Talking points on health care.

[maxcok]

Why are almost all remaining Republicans fringed out whackjobs? WHAT in the hell happened to that party?

Simple. They sold their soul to Jesus.

And corporations.

 

[Industrialsize]

Why are almost all remaining Republicans fringed out whackjobs? WHAT in the hell happened to that party?

The takeover of the Republican party by the religious right that started with Reagan That's what happened.

 

[D_Fortumus Wigglesack]

Paul Ryan is probably the only republican in the summit so far that hasn't just spewed out talking points. That one blonde lady had my hopes up at first, but dashed them spectacularly. The old guy in the corner also made some good points.

 

[maxcok]

The takeover of the Republican party by the religious right that started with Reagan That's what happened.

Well, you're right in the sense that's when it came into full bloom, but actually the strategy started long before that, and the roots reach all the way back to Reconstruction. It was a way to move Dixiecrats and Yellow Dog Democrats into the Republican column, and it was a long time coming.

It's ironic to recall that the Republicans were once viewed as the party of 'liberals'. Kennedy would never have won the White House, had he not had Lyndon Johnson to carry Texas. The rest is history - as the South goes . . . . sad, but true. I do see progress though, and hope for change.

 

[Industrialsize]

Paul Ryan is probably the only republican in the summit so far that hasn't just spewed out talking points. That one blonde lady had my hopes up at first, but dashed them spectacularly. The old guy in the corner also made some good points.

I hope you know that Paul Ryan is leading the charge to ELIMINATE social security and medicare for seniors. My guess is he's been told to shut up by the Republican leadership.

 

[B_spiker067]

No it' not ok to precede an ignorant statement with a smiley face.

You should have followed the thread. I was a twit. But then it was okay because he fixed it with a smiley face. It was ironic.:smile:

 

[B_spiker067]

"crotch rot" ROFL

spiker you are obviously a conservative bent on enforcing your impossible moral standards on everyone else through lies. please continue in the "homosexuals are dirty" line of thinking. it makes people take your shit ideas seriously. really it does.

How do you figure I'm a religious conservative?

What you saw was an explanation of the root of the bias against homosexuality. Many people assert it is simply some sort of ick factor at the mental image of same sex intercourse. It isn't. It is more substantial than that and with a basis in truth.

 

[B_spiker067]

Wow. Ignoring the sheer irrelevancy of your entire post and your failure to even pretend a cursory response - who knew you would so quickly and adamantly reveal yourself to be a crazy religious zealot? I think my work here is done.


p.s. Seeing's how I've never engaged in "adultery", I always assumed I got "crotch rot" from not changing my jock strap. Who knew? Just goes to show, you should learn something new every day. Thanks. Now I think I'll go chow down on some "unwholesome" pork chops.

Your argument was an attempt at obfuscation. I ignored it. It doesn't mean you weren't easily counterpointed.

Go to the NIH and CDC look at the statistics and it is evident behavior affects the health of society. That has been understood for a very long time.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

What you saw was an explanation of the root of the bias against homosexuality. Many people assert it is simply some sort of ick factor at the mental image of same sex intercourse. It isn't. It is more substantial than that and with a basis in truth.

Then please explain why it took a religion like Christianity, which came into our world much later compared to other religions and ruling empires that saw no real problem with homosexuality, to make it an "abomination"?

Seriously, don't try to answer the question because nobody here (including you) knows the "truth". All this explains to us is that someone, when creating the religion, didn't like how homosexuality was not focused upon in other religions & societies and created one where it was targeted. Essentially, it is an "ick factor"... just like anything else that is changed when someone defects from a particular faith and creates a new one. You don't need a Bible to figure this out, but you do need to be able to look at things beyond a blinding faith.

And keep in mind... I am a Christian. But for obvious reasons, not a practicing one. Since I'm going to Hell anyway (according to the most devoted followers), I figured they don't need me... or my money.

