im 28 AND I STARTED SCHOOL IN 1983 AND GOT MY DIPLOMA IN THE EARLY 90'S. MY NEIGHBORHOOD, MY UP BRINGING ,AND THE EDUCATION SYSTEMS THAT I WAS EDUCATED IN, SUFFERED FROM THE FALLOUT AND BACK FIRE FROM A DESIGN IMPLEMENTED FOR AND AGAINST BLACK PEOPLE.( NOT TO MENTION CRACK COCAINE AND HEROIN, ILL SAVE IT FOR ANOTHER TIME). ANYWAY WHEN BLACK PEOPLE WERE FIRST BROUGHT TO THIS SOIL WE WERE RE CULTIVATED TO BE WHITE FEARING DOMESTICATED ANIMALS A PROCESS THAT IS STILL EMBEDED IN US TODAY IN FACT WHE AS BLACK PEOPLE ARE SO RE-CULTIVATED THAT WHEN WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LET WHITE PEOPLE PART TAKE IN AND BE EFFECTED BY THERE OWN FALLOUT AND DESTRUCTION, WE GUARD THEM FROM IT BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY .........IN OTHER WORDS INSTEAD OF BEATING THE WHITE GIRL UP AND RUNNING HER OUT OF WHAT IS MOST LIKELY A POORLY EDUCATED SCHOOL SYSTEM , I WOULD EMBRACE HER ASS AND EXPOSE HER TO THE PIT FALLS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED ON PREDOMINATLY BLACK SCHOOLS EVERY SINCE THIS THEN WHITE GOVERNMENT ALLEDGEDLY UNSEGREGATED THEM

A 13 YEAR OLD FRIEND OF THE FAMILIES FUNEREAL WAS TODAY AND IT WAS THE SADDEST THING EVER , SHE WAS AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER IN A SHOOT OUT , THUS IM AGAINST ANYTHING OR ANY ONE THAT ENCOURAGES NEGATIVE CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARDS PEOPLES QUALITY OF LIFE.

a girl was found chained to her bed because of a bad report card. now i believe in disciplining your kids, but...

fake dudes,lames,wiggers,fags

i am against the state mixing with the church
i am against the "Roe vs Wade for men case"
i am against the movement tot cease abortions all together
i am against gay marriage
i am against the war in Iraq
i am against the immigration reform to punish otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants
i am also against the media making it seem as if homosexuality is the norm...i am not against gay folks..but damn......it's like they're glorifying homosexuality..

wow..i'm against alot of shit...gotta think some more

damn, china...where u disappeared to? alot of the old members are returning

i know gluv...it's been a min...trying 2 get this money right..

i am against sex offenders fighting the law the places them atleast 1000 ft away from parks schools,where ever children frequent....bastards...an island should be made specifically for sex offenders...

cosign...BTW, they're called IRAQIS, chris

I STILL don't understand the argument AGAINST gay marriage. These gay females and males are NOT trying to get married in a church or a mosque, they are trying to have civil marriages RECOGNIZED by the STATE for health benefits, and their own pursuit of happiness.

I find it quite hypocritical that you are FOR separation of church and state, and you have homophobic(which are no doubt sponsored by your belief in religion) views such as a pro-gay media and anti-gay marriages.

My only question to you is:

How does it affect YOU if two gays want to get married??

It's ironic though, African Americans should know how it was to be discriminated against, but when it comes to accepting homosexuality or their marriages, alot(NOT ALL) African Americans are very homophobic and treat homosexuals as subhumans.





SHHHHHHH, don't let the secret out. Muslims are demonized creatures who should face the wrath of America's nuclear weapons.

i was scrolling down reading all the posts, but i have to stop at this one. in truth, it's because of the stripping of the church values is WHY shit is so fucked up in american society today. there's no human values, there's no sort of positive ethics for children to model today. you look at the public schools, alot of them are in such a sad state, from the poverty line to the middle class. while growing up, i used to get the wooden paddle by the teacher, or the principal and then get my ass whupped by my pops because i was fuckin' off in class....today's children, damn near can get away with murder, LITERALLY. because of the chruch values were stripped away in the name of "human rights".

you compare the upbringing by the parents of today from parents of the past?

and then stop and think the moral values are similar throughout, especially within Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. whut the american government did was thrown those moral values out the book, and re-interpret the constitution and more specifically the bill of rights, and that's how we got this chaos that we got now.

and in some ways, it's partially the reason why many countries, especially arabic countries despise us anyway, because of our "secular" nature. america long stopped living off of family values, our current government may us it as an EXCUSE that we do, for their selfish agendas, but the reality is that we don't, and that's why we, the people, are at each others crosshairs right now.

