For all the idiots who vote Republican

Eeset

.
LIFETIME MEMBER
Perhaps a better question is would you vote for Bernie Sanders to keep Ted Cruz out of office. :)
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Perhaps a better question is would you vote for Bernie Sanders to keep Ted Cruz out of office. :)

In essence this is what Jr. was asking: "Would you vote for the mass murdering fag Hitler who would run on today's Libertarian Party ticket to keep the mass murderer Joe Stalin from winning the Presidency on the Democratic ticket?"

I'd vote for neither.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Actually, I've never been a Libertarian, and I'd no longer call myself a libertarian.

A different day a different ideology.

The Republican Party Platform has always been pro life and pro traditional family values. While the insiders have been able to put moderate leftists on the Presidential ticket (John McLame and Mitt "which way is the political wind blowing today?" Romney), there are many conservative candidates and elected officials at all levels in the Republican Party (Ron Paul never being one of them).

If you want to compare the mass murderers Hitler and Stalin to any political party, again, compare them to the pro abortion pro death style Libertarian and Democratic Parties.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
A different day a different ideology.

Yeah, because I totally just shift with the wind:rolleyes:

The Republican Party Platform has always been pro life and pro traditional family values.

This isn't in and of itself enough, but even still, no it isn't. In fact, they're not even "pro-life" in the narrow area of abortion (neither are you, for the record.) They're also pro-war, which is a problem.
While the insiders have been able to put moderate leftists on the Presidential ticket (John McLame and Mitt "which way is the political wind blowing today?" Romney), there are many conservative candidates and elected officials at all levels in the Republican Party

I had in mind people like yourself, Chrysostom, and Republicanchick who just always vote straight line Republican. I'm not trying to say that every single Republican is bad.

(Ron Paul never being one of them).

Ron Paul isn't perfect, but he's way more "conservative" than you'll ever be.


If you want to compare the mass murderers Hitler and Stalin to any political party, again, compare them to the pro abortion pro death style Libertarian and Democratic Parties.

The Libertarian Party sucks, but its not really important.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
A different day a different ideology.

Yeah, because I totally just shift with the wind

Whatever your ideology of the day is, it certainly can't be as bad as the baby murdering, sodomite loving, drug pushing Libertarian one that you held so closely to your bosom for several years.


Quote:
The Republican Party Platform has always been pro life and pro traditional family values.

This isn't in and of itself enough, but even still, no it isn't.

Just becuase people fail to adhere to doctrine, be it political or religious, doesn't make the doctrine bad.

In fact, they're not even "pro-life" in the narrow area of abortion (neither are you, for the record.)

What do you call people that force an 11 year old girl who was gang raped by 20 filthy barbarians and was so psychologically damaged that she would kill herself if she were forced by religious zealots to carry the pregnancy to term?

I call them "murderers".

They're also pro-war, which is a problem.

Have you hugged a muzzie today Jr.?

Quote:
While the insiders have been able to put moderate leftists on the Presidential ticket (John McLame and Mitt "which way is the political wind blowing today?" Romney), there are many conservative candidates and elected officials at all levels in the Republican Party

I had in mind people like yourself, Chrysostom, and Republicanchick who just always vote straight line Republican. I'm not trying to say that every single Republican is bad.

The last time I checked none of us have run for political office or had any influence over legislation like an elected official would. (Try to think outside of your little box Jr.).


Quote:
(Ron Paul never being one of them).

Ron Paul isn't perfect, but he's way more "conservative" than you'll ever be.

For someone who isn't a Libertarian anymore, you seem to be defending the drug pushing defender of sodomy Ron Paul



Quote:
If you want to compare the mass murderers Hitler and Stalin to any political party, again, compare them to the pro abortion pro death style Libertarian and Democratic Parties.

The Libertarian Party sucks, but its not really important.

So does your attempt at logic and debate, but then that's nothing new. Seriously, is this the best rpf can send us?
 

WizardofOz

New member
aCW exposed....yet again

aCW exposed....yet again

Whatever your ideology of the day is, it certainly can't be as bad as the baby murdering, sodomite loving, drug pushing Libertarian one that you held so closely to your bosom for several years.

Yet you're ok with "baby murdering" under certain circumstances.

What do you call people that force an 11 year old girl who was gang raped by 20 filthy barbarians and was so psychologically damaged that she would kill herself if she were forced by religious zealots to carry the pregnancy to term?

I call them "murderers".

I call them pro-life.

