View Single Post
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-08-2004, 20:52
Unsung FIRST Hero
Bill Gold Bill Gold is offline
Retired -- 2006
no team
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 837
Bill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond reputeBill Gold has a reputation beyond repute
Re: John Kerry: Good, bad, or both?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi_guy578
First, religion, I can give exact scripture refrences if you want them.
Second, disease, gays started a very big epidemic called HIV, its very nicely presented in the movie And the Band Played On http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106273/ there is no garuntee.
Religious beliefs should have no influence over whether or not our country recognizes gay marriages. There are many religions that oppose gay marriage, but there are religions that accept them. We should not eliminate the rights of the so-called minority. That is not what democracy is about. The minority needs to be afforded the same protection under the law as the majority, lest we become a tyrannical nation. Also, this whole AIDS/HIV thing being blamed solely on homosexuals is going way off base, and should be retracted.

There is no official state religion in the US, and the fact that everyone has the right to practice their own religion is a cornerstone of our democracy. It allows you to be a Catholic, a friend to be Jewish, another friend to be Hindu, and me to be an Atheist. You have the right to live by what your religion tells you to do, and I have the right to not have my life be affected by your religious quirks. Some things like not being allowed to kill people are both in your religion and in the law, but only because it’s absolutely obvious that people are morally significant figures, and logically it’s immoral to kill a morally significant figure. Do not incorrectly assume the fact that since a law corresponds with part of your religion that it’s there solely because of the religious influence. I shouldn’t be forced to live my life by the code of a Roman Catholic, Muslim, or any other religious person. As an American I deserve to be free from those strict beliefs of others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi_guy578
I worded this very poorly, what I ment to say is his foreign policy isn't as good as Bushs'. Kerry is misleading people to think that attacking Iraq was a bad thing, and we shouldn't have done it, and we should keep out of other people's business. That was Clinton's plan, and look how well that worked. The USS Cole was bombed, what did we do about it.... NOTHING! In fact a lot of americans think that 9/11 was the first terrorist attack on america. In a sense it was the first on american *soil*, but when the cole was bombed we did nothing and we allowed the terrorists to regroup and start their next attack. In another one of Kerry's speaches he mentions how bush is not taking a multilateral approach at things, and how he would if he was in office. Do you think that when kerry gets in office France, Germany, and others will all a sudden start helping america any more than they are now?!?!?
It’s incorrect to say that “Kerry is misleading people to think that attacking Iraq was a bad thing, and we shouldn’t have done it, and we should keep out of other people’s business.” Kerry does not support isolationism which you imply. Kerry is also not misleading anyone when he says that attacking Iraq was a bad thing. Iraq is really about opinion, and yours is different from Kerry’s, which is different from mine. I do believe that attacking Iraq was a bad decision, and set a very dangerous precedent for the world. We were given false intelligence that was the basis for the case to go to war with Iraq. We didn’t provide convincing evidence to what Bush later backhandedly referred to as “Old Europe” (France, Germany, and Russia). We decided to, pretty much, unilaterally preemptively attack Iraq (with more than 10x the troops we sent into Afghanistan to try to find Osama bin Laden). We didn’t find weapons of mass destruction that were promised and testified to at the UN and in the Congress. Kerry’s the one misleading people? Wow…

Yes, I do believe that if Bush is removed from office that Kerry could convince France, Germany, and Russia to provide troops and/or funding to help stabilize Iraq. Every single one of us realizes that we need international support. That’s, luckily, not in question. If all we do is piss other countries off and tell them how ancient their thinking is they won’t want to help us, right? Well, that’s what Bush has been doing. He is obsessed with trying to appear steadfast that he cannot even bring himself to apologize to those other nations. If we apologized, stopped excluding companies from those nations from contracts in Iraq, and offered to give up sole control over military operations in Iraq to NATO or to the UN there would be the necessary incentives to help rebuild Iraq. We’re still the strongest country in the world. What harm does apologizing do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi_guy578
Yes, I over-used the flip-flops. But there is a major difference in Kerry's Flip-flops and Bush's flip-flops. Bush has flip-floped in the past because the political situation has changed.(i.e. different situation, different approach) Kerry flip-flopped during the primaries to get ahead in the polls.
To say that Bush changed his mind, but not to get more votes is ludicrous. Politicians move towards the center during election seasons to try to gain moderate votes. That’s the political cycle. In 2000 Bush stated that he thought Gay Marriages should be left up to the states, and this year he recommends an amendment to the Constitution that prohibits Gay Marriage entirely. There are many other examples in the links I posted previously of completely flagrant attempts by Bush to appease moderates back in 1999/2000 that were reneged after he attained office.

Last edited by Bill Gold : 25-08-2004 at 05:01.