1. There are private religious schools in which Children are taught Church values. PUBLIC institutions shouldn't incorporate the Church with the State, it's a clearly explicited edict in our Constitution--which by the way should be more important to an average American than the Bible.

2. Yes America did a bad thing by abrogating Church and conservative values, I mean after all, Slavery, Native American Genocide, witch hunting, the denial of Women rights, were accepted during the time the Church had predominance over America . Let's go back to that nice little era, because even though we had those aforementioned blemishes, we STILL listened to our teachers with respect and pride.

3. Didn't you say that you didn't follow a set of rigid moral codes and that you were a Christian because you had a devout faith in Christ???? No man made morals can have a lasting impact, the CHURCH RULED Europe and America for a millenium or two, and guess what happened my naive little friend?? Inquisitions, genocide, colonialism, crusades, all sponsored by Church values. I find it hypocritical that you are reverting to this set of moral codes(which you said no man can really adhere too on a consistent basis).

4. America is such a GREAT country because we are open for progressive reforms in our society. We aren't retaining old conservative norms which have a bizzarre one sided view of the future and humanity.

5. And last but not least, we have this nice little pocket of southern states in America, called the Bible belt. They're main document of laws is primarily the BIBLE, not the Constitution. They live, eat, shit, etc all according to the Bible. These people also have intolerant views towards Non Christians, gays, mexicans, etc.



Here, since I am actually in the know, and know why America is so despised by muslims countries, let me fill you in:

1. America's unalterable aid to Israel. I don't even have to eloborate why this is the MAIN reason for Anti-American sentiments in the muslim world. For the past 50 years, America has supplied Israel with so much funding that it alienated the Muslim world. The Muslim world feels America has been exploting it for their oil, while providing shady aid to the enemy.

2. America is trying to impose Democracy in the Middle East--which, unless the people truly accept it, can never be forced with. So you're reasoning for that is right.


Europeans also hate Americans because of our arrogance and insubordination to the UN.

lol...'Iraqians' is funner to say.

@The Gay Marriage Issue...I don't see how anybody can give or take away

the right of two people inlove to get or not get married. Regardless if they

are homosexuals or lesbians, people are making it a bigger issue then is it.

If you don't believe in it, your gonna encounter gay couples anyway, so

marriage shouldn't be a problem.

Word, homosexuality is going to exist no matter what, so if these people want to have the benefits of being married couples, why not give them their right to PURSUE HAPPINESS. Whose welfare are they transgressing on?? Religious fanatics amuse me, "Jesus will be mad, Allah will be mad, Yaweh will be mad if you give them the right of civil marriages", but yet the God of Abraham will be infuriated IF YOU HAVE PRE-MARITAL SEX, USE PROFANITY, LOOK AT OTHERS WITH LUST, but yet we all do it.

co-signature..........

Tha "devaluing" of human life beginz and endz with tha liberalz in America....

They are tha only people on Earth, who will DIE to save trees and tha environment, yet totally advocate tha M U R D E R of babies 7-8 months along(partial birth abortion)......

Ladiez and gentlemen, that iz HOMICIDE.

Tha liberal feminists in America will defend their "right" to partial birth abortion forever....

They rationalize it as being their "right to NOT be pregnant at any time."

Human life has no value to tha liberalz....

Fuckin disgustin...

Saw a cool bumper sticker tha other day, "Thank your mom, she "CHOSE" life."

[quote name='streets disciple' date='Jul 12 2006, 01:15 PM' post='453097']
[quote name='chinablk' post='453085' date='Jul 12 2006, 11:36 AM']
i am against the state mixing with the church
i am against the "Roe vs Wade for men case"
i am against the movement tot cease abortions all together
i am against gay marriage
i am against the war in Iraq
i am against the immigration reform to punish otherwise law abiding illegal immigrants
i am also against the media making it seem as if homosexuality is the norm...i am not against gay folks..but damn......it's like they're glorifying homosexuality..

wow..i'm against alot of shit...gotta think some more
[/quote]


"I STILL don't understand the argument AGAINST gay marriage. These gay females and males are NOT trying to get married in a church or a mosque, they are trying to have civil marriages RECOGNIZED by the STATE for health benefits, and their own pursuit of happiness.

I find it quite hypocritical that you are FOR separation of church and state, and you have homophobic(which are no doubt sponsored by your belief in religion) views such as a pro-gay media and anti-gay marriages.

