Us presidential election 2004

[kerosene 0]

"Serfs vs. Pioneers. We left or were kicked out of old Europe and Asia because as Americans we refused to accept the notion that we were to be serfs and dictated to. That is why the quaint notion of liberty and freedom is such an alien concept to you. We call your attention what still remain as the God-given human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Unless you were black, or an indian, or later on Mexican, or phillipino.  Early American governemnt was as abhorent and hypocritical as any other system at the time.  The only thing settlers did differnet to Europeans was shift the inferority from a social class to other races.

John Kerry dosent value life?  If your pro death penalty or anti-gun control you dont have the right to critcise people who are pro-choice or pro-stem cell research.  Right wingers find it acceptable that X number of people will die (Admittidley through their own negligence in many cases.) so that they can continue to own guns.  I disagree with the Vaticans views, but i respect them because there at least consistent, they dont claim to know which lives are acceptable sacrififces.

"John Kerry does not support liberty. By ignoring the former soviet republics and soviet sattelites that have pledged their lives in defense of those freedoms so new to them."  

But its O.K to send U.S special forces to train troops in former soviet republics that use torture as a routine investigative technique?  

Post WW2 , the U.S has used its power to suppress (left-leaning/ Socialist) democracy in the developing world far more often than its supported it.

[DanAK47 1]

Quote[/b] ]I wouldn't call the economy, foreign policy, civil liberties, social security, education, health care for "small incidents"

Kerry would like for you to think that all of those things are failures, and that they are all Bush's fault. He would also like you to believe that he would do a better job, which I do not believe to be true.

To say that something is failing requires something to relate it to. Kerry is relating it to 4 years ago. Unfortunately for him some serious changes have come in those 4 years and I do not think it is valid to use it as a reference.

You also missed my point entirely. To prove that the strategy in the aforementioned subjects is failing he has provided you with several "points" which are usually either factually wrong (Pells grants for example) or blown out of proportion (Iraq).

[EiZei 0]

Serfs vs. Pioneers. We left or were kicked out of old Europe and Asia because as Americans we refused to accept the notion that we were to be serfs and dictated to. That is why the quaint notion of liberty and freedom is such an alien concept to you. We call your attention what still remain as the God-given human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. John Kerry does not support any of these.

Ah yes, the freedom hating europeans are at it again.

Seriously, this rhetoric is starting to get scary.

[kerosene 0]

Didnt Kerry say in the debate that the number of people qualifying for the grant had went up, so yes people were getting it, but not the amount promised? I think he said something along the lines of "that not what you want"

See, I think a massive tax cut/ rebate before a major war is pretty insane, to me that defies all logic, but I cant buy into trickle-down economics. Are there any stats on how much of that money may have left the U.S? A large percentage went to very wealthy, and they dont do the same stuff as normail peope with their money.

Also, I have a question for the more right leaning forum members, in terms of Kerry getting criticised for speaking out against the vietnam war, do you believe in the Domino effect? im not looking to be confrontational, im just genuinley curious, do you think that prediction would have come true if the U.S had'nt went to vietnam?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Yes ? Elaborate !

Ah no...

See above.

You are hating my style!!!! A international coalition of Billybob2002 haters!!!! Not calling myself a vicitim....

Quote[/b] ]What is shady on his numbers?

Job numbers...overblown

Pell Grants... wrong numbers...tries to spin it after proven wrong....

After-School Programs numbers... flat wrong

surplus numbers...wrong

"The jobs the president is creating pay $9,000 less than the jobs that we're losing," ... wrong

his health plan would cover all americans...wrong. millions will be still left uninsured.

Quote[/b] ]Unless you were black, or an indian, or later on Mexican, or phillipino.

You forgot the Irish! That history is little shady....

[Frisbee 0]

Ahem, allow me to retort.

Quote[/b] ]embracing the mediocrity that has characterized other civilizations.

Riiiight.

Quote[/b] ]bringing democracy to the Middle East is too big a task for us.

Everybody loves being pushed around and being told what to do!

