. Their old insurance probably covered it as, just needed to make flub about it one the aca was put into order. An employer shouldn't enforce they're beliefs on their employees and the employee insurance plan. Honestly, I'm not going to argue anymore about this. it's obvious where you stand politically and it's obvious where I stand. You are wrongfully informed if you believe the health insurance provided by Hobby Lobby before Obamacare covered the abortion pill. It didn't. You also seem a little misinformed in general about the Hobby Lobby case. It wasn't about Hobby Lobby attempting to force their beliefs on their employees. They weren't trying to prevent them from having abortions, they just didn't want to pay for them. In a round about way, you're giving into the original point I made which you initially disputed. I said the government has demonstrated that they are willing to force religions to do something they don't want to do, you disagreed. I gave you a concrete example of how they've done just that and now you're kind of arguing that it's okay. I think maybe you ought to clarify your position. You seem to be for the government compelling individuals to do something they don't want to do so as long as you agree with it. Am I right in that assumption? As for where I stand, I'm not sure it's as clear as you think as I haven't stated what I think about the subject, I'm merely stating the facts of what happened. Please don't confuse the facts with my opinion. I haven't offered an opinion yet. All I have to say is.. the "abortion pill" they cover is plan b. it's a 72hr pill used for failed protection or just for accidents. As I said, you made you political standing clear, just I've made mine. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 17:53:59 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2015 11:05:47 GMT -5
You are wrongfully informed if you believe the health insurance provided by Hobby Lobby before Obamacare covered the abortion pill. It didn't. You also seem a little misinformed in general about the Hobby Lobby case. It wasn't about Hobby Lobby attempting to force their beliefs on their employees. They weren't trying to prevent them from having abortions, they just didn't want to pay for them. In a round about way, you're giving into the original point I made which you initially disputed. I said the government has demonstrated that they are willing to force religions to do something they don't want to do, you disagreed. I gave you a concrete example of how they've done just that and now you're kind of arguing that it's okay. I think maybe you ought to clarify your position. You seem to be for the government compelling individuals to do something they don't want to do so as long as you agree with it. Am I right in that assumption? As for where I stand, I'm not sure it's as clear as you think as I haven't stated what I think about the subject, I'm merely stating the facts of what happened. Please don't confuse the facts with my opinion. I haven't offered an opinion yet. All I have to say is.. the "abortion pill" they cover is plan b. it's a 72hr pill used for failed protection or just for accidents. As I said, you made you political standing clear, just I've made mine. I know what the abortion pill is. It's for after you've had sex and maybe your egg has been fertilized. If you don't want it to attach to your uterus and become a baby, you take the pill and the baby is aborted. It's the abortion pill. Since you didn't ask I'll make my political standing clear... I think politics in America have become a team sport. Each side wants their team to win. They don't really care how that happens or what their side does in office, they just want to be on the winning team. I don't believe in a two party system. I think the system is corrupt and that politicians have been corrupted by corporate money. For that reason I don't trust the government and tend to be against anything government related. I don't believe in ideals, I believe in ideas that work. What has the best chance of working in the real world is what I support. As far as Hobby Lobby is concerned, I think they probably over reacted. If their employees are Christian then it's up to them to not take the abortion pill. That's free will. That's what God would want, for Hobby Lobby to provide the insurance and for their employees to decide on their own not to take the abortion pill. That's how it's supposed to work. That's my opinion. That's not how Hobby Lobby felt though. They had a moral objection to providing that Insurrance. It's not my place to judge them, so I take what they say at face value. That's tolerance. Real tolerance, not liberal tolerance. I've taken Hobby Lobby's word for it and respected their positions even though I disagree with them on a theological level because I show real tolerance for others. |
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Jul 7, 2015 19:30:03 GMT -5