My only question to you is:

How does it affect YOU if two gays want to get married??

It's ironic though, African Americans should know how it was to be discriminated against, but when it comes to accepting homosexuality or their marriages, alot(NOT ALL) African Americans are very homophobic and treat homosexuals as subhumans."
-Streets


^^^ ummmm...don't tell me what i think and i believe in...i AMNOT homophobicc...1 of my best friends is a GAY woman...i have no fear of gay ppl, i do not hate gay ppl...i love going to the MAC counter at the mall and letting a GAY man put his hands all over my face...i've clubbed with a gay man at a gay(men's) club countless times..i treat every1 w/respect...i feel like no 1 is beneath me......i just don't believe that a marriage should be btwn 2 ppl of the same sex...not b/c the BIBLE says so...i 4 one will not and do not quote the BIBLE..b/c i do not live by the BIBLE...these are my personal views


i am also against all of the crime being committed against young blk males by young blk males...every time i turn on the news(here in sth fla) that's all i hear...it's terribly sad...

That is seriously the biggest copout:"I have gay friends". You're point?? Alot of White Supremacists have African American mistresses, yet they are resolute in their hatred of blacks. Same with Black Supremacists.

You haven't provided any legitimate excuse as to why you would try to limit the welfare of a group that you are so "friendly" with. If you're opinion was actually solidified with a veritable argument then I might have respected it--but you're basically discriminating against the rights of certain individuals in society without any justification or reasoning. On that same premise, a white man can say "I have alot of African American friends, I love them, but I don't feel they should have the same rights as us", it's just an absurd statement.





I am a liberal, and I am personally against abortion. But I do realize it is the choice of the female. I am definately against the Abortion of babies of 7-8 months, or after they develop a heartbeat.

To say "human life has no value to the liberals" is a very gross overestimation. Alot of Conservatives support the War in Iraq, they are indifferent to the deaths of Iraqi Civilians which is up towards 60,000 and most of them actually support the tortures of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghriab. So you're point would be moot right then and there.

whaaaaaaaat streets changed an opinion he has

I always said I was PERSONALLY against Abortion, but I recognized that it should be down to the individual to choose if she would want to have the baby.

Thus I am Pro-Choice. I personally am against it though. I wouldn't marry a girl who was thinking of having an abortion.

1. you're right, public schools shouldn't force religon upon the students, but that doesn't mean anarchy is therefore should in its replacement. schools still need to instill or return to old ways of discipline. and take control, and people with righteous morals behind them are capable to do that. but we're so far away from that ever to be recaptured. public education is at its worst, you go to other countries, it's far different and WAY better, also you WONDER why the average student from a private school are more successful than one in a public school. i graduated high school in a magnet school, which is a public school, but in a private school environment, you can see a direct contrast of moral ethics that were being taught in comparison to an average public high school.

2. the church is a scapegoat for blame. plus, you cannot point the finger at the the church as the mastermind to american history. you cannot blame the church for the existence of slavery, especially when a conflict of christian beliefs was debated about slavery during those times, along with many conflicting beliefs between north and south that spearheaded the american civil war. nor it is rediculous to IMPLY it was a secular thought emancipating slavery! when the united states BECAME the united states, their initial thought was to abolish slavery altogether, the only reason it continued wasn't because of "chruch values", but because of eli whitney's invention that had the south booming at the time, then generations later it was something that was accepted until the book "uncle tom's cabin" was published. the conflict of ethics was ALWAYS debated during that time, and it wasn't "church values" that strongheld slavery, but the accepted lifestye that was bestowed upon at the time. in reality ALOT of slaves didn't realized they were being oppressed and accepted as it is, whereas you had a few that were little bit more educated or self-aware of the oppression that was going on, and the continuation of it after slavery. believe it or NOT, it was in a sense "church values" as the backbone of the civil rights movement, so it's HIGHLY ignorant to suggest that leaning towards a secular nature made it better for human rights.

as for the eradication of the native americans, whut evidence do you have that suggest it was DUE to the power of the church or the values of it? call a spade a spade, don't go off rediculous conclusions due to a personal bias. the ethnic cleansing of the native americans is simply because of land, land, and more land to control. most of the frontier men feared the native american as a problem and even went as far as stereotyping them as their version of "terrorists" due to some trying to regain their land taken from them in a hostile way. where you think the term "indian giver" came from? and the last place they forced the remaining native american to live is a mud-fuck stinkhole called oklahoma (i ought to know, it's my home) they threw them in the worst area in america, because it was land they refuse to steal. THEN stole it anyway once they found out that shits load of OIL was coming from that area, thus the word "SOONERS" was born, because their greedy ass snuck in before the mandated time to take land. NONE OF THIS had anything to do with CHURCH VALUES or the influence of the CHURCH by any means.