Quote[/b] ]preferring caution to boldness

Yeah, why should we stop to think before acting? Why should we get evidence and get confirmation and re-confirmation before acting? Diplomacy is boring, anything diplomacy can do LGB's can do better, and LGB's look nicer on CNN.

Quote[/b] ]the meaning of duty, honor, and sacrifice

dulce et decorum est pro patria mori: It is sweet and glorius to die for one's country.

*waves flag around*

Quote[/b] ]Depending on the outcome, they will describe it as the moment America joined the ranks of ordinary nations; or they will describe it as the moment the prodigal sons and daughters of the greatest generation accepted their burden as caretakers of the City on the Hill.

Why should America listen to mere "ordinary nations"? After all, what do they know? We're better than all of them!

Quote[/b] ]This arbitrary selection, whether abortion in the beginning or euthansia in the end deliberately attacks the idea that life is good

Life is good, but keep the death penalty please! We should be able to kill evil men...like terrorists and...the people from the axis of evil, but we can't extinguish the life of a couple of cells because life is good. *nodnodnod*

Quote[/b] ]because they are not capable of making informed choices.

They are not, mankind in general is quite stupid. Do you really think an average man can make decisions that might influence anything long term? Hell no, man lives now, man makes short term decisions. If we could make informed choices, we wouldn't need people to represent us now would we?

That's just such a bunch of stupidly patriotic bullshit. This whole flag waving thing was nice a couple of centuries ago, Brittania rules the waves and such, or the glory of the Roman empire. WE live now though, and we live in a global world now, and you are no longer able to superiorally do as you please, those people trying to blow your people up was a hint to that.

[denoir 0]

Serfs vs. Pioneers. We left or were kicked out of old Europe and Asia because as Americans we refused to accept the notion that we were to be serfs and dictated to. That is why the quaint notion of liberty and freedom is such an alien concept to you. We call your attention what still remain as the God-given human rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. John Kerry does not support any of these.

No, it was mostly because you ancesters were religious nuts that had problems with the secular enlightenment in Europe.

Another big portion later were the lower segments in society trying their luck elsewhere.

The founding elements however were the religious nut-jobs - calvinists, purtians etc who could not handle the modernization fo the European society. Unfortunately to some extent American society is still permeated by those elements.

Quote[/b] ]John Kerry does not support life. In arbitrally picking and choosing what is and isn't life and who deserves it based on passing whims of convienence and political expediency, he denegrates all life. This arbitrary selection, whether abortion in the beginning or euthansia in the end deliberately attacks the idea that life is good, and should be valued, and not discarded lightly as a prison or bundle of excess tissue.

Really? And your definition isn't arbitrary? You believe that your definition is correct because it's fund in some book of fiction you happen to have an abnormal attachment to?

But ok, have it your way. Let's say that you are right and that abortion is murder.

How can you live with yourself? If according to you, abortion is murder, are you not the worst kind of low-life that just watches it happen and does nothing? Why arn't you manning the baricades? I'm sure you even distance yourself from those that blow up abortion clinics, don't you? Why? If it's murder, it's murder. You have a moral responsibility to do something. You call yourself a Christian?

If you truly think abortion is murder then you are the lowest form of moral low-life that stands by while it happens.

Quote[/b] ]

John Kerry does not support liberty. By ignoring the former soviet republics and soviet sattelites that have pledged their lives in defense of those freedoms so new to them, and by trampling on the dreams of those repressed masses throughout the middle east - who up until the proclivities of Bill Clinton dreamed of sending their children to our shores as students, not bombers - and by despising the cause of liberty in the very theater of combat he once served in, he has proven that he neither values nor respects liberty.

The dreams of those repressed masses throughout the middle east is that America stops bombing them and lets them live their life and have their culture. If you havn't noticed, they hate your guts over there - and it's not some government controled propaganda, it's the wide popular opinion. And who can blame them when you without provocation start bombing them and killing their children?

They have every reason to hate you, especially after Iraq.

