Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - paints

Pages: 1 2 3 ... 85
1
Debate & Discuss / Re: Im Calling Police on you
« on: July 12, 2019, 06:52:29 pm »Message ID: 1284037
Cops have no obligation to protect you.   The "Protect and Serve"  written on their cruisers is just another empty slogan. 
I don't call the cops for any reason. 

Yes they do.  They take an oath.  It is more than just a slogan on their cars.

No. They don't.  Their 'oath' means jack.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html?mtrref=search.yahoo.com&gwh=F4D299F604DF6438FC5E9CFE608FE94C&gwt=pay

2
Off-Topic / Re: Way to close a sermon!
« on: July 12, 2019, 04:03:52 pm »Message ID: 1284030
To those of you who say this is a joke:

Shut up! I did not find that funny at all! How would you like it if somebody dumped washer fluids on you and blinded you by doing so?! Also, you never tell someone to figuratively kill anything or anyone else! I remember in the book Black Boy by Richard Wright (which was an autobiography), Richard mentioned the time when his father did not want a kitten around and told Richard to kill the kitten. Richardís father did not mean that literally (and Richard knew that), but Richard followed the command literally anyway to fight back with his father out of his fatherís having a temper!
Thatís just crazy. Wouldnít alcoholic beverages dumped in a river, lake, ocean, etc. poison and maybe also kill fish?!

Yes, it would poison or kill the fish if the alcohol was dumped in sufficient quantities. 

He didn't mean it literally.  It's just another pastor preaching against something, using over-the-top language.



I can't believe some of you are seriously thinking this was a true story....why don't you get it? It was a JOKE.  Lighten up. It didn't happen in real life.  It was a  J-O-K-E. Definition: a thing that someone says to cause amusement or laughter, especially a story with a funny punchline. 

So, lighten up . Doctors agree that you need laughter in your life or it will shorten your life (that is a true statement).

1.  I know it was a joke.  I posted it.
2.  Instead of ridiculing the person who didn't get it,  I explained. 

Not everyone has the same sense of humor.  We all, at one time or another, don't "get it."

3
Off-Topic / Re: Way to close a sermon!
« on: July 12, 2019, 03:56:09 pm »Message ID: 1284029
Thatís just crazy. Wouldnít alcoholic beverages dumped in a river, lake, ocean, etc. poison and maybe also kill fish?!

Yes, it would poison or kill the fish if the alcohol was dumped in sufficient quantities. 

He didn't mean it literally.  It's just another pastor preaching against something, using over-the-top language.



No preacher really said this.  It is a JOKE!    People get way too bent out of shape over foolish stuff.

1. I know that.  I posted it.
2. I can also see why some people would take it literally.
3. I don't get the point of jumping on someone who doesn't see that it is a joke. 

4
Off-Topic / Re: Way to close a sermon!
« on: July 11, 2019, 05:43:46 pm »Message ID: 1283909
Thatís just crazy. Wouldnít alcoholic beverages dumped in a river, lake, ocean, etc. poison and maybe also kill fish?!

Yes, it would poison or kill the fish if the alcohol was dumped in sufficient quantities. 

He didn't mean it literally.  It's just another pastor preaching against something, using over-the-top language.


5
Off-Topic / Re: I don't understand...
« on: July 08, 2019, 03:45:04 pm »Message ID: 1283494
how a cemetery can raise its funeral prices, and blame it on the cost of living...



Yes.  :)

Is that supposed to be a kind of pun? ("cost of living" for the "dead"?)

6
Off-Topic / Re: Way to close a sermon!
« on: July 08, 2019, 03:32:16 pm »Message ID: 1283492
Lol I was wondering where this was going. It reminds me of a true story. During a religious service I attended, thunder was rumbling and the preacher was trying to talk a little faster so everyone could get home before the storm hit. The choir announced that the hymn was going to be "Rain Down" and the whole congregation burst out laughing.

That was awesome!  Thanks for sharing :)

7
Debate & Discuss / Re: What do you think about Transporting illegals
« on: July 08, 2019, 03:30:31 pm »Message ID: 1283491
No human being is illegal.  Seeking asylum is legal.

I'd rather people be put in sanctuary cities, where they can live safely, than be harassed by guards in prison or camps. 

They are illegal if they break the laws, which those who are breaking into our country are illegal and therefore, need to return to their country. Those caravan people have been told that we will allow them into our country with open arms if they say they re seeking asylum, which isn't true. Only 9% of those who claim asylum are true cases. The rest are bogus.  They need to be sent back home and not let go in our country before their cases come up because 99% never do show for their hearings. Sanctuary cities need to be shut down-IOW, those in charge need to be arrested for aiding and abetting illegals, especially those who are more than just illegals. those who murdered someone, assaulted someone, DUI endangering others.

No human being is illegal.  Committing an illegal act does not make a person illegal.

They are illegals.  The def of an illegal is a person who is in the country illegally.  So yes they are illegals.