your strongest arguement is women's rights, however, you have to make point that women worldwide was brought up to be 2nd to man, historically...PERIOD. you can say well the church said this, and the church said that, but that was a common teaching WORLDWIDE, and bit by bit, whutever country made changes or evovled from that way of thinking, you wanting to blame christians for depriving womens right, then you have to look at most arabic countries, that are FAR WORST, however it was still accepted in their eyes. and i'm not here to judge them, not my place to judge, like i always say, however the women empowerment isn't because they went in a secular nature, but a righteous one, because there were ALOT of biblical female heros, nor a true christian would treat a woman 2nd class because jesus never did.

3. i follow or strive to follow the standard jesus made for himself, in other words, the standard is to be like jesus while on earth, which is an impossible task to do, which is why people have to ask for forgiveness, because you always going to fall victim to sin. with that said, i said this before, but the values that the church uphold is universal, there isn't too much different within most of the major religons. also the CHURCH was the government at on point in europe during the middle ages, but whut does that have anything to do with the current ethics and morals of today's american society???? whut does it have to do with the arguement you was making in secular allowances is better for human rights? none! so whut? the church 500 years ago ran europe. that have shit to do with the non-existent united states. saying it has a lasting impact, as if islam is not? where most arabic governments are DIRECTLY from islam? yet, because the authors of the constitution, with their christian beliefs, STILL acknowledged that everyone have the right to follow their own faith....you want to run that by me again on why america merging to a secular way of thinking is helping human rights? did you know that the forefathers of this country was trying NOT for us to be like ENGLAND is in the end we DID? you really think that our secular ways of living is a GREAT example for the rest of the world to follow or acknowledge as a POSITIVE? you think our "jerry springer" tabloided minded ways is whut helping the country in moral values and human rights?

4. i hope you was being sarcastic in that 1st sentence. if not whut positive reforms are you talking about? i look at hiphop, not just the music, but the culture today....there IS NOT MORALS. at least all the way up to the mid-90's, there was ALWAYS some sort of consciousness. hiphop was BORN with a conscious thought thru afrika bambaataa and his zulu nation. it reached its apex during the late 80's and early 90's to where the youth took pride of who they are as well as whut they are in the eyes of society. we have nothing like that today. where's my TEEN SUMMIT? why everything's a minstrel show these days more than ever before? why are the ones that ARE attempting to make positive moves AREN'T HEARD? these "secular" values is reason why i always hear a song where somebody have to "shake it like a dog" or some repetitive bullshit on the radio. or why the violence today is unrecorded to the media, yet PROMOTED in entertainment. and ENTERTAINMENT took over EDUCATION period! instead of taking steps forward, alot of the youth are going three steps BACK because the values are gone! lives are getting destroyed left and right, prisons getting overpopulated, and capitalism with no moral thought of right & wrong is leading the way in this "secular" united states that you proud it changed to.....

5. last but not least, the SOUTH. and yes it is and probably always will be, "the bible belt". no arguement on that. historically, you can SAY most of the south abuse and slighted their christian views to justify their actions. but here's the point you are missing, we're talking about VALUES, ETHICS, HUMAN RIGHTS...just because they CLAIM to be righteousness does not mean in the name of righteousness it authorizes them to do works of the devil. so lets STOP talking about people's actions historically, and talk about exactly whut the subject is about. the church values vs. the secular way of life. in order to UNDERSTAND this is understand whut is right and whut is wrong, or the knowing the definition of righteousness

here's a definition from dictionary.com:

righteousness

n : adhering to moral principles [ant: unrighteousness]

look and look at your own faith, if you feel that believing in a secular lifestyle is adhering to righteousness, then you may as well disown your faith right now. if you DO believe in your faith, then everything you claim about america moving towards secularism is falsehood, because the moral principals of your faith is hardly different, if not even more strict.



(damn, i hadn't written a classic long essay in a while...lol)

im against double cheeseburgers only being on the dollar menu outside of ny, that is a damn outrage..lol

1. I am against gay marriage( I think people need to look at The BIG PICTURE, as opposed to here and now...)


2. I am against the war in Iraq(not a surprise..)

3. I am against Immigration(we already have enough mufuckas here as its is..)

4. I am against outsourcing of jobs

I agree with all of that except gay marriage. I'm christian and I disagree with gays but we can't control what gays wanna do. They diserve to get married and be misreble like other marriages. Again I don't agree with gay marriage but one of my good friends is gay, my cousin is gay, another friend of mines is lesbian and the high school I'm going too has a good number of gay/lesbian and bi sexual students so I think they should do whatever they wanna do. Personally I think it's just between them and God.