Quote[/b] ]John Kerry does not support the pursuit of happiness. To pursue something is to be activiely engaged in seeking of your own volition. The liberal nanny-state mentality says that the citizen is only a mindless serf to be managed because they are not capable of making informed choices. This constant brainwashing, instead of designing to fix the problem and give opportunity to make choices and choose your own destiny, instead incarcerates generations in the psychological prisons of subserviance.

On the contrary, he is pro choice, against gay bans, much more drug-liberal, much more for the freedom of the press etc

The difference is that his ideals are universal humanist ideals. Bush's ideals are fundamentalist Christian ideals. No condoms in schools, no abortions and abstinence-only sex-ed? It's criminally irresponsible.

Quote[/b] ]John Kerry boldy stands for the antithesis of all the American values, the principles on which this country was founded.

If you are refering to the religious nut-jobs, then absolutely. If you are refering to the values defined by your constitution which stem from French secular enlightenment philosophy, then you couldn't be more wrong. Separation of church and state is one of the most fundamental things in there.

That means that you can't band embryotic stem cell research because your particular religion says so, that means that you can't ban gay marriages because your religion has a different definition of marriage, that means that you can't ban abortion because your interpretation of your religious texts is that it is wrong.

Kerry operates on the principle of what's good for society and for the individual, rather than what's acceptable to some backwards religious ethics.

Freedom of religion is important and everybody should have the right to their beliefs. They do not however have the right to wreak havoc in society by imposing their skewed ethical perceptions on others.

[kerosene 0]

Quote[/b] ]Unless you were black, or an indian, or later on Mexican, or phillipino.

You forgot the Irish! That history is little shady....

Its not like im trying to make a leauge table of whos shafted the most people, but the way the history of the U.S is presented is.. a lot of people seem to see it through rose-tinted glasses.

Basically if your nation is or ever was a super-power or near super-power, then its probably got a some very unpleasant episodes in its history (Britain, Belgium, Russia for example.) , America is no different

[shinRaiden 0]

You missed the entire point in the macro and micro cases.

Black Americans too have rised up in the cause of liberty and died to be known as human beings. White Americans died at Antienam and Gettysburg so that Black Americans would legally be considered human beings. Go compare the histories of Jamestown vs Plymouth, then go read some books that chronicle the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention. Don't go for the philosophy stuff etc, look for the stuff that records the notes of Madison and others that explains that entire premise.

On to life. Death penalty cases involve cases where criminals by deliberate and aggravated intent maliciously sought to destroy life for their own self interest. Their actions resulted in a legal forfeiture of their life in return. There is s clear consequence in either case, if the state instead chooses to comit the sentance to life, they are to some extent acknowledging and accepting the murderer's hedonistic worldview that the world revolves around him or her.

As there is innumerable things that could be used to kill people, I suppose that you must be in the waste management business, as you could stand to gain a lot of money by disposing of every last item in the world in a effort to purge it of potential murder weapons. The problem is that no matter how much stuff you throw away into the trash or ban, that still is not lifting one finger to acknowledge or remove murderous intent out of people's hearts.

Socialism != democracy, as I metioned previously. You either have personal accountibiliy and responsibility, or you have the nanny state where your life is decided for you. You can't have it both ways. In reality, you can not refuse or ignore the direct consequences of your actions, no matter how hard you try.

As for the charges of conspiracy in Armies of the Americas training and such, I highly doubt that we are the experts in torture and subversion. The Bush administration has rightfully expressed concern over Putin's recent announcements of consolidation, but it remains to be seen what the actual outcome will be.

The charges of supression of the left are two-part. First is the acountibility part. First, where the socialists are engaged in subversion and sedition, the legal response is appropiately criminally harsh. You're protected for free speech, you are not protected to war against the police and duely appointed officers of the land.

Second, state socialism makes personal liberty and individual choice a crime of most significant prominence against the state. When President Reagan spoke in Berlin, there was supposed to be a large impromptu crowd on the east side of the fence. When he spoke though, they were not there, having been driven back at gunpoint rather than have the opportunity to choose to listen to something they may or may not choose to agree with.