kayfabe Big City Elites in their Ivory Towers dictating the lives you simple country folk. Hmm. Do you have any opinions that aren't conservative talking points? Or any opinions that are based on anything remotely resembling a fact? At this point it's clear that one of two things are true. You are either suffering from a severe mental illness and have a borderline dangerous disconnect from reality; or you are trolling me. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are a troll. Once again you are making claims that you cannot possibly prove. When has anyone democratic party ever threatened to cut benefits for anyone if they were to lose any election? When has that ever happened? I'm in favor of the candidate who receives the most votes winning the election. You know, democracy? It's that system you conservaties claim to love so much until you lose. Then you do everything in your power to undermine the system. (See: Tea Party, creation of) And republicans hand out more entitlements than anyone else. Billionares and corporations receive more welfare than the working poor and impoverished by a very wide margin. It's not a problem when those that don't need it get it but god forbid a single mother working two full time jobs to support her kids asks for a little help. How many times do I have to tell you that I don't use the mainstream media? I don't support them. I don't consume their product. I have no idea what they are reporting on. I gave up on them almost two years ago. But since you brought up CNN, let's take a look at their coverage the last two elections. Their theme for the last presidental election was "Obama is  ed, this one is a lock for Romney." Every story -- every story -- was how Obama was slipping in the polls, this high profile person or group has endorced Mitt Romney, etc. And all of their reporting on the last midterm began with "REPUBLICANS NEED X NUMBER OF SEATS TO WIN A MAJORITY IN BOTH HOUSES. Can they do it? Our sources say yes." There's a bizarre dissconect with republicans. Someone could spend one hour on politics -- 30 minutes making fun of republicans and 30 minutes making fun of democrats -- and all the republicans will hear is when they were being made fun of. You people see conspiarcies everywhere. It's not healthy. What does Tomorrow Land or any other movie have to do with anything? I have no desire to see that movie. And anyone that gets their political idealogy from a movie shouldn't vote. Thankfully that isn't real. What is with these weird connections you keep trying to make? What does any movie have to do with journalism. That's almost as strange as your theory about the insurance industry giving their okay to legalize gay marriage. By your logic the fossil feul industry also had a say in that matter. You're seriously ill man. I don't mean that as an insult, I swear I don't. Normally functioning brains don't work this way. So you're telling me that you have no problem with Hobby Lobby suing the federal government because they were so appaled by the idea of abortions while profiting off of them? You honestly don't see a conflict of interest there? They get all self-righteous about the issue until they can profit off of it. You are a hypocrite. And you're a fool if you don't think that this is anything other than politcially motivated. This was a personal attack on Barack Obama and his signature legistation. You completely manipulated and twisted what I said. I never said that there are any stories reported with obvious bias from outlets that are not supposed to be biased. Once again, you are lying. What I said was that everyone has their political views. Especially those who work in the media and it is their job to ignore their personal beliefs and feelings and report the unfettered truth. That is the job of a reporter. At this point you're no longer just wrong about the morning after pill. Now you are outright lying. The abortion pill and the morning after pill are two different things that do two different things. I gave you informaiton proving this from Princeton that you disregarded because you didn't want to hear anything to shatter your narrow minded, biggoted world view. Princeton, and east coast Ivy League University is just about as far away as one can get from liberal bias without attending a tea party rally. The only reason you could possibly have for not wanting to see that article is that you don't want to see the truth. What the hell are you talking about? Name one time when a Muslim should have been challanged and wasn't. It certainly wasn't all those innocent civillian Muslims that are murdered in drone strikes that kill maybe a handful of enemey insurgents. Or the Muslims that are held for years on end in Cuba without acess to due process, only for us to discover that they were innocent people at the wrong place at the wrong time, as has been the case with many people down there. Do you actually understand the words that your brain comes up with or are you just stringing random words together with the hope of apppearing correct? No you don't. That only only exists in the minds of republicans. But since old, rich, white, Christian republicans are the ones who ruined our economy, deny minorities their equal rights and want to keep us locked in their prepetual war machine by sending other people's children to die... yes I think it would be a good idea to worry about them. I love how you people talk about Obama lying as if a politican being dishonest has never happened before. Can you point to a lie that has directly caused the death of anyone? But before you start counting the bodies, I want you think about the series of lies that the Bush administration told to get us into the war in Iraq and how many lives that cost. People like you are the problem with this country. And that has nothing to do with your political leanings. You make up nonsense that you have no facts to back them up and refuse to look at anything that disproves your distorted view on reality. People like you don't care about facts, the truth or reality. People like you don't even care about the issues. Not really. You're into the drama and argument of politics. You say whatever nonsense you can conjure up to try to appear to win an arguement with no regard for the truth. People like you are the reason why nothing gets done in this country. And people like you are the reason why on the rare occasion that someone does get accomplished, it's usually bad. In short, you are a liar. |
|