And you, pro-choice and a fraud.
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
A different day a different ideology.



Whatever your ideology of the day is, it certainly can't be as bad as the baby murdering, sodomite loving, drug pushing Libertarian one that you held so closely to your bosom for several years.

Well, you still don't understand libertarianism, so I probably shouldn't even bother to tell you what I believe. But I'll tell you anyway. I'm a theonomist.





Just becuase people fail to adhere to doctrine, be it political or religious, doesn't make the doctrine bad.

Saying "its not enough" doesn't mean its a bad doctrine. Pro-life and pro-traditional family values is an important part of the picture, but its not everything.


What do you call people that force an 11 year old girl who was gang raped by 20 filthy barbarians and was so psychologically damaged that she would kill herself if she were forced by religious zealots to carry the pregnancy to term?

I call them "murderers".

Because you don't read the Bible.

Have you hugged a muzzie today Jr.?

No. But I believe we should love Muslims enough to share the gospel with them rather than killing them.


The last time I checked none of us have run for political office or had any influence over legislation like an elected official would. (Try to think outside of your little box Jr.).

My box is pretty big.



For someone who isn't a Libertarian anymore, you seem to be defending the drug pushing defender of sodomy Ron Paul

I don't have to be a libertarian to actually understand libertarianism. And drugs should still be legal. There's a Biblical standard for banning sodomy, but since Ron Paul is against Lawrence v Texas, his Federal level position is correct as well even if what he would do state by state is not.

So does your attempt at logic and debate, but then that's nothing new. Seriously, is this the best rpf can send us?

Its good enough to beat anyone on this website.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
I see that my biggest fan (it's a polite term for "stalker") has followed me to yet another thread.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3922003&postcount=3

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Whatever your ideology of the day is, it certainly can't be as bad as the baby murdering, sodomite loving, drug pushing Libertarian one that you held so closely to your bosom for several years.

Yet you're ok with "baby murdering" under certain circumstances.

Tell us once again how someone who voted for a pro abortion Presidential candidate who ran on a political party ticket that has been pro abortion since that political party (i.e. Libertarian) crawled out from underneath a rock over 35 years ago can call himself "pro life"?


Quote:
What do you call people that force an 11 year old girl who was gang raped by 20 filthy barbarians and was so psychologically damaged that she would kill herself if she were forced by religious zealots to carry the pregnancy to term?

I call them "murderers".

I call them pro-life.

And you, pro-choice and a fraud.

Perhaps you can explain this to me:

How does a baby survive if the mother has killed herself?
 

WizardofOz

New member
I see that my biggest fan (it's a polite term for "stalker") has followed me to yet another thread.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3922003&postcount=3

You're too much of a coward to debate me or address those points so you play these childish games. If you can't take the heat...

Tell us once again how someone who voted for a pro abortion Presidential candidate who ran on a political party ticket that has been pro abortion since that political party (i.e. Libertarian) crawled out from underneath a rock over 35 years ago can call himself "pro life"?

Smokescreen. Abortion policy isn't changing, regardless of who is in the White House.

Do you want to discuss your pro-choice stance now, or will you keep up your facade?

How does a baby survive if the mother has killed herself?

Is it the age or suicidal tenancies that cause you to rationalize being pro-abort? :think:
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Whatever your ideology of the day is, it certainly can't be as bad as the baby murdering, sodomite loving, drug pushing Libertarian one that you held so closely to your bosom for several years.

Well, you still don't understand libertarianism, so I probably shouldn't even bother to tell you what I believe.

You must remember that I spent a good portion of the WHMBR! Part 2 thread talking about and thus exposing the cult you formerly(?) identified with.

But I'll tell you anyway. I'm a theonomist.

i.e. unless the Bible specifically speaks out against the sale and possession of heroin, it shouldn't be illegal.

Yes Jr., I've had numerous dealings with the nutcases Joel McDurmon and his father in law (who is a friend of nutcase Ron Paul) Gary North.

Quote:
Just becuase people fail to adhere to doctrine, be it political or religious, doesn't make the doctrine bad.

Saying "its not enough" doesn't mean its a bad doctrine. Pro-life and pro-traditional family values is an important part of the picture, but its not everything.

When you next see your teacher at that community college you're attending, ask him what the term "nucleus of society" means. Any half way intelligent person knows that the traditional family is the nucleus of a society and that economic growth either prospers or fails, depending on the strength of the family.