[DanAK47 1]

I have noticed a tendency of a lot of you to say that Iraq is more oppressed now than they were under Saddam.

Maybe for the time being they are, I do not think so myself, but I can see where you are coming from. Have some patience.

Kerry seems to lean more towards what most of the population wants. This sounds great, doesn't it? But what happened to Socrates?

Bush is more realistic, although maybe a little bit too aggressive at times.

Most of you seem to have made up your minds already and are wearing your Bush Blinders and Kerry Kaleidoscopes, leaving no room for debate.. I have made my mind up but do not think my candidate is perfect.

[EiZei 0]

As there is innumerable things that could be used to kill people, I suppose that you must be in the waste management business, as you could stand to gain a lot of money by disposing of every last item in the world in a effort to purge it of potential murder weapons. The problem is that no matter how much stuff you throw away into the trash or ban, that still is not lifting one finger to acknowledge or remove murderous intent out of people's hearts.

.

True, but what about things that are exclusively designed to kill?

Quote[/b] ]

Socialism != democracy, as I metioned previously. You either have personal accountibiliy and responsibility, or you have the nanny state where your life is decided for you. You can't have it both ways. In reality, you can not refuse or ignore the direct consequences of your actions, no matter how hard you try.

On the contrary, real leftism is about making sure everybody has equal chances and responsibility, you can become an engineer no matter if you are a rich white boy or poor asian immigrant kid if you have the will to do so.

Quote[/b] ]

The charges of supression of the left are two-part. First is the acountibility part. First, where the socialists are engaged in subversion and sedition, the legal response is appropiately criminally harsh. You're protected for free speech, you are not protected to war against the police and duely appointed officers of the land.

So holding a sign outside a shittily designated free speech zone is waging war against the cops?

Breaking into offices and vandalizing is a crime no matter what.

Quote[/b] ]

Second, state socialism makes personal liberty and individual choice a crime of most significant prominence against the state. When President Reagan spoke in Berlin, there was supposed to be a large impromptu crowd on the east side of the fence. When he spoke though, they were not there, having been driven back at gunpoint rather than have the opportunity to choose to listen to something they may or may not choose to agree with

Yeah, Kerry and DDR are SO similar..

DDR's leadership always were anxious to point out that they were "stabile", "on course" and that they "provided safety."

[shinRaiden 0]

There is a reason why so many were forced into exile or chose the stake instead. Gibbon's classic is not entitled "The modernization and rise of late Rome", it is entitled "the decline and fall of Rome."

The reason I'm not manning the barricades or blowing up clinics is that the courts of the land have ruled that Abortion is legal, because of the disregard for the fundamental concept of life. If you go back and read Judge Blackmun's opinion in Roe v. Wade, he says that as the determination of what is life is far outside the court's ability to decide, that abortions should go on until they find out whether or not it really is 'life' they are killing.

So in response I do what I can to influence people and support the legal process of the land to get the right people elected to correct the backwards confusion on the courts.

For the statements made by the palestinians in the middle east those were from four months in Israel, the West Bank, Egypt, and Jordan in early 2000. They come from personal and private interviews and conversations with bus drivers, shopkeepers, imams, house wives, children, professors, and refugees.

Furthermore, they do understand the difficulties they face, but the optimism of the hope they have in the American dream is what buoy's them up. In a recent interview with a US officer assisting in the formation of city councils across Iraq I heard this week, the officer said that one council member asked if the UN disqualifies Karzai in Afganistan, could he be on the ballot in Iraq. The point is they recognize their problems, grumble that we're helping them out, but are privately appreciative. I mentioned this before and elsewhere, but the tribal structure prevents them from saying publically what they feel privately.

[turms 0]

Quote[/b] ]After-School Programs numbers... flat wrong

Care to point out where?

Quote[/b] ]Job numbers...overblown

Can you elaborate?

