With Jesus it was the publicans.The Republican Party needs to either dismantle or a do-over, starting at the top.
With us, it's the Re-publicans.
Are you saying they should become the Re-re-publicans? :think: :chuckle:
With Jesus it was the publicans.The Republican Party needs to either dismantle or a do-over, starting at the top.
With Jesus it was the publicans.
With us, it's the Re-publicans.
Are you saying they should become the Re-re-publicans? :think: :chuckle:
Right. And since He's not in the Democratic party either, let's just get rid of both and go back to a monarchy.Unfortunately, I don’t see any sign of Jesus in the Republican Party.
I am so thankful you are not a republican ...
Horrible idea. It is so vastly inferior as system of government (unless you're the king of a favorite of him). It's on par with suggesting we reconsider adopting slavery as an integral part of our economic policy.Right. And since He's not in the Democratic party either, let's just get rid of both and go back to a monarchy.
Horrible idea. It is so vastly inferior as system of government
(unless you're the king of a favorite of him)
It's on par with suggesting we reconsider adopting slavery as an integral part of our economic policy.
Is it necessarily exclusive to have an autocratic king /queen /monarch, and to still be a vibrant classically liberal country?Horrible idea. It is so vastly inferior as system of government (unless you're the king of a favorite of him). It's on par with suggesting we reconsider adopting slavery as an integral part of our economic policy.
Study philosophy to learn language. Philosophy understands language. Psychology is a branch of philosophy. Peterson's doctorate is in philosophy.hear, read, think, write, talk
A Means
to improve yourself. Learn to listen. Learn to read. Learn to think. Learn to communicate what you know. These are skills promoted by Jordan Peterson who believes our schools are doing more harm than good. Parents are also complicit in not holding the young responsible for what they do. The liberal academia does not want to listen to this kind of stuff and knows how to "destroy and devalue opposition", a phrase worth borrowing.
Home
Where I'd say the Constitution follows the expressed intent of the Declaration in an affirmative sense, to establish before nations our belief in rights that the government is established to protect for the benefit of its citizens, in service to their interests.I I acknowledge that our constitutional republic separates powers deliberately in an attempt to protect all of our basic human rights from being stolen by our government
That's a bit off though. It may be possible for a good king to preserve it as an expression of his will, but who wants their rights subject to the breath of one man?But is it impossible for an autocrat to faithfully preserve our rights
We agree on these words as far as we as individuals use them. I suspect however that we might disagree on how to interpret "rights," "benefits," and "interests," especially wrt how they integrate together cogently.Where I'd say the Constitution follows the expressed intent of the Declaration in an affirmative sense, to establish before nations our belief in rights that the government is established to protect for the benefit of its citizens, in service to their interests.
If he's a good classical liberal king I don't see any necessary conflict. But what about succession? That to me is much hairier, and lends credence to a constitution of some sort that is a higher authority than any monarch, to keep monarchs in line. And who administrates the constitution? That lends to a republic. And should we enumerate the rights? That lends to a bill of rights as part of the constitution.That's a bit off though. It may be possible for a good king to preserve it as an expression of his will, but who wants their rights subject to the breath of one man?
No. Are you one of those of the empowered majority who pretend at a victim's status by creating absurd categories of slight, like the "war" on Christmas?do you need
A Safe Place
to avoid being offended?
Colleges should be the place where people learn how to identify and confront poor thinking, by developing critical reasoning skill sets and by inhabiting beliefs that are foreign to them and learning how to address them as serious constructs. Sadly, too many liberal arts colleges seem to be deficient at the undergraduate level these days. It's a cause for concern, but one that's also echoed in a conservative transformation of many institutions of higher learning into glorified trade schools, where the point is commerce and relation to it to the near if not complete exclusion of the beneficial other, among which is that skill set.Stay in school until you are able to deal with confrontation.
And learn to call ideas different from your own unpatriotic or unAmerican.Stay out of politics where ideas are proposed and resisted.
Like conservative or liberal forums, where divergence is discouraged. And be sure to only subscribe to non-fake news outlets like Fox or CNN, depending on your views.Limit yourself to small groups that agree with you.
That's probably a good idea for anyone who is over thirty.Don't talk politics at family gatherings.
No, get an ear full of them. You'll find a wide range of opinions, many of them scary. You need to see what religion does to otherwise decent people when they confuse faith with mechanics and their bedclothes with judges' robes.Stay away from religious forums.
He's just being silly at this point, mostly because Chrys only really sees half the problem.Better yet go to a country where free speech is not allowed.
You don't have to go anywhere else for that, just reelect this president and stick around. He's already working on one of those walls, but it's just to keep out an "invader"...honest. Cross his heart and hope to divide.You know where they are. The ones with walls to keep people in.
do you need
A Safe Place
to avoid being offended?
Stay in school until you are able to deal with confrontation.
Stay out of politics where ideas are proposed and resisted.
Limit yourself to small groups that agree with you.
Don't talk politics at family gatherings.
Stay away from religious forums.
Better yet go to a country where free speech is not allowed.
You know where they are. The ones with walls to keep people in.
We sometimes have to establish laws that deal with specific groups because the majority has had a way, historically, of forgetting that everyone should have the same rights, balanced between one another as equally in exercise as we can.you have
A Right
only because you belong to a group. Why does your group need a right? We have the "Bill of Rights" but they apply to every citizen of the United States. That is a big group that includes all genders, all religions, all races etc. Now your subgroup must have a particular right. Why? That right may interfere with the right of another group.
Home
No, though they have a right to be married. A Catholic church isn't a business and isn't holding itself out as one.Do two guys have a right to be married in a Catholic church?
He's just playing with language if he's serious about that. There's no opposite involved, only a distinction between what we are entitled to do and what we do because we accept that it is owed by us. Those aren't logical opposites. And all sorts of people talk about that every day. Peterson's gift is in making the simple sound complex and literary, if only after an I've completed an undergraduate reading list at a decent college fashion.What is the opposite of a right? A right is something you have coming to you. A responsibility is something you owe. A duty. Who is talking about that besides Jordan Peterson? That is a problem for many. Why?