I’m voting for Trump because he’s a white man.

[Hammster]

I doubt the original poster was being honest. In fact all the posts I've seen from them in this forum shows me they are a right wing, Trump and republican supporter.

One out of three.

 

[public hermit]

I’m awaiting your opinion.

You shouldn't do things just because someone else does them. Furthermore, I would say you shouldn't vote for Trump no matter what color he might be. He's not a good president regardless of his accidental qualities.

 

[Hammster]

You shouldn't do things just because someone else does them. Furthermore, I would say you shouldn't vote for Trump no matter what color he might be. He's not a good president regardless of his accidental qualities.

Opinions vary.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm all for this.

Quote from the book..................

I suspect a lot of people are "all for that".

The thing about a "right to be lazy" is it's absolutely one you can exercise. I know plenty of people who don't do the bare minimum at work....and never get ahead...and folks that choose not to work, and are in poverty.

You absolutely have the right to be lazy.

 

[RileyG]

If I was standing for office and someone told me that they voted for me because of my skin colour and my gender then I'd ask them why they thought that was more important than my policies.

EXACTLY!! Well said.

 

[essentialsaltes]

It's only natural that white men be encouraged by the unprecedented appearance of one of their number at the top of a ticket.

 

[BPPLEE]

It's only natural that white men be encouraged by the unprecedented appearance of one of their number at the top of a ticket.

Isn't that true of any race?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Isn't that true of any race?

Probably, in cases where "unprecedented" (or something similar) applies.

 

[Offline4Better.]

Are you saying that you cannot respond to the glory of God?

I do respond to the glory of God, by helping a man on here who struggles with addiction.

 

[rjs330]

EXACTLY!! Well said.

And yet people still do it. A LOT of them.

 

[camille70]

I'm sure you're not alone in this.

 

[DaisyDay]

Now, we need to figure out which guy made the Democrats become sour. Whomever started popularizing the pro-choice movement and the LGTV movement ruined the Democrats for me.

The “guy”?

It’s women for the first and lgbt+ people and their friends and families for the second.

 

[RileyG]

The “guy”?

It’s women for the first and lgbt+ people and their friends and families for the second.

Not all women support the pro choice movement, plenty of them are pro life. All of the Supreme Court justices when Roe V Wade passed in 1973 were in fact male….

 

[Offline4Better.]

The “guy”?

It’s women for the first and lgbt+ people and their friends and families for the second.

Those movements have blown out of proportion, and must be stopped, or reduced.

 

[public hermit]

Those movements have blown out of proportion, and must be stopped, or reduced.

On what basis? It can't be because they don't align with Christian values. Whatever arguments are given for their reduction must with reasons that appeal to the heterogeneous society in which we live. In other words, they need to be secular (or sans religious grounding).

 

[Offline4Better.]

On what basis? It can't be because they don't align with Christian values. Whatever arguments are given for their reduction must with reasons that appeal to the heterogeneous society in which we live. In other words, they need to be secular (or sans religious grounding).

The secular reasoning is that gays spread more disease compared to heterosexuals. I posted a study of that here. For abortion, if we continue raising the age of abortion, then eventually people will kill babies at 9 month terms, then start killing children. In other words, where does this stuff stop? Where is the line drawn?

 

[public hermit]

The secular reasoning is that gays spread more disease compared to heterosexuals. I posted a study of that here. For abortion, if we continue raising the age of abortion, then eventually people will kill babies at 9 month terms, then start killing children. In other words, where does this stuff stop? Where is the line drawn?

Cool, you agree. You are one of the more sensible ones, for sure.

Do they spread more disease than heterosexuals? Interesting. So lesbians are going around getting all kinds of people sick? I doubt it. I am assuming your study was more particular. Or, by "gays" do you mean just men? My apologies, I can't keep up with what the kids say these days. Do you think the general populace would agree with you? I am thinking probably not. So, yes, you are golden for presenting reasons that are accessible to the general populace, but I don't think that one would get much traction.

I'm thinking your last point is a slippery slope, which is a fallacy not a principle.

 

[Offline4Better.]

Cool, you agree. You are one of the more sensible ones, for sure.

Do they spread more disease than heterosexuals? Interesting. So lesbians are going around getting all kinds of people sick? I doubt it. I am assuming your study was more particular. Or, by "gays" do you mean just men? My apologies, I can't keep up with what the kids say these days. Do you think the general populace would agree with you? I am thinking probably not. So, yes, you are golden for presenting reasons that are accessible to the general populace, but I don't think that one would get much traction.

I'm thinking your last point is a slippery slope, which is a fallacy not a principle.

By gays, I refer to mainly men. Yeah, sadly, common sense does not get much traction in 21st century society. I am not sure if the general populace agrees, but I know that the science agrees, including the CDC.

Even the CDC says gay men are more likely to get disease:

About STIs and Gay Men

Understanding prevention, treatment, testing, and risk factors for STDs among gay men.

www.cdc.gov

 

[public hermit]

By gays, I refer to mainly men. Yeah, sadly, common sense does not get much traction in 21st century society. I am not sure if the general populace agrees, but I know that the science agrees, including the CDC.

Even the CDC says gay men are more likely to get disease:

About STIs and Gay Men

Understanding prevention, treatment, testing, and risk factors for STDs among gay men.

www.cdc.gov

Yeah, that's why using protection is a thing. If folks are not going to be in a monogamous relationship, they should use protection. It's common sense. People in this country can have different values when it comes to sex, and many do, but we should all agree on safe practice whatever our values.

 

[Offline4Better.]

Yeah, that's why using protection is a thing. If folks are not going to be in a monogamous relationship, they should use protection. It's common sense. People in this country can have different values when it comes to sex, and many do, but we should all agree on safe practice whatever our values.

Amen to that. But we can go even further, and say no sex before marriage, cos that is how it has always been. But hey, I am an old soul. Still celibate here. But yes, folks should ideally contain their plantain, keep the banana in a peel.

Yes, my sense of humor is strange.