The American Version of Osama Bin Ladin

[Guest]

We must do all we can to guard against this mad man.

"Retard" Santorum does it again, this time by insulting JFK - YouTube

Anyone that will force their religion and way of life on others is a major threat to our constitution and our freedoms. Give your support to Romney so we can stop this madman from destroying our way of life in America.

[Guest]

We must do all we can to guard against this mad man.

"Retard" Santorum does it again, this time by insulting JFK - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJE_IXpFWlw)

Anyone that will force their religion and way of life on others is a major threat to our constitution and our freedoms. Give your support to Romney so we can stop this madman from destroying our way of life in America.

Cannot say I like Santorum's version of what the US society should look like either but that hardly rates a comparison with Osama bin Laden. Aren't you forgetting 9/11 entirely when you make such a claim.

[Guest]

This is the danger of hyperbole. An otherwise rational, cogent argument expressing reservations about Rick Santorum is diminished by a sensationalist headline (or, in this case, Thread Title)

[Guest]

So now Rick Santorum in expressing his belief that JFK was wrong in his statement that "the separation of church and state must be absolute" is compared with Osama Bin Laden?

How are you to respond to a person who writes such off the wall statements that have no basis in reality?

1960 was a different time, and many many people were not keen about Catholics in high office due to their belief that Catholics would be answerable to the Pope before the Constitution.

But, the Constitution does not have a restriction against faith in the public square, and there is no "separation of church and state" written into the Constitution. That is a fact that no one can dispute.

In fact, it is quite the opposite. The first amendment to the Constitution guaranteed U.S. citizens the freedom to practice their religion free from government oversight and interference.

Now, Santorum could have been a little more diplomatic in the way he expressed himself, but to degrade him as some sort of monster is now about the stupidest thing I've read on this forum.

Rick Santorum | Church And State | JFK | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/26/santorum-i-don’t-believe-in-an-america-where-the-separation-of-church-and-state-is-absolute-video/)

[Guest]

Maybe the great Ronald Reagan can explain this better than I.

Ronald Reagan Tribute -- Bel Air Presbyterian Church - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OvN1jTkzXbY)

[Guest]

BUT, put a madman with his strange beliefs in the white house and you will see the prisons filled with men who wear condoms or women that have a child out of wedlock. When it comes to making laws for all Americans, their is not room for God in that process. Can I get an amen to that. He should be and would make a good baptist, but he needs to keep his twisted mind out of our personal business.

[Guest]

BUT, put a madman with his strange beliefs in the white house and you will see the prisons filled with men who wear condoms or women that have a child out of wedlock. When it comes to making laws for all Americans, their is not room for God in that process. Can I get an amen to that. He should be and would make a good baptist, but he needs to keep his twisted mind out of my personal business.

When you begin a post by calling someone a name...I stop reading !!!

[Guest]

When you begin a post by calling someone a name...I stop reading !!!

whew, I dodged that one. Thanks bucco.

[Guest]

...and try to think about how what we post here can contribute to our collective understanding of political issues...and minimize the amount of bile that might result from what we post. All that before we hit the "Submit" button.

[Guest]

...and try to think about how what we post here can contribute to our collective understanding of political issues...and minimize the amount of bile that might result from what we post. All that before we hit the "Submit" button.

Good point. I do try to do that most of the time.

[Guest]

BUT, put a madman with his strange beliefs in the white house and you will see the prisons filled with men who wear condoms or women that have a child out of wedlock. When it comes to making laws for all Americans, their is not room for God in that process. Can I get an amen to that. He should be and would make a good baptist, but he needs to keep his twisted mind out of our personal business.

VII: I recognize and understand your concern of ensuring that America has chosen the right person for our most important leadership role. However, I must admit that I am perplexed in exactly what position (s) Santorum has taken that equate his thinking to be that of a madman. His disagreement with the issue of birth control be it by contraceptives or abortion is a moral issue to him and one in which he has expressed time and time again his beleief in the sancity of life. I am more fearful of an elected official who aggressively would support gratitious abortions because it is a short leap from that mind set to one of eliminating others as unwanted individuals that are perceived in weighing down America. It is also a short leap from the freedom for birth control to a state sponsored birth containment plan mandated by a government. In short I am more comfortable with a person who demonstrates moral courage and conviction. Finally Santorums beliefs do not and cannot translate into laws of the land for no other reason, and there are many, than that citizens won't tolerate it. I am not a Santorum suppporter but of course would vote for him over Obama because Obama's mind set does concern me. I opine others can decide

[Guest]

