McCain vs. Obama Watch

xBillyBrownx
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#321
Report 10 years ago
#321
Unbelievable.
0
quote
reply
MuseValheru
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#322
Report 10 years ago
#322
(Original post by KwungSun)
George Bush did say that God "told" him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Just as Palin said something along the lines of the Alaska pipeline being "God's will".
Of course they say that being that America is extremely religious. I doubt religion played a huge part in the decision making, if any at all!
0
quote
reply
rt6
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#323
Report 10 years ago
#323
(Original post by L i b)
Palin has never said she is against sex education, and indeed informing people about sex and STIs etc. It's not a view I particularly share, but equally it is one that is very much misrepresented.
That's funny. I think McCain and Palin should talk (more than just once). McCain believes teaching abstinence AND safe sex sends 'mixed signals' and would confuse the child. Apparently, it's best to stick with abstience.

(Original post by L i b)
No they don't.
Really? Okay then, why not teach every religions view and present it as fact? Why only Christianity?

(Original post by L i b)
Well, I for one think your view is a far more revolting one: that someone may lose their right to live for reasons that they have no control over.

Assume a rape victim cannot get an abortion - would you support infanticide of her born-child? Your arguments would equally apply to that.

As for the complete nonsense about it not being 'fair' on the child: absolute rot. You can recover from being put up for adoption, being the result of an unwanted pregnancy, an unhappy childhood and so forth - you cannot recover from being killed. But more importantly, it is not your place to judge whose life is worth living before he or she is even born.
HAHA! But Palin is PRO-Captial punishment! How does that work? If that's your argument, then surely the state has no right to kill ANYONE, feotus or adult. You cannot recover from being killed, but people can be rehabilitated. People can also be sentenced to death, even when innocent. Hypocrit.
Side Note: Why does she have the right to kill innocent animals for sport?


(Original post by L i b)
[Religion should have no place in politics.] Why?
Because there are different religions. Using a God that not everyone believes in, to make judgements that affect everyone is not correct.
0
quote
reply
Agent Smith
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#324
Report 10 years ago
#324
(Original post by nisio)
What would make invading Pakistan any different
Pakistan is a powerful and - let's face it - important country. An attack on it would have massive global repercussions that would absolutely dwarf those of Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, it has a strong military, the Bomb and a huge dose of political instability. That's a cocktail not even Barack Obama is stupid enough to shake.
0
quote
reply
JohnKennedy
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#325
Report 10 years ago
#325
I will be voting for Obama, but i'm saying this from a purely objective point of view; I care deeply about my country, but if Americans vote for McCain & Palin, then I will disconect from my own country, i will stop caring for americans. But most of all; Americans will no longer be able to complain when McCain makes a mess of the US economy with his huge tax cuts, his aggressive foreign policy, and his religious fanatic of a VP.
0
quote
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#326
Report 10 years ago
#326
(Original post by rt6)
That's funny. I think McCain and Palin should talk (more than just once). McCain believes teaching abstinence AND safe sex sends 'mixed signals' and would confuse the child. Apparently, it's best to stick with abstience.
Last time I checked, STIs and the risk of pregnancy was not particularly related to 'safe sex'.

Really? Okay then, why not teach every religions view and present it as fact? Why only Christianity?
It is a fact that it is adhered to by some, that's what schools should be teaching. Of course, teach other religion's views on things.

As for an education influenced by religion - in denominational schools, that is the choice of the parent to send their child to such a school.

HAHA! But Palin is PRO-Captial punishment! How does that work? If that's your argument, then surely the state has no right to kill ANYONE, feotus or adult. You cannot recover from being killed, but people can be rehabilitated. People can also be sentenced to death, even when innocent. Hypocrit.

There is no contradiction at all in being pro-life in terms of abortion, and pro-capital punishment. Call her a hypocrite all you like, but your semi-literate arguments amount to nothing.

Palin clearly believes the state has a right to kill people, when they have killed others or committed some other heinous crime, not 'anyone'.

Side Note: Why does she have the right to kill innocent animals for sport?
Er, because animals are not people.

Because there are different religions. Using a God that not everyone believes in, to make judgements that affect everyone is not correct.
The same could be said for any moral belief. Not everyone agrees with the morality of the state and of politicians; they must simply accept that and put their trust in the democratic system working it out.
0
quote
reply
JohnKennedy
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#327
Report 10 years ago
#327
But to tell the truth people, i think that if McCain is elected(heaven no!) he will have advisers and secretary's of state... palin will be marginalized.
0
quote
reply
Rascalov
Badges: 0
#328
Report 10 years ago
#328
(Original post by maze.e)
I'm not a Macain supporter but have been following the American presidential race mainly out of boredom of our own politics, I wanted to start a discussion to why you think Macain will probably win despite him and his vice president not being the best choice for the country in my opinion.
Because a lot of the white women who were voting for Obama have decided to vote for McCain because he's running Sarah Palin as his VP and she has a vagina.
Plus, he's 73, and suffered from several bouts of cancer. She's being talked about in the press as a prospective president because the chances are McCain's gonna be dead pretty soon!
0
quote
reply
Captain Crash
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#329
Report 10 years ago
#329
(Original post by favh)
1. The definition of a capitalist society is x.
2. America does not meet x.
C. Therefore, America is not a capitalist society.