 

[maxcok]

How do you figure I'm a religious conservative?

Simpleguy can speak for himself if he wants. For me it's just a hunch, based on some of these clues:

Egyptians bred dogs for traits 5,000 years ago. Horses (farm animals) have been bred for a very long time. Lepers (and other diseased) were segregated from society back to biblical days.

Paternity was associated with sex from the beginning of time. Kingships have been passed down based on ideas of reproduction and inherited ability/myth.

Societies have had 'doctors' for a very long time and they could identify crotch rot and associate it with certain kinds of behavior. Adultery being among them.

People 5,000 years ago and in the time in between are hardly as ignorant as you'd have them be.

[edit: Think of the cleanliness 'edicts' in the Bible that speak of pigs and other food as being not wholesome.]

Are we wrong?

 

[maxcok]

Your argument was an attempt at obfuscation. I ignored it. It doesn't mean you weren't easily counterpointed.

No, your response, or rather the lack thereof, is a blatant "attempt at obfuscation" on your part, as this response is also. As the OP it seems particularly arrogant and dismissive of you to "ignore it", unless you are not up to the task

I asked you no less than ten direct questions about your thesis - the inordinate costs you allege have been historically placed on the health care system by homosexual behavior - a subject which you introduced to the thread. You failed to respond to any of my questions, but rather went off on an irrelevant tangent about ancient animal husbandry and archaic religious law. If I am so "easily counterpointed", what's stopping you? Please do enlighten us.

Go to the NIH and CDC look at the statistics and it is evident behavior affects the health of society. That has been understood for a very long time.

Why don't you do your own homework? Understood by whom? Can you be specific? Unless this is another "attempt at obfuscation", it should be easy for you to counter my challenge and provide a summation of data that supports your premise. Then, as you so succinctly charged a prior poster, please provide:

Links?

and again, I challenge you to:

Be truthfull . . .

Is this a deliberate misspelling, meaning you're 'full of truth'? Just wondering.

 

[B_spiker067]

Simpleguy can speak for himself if he wants. For me it's just a hunch, based on some of these clues:
Are we wrong?

The reference to the Bible was to show a long history of the points I made as counter examples to what you falsely believe.

Whether you appreciate it or not (i.e. whether there is a God or not) the Bible is a historical document (among many) that tells us about the past and what people thought (if not God). It is a reference source you should be able to easily get your hands on.

 

[B_spiker067]

No, your response, or rather the lack thereof, is a blatant "attempt at obfuscation" on your part, as this response is also. As the OP it seems particularly arrogant and dismissive of you to "ignore it", unless you are not up to the task

I asked you no less than ten direct questions about your thesis - regarding the inordinate costs you say are historically placed on the health care system by homosexual behavior. You failed to respond to any of them, but rather went off on an irrelevant tangent about ancient animal husbandry and archaic religious law. If I am so "easily counterpointed", what's stopping you? Please do enlighten us.

Why don't you do your own homework? Understood by whom? Can you be specific? Unless this is another "attempt at obfuscation", it should be easy for you to counter my challenge and provide a summation of data that supports your premise. Then, as you so succinctly charged a prior poster, please provide:

and again, I challenge you to:

Is this a deliberate misspelling, meaning you're 'full of truth'? Just wondering.

If we sat and talked about the relative behavior of groups and cultural values your position would not overcome the basic NIH and CDC numbers.

The concentration and transportation of sexually transmitted disease is among the sexually libertine be they hetero or homo. The higher crossover is from homo into the hetero community. Again, look at the numbers. Even disease like MRSA which starts in the hetero population will concentrate in the homo community and will linger as a reservoir of infection coming back out into the hetero community and then the general population (hetero and homo) is unreasonably burdened with a disease.

And look at history. Historic man is NOT as ignorant as regularly assumed by modern man. Disease was understood and used. Biological warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If we want lower health care cost we need to modify behavior in many ways, simple fact that was being driven to. Also, an explanation of society's rejection of the gay lifestyle needed an explanation beyond an ick factor.

I understand your defensive reaction. None of this was meant to hurt so much as to make a representation of views. That positions aren't as shallow as many in the gay community might imagine.

If you disbelieve the intent then it was a pointless effort.

 

[maxcok]

The reference to the Bible was to show a long history of the points I made as counter examples to what you falsely believe.

Whether you appreciate it or not (i.e. whether there is a God or not) the Bible is a historical document (among many) that tells us about the past and what people thought (if not God). It is a reference source you should be able to easily get your hands on.

It is arrogant of you and an affront for you to call my beliefs false in any case, moreover as you have no knowledge of my beliefs. Make no presumptions about my knowledge of the Bible either for that matter. Despite your sarcasm, it so happens I have more than one copy of the book. And though I would not call myself a biblical scholar, I am probably more familiar with the contents than your average bible banger.

I have also made a comparative study of Christianity and other world religions in an historical context. Depending on one's definition, there may be 'truth' contained and revealed in these often overlapping, sometimes historically based mythological oral traditions. However, by no stretch of the imagination is the Bible an historical document, any more than the Koran, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, etc. To say otherwise is to reveal your extreme bias and your limited view of reality.

And you are still "obfuscating" from answering my questions.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Ignore the troll, maxcok. It's not worth trying to convince someone so blinded by his own "faith" that there is life outside or even beyond it. He has his own bigotry towards homosexuality, fueled by his "interpretation" of the word, so leave him be.

Besides, it's not like he's going to be in the Afterlife anyhow. I mean, he is on a penis site. That's got to be frowned upon somewhere in scripture.

 

[maxcok]

Ignore the troll, maxcok. It's not worth trying to convince someone so blinded by his own "faith" that there is life outside or even beyond it. He has his own bigotry towards homosexuality, fueled by his "interpretation" of the word, so leave him be.

I am not here to convince, I know that is a fool's errand. Nor am I the least bit "defensive" as he presumes. I am here to reveal him for what he is - an arrogant, condescending prick locked in the prison of his own small-mindedness. Carry on there preacher man, my work is done.

Besides, it's not like he's going to be in the Afterlife anyhow. I mean, he is on a penis site. That's got to be frowned upon somewhere in scripture.

Not in my book. :wink:

(I guess I could have included hypocrite in the above, but I think that goes without saying.)

 

[Industrialsize]

If we sat and talked about the relative behavior of groups and cultural values your position would not overcome the basic NIH and CDC numbers.

The concentration and transportation of sexually transmitted disease is among the sexually libertine be they hetero or homo. The higher crossover is from homo into the hetero community. Again, look at the numbers. Even disease like MRSA which starts in the hetero population will concentrate in the homo community and will linger as a reservoir of infection coming back out into the hetero community and then the general population (hetero and homo) is unreasonably burdened with a disease.

And look at history. Historic man is NOT as ignorant as regularly assumed by modern man. Disease was understood and used. Biological warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If we want lower health care cost we need to modify behavior in many ways, simple fact that was being driven to. Also, an explanation of society's rejection of the gay lifestyle needed an explanation beyond an ick factor.

I understand your defensive reaction. None of this was meant to hurt so much as to make a representation of views. That positions aren't as shallow as many in the gay community might imagine.

If you disbelieve the intent then it was a pointless effort.

This is a homphobic screed, pure and simple.

 

[maxcok]

This is a homphobic screed, pure and simple.

No shit, Louise!

 

[B_spiker067]

This is a homphobic screed, pure and simple.

See it as you see fit. In time the points might sink in and you will understand better more people's views, beyond thinking hateful screed. It will be basis from which to commence provocative conversations with your gay friends.

They may have a better come back than you have had so far.

 

[justasimpleguy]

the bible is a historical document as in an accurate one?

ahahaaahahhaahaaaha.