My Mom Won't Vote for Ron Paul because...

Newsflash fuckheads, not believing in god doesn't make you clever. Congratulations, you don't believe in invisible friends who live in the sky. Yeah, you're definitely on your way to being the next Einstein. Better get on facebook and post some cleaver images showing how atheists are awesome and everyone else are mouth breathing knuckle draggers.

STFU and stop acting like you're so smart and edgy for not believing in a god, you're giving atheists a bad name and making people think we are all annoying faggots.

Furthermore, so what if Paul is a christian? When is the last fucking time we had a god damn president that WASNT a christain? Obama sat in that anti-white and anti-american coon church for 20 years but he still god elected. That's all you faggots have on Paul is that he doesn't agree with killing babies and he believes in an imaginary friend in the sky? If those were the only faults of our last 10 presidents America would be so awesome we would have relocated to the moon by now to get away from the peasants on Earth.
 


That's precisely why Romney won't win the general. America is a Christian nation and every President has been and probably will continue to be Christian.

It's the same in Iran, where every President is Shi'ite.

Or in Israel, where every President is Jewish.

There are social power reasons why the political elites prefers people of specific faiths. Regardless of the truth value of religion, it plays an overwhelming role in our society.
 
People decide who they vote for based on their religion beliefs? I'll vote for the person that involves religion the least. It's a never ending debate and a waste of time.
 
Paul is (clearly) a libertarian.

The fundamental axiom of libertarian theory is that no one may threaten or commit violence ("aggress") against another man's person or property.

...

In short, no violence may be employed against a non-aggressor. Here is the fundamental rule from which can be deduced the entire corpus of libertarian theory. - Rothbard
Click to expand...
If you're a principled libertarian, and you (for some reason) vote, the only vote is a vote for Paul. His religious beliefs should not matter.
 
nickster said:
How about ending the war on terror by giving Al Qaeda a nuke?
Click to expand...

Typical spoonfed moron argument from an uneducated brainwashed ignoramus... The only real terrorists in this world ARE the USA and Israel. Both of them are here today thanks to genocide of the first owners of their lands. To not understand or even acknowledge this is a clear sign that you are a closed minded and biased retard.
 
Yuckystuff said:
I believe you are having trouble with a very key point. We are Israel. Israel is us. You can not separate the two because they are the same. There is no difference in the foreign policy of the United States and Israel. When we threaten Iran, Israel is threatening Iran and vice-versa. Once you understand that, you'll understand how our aggression in the region is a destabilizing force and that Iran's desire to obtain nuclear weapons is to have a deterrent to prevent the US/Israel from attacking them.

Notice how North Korea was in the "Axis of Evil" until they developed nuclear weapons and now we don't fuck with them? Notice how Iraq DID NOT have nuclear weapons and we spent 10 years ass-raping that country? Now you see why a country would want nuclear weapons. To keep us from attacking. The last time Iran invaded a country was during the Persian Empire. WE are the aggressors. That may not make you comfortable, but it is the truth. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Backtracking much? What does the point you are making here have anything to do with the last post you made about who the aggressor is and something to do with troops on borders?

Israel has not threatened Iran and Iran has funded the terrorists that have killed innocent civilians in Israel. Whether those terrorists are right or wrong is a whole other debate, but it goes back to the question of who is the aggressor against the other(your question).

So the US is aggressive towards Iran, so Iran is right to be aggressive towards Israel? I am really not understanding your circular logic.

Iran wants the destruction of Israel, they have said so in no uncertain terms on many occasions (by both Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah), and backtracked on it on many more. I am not going to cite and debate these as they are well documented and you can look them up for yourself.

So if one nation threatens another nation directly then they would by definition be the aggressor. If that nation wants your destruction and the only thing holding it back is the firepower to do so then wouldn't it be smart to stop them at any cost?

Israel has never threatened to wipe Iran off the map (or pages of history) preemptively so where is the threat and aggression on Israels side?
 