1. A Scotsman is someone from Scotland.
2. Person A did something Very Bad.
C. Therefore, Person A is not a Scotsman.

One of these is fallicious, the other is not.

If you really think it's a fallacy to say "x is not a true y because it doesn't meet the definition of y" then how can you justify making any descriptive statements about anything?
The definition of a capitialist country is a very loose one i.e one based on property rights and primarily on free market principles. (Note that the lack of a firm consensual definition of capitalism/true scotsman is the root of this fallacy.)

This definition fits the US - if it doesn't give one that can be called capitalist in it's stead. And don't say HK - it's 'freest market' facade is a distortion of the facts.

Hence saying the US, the epitome of a capitalist country, is not capitalist because it does something some anarcho-capitalist or whomever doesn't agree with is a fallacious as saying a scotsman isn't scottish because he's done something you wouldn't consider a scottish attribute.
0
quote
reply
Marlowe
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#330
Report 10 years ago
#330
(Original post by 123monster)
And hasn't even proposed even one serious bill. The kind of bills he has proposed have been like "lets dedicate a day in honor of ...." OK
fine recently,:rolleyes:
I realise you're a moron and all, but why are you making statements that are quite obviously false, with no shame or sense of responsibility at all?

Is it really so hard to use Google? Maybe his Senate website? Wikipedia? Come on. Ever heard of FFATA? DPVIPA perhaps? No? Then don't post trash.
0
quote
reply
Captain Crash
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#331
Report 10 years ago
#331
(Original post by Agent Smith)
Pakistan is a powerful and - let's face it - important country. An attack on it would have massive global repercussions that would absolutely dwarf those of Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, it has a strong military, the Bomb and a huge dose of political instability. That's a cocktail not even Barack Obama is stupid enough to shake.
You mean like the repercussions that happened after this?

Seems Bush agrees with Obama on this...
0
quote
reply
rt6
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#332
Report 10 years ago
#332
(Original post by L i b)
Last time I checked, STIs and the risk of pregnancy was not particularly related to 'safe sex'.
I'm sorry, but what? Safe sex is not related to STI's and the risk of pregnancy? Last time I checked, education on condoms is there to help reduce STI's and pregnancy. I don't understand what you're saying.


(Original post by L i b)
It is a fact that it is adhered to by some, that's what schools should be teaching. Of course, teach other religion's views on things.

As for an education influenced by religion - in denominational schools, that is the choice of the parent to send their child to such a school.
Okay, but surely creationism and other such things should be taught in Religious Studies? If there is evidence for such, then bring it into the realms of science and teach it in those faculties.

[QUOTE=L i b]
There is no contradiction at all in being pro-life in terms of abortion, and pro-capital punishment. Call her a hypocrite all you like, but your semi-literate arguments amount to nothing.

Palin clearly believes the state has a right to kill people, when they have killed others or committed some other heinous crime, not 'anyone'.
[QUOTE]

Oh I see, sorry. I thought that killing people was wrong, especially when there's no way of guaranteeing guilt 100% of times. It's okay to kill someone we think has commited a crime and it's also okay to have a rapist have a child then not be in its life. Lack of parental guidance is the cause of many crimes, and all she's doing is seeding it further. Also, why did God create murderers in the first place, if we're just going to kill them?



(Original post by L i b)
Er, because animals are not people.
Okay, God creates animals for us to kill? Why, therefore, have them feel pain? Bit out of order isn't it? Also, doesn't the bible say "thou shall not kill"? Or was there a 'terms and conditions' section I missed which said that it's okay to hunt animals? But wait, the war on Iraq is God's war, right? How does she know? Many many civilians are being killed, but that's fine because God says it is, and he says it's okay to kill animals. Therefore, Iraq civilians = animals according to her. Correct me where I've gone wrong.

(Original post by L i b)
The same could be said for any moral belief. Not everyone agrees with the morality of the state and of politicians; they must simply accept that and put their trust in the democratic system working it out.
Why should religion and politics mix? What are the pros of such?
0
quote
reply
Darkened Angel
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#333
Report 10 years ago
#333
(Original post by L i b)
Palin has never said she is against sex education, and indeed informing people about sex and STIs etc. It's not a view I particularly share, but equally it is one that is very much misrepresented.



No they don't.



Well, I for one think your view is a far more revolting one: that someone may lose their right to live for reasons that they have no control over.

