Well now that the election is over...

[karl k]

Pete, you don't really believe this do you? Sorry bud, white men don't get off that easy. Racism in case you didn't know it is on the rise. Institutional racism is not gone, it has metamorphsized into a much more subtle culture. Blacks are still not widely welcomed in the board room, still lagging in employment, health, education, and in the highest reaches of government. Let's not even mention Hispanics. Anyone who believes that racism is no more has obviously closed their eyes, or have buried their heads deep in sand. White men still control the board room, the government, education, finance you name it. And it looks like they are not willing to share that control anytime soon



This is a bunch of pish posh. The gay "marriage" amendment is about hate and intolerance, even this straight guy can see that. You cannot legislate morality, and you cannot force any form of morality on anyone. How health comes into the issue escapes me, can you enlighten me on that one? When my wife was alive, I cannot see for the life of me how two married men would negatively affect us. My next door neighbors are two men that have been together longer than every married couple in the neighborhood. They have raised two beautiful little kids, who are now by the way two grown young people attending college. Living next door to them has been a very enlightening experience. They are not as wicked and self indulgant as Alan Keys has lead us all to believe.

You appear to be educated and leaning a little left, maybe you can enlighten me as to the Dems "Big Picture"? What is their core ideology as you see it. While I do take great pleasure in watching the conflict baloon before my eyes, PLEASE answer my question before it gets lost in the insueing arguement.

Thanks for being a standup guy!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You appear to be educated and leaning a little left, maybe you can enlighten me as to the Dems "Big Picture"? What is their core ideology as you see it. While I do take great pleasure in watching the conflict baloon before my eyes, PLEASE answer my question before it gets lost in the insueing arguement.

Thanks for being a standup guy!

Karl, I am more of a moderate than left leaning. I have no clear idea what the demo's big picture is, and neither do they which is part of the problem. As far as I know, its strengthening the middle, and lower class through tax cuts, healthcare for everyone, strong military, balanced budget, more money for education. Those seem to be the themes I have heard for the last couple of elections. Oh, and the get rid of Bush montra, which I don't think is particularly helpful.

[piece-it pete]

Karl, I am more of a moderate than left leaning.

I take issue with this.

If someone's a moderate, that implies middle of the road. If you're middle of the road, why haven't you agreed with the GOP over anything of substance, while fighting for the Libs at every turn?

Pete

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I take issue with this.

If someone's a moderate, that implies middle of the road. If you're middle of the road, why haven't you agreed with the GOP over anything of substance, while fighting for the Libs at every turn?

Pete

Perhaps because no GOP issues have been mentioned here that I agree with. And please refrain from calling all democrats libs. We are not all that way, just like not all GOP supporters are not racist haters.

[Chris]

And please refrain from calling all democrats libs.

Aren't they the same thing? My Republican friends seem to think so. Isn't a liberal anyone who doesn't agree with Bush's policies? Oh wait, those are communists and terrorists...

[piece-it pete]

Perhaps because no GOP issues have been mentioned here that I agree with. And please refrain from calling all democrats libs. We are not all that way, just like not all GOP supporters are not racist haters.

You mention in your response to karl:

"Republicans(especially the old school repubs, not this new generation) had plenty of ideals I openly support. Strong military, balanced budgets, smaller government and less intervention in private matters. The new generation of repubs talk about these things, but they fail in practice."

I have not seen the arguments that back this statement up, except the budget, which was a Kerry mantra.

Libs, well, not intended as a slight. Sometimes I use Dems. I used to use Cons as well - but it just didn't come off very well .

Although many would agree .

Further, you are now parsing your statement about hate and intolerance. So let's come to an agreement: I'll stick to Reps and Dems, you drop the hate and intolerance.

BTW, I am so conservative I made Kerrys' blood freeze when he saw me. I have questioned my continueing participation in the Grand Old Party as it drifts left. If you think the "old" Reps would have allowed abortion and gay "marriage" you are quite mistaken.

The neocons you are referring to are in for quite a shock this term. It should be a lot of fun watching!

Pete

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You mention in your response to karl:

"Republicans(especially the old school repubs, not this new generation) had plenty of ideals I openly support. Strong military, balanced budgets, smaller government and less intervention in private matters. The new generation of repubs talk about these things, but they fail in practice."

I have not seen the arguments that back this statement up, except the budget, which was a Kerry mantra.

Okay, Its a fact that government has not gotten smaller under Bush. It has gotten larger, that is a fact. This anti gay amendment is more government intervention in private matters. The military is stronger because of weapons developement under a Democratic leadership.

Libs, well, not intended as a slight. Sometimes I use Dems. I used to use Cons as well - but it just didn't come off very well .

Although many would agree .

I guess many would agree(especially blacks and the poor) that the Republican party is the party of rich white racists, overly judgemental bible thumping christians, and white collar thieves, but I am sure that wouldn't go over well either.