[quote][/quote]I agree with all of that except gay marriage. I'm christian and I disagree with gays but we can't control what gays wanna do. They diserve to get married and be misreble like other marriages. Again I don't agree with gay marriage but one of my good friends is gay, my cousin is gay, another friend of mines is lesbian and the high school I'm going too has a good number of gay/lesbian and bi sexual students so I think they should do whatever they wanna do. Personally I think it's just between them and God.[/quote][/quote]




Yo fizzles, I got a question for you..I ask every Christian I know this same question and get a 50/50 split..


Do you think being a homosexual and a christian is hypocrisy?..

[quote name='jayhustler' date='Jul 13 2006, 02:32 AM' post='453421']
[quote][/quote]I agree with all of that except gay marriage. I'm christian and I disagree with gays but we can't control what gays wanna do. They diserve to get married and be misreble like other marriages. Again I don't agree with gay marriage but one of my good friends is gay, my cousin is gay, another friend of mines is lesbian and the high school I'm going too has a good number of gay/lesbian and bi sexual students so I think they should do whatever they wanna do. Personally I think it's just between them and God.[/quote][/quote]




Yo fizzles, I got a question for you..I ask every Christian I know this same question and get a 50/50 split..


Do you think being a homosexual and a christian is hypocrisy?..
[/quote]Yes I do believe it is but for me to be a true christian I am not allowed to hate someone for what they do and I am not allowed to judge anybody becuase God said only he can judge. So I just leave the gay issue alone and let them do what they wanna do because it's not my business. Also I understand that not everyone is christian.

I dont know if this makes since..but Im against people that are against the war in Iraq, but dont support the troops over there..you can still support the troops.. and be against the war..

Actually, it isn't. As Fizzles said, there are verses in the Bible that clearly state that a Christian must not hate his or her enemy, must not judge them, it is for God to decide and judge if they are right or wrong.

Secondly, alot of devout Christians engage in pre-marital sex, so how doesn't that constitute as being hypocritical, especially since adultery, fornication, etc are the most serious sins in Christianity??

1. Religious morals aren't replaced with anarchy. They are replaced with science, history, mathematics, English, physical education, etc. All of these are instrumental to our further careers. Yes, religion is important, but not everyone has a desire to be religious. There are 1 Billion Secular humanists/agnostics/athiests in this world alone, and most of them aren't religious because of the austere disciplinary laws that govern them. They rather follow governmental laws, because those are the ones that give them the freedom of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.




Actually to this day, the South as a whole has the most intolerant and racist makeup in the United States. AND they as a whole have the most conservative Christian electorates in the country. Do you not see the correlation?? Yes, there was economic differences between the south and the north, but this is an incontrovertible claim--THE SOUTH WAS ALWAYS MORE DEVOUT THAN THE NORTH, yet they were prepared to DIE for the existence of slavery. I think Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn described how religiously devout southerners were, and yet how intolerantly cruel they were at the same time. It's no difference that Islamic fundamentalists are the ones blowing up civilians, and Christian fundamentalists were the ones murdering African Americans and enslaving them.



Yes, none of this had to with Church values. But it was all done at a time where the Protestanism was a powerful influence OF EVERY American. Am I wrong?? My point is, we WERE in a time where the Church values had a predominance over American ethics, and we saw how that turned out. Once more liberal/secular reforms started to resurface, then AND ONLY THEN, were African Americans given such inherent rights such as the right to vote with equal protection, and the abrogation of the Jim Crow era. If it wasn't for liberal reforms, the Solid South would still have implemented then Jim Crow era, and by what history dictated, I DOUBT African Americans would have done anything significant about that without the backing of a more secular federal government. There is a reason why Malcolm failed, and Martin succeeded, one had the endorsement of the Federal government, the other had the endorsement of millions of African Americans. I'll let you decide who is who.




1. I never said that the deprivation of women's rights is only bound to Christianity. Where did I state this? I said in AMERICA, during a time of Christian predominance and church values, women's weren't allowed the same freedom as men. This has a huge correlation with the retrograde thinking of the Bible. I know for a fact that alot of Arabic countries don't provide Women the same rights as men, and I haven't forgotten to acknowledge that. And your last sentence of Jesus is hilarious, if Christians(as a whole) were actually tolerant and peaceful like Jesus, the world would be such a peaceful place, right, the Crusades, colonialism, slavery, the war in Iraq would all be null and void, right?? Few Christians actually behave like Jesus, the rest act according to their own wills and judgements. Same goes for Muslims and Jews. But at the end of the day, if you count the atrocities done by the "Christian" world, and compare it to the atrocities of the rest of the world, you would have a staggering difference, I assure you of that.



