What should legislators do to stop another "GW Bush" from ever happening again? - Page 2

DinoDoc · August 26, 2003, 01:39

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
In short, this is a situation that threatens the future of democracy and one that must be firmly addressed.

Considering the fact that you are talking about rigging the outcome of elections, just get rid of the annoying fiction you would turn them into and admit that you want a dictatorship.

Ned · August 26, 2003, 01:41

I find it interesting how the hate mongering Monkspider equates religious zeal with immorality.

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 01:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Judges should have a mandatory retirmement age.

And can you tell me how this wouldn't violate the ADEA or other federal Age Discrimination Laws?

Constitutional amendment!

Haha, I ducked!

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 01:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
I find it interesting how the hate mongering Monkspider equates religious zeal with immorality.

Some of the most immoral people I've ever known were religious zealots.

Imran Siddiqui · August 26, 2003, 01:46

Quote:

Constitutional amendment!

Ah, so now we are introducing frivilous Amendments like 'Judges over 70 should be forced to retire'. I thought we learned our lessons about frivolous Amendments from the 18th.

Seeing as the ADEA is a LAW, why didn't you just say change the law?

Edan · August 26, 2003, 01:53

No Judges over 200!

Damn it with these zombie judges and their maintaining their jobs with an undead loophole!

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 01:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Seeing as the ADEA is a LAW, why didn't you just say change the law?

That would be too easy, and the 14th Amendment would probably strike that down anyway.

Ned · August 26, 2003, 01:59

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Some of the most immoral people I've ever known were religious zealots.

Name one.

However, this does mean that religious zeal ineluctably leads to immorality.

Imran Siddiqui · August 26, 2003, 02:00

Quote:

14th Amendment would probably strike that down anyway

Why? Age isn't something which is protected by the 14th.

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 02:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Name one.

Do I have to stop at one? Fine, Rev. Fred Phelps. (Oh come on, that was too easy). How about Jim and Tammy Baker? Oral Roberts? Pat Robertson? Jerry Falwall? Terry Randall?

Quote:

However, this does mean that religious zeal ineluctably leads to immorality.

Of course not. Those who don't want to shove their beliefs down my throat are not immoral. Those who want to tell me how I must live my life and will punish me if I don't do what they say, however, are immoral.

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 02:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

14th Amendment would probably strike that down anyway

Why? Age isn't something which is protected by the 14th.

Not specifically (hence the need for a law), but I would be willing to bet that SCOTUS would discover that the 14th would prevent a specific group of Americans for being singled out, i.e., old judges.

Ned · August 26, 2003, 02:07

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Name one.

Do I have to stop at one? Fine, Rev. Fred Phelps. (Oh come on, that was too easy). How about Jim and Tammy Baker? Oral Roberts? Pat Robertson? Jerry Falwall? Terry Randall?

Quote:

However, this does mean that religious zeal ineluctably leads to immorality.

Of course not. Those who don't want to shove their beliefs down my throat are not immoral. Those who want to tell me how I must live my life and will punish me if I don't do what they say, however, are immoral.

I agree - so we should get bigots like Monkspider out of here.

chequita guevara · August 26, 2003, 02:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
I agree - so we should get bigots like Monkspider out of here.

Has monkspider threatened to punish you?

notyoueither · August 26, 2003, 03:04

Bar from participation in the electoral process, perhaps...

Ned · August 26, 2003, 04:19

Che, as NYE expressly states, Monkspider would deny political freedom to all religious zealots:

"what can legislators do to stop such supremely immoral men from ever coming to power ever again? What steps can be taken to prevent this from happening to future generations? "

This is extremist - and directed against a class of people, the religious. Monkspider clearly is a bigot and a hate monger.

Nubclear · August 26, 2003, 04:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
This is extremist

Coming from Ned?!

The Mad Monk · August 26, 2003, 04:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Constitutional amendment!

Ah, so now we are introducing frivilous Amendments like 'Judges over 70 should be forced to retire'. I thought we learned our lessons about frivolous Amendments from the 18th.

Seeing as the ADEA is a LAW, why didn't you just say change the law?

I find it entertaining that, just as our longer and healthier lifespans are about to force us to jack up the age eligabilty for retirement, Che wants to force judges into a relatively low one.

Robert Plomp · August 26, 2003, 05:32

It's clear that some of you do hate religous zealoats for being a busybody in other men's matters.
It's clear that they're not strict religious zealoats because the Bible clearly teaches us that we shouldn't be busybodies in other men's life, read 1 Pete 4:

"But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or [as] a thief, or [as] an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters."

Conclusion: if you hate one, it can't be a real zealoat!

Ned · August 26, 2003, 07:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar

Coming from Ned?!

All you commies ever think of is denying the right to vote to anyone who is not a fellow commie. And you think people who believe in democracy and tolerance are extremists!

Q Classic · August 26, 2003, 07:56

Quote:

All you commies ever think of is denying the right to vote to anyone who is not a fellow commie. And you think people who believe in democracy and tolerance are extremists!

wait, were you serious?

Ned · August 26, 2003, 08:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Q Cubed

Quote:

All you commies ever think of is denying the right to vote to anyone who is not a fellow commie. And you think people who believe in democracy and tolerance are extremists!

wait, were you serious?

Find me a communist who truly believes in a multi-party system. Lenin, Mao, Ho, Castro? Who?

Ned · August 26, 2003, 08:53

As a example of where I am coming from, I was walking on the beach today and saw a group of 200 Baptists holding baptism ceremonies in the Pacific Ocean. They had a banner declaring there church and denomination. The only problem was, this beach also happens to be a state park where a lot of commies and their kids come to enjoy the Pacific free from religion. I would bet that if Monkspider had been there, he would have charged the Baptists, waving his red flag, shouting for the Baptists to leave because they were polluting his religion-free, state-park space.

Get the picture? Who is intollerant. Who is denying whom freedom of religion. Who is the bigot?

Q Classic · August 26, 2003, 10:57

I wouldn't be that monkspider would do it. to do so would not only be presumptuous--i don't know him well enough to say that.

you're right. at the same time, many of those southern baptists want to force religion down the throats of every little child who may or may not be going to hell, depending on whether they are baptist or not. so there are people on both sides who are intolerant. is that what you're looking for? news flash, ned, it's been obvious to many for years.

Arrian · August 26, 2003, 13:59

@ this thread.

I happen to pretty much agree with Che's list of reforms to the electoral process (though I just skimmed them), by the way. Well, that's my one agreement with Che this month

-Arrian

Defiant · August 26, 2003, 14:39

Why should we do anything, from the point of the majority of Americans, everything is being done as correctly as can be. If you want something to change, change that joke of an institution called the Divided Nations.

child of Thor · August 26, 2003, 14:46

It all seems to be boiling down to a THEM and US situation.
If your a THEM, then the future is looking pretty bleak right now.
If your an US(coincidence

), then you've pretty much deluded yourselves into thinking life et all is nothing more than a civ game, with winners and losers.
The sad part is this kind of polarisation only breeds losers, and i dont think any political reform at any level will actually resolve the issue in a peaceable way.
As someone said its rapidly becoming not the realm of the politician, but the people to decide what kind of world do we want to live in.
Its quite exciting in a destructive kinda way.....IMHO.
Im getting ready

Kuciwalker · August 26, 2003, 14:49

monkspider: Bush has a majority popular support right now. Are you saying that, despite the wish of the majority, we should institute YOUR policies?

Convince the majority of Americans that you are correct, and we'll do it

You are making the same claim as religious zealots do - just take it on faith.