Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Discussion and Debate > Politics > General Political Discussion
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Calendar Mark Forums Read

General Political Discussion A new open forum for general politics discussion.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 5th April 2010, 09:20 AM
Senior Veteran

Faith: Baptist Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 20th June 2004
Posts: 3,202
Blessings: 116,317
Reps: 1,327,714,146,010,089 (power: 0)
clirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond repute
clirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond reputeclirus has a reputation beyond repute
Innocent Children of Guilty Parents

Innocent Children of Guilty Parents

I do not like Pacifists, Socialists, Atheists and Extreme Environmentalists because they do more harm than good. I believe Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats are good at hope propaganda but not the truth of reality. I believe the hope concepts avoid the tough love programs that could really work. Even if the tough love programs did not work, they are better than Socialism that requires stealing from most to give to the few.

The Bible has the following to say about the Innocent Children of Guilty Parents as part of the Ten Commandments.

TEN COMMANDMENTS Exodus 20:36;
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

The concept of innocent children is often used by Pacifists, Socialists and Atheists to advocate their evil activities.

SOCIALISTS use the concept of innocent children to create massive socialist educational programs to give money to disadvantaged children. The Socialist would say they are helping the disadvantaged children, but in most cases they are just wasting money on children with low potential for success.

There is very low potential of helping a child during the 6 hours they are in a school, when the child had to go back into 18 hours of parents that set a very low lifestyle example.

A better way to deal with this situation is to get rid of guilty parents. America needs to have an Absolute Paternity Law that say parents must provide for their children. Failure to provide for their children (as proved by asking for government assistance) should be punishable by death using the three strikes and you are out concept.

No health care/welfare or any other Socialistic Program should be available to any child that has a living father. The Bible has the following to say about men that father children and fail to provide for their children.

I Timothy 5:8 states, "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

PACIFISTS use the concept of innocent children to make war look like an atrocity instead of eliminating an enemy that threatens your existence.

There are two ways to fight a war.

In the short war concept you rapidly eliminate the enemy, thus ending the war quickly. This means you maximize the casualties of the enemy and minimize your own casualties. If there is a shot from a house, you destroy the house and move on. The short war concept give the advantage to those that are trying to eliminate the enemy.

In the long war concept you act carefully to try avoid casualties of the enemy. This means you expose your own people to greater danger while you try to determine whether a person is a non combatant enemy or a combatant enemy. The long war concept give the advantage to the enemy.

Pacifists would make great distinction between non combatant enemy and combatant enemy. The military needs to keep a lot of reporters with them to send up to a house where there has enemy fire and let the reporters determine which are non combatants enemy and which are combatant enemy. When the reports don't come back, the military can proceed to destroy the house since there must be only combatant enemy there.

Judy Woodruff of the PBS Newshour cannot present a Middle East War story without bring up "the problem of civilian causalities". I believe the appropriate statement about Judy Woodruff and most Pacifists would be, "an useful idiot that aids the enemy"

The time to discuss Pacifism is before the war and not during he war. After the war has been declared Pacifists need to keep quite or risk being charged with being a traitor and sent to Guantanamo and face a military trial for treason (aiding the enemy).

Another person abusing the concept of innocence is Afghan President Hamid Karzai. I believe Karzai is just like Arafat that play both sides against each other to enrich himself and his cronies. I would hope the American policy would be to provide only military protection and financial aid to the rural areas so that a ground up democracy could take hold instead of a continuing top down corruption. An election (as in a democracy) does not insure good government, when there are no good people running for office. It may take many years for good people to learn how to use democracy.

The best way to do something good for innocent children is to deal with the guilty parents. It is sort of ironic that the Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats that worry about innocent children usually are the same ones that support abortion.
Reply With Quote
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #2  
Old 5th April 2010, 09:39 AM
Cranky octogenarian at heart

36 Gender: Female Married Faith: Eastern-Orthodox Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 12th January 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,964
Blessings: 1,019,674
My Mood Cold
Reps: 409,615,275,790,593,088 (power: 409,615,275,790,605)
cobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond repute
cobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond reputecobweb has a reputation beyond repute
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God."