1. Most arabic countries do not follow Sharia laws. They have their own tainted view of Islamic law. ANY scholarly attributed muslim can tell you this. But obviously, you believe everything the media says. The last empire to even follow rules and regulations comparable to the Sharia law were the Ottomans, after them, the muslims world was carved up between France and England and then the revolutions took place and the world today is a result of all this. Muslim governments today are not DIRECTLY in concordance with the Quar'an, that is a fallacious statement that you need to separate yourself from. Don't assume, learn and then make up your own conclusions.

2. Many of the forefathers were Dhiests--which means they did acknowledge God, but they believed God wasn't really interested in our world, since he had to take care of an entire universe. Hardly a Christian ideal. Learn about Dhism, and then get back to me. Second, our forefathers also believed in slavery(Thomas Jefferson used to have several black slave mistresses), they also believed in the degragation of women's rights, etc.

3. The acceptance of Darwinism, womens rights, civil rights, are ALL secular movements. How dare you reproach the same movements that established the right of ALL minorities in this countries. Those ARE human rights. Okay, Liberal reforms believe in abortion, and they have strong reasoning behind this belief, but what is your argument about the way of life when Christian values were at it's peak???? Jim Crow?? You liked those set of standards?? You want Christian values?? Then almost every rap record you cherish will be abrogated because of the lewd sexual insinuations, the profanity, and the racist sentiments in there. There goes your Hiphop. But don't worry Gluvster, you would still BUMP THAT CHRISTIAN RAP. You're contradictions are glaring in this argument. On one hand you complain about a rigid set of values, (that's why you can't be a muslim, as you say), on another hand you say these same values and laws are essential to EVERY American?? Make up your mind.

4. Atleast Jerry Springer is excercising his own freedom. Also, I believe the fodder that he produces is a grotesque examination of the deranged in America. It provides as an effective deterance. How many people watching the Jerry Springer would try to replicate the actions of those deranged guests??



I agree about the Hiphop statement altogether, that is why I essentially retracted my love for present day hiphop, because it's just full of idiots making atrocious music.

I doubt the values are gone, to this day Church girls are the freakiest whores in the neighborhood. These girls spend most of their time reciting the bible, and learning about the greatness of Jesus, yet they spend some of their time indulging in the peanis of another male. I mean, these stereotypes don't surface without justification. I live in a predominantly Black neighborhood, there are churches IN EVERY FUCKIN CORNER. That doesn't help much though, because the kids don't have effective parenting.




My point is----We already went through a 200 year phase where Church values were at it's strongest. What did that accomplish?? Slavery?? Prohibition of women's rights?? Jim Crow Era?? the systematic genocide of native americans?? If honorable church values couldn't prohibit the MOST DEVOUT CHRISTIANS IN THE SOUTH BACK THEN FROM COMMITING THESE SIN, THEN HOW COULD THEY PROHIBIT THE CHRISTIANS IN THE WORLD TODAY?? TRY to implement the Church values of yesterday on to this world, but there will be people corrupting it, every single day.



Actually, I am not practicing Muslim. I don't pray five times a day, I don't do the mandatory requirements that are asked of me in Islam. However, I abstain from sins I CAN stop myself from doing--such as fornication, drinking alcohol, eating pork, gambling, etc. I view my faith as a ethnicity, a nationality, a culture, my own identity--as MOST muslims do. If I see a Black or White or Latino muslim, that is my brother, regardless of race or language, they are my people, so I sympathize with them, but I don't sympathize with the corrupt ones, such as the terrorists or whatever.

