What's happening to Conservatism?

<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies> Nobody, and I mean nobody,...can say this is a bigger white problem than black problem. The facts are indisputable.
<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>.....he spun the facts to fit his agenda, and conveniently left out key statistics.

<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>

 

<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>

Brian's initial quote was not the "greatest number" as you claim here. Brian's quote was "the majority". <Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>
Go back to page 5, read Brian's initial reply to Cupid, and try to process what "the majority" means. Allow me to also quote what Webster says the definition of majority means:

"a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total"

So once again.....how exactly are you and your pal claiming Brian lied? And got caught in a lie? Percentages and proportionality as you call it are quite relevant to his initial claim.

<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>

 

Its a screwed up skewed poll don't know if you noticed the lumped moderates in with liberals so to increase he outcome for liberals

where do you think liberals would be on the chart if they didn't include moderates in their numbers? number of liberals have always been lower on surveys compared to conservatives and moderates

 

Did you see that "shift" in the last two off-year elections when a combination of Tea Party conservatives and Republicans wiped out liberal Democrats in the worst consecutives elections for them in history? Where is the youthful energy of Democrats like JFK in the past who invigorated your party? You've got an incompetent and corrupt grandmother who has failed at every position she's been handed with zero accomplishments running virtually unopposed for president, and an ancient fossil and avowed Socialist seemingly the only one willing to run against her! You look across the aisle and you see the youth, wisdom and vitality of Republicans like Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Santorum already in the race, as well as strong, practical business leaders like Dr. Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and Donald Trump all already in the race or seriously considering it! All of them full of ideas to re-direct the country back on the right path! Where is there that kind of excitement among Democrats? Or are you holding your collective breath waiting for another couple of old codgers like Joe Biden and Al Gore to jump in? You had your one shot with an inexperienced sophomore that failed miserably, and virtually every other potential leader had their rear ends kicked in on election day over the last few years! But does it matter to you liberals? Not a whit! You'd vote for an empty suit if it had a "D" at the end of his name, just as you did last time!

 

Thanks for verifying my position, <Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies> You just quoted his post....."the majority". He didn't state the "greatest number" as you claimed in your previous post. He claimed, as I stated, "the majority". And again, the majority means number OR percentage. That is, unless you're also calling Webster a liar? And being that the percentage is anywhere between 67% and 75% of black children coming from single parent homes vs. 27% of white children, I'd say Brian is spot on. Thanks again.

Please elaborate exactly how the data you just quoted "clearly shows this not to be the case"?

<Flame-baiting/Insults/Replies>

 

Both ways sir, both ways. No state sponsored religion.

 

If one is offended by someone's freedom, the problem is on the offended, not the offender.

 

Social freedoms are restricted for the benefit of society as a whole.

When I was growing up, using the F-word in public was unacceptable. Back in the 80's I almost punched out and got in trouble with a couple of foul-mouthed teens using it extensively in front of my 6 & 8 yo kids at a Burger King. Today, no holds barred!

So I shud be able to walk around nude in front of your children and even masturbate to express my freedoms, huh?! <Mod Edit: Rule 2>

 

Well stated PD. I'm removing myself from anymore colorful exchanges in this thread. Some posters want to ignore the obvious and just argue. I have no interest in arguing over the obvious.

 

Yep. Between racism, religion and money... the Right has literally relinquished a sizable amount virtue and pragmatism.

It's a damned shame.

 

To avoid confusing foreigners? LOL. Yeah, right. And what's with the "you" stuff? I'm not a Democrat.

The right has been toying with language since they hired George Lakoff. Only those ignorant of language fall for it. I'm used to it. The left does the same thing, but it doesn't catch on like it does with the right. One person says "leftist," and before you know it, everyone on internet forums is using it as well, ignorant of its original meaning.

 

... nothing is happening, except they are gettingsmaller on number, and their churches are getting empty.

The religious right sticks to the medieval genesis stories that they were taught to repeat, when science is actually showing the scripture is correct when read correctly.
And the Gays and the Feminists have been winning as the economy fails when flooded by too many unskilled workers, and Gay marriage ignores the Child Abuse of fatherless kids, all raised in a sexually promiscuous culture Gays add to.

 

Yeah.. and they all rant about "freedom of speech".............. Still foul mouthed and unacceptable to me.

 

But you ignore that the kids had fathers and mothers and did not suffer child abuse.
Nor were the cities uninhabitable, either.

Rev Martin Luther King used the Truth to set his people free, which had nothing to do with Feminism or Gays marching in the face of the kids,

 

The defining method is to measure Sexual Morality.

One group still marries, goe to church,opposes Gay and Straight sexual promscuity or advertising, dress coded, etc.

Etc etc,...

See the Book,...

 

No, but it still does not mean that people of faith should not have the ability to petition and influence government.

 

The above claim is 100% inaccurate. Child abuse has been around since the dawn of humanity as has abusive parents in two parent homes. Where is your objectivity? I personally know people born before 1960 that were abused in two parent homes.

An example of an uninhabitable city?

And this has what to do with anything I said?

 

Thus the laws we have.

Cussing is not illegal but assault and battery is.

There are places in western civilization where it is perfectly legal to walk around nude in front of children. As for masturbating in front of a child is considered a sex crime and illegal.

 

?
You think single mothers raise kids which suffer the same abuse as two natural parent kids...???

WHat about the scientific studies which say you are way wrong?

CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census).
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
80% of rapist motivated by displaced anger come from fatherless homes. (Source: Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 403-26).
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. (Source: National Principals A Report on the State of High Schools).
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. (Source: Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. Of Corrections, 1992).
These statistics translate to mean that children from fatherless homes are:
5 times more likely to commit suicide
32 times more likely to run away
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
14 times more likely to commit rape
9 times more likely to drop out of high school
20 times more likely to end up in prison
Children from "fatherless families of single mother" homes are*:
15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
4.6 times more likely to commit suicide
6.6 times more likely to become teenaged mothers
24.3 times more likely to run away
15.3 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
6.3 times more likely to be in a state-operated institutions
10.8 times more likely to commit rape
6.6 times more likely to drop out of school
15.3 times more likely to end up in prison while a teenage
73% of adolescent murderers come from mother only homes
Daughters who live in mother only homes are 92% more likely to divorce**
///
http://www.cato.org/publications/con...-state-crime-0

 

Why not?

People without faith can influence government.
How would outlawing voters who are religious be fair?

 

Hmmm,...
How about assaulting kids verbally, by talking about masturbation or acting sexual suggestive when they can see you?
Is that illegal?

 

And this has what to do with anything I said? Anyway the above has been previously asked, answered and rejected on numerous threads. That dead horse has been thoroughly beaten.

 

Perhaps a growing number of moderates are joining the party.

 

By the above logic sex ed or even parents talking about the birds and bees with their own childeren would be "assaulting kids verbally". Define a suggestive act? Mom and dad kissing? Mom and dad hanging a hat on the bedroom door as a sign to the kids "keep out sex in progress"? Dad playfully patting mom on the rear when she walks by?