I am a pacifist and very conservative in matters of Faith. We do exist. I recognize that sometimes war is unavoidable and the lesser of 2 evils, but I don't believe that it is good.

It is hard to love your neighbor and do good to those who persecute you (another teaching of Christ) while you are blowing them up.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 5th April 2010, 10:13 AM
Archaeopteryx's Avatar
Ancient Wings

Gender: Male Faith: Humanist Party: UK-Liberal-Democrats Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 1st July 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 12,444
Blessings: 2,161,126
Reps: 203,036,892,708,122,848 (power: 203,036,892,708,141)
Archaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond repute
Archaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond repute
I do not like Pacifists, Socialists, Atheists and Extreme Environmentalists because they do more harm than good. I believe Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats are good at hope propaganda but not the truth of reality. I believe the hope concepts avoid the tough love programs that could really work. Even if the tough love programs did not work, they are better than Socialism that requires stealing from most to give to the few.
Actually, the desired end of Socialism is not to take from the most to give to the few, but rather, to take from all and to give to all.

SOCIALISTS use the concept of innocent children to create massive socialist educational programs to give money to disadvantaged children. The Socialist would say they are helping the disadvantaged children, but in most cases they are just wasting money on children with low potential for success.
How do you know that children in these programs have low potential for success when you advocate taking away the opportunity for any potential to become realized?

There is very low potential of helping a child during the 6 hours they are in a school, when the child had to go back into 18 hours of parents that set a very low lifestyle example.
Not necessarily. How many of the world's most renowned thinkers didn't have the most hospitable of home environments and yet they still had potential?

A better way to deal with this situation is to get rid of guilty parents. America needs to have an Absolute Paternity Law that say parents must provide for their children. Failure to provide for their children (as proved by asking for government assistance) should be punishable by death using the three strikes and you are out concept.
And what if the parent has a legitimate reason for asking the Government for assistance? Such as being unable to provide for his child because his business was destroyed in a natural diaster that was not of his making?

No health care/welfare or any other Socialistic Program should be available to any child that has a living father. The Bible has the following to say about men that father children and fail to provide for their children.
As I said above, what if that failure to provide is not the result of willful and deliberate negligence or laziness but rather an incapacity to do so due to extraneous circumstances that bring to bear on the situation? Why punish someone who wants to provide for his family, but can't, equally with someone who doesn't want to provide for his family, but can???

Judy Woodruff of the PBS Newshour cannot present a Middle East War story without bring up "the problem of civilian causalities". I believe the appropriate statement about Judy Woodruff and most Pacifists would be, "an useful idiot that aids the enemy"

The time to discuss Pacifism is before the war and not during he war. After the war has been declared Pacifists need to keep quite or risk being charged with being a traitor and sent to Guantanamo and face a military trial for treason (aiding the enemy).
If someone protests a war that they believe is unjust then they have the right to do that without fear of being prosecuted as a traitor.

By your venomous logic, if the US launched a war against Israel or Christianity, you would have to shut up, or otherwise risk facing a military tribunal under the charge of treason for simply disagreeing with the government's policy (aka. aiding the enemy).

I really wish you'd more thoroughly consider the final logical destination of your claims. Argumentum ad absurdum.
__________________
"In seeking to silence doubt with certainty beyond warrant, all forms of fundamentalism threaten to cultivate hypocrisy and conceit." -- Gary Edwards
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 5th April 2010, 10:15 AM
Archaeopteryx's Avatar
Ancient Wings

Gender: Male Faith: Humanist Party: UK-Liberal-Democrats Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 1st July 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 12,444
Blessings: 2,161,126
Reps: 203,036,892,708,122,848 (power: 203,036,892,708,141)
Archaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond repute
Archaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond reputeArchaeopteryx has a reputation beyond repute
I hope that Clirus' toxic thinking, demonstrated here, never goes mainstream; that it never becomes part of the mental furniture of our culture, for it would certainly represent a moral regression.
__________________
"In seeking to silence doubt with certainty beyond warrant, all forms of fundamentalism threaten to cultivate hypocrisy and conceit." -- Gary Edwards
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 5th April 2010, 10:21 AM
Veteran