I have morals that I uphold for myself through the medium of the Quar'an. But guess what?? I CANNOT FORCE THESE MORALS onto people that don't want nothing to do with them. That is the point you are missing, you can't force feed anything to people. It doesn't work that way. It's the inherent freedom that our
country provides that makes it so great.

i'll cut thru all the fat and go right here at the last paragraph, because it's the meat of everything overall:



this paragraph i absolutely agree, the difference IS and maybe you can call it a generation gap or whutever, is the more secular our society gets the more worst off our morals are overall, and we're taken the burden, but pointing the blame elsewhere.

when the constitution was written, the bill of rights were specifically placed for a reason, the thing you're not seeing is that america is controlled by the current morality of society. it was easier to accept the values in the 19th century, because almost everybody had a christian-upbringing anyway, and really it was left unsaid. when immigrants from lands that never practiced christianity, it wasn't an ISSUE of them to stop practicing their beliefs, of course you have racism and bigotry, but that's a seed installed from the very beginning and never will go away, but the bill of rights PROTECTED those from completely different cultures, the constitution protected them.

whut you fail to realize that the forefathers that helped designed the constitution, were all from christian background, yet instilled morals and ethics that are opened for everybody. it's IMPOSSIBLE for the government to force how you should worship and your way of life, because its unconstitutional. of course throughout american history there been modifications or redefinition to the whut constitution is, but it something that added on and not taken away.

whut was gotten away IS the ethics today, and that's why i see your statement as crazy. a recent arguement is the debate on freedom of the press. now the press, the media, tabloid, whutever, have the freedom to put out whutever the fuck they want to put out. they can bash the president without even a blink of worry behind it, they can say whutever they want to say about anything, because it's their constitutional right to do so. but in the past in journalism, they had a code of ethics they abide by, there were certain things you just don't put out or mislead. if something that's deemed confidential, you never snitch, or you never snitch about your sources, or anything of that nature. you look at how the media handle KATRINA, you may as well say that ethics are thrown out the window. when you have geraldo down in iraq with the troop drawing a map of their location on live television, you're an idiot to do that, but the code of ethics is long gone....america LIVES in a secular controlled society, and i totally disagree that it's a better life....i honestly FEAR whut my daughter may endure while growing up!

If you claim to be a liberal, and don't support ALL abortions, you are no liberal.

And, the best end result of the Iraq War, as poorly planned and executed as it has been, was the death of Saddams 2 sons.

I read alot of INSANE shit about those two bad-asses............

They definately would have been way worse than Hitler, they would LOVE to have had some nuclear weapons to unleash.............

As far as treating Iraqi prisoners with "dignity" and "respect", fuck that....

They don't deserve it...

The all good and great "Geneva Convention Rules", have NEVER EVER been followed by ANY terrorist organizations or groups....

Why should they get the BENEFITS of those "humane" laws??????????????????????????????

It's time for Bush to totally ignore the whining liberal delegation and the rest of the "world community" who are not even helping fight tha war, and start giving ALL captured Al-Queda prisoners tha death penalty immediately.....

To win a war vs. terrorists, who play by no rules, America has to start fighting fire with fire.

As soon as that happens, tha war will progress........

It's time for America to STOP showing courtesy to those who show NONE....................

Um..Bush needs to realize you can't go to war with 'terrorism', cause

terrorism is a CRIME. It's not a country. And any terrorist that gets

captured should no way at all be held under the Geneva Convention.

They should be held as a criminal instead of a prisioner of war.



We're not fighting Iraq, we're fighting terrorism. Technically this shouldn't

be considered a "war".

I find this quote to be hilarious. Abortion is only ONE of the many liberal/conservative social issues. There are MANY liberal/conservative social issues, such as science in schools, the church's role in public instutions, immigration, death penalty, multi culturalism, gun control, gay rights, global warming, enviroment vs business, etc. I didn't even touch the economic aspect of the liberal/conservative debate yet so trust me, there is more to conservatism and liberalism than just abortion. I know, I am a political science major.



At the expense of 60,000+ civilians. Good stuff.




LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO@them being worse than Hitler. You really do eat up the right wing propaganda, don't you?? Iraq HAD NO MEANS to acquire Nucleaur Weapons, are you that slow??



These "prisoners" weren't convicted, they are held without a trial, for all we know, alot of them are INNOCENT CIVILIANS, picked up off of the street. Yes, I love your analogy though, let's throw out Habeous Corpus--I mean they are muslim, that's enough to convict them of terrorism. I wonder how that would fly if America started to do with domestic African Americans and just tortured them without a conviction.



Because they are human.



It's official, you're a far right nut job. Tell Ann Coulter and the other racist delegates of your ideaology, what's up.

Haha. If your flawed logic was to be played out, then America should start giving ALL domestic terror groups such as the Bloods, Crips, the death penalty WITHOUT a trial, because they show no courtesy to no one.

Also, it's quite ironic that you're an ardent pro-LIFER yet you are quick to wish for the death penalty. Shows me how sincere you are about life.