Quote:
What do you call people that force an 11 year old girl who was gang raped by 20 filthy barbarians and was so psychologically damaged that she would kill herself if she were forced by religious zealots to carry the pregnancy to term?

I call them "murderers".

Because you don't read the Bible.

Says the kid who stated in another thread that the Bible allows all consensual acts as long as children aren't involved?

Quote:
Have you hugged a muzzie today Jr.?

No. But I believe we should love Muslims enough to share the gospel with them rather than killing them.

I know that a lot of TOL'ers including myself will be more than happy to buy you a one way ticket to Iran so that you can "share the gospel" with those ever so tolerant barbarians. Just ask and you will receive the funds Jr.

Quote:
For someone who isn't a Libertarian anymore, you seem to be defending the drug pushing defender of sodomy Ron Paul

I don't have to be a libertarian to actually understand libertarianism.

Nor do I, and I understand your cult (nothing former about it) better than you do.

And drugs should still be legal.

For people other than you and Ron Paul to use. After all, drug pushers never use their own poison do they Jr.?

There's a Biblical standard for banning sodomy, but since Ron Paul is against Lawrence v Texas, his Federal level position is correct as well even if what he would do state by state is not.

Yet Daddy Paul voted to allow sodomites to openly serve in the military. The last time I checked Jr., the US military is a federally run agency.


Quote:
So does your attempt at logic and debate, but then that's nothing new. Seriously, is this the best rpf can send us?

Its good enough to beat anyone on this website.

Come on Jr., rpf must have a few that aren't heroin addicts or that aren't ready to drop from AIDS that can come debate me. If you're the best Daddy Paul can offer, they're a sadder bunch than I thought.
 

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I see that my biggest fan (it's a polite term for "stalker") has followed me to yet another thread.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...03&postcount=3

You're too much of a coward to debate me or address those points so you play these childish games. If you can't take the heat...

It wouldn't be an Aaron rant if you didn't include:

"Liar!" as well.


Quote:
Tell us once again how someone who voted for a pro abortion Presidential candidate who ran on a political party ticket that has been pro abortion since that political party (i.e. Libertarian) crawled out from underneath a rock over 35 years ago can call himself "pro life"?

Smokescreen. Abortion policy isn't changing, regardless of who is in the White House.

I'll guarantee you that if people continue to elect pro abortion candidates who run on pro abortion political party platforms, traditional family values won't make a return to this country (you do realize that being pro life means being a part of traditional family values don't you Aaron?).

Do you want to discuss your pro-choice stance now, or will you keep up your facade?

You mean the "facade" of voting for traditional values candidates who run on a traditional values political party platform, that "facade" Aaron?

Quote:
How does a baby survive if the mother has killed herself?

Is it the age or suicidal tenancies that cause you to rationalize being pro-abort?

We're going to take a little trip to someplace you've never been before Aaron, it's called "reality".

There are some young girls and even some women who were so severely psychologically damaged from rape that they'd kill themselves before carrying the baby to term. Every civilized country on earth makes provisions in the law for those rare cases (state certified psychologists have to confirm that the mother is an extreme suicide risk before the abortion can take place).

I will ask you again Aaron:

How does a baby survive if the mother has killed herself?
 

WizardofOz

New member
you do realize that being pro life means being a part of traditional family values don't you Aaron?

You do realize that being pro life means not supporting abortion in certain circumstances, don't you aCW?

You're even alaCarte when it comes to protecting the unborn.

You mean the "facade" of voting for traditional values candidates who run on a traditional values political party platform, that "facade" Aaron?

I mean the facade of pretending to be pro life...until you're not. If you think there should be a choice to abort in certain circumstances, there's a term for that.

It's pro-choice.

You are pro-choice.

Quote:
Is it the age or suicidal tenancies that cause you to rationalize being pro-abort?
There are some young girls and even some women who were so severely psychologically damaged from rape that they'd kill themselves before carrying the baby to term. Every civilized country on earth makes provisions in the law for those rare cases (state certified psychologists have to confirm that the mother is an extreme suicide risk before the abortion can take place).

I will ask you again Aaron:

How does a baby survive if the mother has killed herself?

You didn't answer the question. Are you pro-choice based on age, rape or suicidal tendency?
 

Christian Liberty

Well-known member
You must remember that I spent a good portion of the WHMBR! Part 2 thread talking about and thus exposing the cult you formerly(?) identified with.

The fact that you talked about libertarianism doesn't mean you actually understand it. The fact that you call it a "cult" proves this much.


i.e. unless the Bible specifically speaks out against the sale and possession of heroin, it shouldn't be illegal.