26 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: Ireland Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 22nd March 2009
Location: I'm a Dub, but I live in Scotland now
Posts: 1,008
Blessings: 239,936
My Mood Bookworm
Blog Entries: 1
Reps: 9,824,571,865,200,960 (power: 0)
peadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond repute
peadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by clirus View Post
Innocent Children of Guilty Parents

I do not like Pacifists, Socialists, Atheists and Extreme Environmentalists because they do more harm than good. I believe Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats are good at hope propaganda but not the truth of reality. I believe the hope concepts avoid the tough love programs that could really work. Even if the tough love programs did not work, they are better than Socialism that requires stealing from most to give to the few.
When 1% of the people control 90% of the wealth, socialism would involve taking from the few to give to the most. You cannot in any way argue against this, so please stop trying. Debate the morality, debate the practicality, but you can't argue against a concrete fact.

The Bible has the following to say about the Innocent Children of Guilty Parents as part of the Ten Commandments.

TEN COMMANDMENTS Exodus 20:36;
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
So you're saying god is evil and malicious? Why take out peoples sins on innocents? If you cut me off on the motorway, would it be okay for me to come round to your house and punch your 6 year old son in the face?

The concept of innocent children is often used by Pacifists, Socialists and Atheists to advocate their evil activities.

SOCIALISTS use the concept of innocent children to create massive socialist educational programs to give money to disadvantaged children. The Socialist would say they are helping the disadvantaged children, but in most cases they are just wasting money on children with low potential for success.

There is very low potential of helping a child during the 6 hours they are in a school, when the child had to go back into 18 hours of parents that set a very low lifestyle example.
So why can't we have both? Free education and addressing of social problems? And something I really approve of; time in the curriculum dedicated to parenting classes?

A better way to deal with this situation is to get rid of guilty parents. America needs to have an Absolute Paternity Law that say parents must provide for their children. Failure to provide for their children (as proved by asking for government assistance) should be punishable by death using the three strikes and you are out concept.
And this is going to help the kids how, exactly? All you're going to end up with then is a whole load of angry kids, a load of angrier widows, and tens of millions of people willing to overthrow the government implementing this scheme. And I find it interesting that you consider state intervention in education and health care by way of funding to be extremely evil, but state intervention by way of executing people you, clirus, consider to be bad parents, as something not just acceptable, but desirable.


PACIFISTS use the concept of innocent children to make war look like an atrocity instead of eliminating an enemy that threatens your existence.

There are two ways to fight a war.

In the short war concept you rapidly eliminate the enemy, thus ending the war quickly. This means you maximize the casualties of the enemy and minimize your own casualties. If there is a shot from a house, you destroy the house and move on. The short war concept give the advantage to those that are trying to eliminate the enemy.

In the long war concept you act carefully to try avoid casualties of the enemy. This means you expose your own people to greater danger while you try to determine whether a person is a non combatant enemy or a combatant enemy. The long war concept give the advantage to the enemy.

Pacifists would make great distinction between non combatant enemy and combatant enemy. The military needs to keep a lot of reporters with them to send up to a house where there has enemy fire and let the reporters determine which are non combatants enemy and which are combatant enemy. When the reports don't come back, the military can proceed to destroy the house since there must be only combatant enemy there.
I think anyone who is not a monster would make a distincton between non combatants and combatants. Do you accept and agree with flying a plane into a crowded skyscraper, because it isn't making that distinction?

There's a difference between making sure there are no civilians in an area, and nuking an entire country into a puddle of radioactive glass (which I'm fairly sure I've actually seen you advocate before). Isn't there something in the bible about not committing murder? I'm fairly sure there is!!

Judy Woodruff of the PBS Newshour cannot present a Middle East War story without bring up "the problem of civilian causalities". I believe the appropriate statement about Judy Woodruff and most Pacifists would be, "an useful idiot that aids the enemy"
To be honest, people who kill civilians aid the enemy more, by giving them angry people who hate the Americans for killing their innocent friends and family, and fuel for propaganda, even when you leave out the morality of killing innocent people.