Further, you are now parsing your statement about hate and intolerance. So let's come to an agreement: I'll stick to Reps and Dems, you drop the hate and intolerance.

I will be more than glad to drop hate and intolerance when the Republican work harder on equal rights for all, and less on discriminating against gays. Their actions warrant the words intolerance and hate.

BTW, I am so conservative I made Kerrys' blood freeze when he saw me. I have questioned my continueing participation in the Grand Old Party as it drifts left. If you think the "old" Reps would have allowed abortion and gay "marriage" you are quite mistaken.

No, I would expect them to be more hateful and intolerant than they are now. But then I wasn't referring to either of thse issues when talking about "old" republicans. It just goes to show how much you guys have progress. You were discriminators and haters back then, and you still are today. So much for party progress.

The neocons you are referring to are in for quite a shock this term. It should be a lot of fun watching!

Pete

Yes, it will be very interesting to see how the course of action this president has chosen to take will unite this country.

[piece-it pete]

Okay, Its a fact that government has not gotten smaller under Bush. It has gotten larger, that is a fact. This anti gay amendment is more government intervention in private matters. The military is stronger because of weapons developement under a Democratic leadership.

Yep, like the Star Wars program.

When is the last time the gov't has gotten smaller? Hoover? Well maybe Truman as the war wound down. I'll have to look sometime. The only issue is how fast it grows.

I see the gov't as intruding on a private matter, the definition of marriage. The vast majority agree. So we will take away the power of the gov't to force it.

I suppose the military became stronger by voting for equipment, before voting against it.

I guess many would agree(especially blacks and the poor) that the Republican party is the party of rich white racists, overly judgemental bible thumping christians, and white collar thieves, but I am sure that wouldn't go over well either.

Sir TT, my comments were directed at the Reps. My apologies if that was unclear.

I will be more than glad to drop hate and intolerance when the Republican work harder on equal rights for all, and less on discriminating against gays. Their actions warrant the words intolerance and hate.

So, the Democratic partys' actions do not warrant the new meaning of the word "liberal"?

No, I would expect them to be more hateful and intolerant than they are now. But then I wasn't referring to either of thse issues when talking about "old" republicans. It just goes to show how much you guys have progress. You were discriminators and haters back then, and you still are today. So much for party progress.

I assume you are dropping the appearance of neutrality now? I would say this has degenerated into a name-calling match, except only one side is calling names.

The "old" Republican party freed the slaves.

Yes, it will be very interesting to see how the course of action this president has chosen to take will unite this country.

How would a Dem unite the country? Agree on gay "marriage", and not agree on it?

Fact is, there are two or more sides to every question. Somebody will always be upset. If you can come up with a way to unite us, please clue us in.

Pete

[Chris]

We aren't denying gays anything, unless you change the definition of marriage to include them.

All issues that are brought up, be it inheritance, hospital visits, etc, as reasons to change marriage can all be addressed RIGHT NOW through current legal devices like wills, living wills, and power of attorney.

Actually, don't married couples get lower auto insurance rates, pay less for medical insurance, and are eligible for medical benefits where gay couples aren't? I would say that's denying them the same opportunities. You don't have to allow them to marry, just give them the same opportunities. By denying them, you're basically implying that they are inferior and that they do not deserve the same benefits rewarded to married couples. That's where I see it being wrong.

This is one fundamental belief I disagree with in Christianity (and other religions). I'm as straight as they come, but I feel a great injustice for the gay people I know who have had to endure being outcasts because of religion. I don't fault you for fully embracing a religion that outcasts a certain group of people. You're taught to believe things and not to question them. I just wish people would look at things from the outside a little more and realize what great atrocities have been attributed to religion in the past. Just ask the terrorists - they seem to think it's perfectly fine to murder innocent people in the name of their God - luckily others don't agree. Though sexuality is different than race, it is still alienation of a people, and it's something you teach your children to do. Hopefully we don't regress too far with these new bans.

The whole freedom of religion thing just sounds a little ironic at times like this. Here we're saying that anyone can practice any religion they want, yet our laws only reflect the beliefs of one religion. And some are trying to create new laws based on that one religion that we all will have to live by. Faith is good folks, but religion can be a little scary sometimes. Pete, I don't think you "hate" gays. But I must ask how many gay friends you have. Through the gay people I've come to know and befreind, I've learned more about what they go through and have realized that they are good people like you and I. Why create more laws that prevent them from being apart of our society?

Anyway, there's not much that can be done to battle a religious belief thousands of years old. If some had their way in our country, we'd still have slavery - and that's not even a religious belief, just a deep-rooted hatred. I fear this is something we'll have to agree to disagree on. I'm rambling now. Thanks for listening...

[piece-it pete]

Chris,

It took I while, but I've figured out why I enjoy discussing various things - I learn why, exactly, I believe certain things, and why others believe what they do. Glaring inaccuracies get uncovered, new facts discovered, on and on.