VII: I recognize and understand your concern of ensuring that America has chosen the right person for our most important leadership role. However, I must admit that I am perplexed in exactly what position (s) Santorum has taken that equate his thinking to be that of a madman. His disagreement with the issue of birth control be it by contraceptives or abortion is a moral issue to him and one in which he has expressed time and time again his beleief in the sancity of life. I am more fearful of an elected official who aggressively would support gratitious abortions because it is a short leap from that mind set to one of eliminating others as unwanted individuals that are perceived in weighing down America. It is also a short leap from the freedom for birth control to a state sponsored birth containment plan mandated by a government. In short I am more comfortable with a person who demonstrates moral courage and conviction. Finally Santorums beliefs do not and cannot translate into laws of the land for no other reason, and there are many, than that citizens won't tolerate it. I am not a Santorum suppporter but of course would vote for him over Obama because Obama's mind set does concern me. I opine others can decide

Well said, and I respect your right to feel the way you do. I;however, see overpopulation as the largest threat to the world at this time. Santorum would only increase population due to his (in my opinion) superstitious beliefs about reproduction. You may like to see 5 billion people in the US, I would like to limit it to at or even less than we have now. That does not make either one of us right, just two opinions. We have people breeding like rabbits with no way to support their offspring. Any intelligent person with a brain can see that overpopulation causes decease, starvation, etc. Mankind will have to stop this madness or destroy the planet. It is bad enough to have someone like santorum preach his nonsense about abortion, but to even insinuate NO Birth control at all is the sounds made by a madman. Wake up people, this is no cartoon your living in, its real life.

[Guest]

Well said, and I respect your right to feel the way you do. I;however, see overpopulation as the largest threat to the world at this time. Santorum would only increase population due to his (in my opinion) superstitious beliefs about reproduction. You may like to see 5 billion people in the US, I would like to limit it to at or even less than we have now. That does not make either one of us right, just two opinions. We have people breeding like rabbits with no way to support their offspring. Any intelligent person with a brain can see that overpopulation causes decease, starvation, etc. Mankind will have to stop this madness or destroy the planet. It is bad enough to have someone like santorum preach his nonsense about abortion, but to even insinuate NO Birth control at all is the sounds made by a madman. Wake up people, this is no cartoon your living in, its real life.

OOHHH, now I completely understand your comparison of him to the world's most famous terrorist who took down the World Trade Center towers.

Here's a link to help you with this.

The Insanity Test (http://penddraig.co.uk/pen/tests/sanity.htm) :loco::wave:

[Guest]

Well said, and I respect your right to feel the way you do. I;however, see overpopulation as the largest threat to the world at this time. Santorum would only increase population due to his (in my opinion) superstitious beliefs about reproduction. You may like to see 5 billion people in the US, I would like to limit it to at or even less than we have now. That does not make either one of us right, just two opinions. We have people breeding like rabbits with no way to support their offspring. Any intelligent person with a brain can see that overpopulation causes decease, starvation, etc. Mankind will have to stop this madness or destroy the planet. It is bad enough to have someone like santorum preach his nonsense about abortion, but to even insinuate NO Birth control at all is the sounds made by a madman. Wake up people, this is no cartoon your living in, its real life.

lifeissues | Overpopulation? (http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/kas/kas_01overpopulation.html)

I can see having too many kids being a bad idea if you do not have enough resources to support them. It looks though from the little research I have done on overpopulation that diseases, starvation, war, and famine are more the result of political and economic problems in various countries and not really on there being too many people.

[Guest]

OOHHH, now I completely understand your comparison of him to the world's most famous terrorist who took down the World Trade Center towers.

Here's a link to help you with this.

The Insanity Test (http://penddraig.co.uk/pen/tests/sanity.htm) :loco::wave:

:pray :barf

[Guest]

Osama: If your not a Muslim you die

Sanitarium: If your not a Christian you Burn in Hell.

Yes, Osama was more violent, but no more fanatical than rick

I see very little difference between these two fanatics.

That said, I just hope enough folks read about the Madman so not to vote for him.

Keep poking at me and I will give you what you ask for. :boxing2:

[Guest]

There are so many sides to this over population scenario. For example it is said "statistically" that because of the lack of reproduction in less than 200 years both Italians and Irish will no longer exist. The Japanese also have the same problems as America but unlike Japan America has a vast flow of immigrants. So essentially its not a population problem entirely but rather the proper geographical and soci-economic application of birth control.

Do you believe that many of those reproducing rapidly as you indicate know, care or realize the consequences of their acts? I don't and its why I believe we should begin with educating young people about their responsibilities and the benfits of celibacy. I am not adverse to birth control devices but you first have to educate people about the former.

But we may never get back to that point as young people look all around them and society ( movies, books, teachers, peers, etc) keep telling them gratitutious sex is a good thing.

I recognize this is somewhat simplistic and the applications more complex but we need to return to the moral aspects of pre-martial sex and reinforce good behavior with rewards; otherwise our astronmical teen births will continue.

Again Santorum has some solid points.....I just saying......

[Guest]

Overpopulation is not a problem! It is underpopulation that is causing peoples to become extinct. It is underpopulation that has wrecked old age pension plans throughout the Western World.