Exactly, but these lame brain right wing nut jobs, seem to think Arabs and Muslims are the only type of terrorists in this world.

the "war" on terrorism is like saying the "war" on drugs back in the 80's..it's not suppose to be taken literally.

but then again, in BOTH scenarios, who's REALLY the supplier???? you ever seen "swordfish"?

we gave iraq weapons when they were going to fight iran i think.

this is how we know they DID have womds

Weapons of Mass Destruction=Nuclear Power.

There is no chance in hell that America would confide in another Non-Western country Nuclear secrets DURING the Cold War. Yes, they helped Iraq with artilleraly during their war with Iran 1981-1988, but they didn't give them Nuclear Weapons.

At the end of the day, Iraq HAD NO WOMD.

Im against homosexuality.

Im against corrupt police men.

Im against the system being mainly for Women.For example a Woman can call the Cops on a guy and he will automatically be arrested even if he didnt do anything.

The Draft...(even though Im in the military)

Im against the mosaic of different issues brought up. (Too many to focus on.

Seriously though if there is one thing i am against it would be nihilism and what former NOW president Tammy Baker calls "Maligniant Narcissism."

As far as the issues brought up thus far go:

Abortion:

Like many issues im abivalent because although i believe that a women have the constitutional right to choose whether or not they want to have a baby i also feel Notwithstanding, that with rights comes responsiblities and although there have been plenty of times were i have either fooled around with a girl or had the oppurtunity to have sex with her and didnt. I have a 17 year old sister and although im all for reproductive rights i dont believe those rights should be afforded to persons who are dependant on others (parents, guardians etc.) I remeber reading an article in my local metropolitian newspaper in the forum section about whether or not the father should have any rights regarding the fetus. Although the women is the one who ultimately undergoes the physical labor that is need to have a baby they still had made the conscious decision to have sex even with a plethora of other contrivances that could prevent pregnancy such as birth control, condoms, abstinence, and the relatively newly available Emergency plan B. To paraphrase a bio ethicist I dont believe that the fetus should be defined as simply another organ in a woman's body nor do i subscribe to the conservative notion that a fetus is a full blown human with constitutional rights. We should also look at the bigger picture: Population. One of the global problems contributing to hunger, and absolute poverty is because of an inadquete system for population control. This isnt reason enough to support abortion rights, i know but there are other unintended consquences that should be considered.

Iraq: Every year at my former Community College they have a multicultural day called "diversity day" where students can go to different events and learn everything from Sikhism to the struggle that Deaf people have to go through. Last year i was attempting to attend as many of these events as i could and i stumbled across an advertisment about the Iraq war.
I went to the event it was held in the auditorium. The movie was called "Inside Iraq" It was one of the least bias movies i saw thus far in Iraq. The director of the movie told us that we are to see a movie that was going to support our opinions whole heartedly about the war and we are going to see other incidents where are opinions are crushed. Because the leitmotif of this forum seems to be overwhelmingly against the war i will play devils advocate.

Its is true according to both the 9/11 report and an ISG report that there were neither any indication that Saddam Huesain didnt have any weapons of mass destruction: chemical biological or nulear. It is also true that Sadam had no ties to Al Qadia. This was the logical construction of the CIA

Premise one

Osama bin Laden is responsible for 9-11

Premise two

Osama bin Laden has ties to the IRaq dictator

Premise three

The Iraq Dictartor has weapons of mass Construction

There fore because Osama bin Laden has an obvious grudge against America and because Osama has close connections with a middle eastern government who is able to supply him with the nuclear capablities to destroy america. America must dismantle Iraq.

These allegations were nothing more than political pretenses but was it ultimately wrong for us to go into iraq. If our intelligence was so flaud then why did other nations go as well and why did John kerry state that even if he did know that saddam Had no nuclear means he would have still supported the war?

I support the war to a certain degree notwithstanding the pretenses. Why? Because Saddam was a ruthless dictator. Sure he secured peace and tranquilty throughout the land with his laws but as French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau once wrote: Tranquilty and peace can also be found in a dungeon it doesnt necessarily mean it right. (Im paraphrasing.) In one of testimonies given during the trial of Saddam a women speaks of what she had to witness and what she went throught while iraqi forces interegated her. She says that while she was in prision there was a women who was in labor and about to give birth and that she had tried to help her but the guards prevented her from doing so. In the end her fellow prisonmate lost a child due to complications. The child suffocate and died as a result. Its one thing to random randomly erroneously jump in an arbitrary middle eastern country and attempt to oust a leader. Which is clearly wrong. Its another thing to willfully ignore the plight and suffering others go through due to political violence and apathy on our part even if we have the means from preventing it. Which makes me wonder about Darfur. I hope my post made some sense.