No.  They are people.  Legal or illegal applies to acts, not people.

They are in the country illegally.  So yes they are ILLEGALS.  That is the term used to define people who are in the country illegally.  If you want to take a family in and take care of them feel free but we the tax payer should not have to support these law breakers.

By that reasoning, Trump is an illegal.  Jamie Dimon is an illegal.  Wells Fargo's CEO is an illegal.  They are lawbreakers, and were bailed out and subsidized by taxpayers. 

No human being is illegal.

8
Debate & Discuss / Re: What do you think about Transporting illegals
« on: July 08, 2019, 01:46:07 pm »Message ID: 1283459
No human being is illegal.  Seeking asylum is legal.

I'd rather people be put in sanctuary cities, where they can live safely, than be harassed by guards in prison or camps. 

They are illegal if they break the laws, which those who are breaking into our country are illegal and therefore, need to return to their country. Those caravan people have been told that we will allow them into our country with open arms if they say they re seeking asylum, which isn't true. Only 9% of those who claim asylum are true cases. The rest are bogus.  They need to be sent back home and not let go in our country before their cases come up because 99% never do show for their hearings. Sanctuary cities need to be shut down-IOW, those in charge need to be arrested for aiding and abetting illegals, especially those who are more than just illegals. those who murdered someone, assaulted someone, DUI endangering others.

No human being is illegal.  Committing an illegal act does not make a person illegal.

They are illegals.  The def of an illegal is a person who is in the country illegally.  So yes they are illegals.

No.  They are people.  Legal or illegal applies to acts, not people.

9
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: July 08, 2019, 11:34:29 am »Message ID: 1283446
95% is a made up statistic.  When you have to make up the numbers, you know it is a bogus argument.


I apologize for the wonky formatting. I was trying to make it more readable, and it messed up the columns and format a bit.


It looks like JediJohnnie's number is actually pretty close since the top six or seven reasons can all be boiled down to some sort of convenience excuse/argument. Is it exactly 95% - no, obviously not... But it is much closer to that (hovering around 90-95% depending on which you consider to be convenience arguments and since you cannot really classify the 4% other - can't rule it in, but also can't fully rule it out either) and far far far far away from being a "made up" statistic to support a bogus argument.


So before you decide to disregard someone's argument by accusing them of making up numbers, maybe do a little bit of research first. Dismissing an opposing viewpoint as bogus simply because it cites to a statistic is being just as shortsighted as what you are [wrongfully] accusing JediJohnnie of (i.e. making up numbers). That is the sort of tactic people who have no convincing counter argument usually resort to.


I pulled this list from this website under the heading The vast majority of abortions are elective. But if you look at their source (cited below) you can track it back to the original source - one that is widely cited elsewhere.




 
Why Women Choose Abortion
Inadequate finances to raise a child
21%
Not ready for responsibility
21%
Woman's life would be changed too much
16%
Problems with relationship; unmarried
12%
Too young; not mature enough
11%
Children are grown; woman has all she wants
8%
Unborn child has possible health problems
3%
Woman has health problems
3%
Pregnancy caused by rape, incest
1%
Other
4%
(Average number of reasons given:   3.7)
Source: Torres and Forrest, as cited by Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health and the Alan Guttmacher Institute in An Overview of Abortion in the United States
(October 2001)


None of the statistics equal "convenience."

10
Off-Topic / Way to close a sermon!
« on: July 08, 2019, 10:05:23 am »Message ID: 1283433
A pastor was completing a sermon on temperance.

"If I had all the beer in the world, I'd take it and throw it in the river!"

With even greater emphasis, he continued, "And if I had all the wine in the world, I'd take it and throw it in the river!!"

Finally, he said, "And if I had all the whiskey in the world, I'd throw it in the river, too!!"

Finished, he sat down, and the song leader stood up to lead the closing hymn.

"For our closing song, let us sing hymn number 365,  "Shall We Gather at the River..."

11
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: June 26, 2019, 08:00:05 pm »Message ID: 1281386
One of the flaws in the anti-abortion argument is it speaks from the Disney-fied version of childbirth.

Every pregnancy is different, and every woman is different.  And, no matter how rose-colored your glasses, pregnancy and childbirth is no easy thing. 

Bottom line, a woman has final say over her body, and her life. 

A woman shouldn't have the say over somebody else's body- I.E the child that will be killed.

The 'her body/her choice' crap is nonsense. We tell women what they can & can't do with their bodies all the time.

Want to take illegal drugs? The Government won't let you.

Want to rent yourself out as a prostitute? The Government won't let you (in 99% of the country)

Want to engage in pedophilia? The Government won't let you (and rightly so)

So, is it so horrendous a concept that the government tell a woman that she can't murder her unborn child for the sake of convenience?

We made certain drugs illegal.  So now, nobody takes drugs.

We made prostitution illegal.  So now, there are no more prostitutes.

We made pedophilia illegal.  Look Ma, no more pedophiles!