I am voting for Santorum on Tuesday. We do not need Barack Oromney.

[Guest]

World population has reached 7 billion on October 31, 2011

[Guest]

If you do your homework, you will find that significant and irreversible population declines are underway in all of Europe, Japan, China and the rest of the developed world. The US is the exception and that is because of illegal immigration.

[Guest]

If you do your homework, you will find that significant and irreversible population declines are underway in all of Europe, Japan, China and the rest of the developed world. The US is the exception and that is because of illegal immigration.

One more reason to supply birth control to the other countries.

[Guest]

Now, Santorum could have been a little more diplomatic in the way he expressed himself, but to degrade him as some sort of monster is now about the stupidest thing I've read on this forum.

Rick Santorum | Church And State | JFK | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/26/santorum-i-don’t-believe-in-an-america-where-the-separation-of-church-and-state-is-absolute-video/)

Except that he LIED about the tone of JFK's message. Santorum said he hated that only people of no faith were 'allowed in the public square' when there was no such statement. People of faith ARE allowed in the public square and JFK
said that. It's just that there are certain rights that shouldn't be trampled on.

Remember, the whole reason for that speech was that people were afraid that, if JFK won the Presidency, being a Catholic, that he would be taking orders from the Pope.

[Guest]

One more reason to supply birth control to the other countries.First you say that overpopulation is the greatest threat to the world. Then, when shown you are wrong, you say it's time to drive population lower. Thomas Malthus preached this doctrine in the late 1700', Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives advocating strict racial segregation to preserve the white race and discourage other races from having children and Deng Xiaoping established the one child policy in China. Which of these courses of action are you advocating?

[Guest]

Except that he LIED about the tone of JFK's message. Santorum said he hated that only people of no faith were 'allowed in the public square' when there was no such statement. People of faith ARE allowed in the public square and JFK
said that. It's just that there are certain rights that shouldn't be trampled on.

Remember, the whole reason for that speech was that people were afraid that, if JFK won the Presidency, being a Catholic, that he would be taking orders from the Pope.

I think you just twisted Santorum's words around. The way he said them gives them a bit of a different flavor that you gave them.

The context of JFK's statements notwithstanding (and I already made your point), Santorum has every right to disagree with what JFK said. JFK was wrong in Santorum's view, and the view of most Americans I could argue.

[Guest]

First you say that overpopulation is the greatest threat to the world. Then, when shown you are wrong, you say it's time to drive population lower. Thomas Malthus preached this doctrine in the late 1700', Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives advocating strict racial segregation to preserve the white race and discourage other races from having children and Deng Xiaoping established the one child policy in China. Which of these courses of action are you advocating?

Not even close. If we are all gods children, why would you care what race covers more earth than an other? Twist my words all you wish. I can turn the other cheek

[Guest]

You’re right, it is not close but dead on. You want population reduction, but since it is not the Europeans, the Chinese, the Japanese, etc. be specific - what country, religion or race do you want to decrease? I know it’s hard for a liberal/progressive to speak honestly and still be politically correct – but try. Which group/race do you want to see decline/disappear? You cannot say none of the above and still pretend to be honest. Your words are not being twisted, but rather exposed.

[Guest]

I think you just twisted Santorum's words around. The way he said them gives them a bit of a different flavor that you gave them.


Here are Santorum's words - a direct quote:


To say that people of faith have no role in the public square? You bet that makes you throw up. What kind of country do we live that says only people of non-faith can come into the public square and make their case?


Read it closely. He says we live in a country where only people of non-faith can come into the public square and that is BLATANTLY not true. I mean, good grief, people of faith are CONSTANTLY exercising their First Ammendment rights to make their case!

Now, those are the facts. My OPINION as to why Santorum said that would be another matter.

[Guest]

Here are Santorum's words - a direct quote:



Read it closely. He says we live in a country where only people of non-faith can come into the public square and that is BLATANTLY not true. I mean, good grief, people of faith are CONSTANTLY exercising their First Ammendment rights to make their case!

Now, those are the facts. My OPINION as to why Santorum said that would be another matter.

OK; even if you are correct; Santorum is not far off. Religion is being eliminated from the public square at every turn, and you've got to know that.

We've further down the road of "freedom from religion" that the "freedom of religion" that our founders guaranteed us in the Constitution that we were when JFK was President and no one, not even you, can dispute that.

Religion is under assault in this country by the secular establishment.

[Guest]

You’re right, it is not close but dead on. You want population reduction, but since it is not the Europeans, the Chinese, the Japanese, etc. be specific - what country, religion or race do you want to decrease? I know it’s hard for a liberal/progressive to speak honestly and still be politically correct – but try. Which group/race do you want to see decline/disappear? You cannot say none of the above and still pretend to be honest. Your words are not being twisted, but rather exposed.

The US should be at or less than it is right now.