The time to discuss Pacifism is before the war and not during he war. After the war has been declared Pacifists need to keep quite or risk being charged with being a traitor and sent to Guantanamo and face a military trial for treason (aiding the enemy).
Are the wars in the middle east not supposed to be fighting against tyrrany? How is stamping down on legitimate free speech, something which, may I remind you, is enshrined in your constitution, any better than what people are doing in Saudi Arabia?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 5th April 2010, 10:23 AM
Veteran

26 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: Ireland Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 22nd March 2009
Location: I'm a Dub, but I live in Scotland now
Posts: 1,008
Blessings: 239,936
My Mood Bookworm
Blog Entries: 1
Reps: 9,824,571,865,200,960 (power: 0)
peadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond repute
peadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond reputepeadar1987 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post

And what if the parent has a legitimate reason for asking the Government for assistance? Such as being unable to provide for his child because his business was destroyed in a natural diaster that was not of his making?



As I said above, what if that failure to provide is not the result of willful and deliberate negligence or laziness but rather an incapacity to do so due to extraneous circumstances that bring to bear on the situation? Why punish someone who wants to provide for his family, but can't, equally with someone who doesn't want to provide for his family, but can???
Art, you do realise who you're talking to, right? The lady who thinks that all bad circumstances are caused by the cardinal sin of not being clirus, right?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 5th April 2010, 11:15 AM
rambot's Avatar
Senior Member

Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Party: CA-Greens Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 13th April 2006
Location: Up your nose....wid a rubbah hose.
Posts: 6,716
Blessings: 1,110,549
My Mood Relaxed
Reps: 74,053,571,291,274,320 (power: 74,053,571,291,289)
rambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond repute
rambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond reputerambot has a reputation beyond repute
With the number of people clirus hates/dislikes/castigates to hell, one has to wonder if she is ever happy.

I mean really, do you smile clirus? Where is your joy in this life? How do you contribute in a positive way to this world?
__________________



I'm a Christmas Unicorn.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 5th April 2010, 01:47 PM
jgarden's Avatar
Senior Veteran

Gender: Male Faith: Methodist Country: United Nations Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 1st January 2004
Posts: 6,588
Blessings: 124,361
Reps: 55,387,214,749,984,232 (power: 55,387,214,750,001)
jgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond repute
jgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond reputejgarden has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by clirus View Post
Innocent Children of Guilty Parents

I do not like Pacifists, Socialists, Atheists and Extreme Environmentalists because they do more harm than good. I believe Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats are good at hope propaganda but not the truth of reality. I believe the hope concepts avoid the tough love programs that could really work. Even if the tough love programs did not work, they are better than Socialism that requires stealing from most to give to the few.

The Bible has the following to say about the Innocent Children of Guilty Parents as part of the Ten Commandments.

TEN COMMANDMENTS Exodus 20:3–6;
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

The concept of innocent children is often used by Pacifists, Socialists and Atheists to advocate their evil activities.

SOCIALISTS use the concept of innocent children to create massive socialist educational programs to give money to disadvantaged children. The Socialist would say they are helping the disadvantaged children, but in most cases they are just wasting money on children with low potential for success.

There is very low potential of helping a child during the 6 hours they are in a school, when the child had to go back into 18 hours of parents that set a very low lifestyle example.

A better way to deal with this situation is to get rid of guilty parents. America needs to have an Absolute Paternity Law that say parents must provide for their children. Failure to provide for their children (as proved by asking for government assistance) should be punishable by death using the three strikes and you are out concept.

No health care/welfare or any other Socialistic Program should be available to any child that has a living father. The Bible has the following to say about men that father children and fail to provide for their children.

I Timothy 5:8 states, "But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

PACIFISTS use the concept of innocent children to make war look like an atrocity instead of eliminating an enemy that threatens your existence.

There are two ways to fight a war.