Start from these 2, ill be happy to post some more of Kerrys thoughts about economy, if you can answer these first.

[DanAK47 1]

Was the gun designed to kill for the reason of protecting the user?

[shinRaiden 0]

In socialism, you get assigned to be an engineer or a doctor, regardless of whether you are competant or interested, as it is the 'choice' of the state, not the serf.

[DanAK47 1]

It is quite ridiculous to use John Kerry's OWN WEB SITE to try and provide some unbiased facts to this discussion.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Care to point out where?

http://www.factcheck.org/article281.html

Quote[/b] ]

Wrong on After-School Programs

Kerry claimed that "500,000 kids lost after-school programs," which isn't the case. A cut was proposed but Congress rejected it. The Department of Education's 2004 budget proposal called for a nearly 40% cut in funding for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, or a drop of nearly $400 million from about $1 billion in 2003. According to a report by the Afterschool Alliance, "More than 550,000 children would lose access to afterschool programs." But even assuming that projection would have turned out to be correct, it never happened because Congress kept funding at about $1 billion.

......

Quote[/b] ]Can you elaborate?

Quote[/b] ]Kerry twice claimed 1.6 million jobs have been lost under Bush, which is 1 million too high.

[denoir 0]

The reason I'm not manning the barricades or blowing up clinics is that the courts of the land have ruled that Abortion is legal, because of the disregard for the fundamental concept of life.

If you go back and read Judge Blackmun's opinion in Roe v. Wade, he says that as the determination of what is life is far outside the court's ability to decide, that abortions should go on until they find out whether or not it really is 'life' they are killing.

So in response I do what I can to influence people and support the legal process of the land to get the right people elected to correct the backwards confusion on the courts.

You mean like when Hitler said that killing Jews was a-ok?

Quote[/b] ]For the statements made by the palestinians in the middle east those were from four months in Israel, the West Bank, Egypt, and Jordan in early 2000. They come from personal and private interviews and conversations with bus drivers, shopkeepers, imams, house wives, children, professors, and refugees.

Ah, yes, anecdotal evidence, the best kind. Look at opinion polls. Look what the Iraqis have to say about you.

Quote[/b] ]There is a reason why so many were forced into exile or chose the stake instead. Gibbon's classic is not entitled "The modernization and rise of late Rome", it is entitled "the decline and fall of Rome."

You are mixing up the centuries, but I don't blame you, you have a very skewed picture. The people that moved to America on religious grounds did so mainly in the 17th and 18th century - through out the late renaissance and the enlightenment. Very characteristic for both periods is that freedom of religion was bootsed and the church lost its influence.

These movements that went to America mostly did so because they objected against the secular progress which they thought was morally corrupting Europe.

[denoir 0]

In socialism, you get assigned to be an engineer or a doctor, regardless of whether you are competant or interested, as it is the 'choice' of the state, not the serf.

And in capitalism, parents are forced to sell their children as dog food to the highest bidder.

Get a grip man. Not even under the worst form of communism in Stalin's Russia did the state assign professions to the people.

On the contrary, one of the basic elements in socialism is to give everybody the opportunity to use their full potential - regardless of their social background.

[kerosene 0]

You missed the entire point in the macro and micro cases.

Black Americans too have rised up in the cause of liberty and died to be known as human beings. White Americans died at Antienam and Gettysburg so that Black Americans would legally be considered human beings.

You seem like a knowlegable guy, so you know that war wasnt purley about slavery.  Britain for its faults, outlawed the slave trade in 1807

--

in 1788, over 100 petitions attacking the slave trade were presented to the House of Commons in the space of just three months. The campaign of 1792 was more ambitious still. In all, 519 petitions were presented to the Commons, the largest number ever submitted to the House on a single subject or in a single session, but just as important as the size of the campaign was its range and diversity. While the industrial north provided the most enthusiastic support for abolition, every English county was represented in 1792, in addition to which Scotland and Wales made significant contributions.  ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/history.....shtml)