"Iran wants the destruction of Israel, they have said so in no uncertain terms on many occasions (by both Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah), and backtracked on it on many more. I am not going to cite and debate these as they are well documented and you can look them up for yourself. "
 
nickster said:
Backtracking much? What does the point you are making here have anything to do with the last post you made about who the aggressor is and something to do with troops on borders?
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with it. Our foreign policy is aggressive by nature, if you can't see that I can't help you. That's Ron Paul's whole point. We invite attacks on ourselves and our interests through blowback. For instance, 9/11 would have never happened if we didn't have military bases in Saudi Arabia on Muslim holy land. In fact, bin-Laden would be running his fathers construction company if we hadn't given him CIA money and training to lead the Mujaheddin against the Soviets in the 80's. Everything we do has consequences, so we need to be smarter about our foreign policy or this shit will never end.

nickster said:
Israel has not threatened Iran
Click to expand...

Yes they have, numerous times. Iran has been told in no uncertain terms that if they attempt to develop nuclear weapons they will be attacked. How is that not a threat? Israel has also attacked targets in Iran on several occasions. Iran has never attacked Israel.

nickster said:
...and Iran has funded the terrorists that have killed innocent civilians in Israel.
Click to expand...

Have we not funded terror in Iran and elsewhere? Do you think the CIA and Mossad sets up schools and hospitals or something?

nickster said:
So the US is aggressive towards Iran, so Iran is right to be aggressive towards Israel?
Click to expand...

Iran has a right to defend themselves from us and Israel, don't they? But as far as them being aggressive towards Israel - when? Again - Israel has actually physically attacked sites in Iran, yet Iran has never attacked Israel. Who is the real aggressor?

nickster said:
Iran wants the destruction of Israel, they have said so in no uncertain terms on many occasions (by both Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah), and backtracked on it on many more. I am not going to cite and debate these as they are well documented and you can look them up for yourself.
Click to expand...

You're not going to cite them because you're wrong. Ahmadinejad has spoken out against Zionism, which is different from speaking out against Israel. It would be like if someone said the Neo-Cons should be wiped off the face of the earth - does that mean they think the US should be? Fuck no. Just the aggressive war mongers that call themselves Neo-cons, and the same can be said for the Zionists.

nickster said:
So if one nation threatens another nation directly then they would by definition be the aggressor. If that nation wants your destruction and the only thing holding it back is the firepower to do so then wouldn't it be smart to stop them at any cost?
Click to expand...

What's more aggressive - empty verbal threats, or actual physical attacks, wars on both borders and a systematic policy of economic sanctions?

Ask yourself a very simple question. What would happen to Iran if they attacked Israel? Everyone in the world knows that Iran would be annihilated, including them. Do you really think the leaders of Iran are suicidal?

Or do you think maybe they really just want nuclear weapons to keep us from attacking them, in the same way the North Koreans kept us out of their country? Take your red, white and blue blinders off for a second and you use your logic and I think things will be much clearer.
 
You need to go back and read what I wrote. I said aggression PRIOR to the nuclear issue, the nuclear issue has been procipitated by the aggression that Iran has ALREADY shown towards Israel.
 
At 12:07 in the video I posted: I will quote since obviously nickster is too fucking mentally lazy to actually watch the damn thing. On the question of "destroying" Israel... (Ahmadinejad) "what we are saying is occupation must cease, that the siege of the people of gaza should stop, that murders and killing must stop, that terror must stop"

As I've said before you can't reason with fuckwits so I'm not even going to bother any more, because it is apparent that nickster is either some Zionist piggy who could never go against his ideals even if logic dictates it, or he/she/it is just a brainwashed idiot. Either way reason and logic will not sway such a mind.
 
Imhotep said:
At 12:07 in the video I posted: I will quote since obviously nickster is too fucking mentally lazy to actually watch the damn thing. On the question of "destroying" Israel... (Ahmadinejad) "what we are saying is occupation must cease, that the siege of the people of gaza should stop, that murders and killing must stop, that terror must stop"

As I've said before you can't reason with fuckwits so I'm not even going to bother any more, because it is apparent that nickster is either some Zionist piggy who could never go against his ideals even if logic dictates it, or he/she/it is just a brainwashed idiot. Either way reason and logic will not sway such a mind.
Click to expand...

