The only thing that bothered me is the gestapo style tactics some felt towards others of differing opinions.

Otherwise, just remember, in this country some places are too homey some are too tight. Just make sure not to piss off someone dangerous.

-Shoe

ShoeUnited Wrote: The only thing that bothered me is the gestapo style tactics some felt towards others of differing opinions. Otherwise, just remember, in this country some places are too homey some are too tight. Just make sure not to piss off someone dangerous. -Shoe

Yeah like religious freakos intimidating gays, protesting outside their house with signs like 'You will burn in hell', etc.

I see what your saying with that. Most of Texas is kinda homey and tight. So I've grown up in alien territory lol. But yeah there are dangerous people, i.e. people who bomb abortion clinics.

In the sense of democrats and republicans, yes it is a divided nation. The parties really get on my nerves. A democrat switches to the republican party and they act like it was some player in a league that got traded. Like shaq left and went to Chicago. The parties are supposed to represent two different ideals/views on issues. So you are telling me that someone who spent decades on the Democratic party suddenly woke up oned ay and said, "You know, I woke up today and all my views on things were different, I really feel like a Republican now!". It's a joke really.

I hate this bickering back and forth between candidates. Instead of bickering they should be putting their heads together and coming up with ideas to improve our economy, to improve the American way of life. But instead we would rather argue about who did what during Vietnam. There will never be a "Uniting of America" as long as this continues. It's just like a slap in the face. Even if the Democratic candidate has better ideas than the Republican, do you think the Republicans will ever support it? Nope.

Instead of being Democrats and Republicans, why don't you just be Americans. Stop acting like you are playing for a team. These are our elected leaders and yet they act like they are playing on a little league or something.

Although it might sound good to the average Joe, at heart, the idea of bi-partisanship in politics, in most cases, is a bit of joke. Conflict of ideas is at the heart of politics. Of democracy really, because remember, in a lot of other places this clash of ideas is very violent.

Although I do think at certain times it gets intense enough where we do start to have civil unrest over it. But if you look at most Parliaments around the world, then our Congress, you will notice our Congress is actually pretty civil.

I was really talking in society as well we are very divided. Economic status, unfortunately, is increasingly dividing us. I lived in this small rural town from age 5 to 13 and went to their school.

There was a nearby gated community. Nearly all of the teachers and administration were from this gated community(which was upper middle class). However, the students from there were a minority in the school, but it seemed to revolve around them, and the teachers in truth seemed to care little for the rest of our educations. It was very clannish.

Also, a lot of it is social issues. I am pro-legalization, pro-choice, and irreligious. There are millions of Americans who see those views as evil, and that is part of the problem. Dissagreements are fine. The problem is, often these days, it translates into actual hate. Or that is what I have seen from my own experiances. Most social liberals like myself have no problem with social conservatives lifestyle, yet most of them seem to be intolerant of our's.

there are 2 Americas...America and America Jr. aka Canada.

So to John Kerry, this diversity is bad? Interesting.

]0MBAT Wrote: So to John Kerry, this diversity is bad? Interesting.

Where in the world did you draw that conclusion? It really seems out of thin air. What I was saying is, we seemed to be getting more polarized not just in politics but in society in general in a lot of ways.

I wasn't saying not to have diversity.

What bothers me, and made me think of this topic is, I think the silent majority is socially liberal, but the conservative Christian minority, and their puppet in the White House, try to force their 'morality' down the throats of other people. For example, Bush banning stem cell, because of his religious beliefs.

you know what ]0MBAT, i have a question for you...guess who said this??

"The problem with the French is that they dont have a word for entrepreneur"?? Take a wild guess...

Vote John Kerry for Prez!!

TheTinMan2005 Wrote: But yeah there are dangerous people, i.e. people who bomb abortion clinics.

I always find that very ironic. Those people claim to be pro-life, and yet their killing people to try to get their point across...

I find it ironic when people are anti-hunting, anti-war, but yet they are pro-abortion.

chainzofmisery Wrote: there are 2 Americas...America and America Jr. aka Canada.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAno.

Hellllll, no.

Much as you'd like to think it, no.

North and South America, I though everyone knew that?

BTW, nice to see you again SHoe, where've you been?

It is bad when one of the groups (Nazi-ah I mean republicans) seek to segregate and limit options for groups

]0MBAT Wrote: So to John Kerry, this diversity is bad? Interesting.

That's a two sided argument moron. One could say killing handicap people for murders they don't remember is more evil than killing an UNBORN baby.

You can't murder someone who never existed in the first place.

If something has a beating heart, I believe that is existing.

TheTinMan2005 Wrote: You can't murder someone who never existed in the first place.

I'd suggest learning your biology a little bit better. The baby(which is a zygote, an embryo, and then a fetus) is not considere 'alive' until 16 weeks into the pregnancy, abortions are supposed to be performed before than. If its not even alive yet how can it be 'murder'.

Just giving my opinion, no need to start calling names.

anubis177 Wrote: Just giving my opinion, no need to start calling names.

Whatever dude, you indirectly insulted me, trying to imply that I was a hypocrite. Your argument would be valid, if the baby was ALIVE when they do the abortion, but like I stated, they can only perform them up to a certain point in the pregnancy. Guys, lets not get bitter in this thread. Perhaps I should not have made it if we cannot control our emotions.

Learn my biology you say. I know the stages of development. Thanks for sharing tho. That has no bearing on what you said. Whether you call it a zygote, embryo or fetus, it's all the same baby. At around 24 days, the baby starts to develop a heartbeat, a nervous system, a skeletal system, muscles and blood starts to flow.

Sounds pretty much alive to me. I can find you some links if you need me to.

Please do, because I have never heard that before.

Whoa... Hold up there chief. I did not intend on insulting you(directly or indirectly), I was just stating an opinion based on what the guy above me posted, it had nothing to do with you.

If you are talking about me being bitter, and needing to control my emotions, you are mistaken.

Please tell me where I was letting my emotions get out of control, because I honestly have no idea how you drew that.

Alright.

This should be all you need.