Theres a difference between the communist dictatorships of eastern Europe and left leaning governments.  Guetamala is the worst example of failure to diffrentiate between Socailism = bad, free market capitalism = good, and actual good/bad.

if the U.S had had a problem with Battista I could accept the stace on Cuba, but Battista was a "good" dictator so there was no problem - so you think Cuba would be a better place if the C.I,A had killed Castro in the 70's or 80's?  (I say, let him die of old age, Cuba will probably transition to democracy relativley well afterwards) Also you do have to be qualified\trained to be a doctor, i dont think careers were just assigned out of a hat. Are you going by that Karl Marx quote

"from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

Cause it says from ability, I heard something about children in East germany having a sport picked from them very early by the state, but i dont know of actual careers, espically ones requiring a brain just being assigned regardless of skill and competencey.

Plenty of democracies still have compulsory national service, isnt that the same principle? forcing members of the population to spend x amount of their life doing something without choice.

[The charges of supression of the left are two-part. First is the acountibility part. First, where the socialists are engaged in subversion and sedition, the legal response is appropiately criminally harsh. You're protected for free speech, you are not protected to war against the police and duely appointed officers of the land. ]

I dont think America hasnt changed since then, but I think Bush is a step backwards, I worry that the war against Terror/ Islamic fundamentlism could become as blind as the war against communism did in latin america/S.E asia. There are real problems with Guantanamo if there are senile pensioners detained - released now, but still)  The prisoner release in Iraq after Abu-Ghraib, if so many prisoners could be released in blocks over a few days, does it raise questions about what they were doing there in the first place?

[shinRaiden 0]

They are doing it in the school district in town, and it is the model for the entire state.

Again, you missed the point entirely of public vs. private opinion.

I am not mixing up centuries, I was citing a prior case model of the environment that similarly typified the events leading up to the mass exile of the 17th through 20th centuries. Rome dropped the ball because they didn't give a rip. The pioneers said "You know what, we're tired of being serfs, we want to be me. Can't do that here, so let's go elsewhere." You can give any number of reasons, taxation, drafts, property ownership state-sponsored religious oppression, etc.

Back to Rome. The so-called 'barbarians' realized "hey, we're not barbarians, lets make something of ourselves", much to the consternation of self-pious Rome. The barbarians had their homeland, and built great empire, then slacked off as had all the generations before them.

The only thing we learn from history is that no one learns from history.

[canukausiuka 1]

I have noticed a tendency of a lot of you to say that Iraq is more oppressed now than they were under Saddam.

Maybe for the time being they are, I do not think so myself, but I can see where you are coming from. Have some patience.

Kerry seems to lean more towards what most of the population wants. This sounds great, doesn't it? But what happened to Socrates?

Bush is more realistic, although maybe a little bit too aggressive at times.

Most of you seem to have made up your minds already and are wearing your Bush Blinders and Kerry Kaleidoscopes, leaving no room for debate.. I have made my mind up but do not think my candidate is perfect.

Have to agree with you that, in my opinion, things will turn out better for the Iraqi people. Maybe that is just an overly optimistic and cherry world view, but for either side, it is impossible to know. It is sad, too, that a lot of people do seem unwilling to accept the flaws in their candidate of choice.

denior, probably about the last thing I want to try to impress on you is that I do not think you are bad for your beliefs on abortion, gun control, etc. I just want you to realize that it is a cultural difference. It would be wrong of me to try to tell you that you should not let people have abortions, or that you need to own a gun. If the majority of your culture supports that, then it is fine to legislate it appropriately. But in the US, there is not overwhelming support one way or the other. To make a federal decision is effectively ignoring the culture of half the population here. That's not something to do lightly. All I am asking is that you not try to sit on a high chair and tell us that our values are screwed up. They may not be what you agree with, but just realize that they are valid. Personally, I think abortion is abhorrent. Most people here feel that way. Is there some reason why you should force us to allow it, when to us it is an abomination? (Don't get me too wrong here... I would not have abortion banned outright. There can be legitimate reasons for it. But simply as a form of birth-control to me is very wrong).