It's a shame it gets heated to the point where folks genuinely believe the other side is coming from a place that is not very good, particularly when previously they liked and respected each other. Nature of the beast, I guess.

Guess it's my turn to ramble!

Actually, don't married couples get lower auto insurance rates, pay less for medical insurance, and are eligible for medical benefits where gay couples aren't? I would say that's denying them the same opportunities. You don't have to allow them to marry, just give them the same opportunities. By denying them, you're basically implying that they are inferior and that they do not deserve the same benefits rewarded to married couples. That's where I see it being wrong.

I would tolerate ( ) some sort of civil union. That said, the issues you mention above also apply to single people, who are therefore discriminated against.

This is one fundamental belief I disagree with in Christianity (and other religions). I'm as straight as they come, but I feel a great injustice for the gay people I know who have had to endure being outcasts because of religion. I don't fault you for fully embracing a religion that outcasts a certain group of people. You're taught to believe things and not to question them. I just wish people would look at things from the outside a little more and realize what great atrocities have been attributed to religion in the past. Just ask the terrorists - they seem to think it's perfectly fine to murder innocent people in the name of their God - luckily others don't agree. Though sexuality is different than race, it is still alienation of a people, and it's something you teach your children to do. Hopefully we don't regress too far with these new bans.

Christianity goes deeper than that. All sinners are outcasts - and all are sinners in the eyes of God.

Butthat doesn't mean that we as a society should validate it! Just as we should attempt to limit divorce, we should keep marriage the way it is.

The whole freedom of religion thing just sounds a little ironic at times like this. Here we're saying that anyone can practice any religion they want, yet our laws only reflect the beliefs of one religion. And some are trying to create new laws based on that one religion that we all will have to live by. Faith is good folks, but religion can be a little scary sometimes. Pete, I don't think you "hate" gays. But I must ask how many gay friends you have. Through the gay people I've come to know and befreind, I've learned more about what they go through and have realized that they are good people like you and I. Why create more laws that prevent them from being apart of our society?

2, and a family member, and a coworker, who I occasionally travel with. Mostly nice folks, but wow some bizarre relationships.

We're not creating laws excluding them, we are preventing laws from being created that validate them as legitimate "marriages".

The reason the laws here are based on one religion because, well, the majority is one religion. Outside of Constitutional protection the majority rules. Moreover, this is a good thing, as all the Founding Fathers agreed that this system of gov't, that they designed, would only work with a society based on the ten commandments.

Anyway, there's not much that can be done to battle a religious belief thousands of years old. If some had their way in our country, we'd still have slavery - and that's not even a religious belief, just a deep-rooted hatred. I fear this is something we'll have to agree to disagree on. I'm rambling now. Thanks for listening...

This isn't slavery, but yes, we can agree to disagree. Nice talking to you.

Pete

[karl k]

Karl, I am more of a moderate than left leaning. I have no clear idea what the demo's big picture is, and neither do they which is part of the problem. As far as I know, its strengthening the middle, and lower class through tax cuts, healthcare for everyone, strong military, balanced budget, more money for education. Those seem to be the themes I have heard for the last couple of elections. Oh, and the get rid of Bush montra, which I don't think is particularly helpful.

Seeing you write about racism and other "dem supported" issues pertaining to predjustice, you seemed a little left. I, with yourself, am more in the middle than I may seem. I, like yourself(again) speak about equality and the freedom to do as I wish(as long as it's not hurting anyone) pretty passionately. And rightfully so...IMHO. In general, you seem to have the same handle on the left and the right as I and many others. I went to the DNC and RNC websites and did a little reading.(I figured someone would tell me to do so anyway) Not overly enlightening, but did expect more spin than I got.

Anyway, I wont bore you any longer. I just wanted to thank you for answering my question personally in the context I asked for.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Seeing you write about racism and other "dem supported" issues pertaining to predjustice, you seemed a little left. I, with yourself, am more in the middle than I may seem. I, like yourself(again) speak about equality and the freedom to do as I wish(as long as it's not hurting anyone) pretty passionately. And rightfully so...IMHO. In general, you seem to have the same handle on the left and the right as I and many others. I went to the DNC and RNC websites and did a little reading.(I figured someone would tell me to do so anyway) Not overly enlightening, but did expect more spin than I got.

Anyway, I wont bore you any longer. I just wanted to thank you for answering my question personally in the context I asked for.

Karl, I guess It would seem like I am from the left because I talk about prejudice and racism. The Republicans don't usually want to talk about it because they are usually the perpretrators(Prop 209 and 187 and totally anti affirmative action)

Republicans(especially the old school repubs, not this new generation) had plenty of ideals I openly support. Strong military, balanced budgets, smaller government and less intervention in private matters. The new generation of repubs talk about these things, but they fail in practice.