Ever hear of the distinction between sin and crime?

Possession of heroin, and its sale, are certainly sins. But that doesn't mean that the civil government should ban it. There are other institutions in society, and self-government is a critically important aspect of freedom.

The civil government should use the sword specifically to punish those things which God said should be criminal, murder, theft, kidnapping, adultery, homosexuality, open blasphemy, etc.

Yes Jr., I've had numerous dealings with the nutcases Joel McDurmon and his father in law (who is a friend of nutcase Ron Paul) Gary North.

McDurmon and Gary North are both brilliant. Not perfect men, but nonetheless brilliant.

You should really watch McDurmon's debate against JD Hall. if you actually want to learn something, I'm willing to send.


When you next see your teacher at that community college you're attending

Actually, I attend Patrick Henry College.

ask him what the term "nucleus of society" means.

Yeah, because a secular person is totally going to understand that:rolleyes:

Any half way intelligent person knows that the traditional family is the nucleus of a society and that economic growth either prospers or fails, depending on the strength of the family.

I'm not sure that weak families would necessarily reduce economic utility, but it doesn't matter because you are definitely right that weak families lead to a weak country in general. I'm not saying that its OK for a candidate to be bad on family issues. I'm saying that a canddiate being good on family issues doesn't automatically make them good.



Says the kid who stated in another thread that the Bible allows all consensual acts as long as children aren't involved?

No, that's not what I said. I don't think you're able to read. I'm not sure you're capable of grasping the nuance that changed my former position to my current one, so I'm not going to waste my energy. Anyone who actually wants to know what I did feel free to PM me, and I'd be happy to share.

I know that a lot of TOL'ers including myself will be more than happy to buy you a one way ticket to Iran so that you can "share the gospel" with those ever so tolerant barbarians. Just ask and you will receive the funds Jr.

I don't think God is calling me to risk my life in Iran at the present. That doesn't change the fact that the correct response to Islam is to preach and not to bomb. Again, your worldview is entirely built on force and you don't understand freedom or free markets.

Nor do I, and I understand your cult (nothing former about it) better than you do.

I've seen theonomists called everything from libertarian to extremely authoritarian. You could possibly say there's a sense I'm a libertarian. But, I reject the NAP.

For people other than you and Ron Paul to use. After all, drug pushers never use their own poison do they Jr.?

We don't sell it or condone it either.


Yet Daddy Paul voted to allow sodomites to openly serve in the military. The last time I checked Jr., the US military is a federally run agency.

This is a fair point, and I can't really justify this one. Ron Paul is wrong. Considering that the US government is currently an illegitimate and anti-Christian institution anyway, no Christian should be joining the military anyway, so its not exactly an issue I'm losing sleep over. It may well be incidental and accidental, but Ron Paul has the Christian position on over 95% of issues. Yes, his secularish brand of libertarianism occasionally leads him to take a bad position like this one, but I would still argue that Ron Paul would be a positive good for this country and not a lesser evil. I'm a bit more iffy and back and forth on Rand, considering his compromises on foreign policy and the whole "war is the health of the State" thing. If I vote for anyone in 2016 it will be Rand. Not joining the GOP.


Come on Jr., rpf must have a few that aren't heroin addicts or that aren't ready to drop from AIDS that can come debate me. If you're the best Daddy Paul can offer, they're a sadder bunch than I thought.

The only drug I've ever struggled with addiction to is caffeine, and I'm a virgin. Now stop being an idiot.
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
we give these people a platform
we listen to them
but
we don't vote for them

I wish they didn't leave such a mess
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
The Republican Party Platform has always been pro life and pro traditional family values.

That's why they most recently nominated for president, a man who pledged to always protect a "woman's right" to abort her child.
 

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
That's why they most recently nominated for president, a man who pledged to always protect a "woman's right" to abort her child.

you pathetic democrat shill

he also pledged to nominate conservative judges

did you know that the democratic party supports abortion
and
should be destroyed because of it?
 

WizardofOz

New member

during a town meeting in Hopkinton, N.H., on Oct. 10, 2011, Romney answered a question about his position on abortion this way:

"What I would like to see happen would be for the Supreme Court to say, look, we’re going to overturn Roe v. Wade and return to the states the authority to decide whether they want to have abortion or not, state by state. That’s the way it was before Roe v. Wade. So I am firmly pro-life."



Source

His position was quite similar to...Ron Paul's :noway:
 
Top