In short, its a difference in our value systems. That is where the root lies. But it is an opinion, not a universal truth or a fact. There is nothing but our culture, upbringing, and internal moral compass to tell us what is right. (and I guess all that is a long winded way to say, I'd appreciate it if you try to respect my values, and I will do the same for you.)

Quote[/b] ]No, it was mostly because you ancesters were religious nuts that had problems with the secular enlightenment in Europe.

Another big portion later were the lower segments in society trying their luck elsewhere.

The founding elements however were the religious nut-jobs - calvinists, purtians etc who could not handle the modernization fo the European society. Unfortunately to some extent American society is still permeated by those elements.

Just FYI, this is the sort of thing that caused me to not want to post here. Its not a personal attack, that's not what I was talking about. It is an assault on my values simply because you disagree with them. You have every right to disagree, but if you had taken a less condescending tone (things like "religious nuts" and "lower segments in society" really do have that tone), I think you'd come off as much more amiable.

Edit: just for the record, here are my results from the SelectSmart.com Presidential selector:

1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)

2. Bush, President George W. - Republican (80%)

3. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (52%)

4. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (46%)

5. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (39%)

6. Cobb, David - Green Party (20%)

7. Nader, Ralph - Independent (20%)

8. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (15%)

[denoir 0]

Rome dropped the ball because they didn't give a rip. The pioneers said "You know what, we're tired of being serfs, we want to be me. Can't do that here, so let's go elsewhere." You can give any number of reasons, taxation, drafts, property ownership state-sponsored religious oppression, etc.

Back to Rome. The so-called 'barbarians' realized "hey, we're not barbarians, lets make something of ourselves", much to the consternation of self-pious Rome. The barbarians had their homeland, and built great empire, then slacked off as had all the generations before them.

When Rome broke up and washed away, it was followed by a period of over 500 years, called the "Dark Ages" for a good reason. Poverty, religious fanaticism, violence and general decline of society. Are you saying that's your ideal?

The strenght of Rome was the organization of the state. Social organization is the hallmark of civilization. Without it we'd still be living in caves. The more advanced and complex the society is, the more organization it requires not to fall apart.

It's true, that America is behind Europe in that development, but you're going there slowly. Bush may be a step back, but it's just temporary. He's just another Nixon in the way of progress. I'm confident however that one day you'll get there.

[denoir 0]

denior, probably about the last thing I want to try to impress on you is that I do not think you are bad for your beliefs on abortion, gun control, etc.  I just want you to realize that it is a cultural difference.  

The thing is, I think it's more than that. We in Europe had those values (some still do) but we moved ahead. Now I don't want to sound too condencending, but I think it's not so much a question of culture, but one of social evolution.

To give you a counter-example: In Afghanistan women could vote. It was not however because the Afghans wanted it, but because you think that full democracy is a desired cultural development.

Quote[/b] ]But in the US, there is not overwhelming support one way or the other. To make a federal decision is effectively ignoring the culture of half the population here.

Exactly, but we're talking about a decision limiting a freedom (abortion for instance) based on a belief that is highly personal (since it's religion based). I would equally oppose a gun-ban based on a groups' religious beliefs.

Quote[/b] ]You have every right to disagree, but if you had taken a less condescending tone (things like "religious nuts" and "lower segments in society" really do have that tone), I think you'd come off as much more amiable.

I'm not calling all religious people "religious nuts" - on the contrary, I'm talking about fundementalist movements that are willing to sacrifice the lives or the quality of lives of other people for a belief system that is ultimately private. It is the legal imposing of your beliefs on others that is a problem.

[shinRaiden 0]

Again, Rome took all that legacy and threw it out the window of self-gratification in the name of "modernization", and that caused the dark ages. Only when people again began to value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness - and died at the stake defending it - did the stake start to sink into the heart of dark ages which died kicking and screaming.

Of course I don't want to see the dark ages. The only way I wouldn't mind is if I was a mindless serf and nodded my head to every spoonful of mush fed in my direction.