Firstly, I watched that whole video. In fact I have seen it before.

Secondly, he didn't deny saying it.

Thirdly, I am neither from the US nor am I a Zionist and I don't agree with either of their foreign policies.

Fourthly, If you can't debate without slinging around personal insults as your weapons of choice then you don't have the mental ability to debate me. I suggest you go and troll another forum which has the collective brain power more suited to your needs.
 
I wouldn't call that "debate" because you are a closed minded person, so "debate" is impossible with such a person. The personal insult stands as it is, merely an observation of where you stand and why. Amazingly you refute by resorting to personal insult yourself... how ironic. My "mental ability" is in fact far greater than yours and that is pure FACT, however I have no regard for people like you so I'm not morally above insult to show my contempt for your foolish belief in your own superiority.
 
nickster said:
Please tell me what version of Christianity doesn't believe that God created everything?
Click to expand...

I've just told you. The Church Of England has publicly supported evolution.

By definition, if you support evolution, you can't believe that "God created everything".

You can believe that God started it all off, which is different - and what they appear to be saying. But that's not Creationism, is it?
 
What about our "geo-political " interests in middle east?
How the fuck we ll get crude at cheap prices?

Yuckystuff said:
It has everything to do with it. Our foreign policy is aggressive by nature, if you can't see that I can't help you. That's Ron Paul's whole point. We invite attacks on ourselves and our interests through blowback. For instance, 9/11 would have never happened if we didn't have military bases in Saudi Arabia on Muslim holy land. In fact, bin-Laden would be running his fathers construction company if we hadn't given him CIA money and training to lead the Mujaheddin against the Soviets in the 80's. Everything we do has consequences, so we need to be smarter about our foreign policy or this shit will never end.



Yes they have, numerous times. Iran has been told in no uncertain terms that if they attempt to develop nuclear weapons they will be attacked. How is that not a threat? Israel has also attacked targets in Iran on several occasions. Iran has never attacked Israel.



Have we not funded terror in Iran and elsewhere? Do you think the CIA and Mossad sets up schools and hospitals or something?



Iran has a right to defend themselves from us and Israel, don't they? But as far as them being aggressive towards Israel - when? Again - Israel has actually physically attacked sites in Iran, yet Iran has never attacked Israel. Who is the real aggressor?



You're not going to cite them because you're wrong. Ahmadinejad has spoken out against Zionism, which is different from speaking out against Israel. It would be like if someone said the Neo-Cons should be wiped off the face of the earth - does that mean they think the US should be? Fuck no. Just the aggressive war mongers that call themselves Neo-cons, and the same can be said for the Zionists.



What's more aggressive - empty verbal threats, or actual physical attacks, wars on both borders and a systematic policy of economic sanctions?

Ask yourself a very simple question. What would happen to Iran if they attacked Israel? Everyone in the world knows that Iran would be annihilated, including them. Do you really think the leaders of Iran are suicidal?

Or do you think maybe they really just want nuclear weapons to keep us from attacking them, in the same way the North Koreans kept us out of their country? Take your red, white and blue blinders off for a second and you use your logic and I think things will be much clearer.
Click to expand...
 
amateursurgeon said:
You can believe that God started it all off, which is different - and what they appear to be saying. But that's not Creationism, is it?
Click to expand...
It's Deism. Most of the Founding Fathers who were Masons (like George Washington) were Deists.

Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson as well IIRC. Sit Isaac Newton and Ben Franklin as well maybe.
 
What's interesting is the majority of conservative christians I know support Ron Paul.

Rather than make fun of those that hate him for his foreign policy , rather than call them names, I debate with them.

So far I'm right around a 100% conversion rate for them to be won over to the cause.

I don't know what everyone in this thread or this forum personally believes, but I do know one thing - If all you ever do is make fun of and attempt to belittle people you disagree with, you're just as bad as they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom