The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

Sorry, we saw the fez on your avatar and assumed all your people specialized in salt caravans.

Jk, I know most salt comes from quarries like in the midwestern NA or from filling and evaporating large sheets of sea salt.

Old Testament Christianity is not New Testament Christianity.

Old testament Christianity is called Judaism

new testament christianity also has about 50 subflavors.

Oh and then there's the third installment to the book series, the Qua-ran.

Considering how much has been added to christianity over the years, i'm surprised they actually never added a third or fourth chapter.

Stuff like purgatory, limbo, the devil... it's all not in the bible.

The devil is mentioned quite a few times, and at least once directly (temptation of Jesus, for example). The rest of it isn't in there because it wasn't intended to be a part of God's Word in the first place.

John Smith, founder of the Mormon Church, did exactly this. Just like with every sequel, however, less and less people favor each sequel that comes out. Which is why we have judaism, christianity, islam, and mormonism, acting exactly the way they do. Jews acting like old salty fedoras, christians acting like "90s kids", muslims acting like millennials, and mormons acting like mainstream douchebags. Then, you have atheists, who act like the tough guys who are too cool to like things, and the wiccans who are like the emos who listen to a different music entirely.

Mind you I am being incredibly stereotypical of those groups, no single group of individual persons all act identical.

Speaking of my last post, the **** do people shoot cops in a DIFFERENT CITY/STATE when there is a questionable police shooting somewhere else? Was Dallas just easier? Because shooting "just some cop" is far from targeting the person at fault whom you actually want, and is no better than shooting "just some white guy" or "just some muslim" or "just some Trump supporter". Jeez how can people be so dumb as to shoot innocent people because they merely "resemble" people they don't like, SHOOTING SOMEONE is not something you should do lightly, especially to strangers for God's sake...

yeah!! geez! shooting someone is definitely something that shouldn't be done lightly!! Contrary to selling a gun! wich it is totally okay to do lightly! and sell to lightheaded pre-pubesents who most certainly won't take shooting people lightly! especially not cops! WHATAREYOUTALKINGABOUTIHAVENODOUBLESTANDARTS!!!1!!11! /S



EDIT : http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ing-america-racist-creation-article-1.2704556

Speaking of

who supports trump here?

I wanna poll this but I do wanna distiguish those who are just voting for Drumpf as opposed to those who "support", "condone" him.

1. Both candidates suck! In this situation I would vote Hillary but I think I litterally abhore her but Drumpf makes every effort to be somehow worse. it's mindblowing but he does it and I'm going to vote Hillary to save this country.
2. Hillary is a fuckin hazard but I'm voting for her in a move to throw our country into a revolution. She's the only candidate subsceptible to upset people enough that they'd want to overthrow the government wich is what I most deeply desire, we really need a new government and this is the quickest way to it.
   
3. I'm not gonna vote (all reasons included)
4. I litterally abhore Drumpf but Hillary makes every effort to be somehow worse. it's mindblowing but she does it and I'm going to vote Drumpf to save this country.
5. Trump is a fuckin hazard but I'm voting for him in a move to throw our country into a revolution. He's the only candidate subsceptible to upset people enough that they'd want to overthrow the government wich is what I most deeply desire, we really need a new government and this is the quickest way to it.
6. I think Trump is okayish. Kinda bad at times but okayish. while Hillary on the other hand is the worst thing that could happen to this country.
   
7. I think Trump is good for America. Kinda bad at times. while Hillary on the other hand is the worst thing that could happen to this country. I mostly agree with Trump so it's the best option by far.
   
8. **Trump is being cohesively misrepresented and lied about by a grand power network hiding in plain sight formed of a conjoined media and state that is attemting to prevent democracy by trying to prevent his ellection and are the frontier to the freedom of speech that Trump represents. Despite this, Trump is still beating them, proving that he is made of real democracy and attaining the role of president the riteous way despite unphathomable odds.** + I still think he is quite unruly and not "fit to be president" because of some aspects. hopefully he listens to all the good intelect and brainpower he'll have access to if & when he attains presidency in order to "change" a bit for the better.
   
9. **8** + I don't think he has anything to blame himself for. He's really quite clean in all regards all things considered.
10. Trump is like Jesus. he is Litteraly EXACTLY what america needed. I stand by everything he says, it's like he's reading my fuckin mind then speaking it, it's fuckin midblowing.

RULES OF THE BALOT :

mutiple choice is allowed.
participating even if not a U.S. citizen is allowed but you must state it in order to get a clear picture.
out of politeness and in the intrest of getting as many and as clear answers as possible just state, your number, rectify the bits that weren't 100% your state of mind so we have a better read and please abstain/refrain from commenting on the voting choices listed that are not the ones you chose, no matter how tempting that may be or how funny what it is you have to say and do not criticize others for their pick. debate the ideas/ideal not the people.
Justify your choice.

it's hard but I hereby declare that I will conform to this.

I'll start : I'm not a U.S. citizen but; 1

Justification:
I honestly wouldn't have ever pinned Hillary as my candidate of choice. she doesn't represent much of my values and she doesn't seem honest and trustworthy to me. she's not a "danger" as in : her having the nuclear codes blows neither hot or cold on me, I think she has virtually no intrest for them. There is only one redeeming factor in her for me and it's that she'd be the first ever Woman president in the history of U.S.A. but just like when that was an option in france in 2007 it's like : " out of ALL ....the women you could possibly choose ...HOW did we choose her??" and that coud never be the deciding factor for me because it's like a pity-vote and that is not what feminism and equality is about. The real reason I'd choose her is litterally because Drumpf is really really that much worse to me than her, no, worse yet, I consider Trump a danger to the U.S., but even more seriously, the world. seeing how thin his skin is makes me tantanized at the idea of him having the nuclear codes. what if Putin calls him out, saying they've never met and they're not best pals and jokes about him saying he's a morron for trying to look cool through false claims?? what if a mexican rapes his daughter and that sends him into a furious rage and he sends nukes to mexico and all latin america? okay what if the muslim badges, surveilance and concentration camps are not something the rest of the institution have the power to stop him from doing, that he places sufficent numbers of his backers into the government and other ranks of power and that those things really happen? what if, enflamed by their fulgurant leader, the american people become more and more totalitarian and endoctrinated then they already are? with people wanting to take the mexican and muslim and middle-east hate further and further untill they are really considered less than people? (are they already considered less then people in america? in the case of the middle-east I think it'd be hard to build the case that the average american wouldn't fall into that categorization) and then a new crusade is started, a new dictature is born?

I haven't even gone through a hundredth of his campain promises here and I'm already getting tired.

http://video.nydailynews.com/?ndn.t...051&sitesection=nydailynews-news&vid=31112562

watch the video to the end (dear god have mercy on your soul if as an american his language is too complicated for you to stay awake through the whole thing) tell me if there's anything you dissagree with.

I'd go with this.

Trump seems to try so hard to be unlikeable that i still expect each day to see a headline "TRUMP ANNOUNCES CANDIDACY AS PRANK".

*puts on brexit hat* I'd vote for trump because I know he never would become president.

5 is my choice just to see what happens Hillary in this case is the boring choice.

Look up George Carlin to see my opinion on voting for deplorable candidates.

As far as guns go, guns are constitutionally protected right to defense. Automobiles, or "explosive-powered carriages", were inconceivable when the constitution was written, and they kill 3x more people yearly than firearms. They are NOT constitutionally protected, and are NOT BANNED ANYWHERE in America, and simply require registration and licensed training for less than 140 dollars on average. Firearms, should DEFINITELY NEVER REQUIRE ANYTHING MORE THAN IT TAKES TO OWN AN AUTOMOBILE. I would trust someone with a firearm way before I trust them with an automobile, they are trained yet most drivers still flimsily toss those around like they are in no way dangerous.

I would most definitely support bi-partisian... that is, everyone gets something they want, a compromise if you will... legislation for gun control. Something worded along the lines of "Anyone over 18 can purchase a firearm, registration and licensing are required, their cost is limited to at most the average cost of Automobile license and registration, anyone license can carry a registered firearm anywhere in public concealed or open and is banned in no cities, individuals are prohibited from firearm ownership when they commit a violent crime, [arbitrary national registry of convicted violent crimes and firearm prohibition and an appeals process for it]."

Then, you get your gun control, and gun rights, because right now, we have a disturbing absence of both.

Did you normalise for how many cars there are in use versus how many guns are in use?

Automobiles also have a practical purpose, unlike guns. (Hunting is not a practical purpose in this day and age; it's an activity done for the experience rather than the result). Automobiles are harder for a child to accidentally kill someone with. Automobiles are harder to kill 70 people in the span of a minute with.

And let me guess: you think since these futile guns are only used to kill people that murder rates will decrease if they are taken away?

Yes, yes I do. The U.S. murder rate is much higher than countries with harsh gun laws, and States with strong gun laws tend to have lower murder rates than those that don't.

This does not, however, mean that the best solution is to take away everyone's guns. While yes, gun control can palliate the symptoms, it can't address the cancer causing them. Switzerland is a country with lax gun laws. It also has 1/7 the murder rate of the U.S.

It also has half the poverty rate of the U.S.

Poverty is the real problem here. If we want to be serious about our gun violence problem, we need to attack poverty, not attack the poor.

Higher gun control correlates with less crime. It does not cause less crime. There are hundreds of other factors that prevent crime.

Taking away guns won't stop criminals from buying them from the black market. The Dallas shooter would have still had his rifle.