Abortion is never about convenience.  Never. 


And this argument is also nonsensical. As I said before (possibly in this thread) you can't dictate what's illegal on the basis of 'they'll do it anyway.'  It's an immoral treatment of a human life. And 95% of the time it IS only for the sake of convenience.

It's no more nonsensical than your argument. 

Women own their bodies.  It's not up to you to approve or disapprove, only to mind your own.

95% is a made up statistic.  When you have to make up the numbers, you know it is a bogus argument.

12
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: June 26, 2019, 07:08:26 pm »Message ID: 1281382
One of the flaws in the anti-abortion argument is it speaks from the Disney-fied version of childbirth.

Every pregnancy is different, and every woman is different.  And, no matter how rose-colored your glasses, pregnancy and childbirth is no easy thing. 

Bottom line, a woman has final say over her body, and her life. 

A woman shouldn't have the say over somebody else's body- I.E the child that will be killed.

The 'her body/her choice' crap is nonsense. We tell women what they can & can't do with their bodies all the time.

Want to take illegal drugs? The Government won't let you.

Want to rent yourself out as a prostitute? The Government won't let you (in 99% of the country)

Want to engage in pedophilia? The Government won't let you (and rightly so)

So, is it so horrendous a concept that the government tell a woman that she can't murder her unborn child for the sake of convenience?

We made certain drugs illegal.  So now, nobody takes drugs.

We made prostitution illegal.  So now, there are no more prostitutes.

We made pedophilia illegal.  Look Ma, no more pedophiles!

Abortion is never about convenience.  Never. 

13
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: June 19, 2019, 02:43:44 pm »Message ID: 1280571
One of the flaws in the anti-abortion argument is it speaks from the Disney-fied version of childbirth.

Every pregnancy is different, and every woman is different.  And, no matter how rose-colored your glasses, pregnancy and childbirth is no easy thing. 

Bottom line, a woman has final say over her body, and her life. 

14
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: June 19, 2019, 11:37:21 am »Message ID: 1280549

The abortion discussion centers around the fetus, or the unborn, rather than the woman and her right to life.
Thus reducing a woman to the status of an incubator, instead of a person with a mind and a soul.



Tell me I am not the only one to see the irony in this choice of phrasing.

Amazingly enough, a woman has a right to life.  That is not considered when fetishizing the unborn.


15
Debate & Discuss / Re: Abortion Ban
« on: June 17, 2019, 08:54:17 am »Message ID: 1280287
Banning abortions won't stop women from having them.  The bans are a futile effort, and a waste of taxpayer time and money.

"Between 1974 and 1983 the repeat abortion rate soared drastically - 166%."

It is definitely NOT a futile effort to ban abortions. And I can't think of a better way to spend taxpayer money. It would be first on my list.

"Since legalization, abortion has become so routine more than 40 million unborn
babies have been aborted since 1973. In 1996, 1,365,730 abortions were recorded, an
increase of well over 100% since 1973, when the annual figure was 615,831, according to
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. About every 20 seconds a baby is
aborted. 159 abortions are done every hour, 3,805 every day, 115,744 every month.
Almost 30% of all pregnancies are now ended by abortion."


The quotations are taken from Georgia Right To Life website.

The other data to consider is the effect that abortions have upon the mother including physical, psychological and emotional trauma and, in some cases, death.

It's also interesting to imagine what sort of people may have been lost forever who were geniuses in some field that would have been a vital asset to our country and we'll never know. We'll never know.


As I said, banning abortion won't stop them.  It will simply make it unsafe, and women will die.
What lowers the abortion rate is free and accessible birth control. 
Women aren't incubators.



I agree that banning abortions will not stop them, but legalization drastically increases the number. I guess you didn't read my post before you wrote your response. Banning anything is not an answer, but saying that birth control is an option is obvious but doesn't always work and it's not free.

Abstinence is free but that's not practiced very much anymore.

The people who opt for abortions are generally looking for an easy way out of an uncomfortable position they got themselves into. It's a selfish act that totally disregards another person's right to life.

There are many organizations that are willing to help people deal with their particular situation (unwanted pregnancy) that might not be as easy, but are obviously more humane.

What does your comment about incubators have to do with the post? I never said women were incubators. Here is the definition. What is your point?

in∑cu∑ba∑tor

   1.  an enclosed apparatus providing a controlled environment for the care and protection of premature or 
         unusually small babies.
   2.   an apparatus used to hatch eggs or grow microorganisms under controlled conditions.   
   3.  a place, especially with support staff and equipment, made available at low rent to new small businesses.


An incubator is a machine, without a mind or soul, whose sole purpose is to bring a fetus to a point that it can survive outside the incubator.

The abortion discussion centers around the fetus, or the unborn, rather than the woman and her right to life.
Thus reducing a woman to the status of an incubator, instead of a person with a mind and a soul.

That was my point.





Pages: 1 2 3 ... 85