In the short war concept you rapidly eliminate the enemy, thus ending the war quickly. This means you maximize the casualties of the enemy and minimize your own casualties. If there is a shot from a house, you destroy the house and move on. The short war concept give the advantage to those that are trying to eliminate the enemy.

In the long war concept you act carefully to try avoid casualties of the enemy. This means you expose your own people to greater danger while you try to determine whether a person is a non combatant enemy or a combatant enemy. The long war concept give the advantage to the enemy.

Pacifists would make great distinction between non combatant enemy and combatant enemy. The military needs to keep a lot of reporters with them to send up to a house where there has enemy fire and let the reporters determine which are non combatants enemy and which are combatant enemy. When the reports don't come back, the military can proceed to destroy the house since there must be only combatant enemy there.

Judy Woodruff of the PBS Newshour cannot present a Middle East War story without bring up "the problem of civilian causalities". I believe the appropriate statement about Judy Woodruff and most Pacifists would be, "an useful idiot that aids the enemy"

The time to discuss Pacifism is before the war and not during he war. After the war has been declared Pacifists need to keep quite or risk being charged with being a traitor and sent to Guantanamo and face a military trial for treason (aiding the enemy).

Another person abusing the concept of innocence is Afghan President Hamid Karzai. I believe Karzai is just like Arafat that play both sides against each other to enrich himself and his cronies. I would hope the American policy would be to provide only military protection and financial aid to the rural areas so that a ground up democracy could take hold instead of a continuing top down corruption. An election (as in a democracy) does not insure good government, when there are no good people running for office. It may take many years for good people to learn how to use democracy.

The best way to do something good for innocent children is to deal with the guilty parents. It is sort of ironic that the Liberal Christians, Atheists and democrats that worry about innocent children usually are the same ones that support abortion.
Where does "clirus" get these extremist ideas - certainly not from the Bible!

Perhaps a "cult!"
__________________
Leviticus 20:9 " 'If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head."

Last edited by jgarden; 5th April 2010 at 05:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 5th April 2010, 05:52 PM
bigbadwilf's Avatar
Drinking from the glass half-empty

Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: United Kingdom Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 22nd December 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 788
Blessings: 1,040,913
Reps: 41,258,768,112,824,160 (power: 41,258,768,112,830)
bigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond repute
bigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond reputebigbadwilf has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by clirus View Post
There are two ways to fight a war.

In the short war concept you rapidly eliminate the enemy, thus ending the war quickly. This means you maximize the casualties of the enemy and minimize your own casualties. If there is a shot from a house, you destroy the house and move on. The short war concept give the advantage to those that are trying to eliminate the enemy.

In the long war concept you act carefully to try avoid casualties of the enemy. This means you expose your own people to greater danger while you try to determine whether a person is a non combatant enemy or a combatant enemy. The long war concept give the advantage to the enemy.

Pacifists would make great distinction between non combatant enemy and combatant enemy. The military needs to keep a lot of reporters with them to send up to a house where there has enemy fire and let the reporters determine which are non combatants enemy and which are combatant enemy. When the reports don't come back, the military can proceed to destroy the house since there must be only combatant enemy there.
Given the choice, I think most reasonable people wouldn't chose My Lai writ large as the strategic plan for an entire war. But then again, most reasonable people aren't Clirus.
__________________
Ninety-nine out of a hundred dreams came crashing down around you. But if life always fell short of your expectations, that was no argument for lowering them. There was always the hundredth dream.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 6th April 2010, 06:20 PM
ArnautDaniel's Avatar
Veteran

Gender: Male Married Faith: Other-Religion Party: US-Others Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 28th August 2006
Location: The Village
Posts: 5,314
Blessings: 86,062
My Mood Cool
Reps: 18,572,085,511,231,920 (power: 18,572,085,511,244)
ArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond repute
ArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond reputeArnautDaniel has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by clirus View Post
Even if the tough love programs did not work, they are better than Socialism that requires stealing from most to give to the few.
"stealing from the most to give to the few" sounds like laissez-faire capitalism to me.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Return to General Political Discussion

Thread Tools
Display Modes


 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:36 AM.