Assume a rape victim cannot get an abortion - would you support infanticide of her born-child? Your arguments would equally apply to that.

As for the complete nonsense about it not being 'fair' on the child: absolute rot. You can recover from being put up for adoption, being the result of an unwanted pregnancy, an unhappy childhood and so forth - you cannot recover from being killed. But more importantly, it is not your place to judge whose life is worth living before he or she is even born.



I could say the same about you, but it would be complete nonsense. Either way, she is in politics, and she's very likely to become the next Vice President of the United States. That's your problem, it would appear, not hers.



Why?
I cant believe you just compared abortion to infanticide! They are not equal! This is exactly why religion shouldn't mix with politics. A fetus is not a life, it's a bunch of cells. No one should be forced to have a child they did not want or even planned. A rape is traumatic enough without a child being involved. You may as well rule out contraception as it ends potential lives :rolleyes:
0
quote
reply
Melancholy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#334
Report 10 years ago
#334
Saying that she wants to punish the rape victim is a tad dishonest.
0
quote
reply
Meus
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#335
Report 10 years ago
#335
Anyone else feel dejavu on reading this thread? And alot of that stuff in that link is over-exaggerated
0
quote
reply
123monster
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#336
Report 10 years ago
#336
(Original post by Marlowe)
I realise you're a moron and all, but why are you making statements that are quite obviously false, with no shame or sense of responsibility at all?

Is it really so hard to use Google? Maybe his Senate website? Wikipedia? Come on. Ever heard of FFATA? DPVIPA perhaps? No? Then don't post trash.
I was taught that there's no point in arguing with people that call you names... I know this information from a while back... now that he's so strong in the race a lot of web pages are hiding. So I'm asking you since you've got such strong research skills... to please get me a list of what proposals obama has done and the date.
0
quote
reply
crazygirl4521
Badges: 14
#337
Report 10 years ago
#337
(Original post by Rascalov)
Plus, he's 73, and suffered from several bouts of cancer. She's being talked about in the press as a prospective president because the chances are McCain's gonna be dead pretty soon!
Yeah I was reading an article in the Guardian and they way literally saying macians going to get the women vote because its the closet they will come in this election to getting a female in the oval office. There is a good chance she would take presidency IMO if macain wins, I actually don't think macain will be able to survive 8 years in office.
quote
reply
DrunkHamster
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#338
Report 10 years ago
#338
(Original post by Captain Crash)
The definition of a capitialist country is a very loose one i.e one based on property rights and primarily on free market principles. (Note that the lack of a firm consensual definition of capitalism/true scotsman is the root of this fallacy.)

This definition fits the US - if it doesn't give one that can be called capitalist in it's stead. And don't say HK - it's 'freest market' facade is a distortion of the facts.

Hence saying the US, the epitome of a capitalist country, is not capitalist because it does something some anarcho-capitalist or whomever doesn't agree with is a fallacious as saying a scotsman isn't scottish because he's done something you wouldn't consider a scottish attribute.
Except the difference is that he's not puling some distinction out of his hat - it's patently obvious that, broadly speaking, the more government interference in an economy (with the exception, perhaps, of protection of people and property) the less capitalist it really is. I don't know what a 'true capitalist country' looks like because it's not some binary attribute, but I do know that if you look at capitalism/socialism as a continuum, the US would be further to the capitalist side than most other countries but still a long way off from the end. I don't see how any of this is in any way controversial, unless you're trying to play childish games and trying to score some points by putting the US on one 'side' or another.
0
quote
reply
zanejamal
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#339
Report 10 years ago
#339
(Original post by L i b)
Well, I for one think your view is a far more revolting one: that someone may lose their right to live for reasons that they have no control over.
An early stage fetus is not self aware, it is a bunch of cells rapidly dividing, I'm having trouble understanding what "right to live" this has?

It is ridiculous to suggest that a rape victim should have to bare the responsibility of a child when it would significantly reduce the quality of their life. What "right" does the state have to impose on the rape victim of going through 9 months of pregnancy and having a baby. Then either having to take care of it or give it up for adoption. Also I think adoption laws allow potential parents to find out about the biological family history and may be less inclined to adopt if they discover the child is the result of a rape. I know thats a very cynical view but it doesn't make it less likely to be true.
0
quote
reply
KwungSun
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#340
Report 10 years ago
#340
(Original post by MuseValheru)
Of course they say that being that America is extremely religious. I doubt religion played a huge part in the decision making, if any at all!
Sure, it's hard to tell if politicians are revealing their actual motives or simply revealing motives they think will go down with the electorate. I would nonetheless think that a large chunk of America would balk at a president claiming that divine inspiration guided his policies rather than careful research and conference, but of course we're just speculating.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (115)
26.38%
No (321)
73.62%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise