The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[indiucky]

That's the second time he has tried to say the data presented wasn't complete when it was. A pattern perhaps?

No...I don't think so...Consumer confidence is hard to quantify and I think Alpo thought I was denying the upward tick during the Obama Presidency...

 

[indiucky]

I don't know how you guys tolerate the consistent personal attacks.

 

[hoosierdoc]

The political forum has been circling the drain for years. It seems like every thread ends up this way.

What topics would you like to see?

I think the topics are there, they're just too hard to follow with so many cross discussions going on. Separate this thread into discussions about taxes, Russia collusion, etc

 

[indiucky]

It does allow buisness to refuse service based on sexual preference doesn’t it?

I refuse people business based on I just don't like the vibe I get from them.....

 

[Alpo]

Not denying the 8 year trend line for Obama...more that there are more data points needed in the Trump administration before we declare victory.

The first graph shows a downward trend, doesn't it? But, it's only a few data points. A longer period is necessary to adequately evaluate the current administration. That's all I'm saying.

And I'm not a big believer that presidents should get credit or be blamed for economic activity in most cases. The world is a lot more complicated than that.

 

[Dddrees]

My compliments sir, now that sir is the way to live and enjoy life!!

 

[Dddrees]

I refuse people business based on I just don't like the vibe I get from them.....

Well, I think every buisness has the right to refuse service. Just think the law that was crafted is not something that should be tolerated. Legalized discremination is just plain wrong.

 

[Dr.Midnight]

 

[actaeon277]

So, I guess if we can't allow "discrimination", reddit has to allow the Nazis back then. After all, wouldn't want the Nazis to be able to sue for discrimination.

 

[Woobie]

It does allow buisness to refuse service based on sexual preference doesn’t it?

Now, now. You don't need me to tell you what it says. I'm sure you could find something in the bill to support your position. Well, if it's there, that is.

 

[Birds Away]

No, that was my perception, and my interpretation. No, that’s how I see this lame excuse for something to preserve one’s right to discriminate against other people.

The common theme of Republicans when they are being criticized nowadays is that it’s the Media’s fault we now have people in the White House that can’t simply tell the truth. What a lame excuse.

No, not everything is the Media’s fault. No, actually things like this and the fact Trump lies is Trumps fault and this law is bad policy.

So you prefer religious persecution to discrimination based upon sexual preference. I see.

 

[Woobie]

I for one think discrimination is a natural and usually healthy human activity. Being prejudicial is wrong, but why make morality a matter of law? And if you decide to try, you're going to have to be prejudicial on which types of prejudice you want to outlaw.

 

[hoosierdoc]

I for one think discrimination is a natural and usually healthy human activity. Being prejudicial is wrong, but why make morality a matter of law? And if you decide to try, you're going to have to be prejudicial on which types of prejudice you want to outlaw.

i'm not sure being prejudicial is wrong. Making assumptions of a person based on certain demographics may be very accurate and appropriate.

I go to Chicago and walk down the street, trusting no one. I'm prejudiced against chicagoans. Am I evil, or cautious?

 

[Woobie]

i'm not sure being prejudicial is wrong. Making assumptions of a person based on certain demographics may be very accurate and appropriate.

I go to Chicago and walk down the street, trusting no one. I'm prejudiced against chicagoans. Am I evil, or cautious?

You are discriminating, which is smart, and something we all do dozens of times a day.

 

[printcraft]

........

The "dossier". First commissioned by a Republican. Not sure it rises to a level above opposition research. Again: maybe. Let's see the indictment.

How much faith do you have in the golden shower story?

 

[Dddrees]

So you prefer religious persecution to discrimination based upon sexual preference. I see.

As I said previously I don’t see discremenating people as being Christian. But frankly if you wish to drag religion into it why don’t we discuss all those dark dirty details of how religion has been the reason used for mistreating people or going to war.

 

[printcraft]

i'm not sure being prejudicial is wrong. Making assumptions of a person based on certain demographics may be very accurate and appropriate.

I go to Chicago and walk down the street, trusting no one. I'm prejudiced against chicagoans. Am I evil, or cautious?

kut?

 

[Dddrees]

How much faith do you have in the golden shower story?

Well he does like to brag about grabbing women’s genitalia without consent so who knows maybe he does like to be pee peed on.

 

[Woobie]

As I said previously I don’t see discremenating people as being Christian. But frankly if you wish to drag religion into it why don’t we discuss all those dark dirty details of how religion has been the reason used for mistreating people or going to war.

So you're conceding the point? So far you haven't supported your claim that the law was prejudicial.

 

[Birds Away]

As I said previously I don’t see discremenating people as being Christian. But frankly if you wish to drag religion into it why don’t we discuss all those dark dirty details of how religion has been the reason used for mistreating people or going to war.

Once again you miss the entire point. Freedom to practice one's religion is an enumerated right under the Bill of Rights. Freedom to buy a cake with you and your buddy Bob on it is not. Do I support you and your buddy Bob being able to buy a cake? Sure I do. But if it violates the bakers religion to sell you one then I say go find another baker.