UN demands Israel tear down the barrier

[Tuberload]

Me: I think that was aimed more towards Bush, but you're right as well.

You: Bush does what he thinks is right. His religious beliefs shape his values, which will affect what he thinks is right. But this does not mean his foreign or domestic policies are based on his religious beliefs. Keep in mind one reason why we support Israel is because of their location. They are a friendly western democracy in an unfriendly part of the world. We support Kuwait for the same reason... we can put troops on something like 1/3 of that country if we want to at any given time from what I have heard.

Me: Yes but Bush has said many things that could make it seem like all of his policies are based around his religion.

You: quotes please so I can see what you are referring to.

Me: I am not going to dig up quotes for you, because if you have listened to any of his speaches you'll know what I am talking about. Last night I watched a documentary on CNN about his presidency and he believes it was his calling to become the president. He believes he is fighting the war on terrorism on behalf of god and his wishes. He prays every mornign and night for god to give him the answers.

You: So whats wrong with praying for guidance? Just because he prays that he will make the right choices does not mean that he is working to forward his denomination or religion.

Me: When exactly did I say it was wrong or that he is working to forward his denomination?

You: I have heard many of his speaches and I still do not get what you are talking about. Give me specifics about how he is basing his policies on his religion or the spreading of it.

Me: Once again what the hell are you talking about? I made a defensive comment supporting why some people may think Bush supports his policy based on his religion. Besides I told you, CNN documentation on Bush. Feel free to look it up and watch it. I am not going to defend my right to state an opinion, just because you feel the need to blow everything I have said thus far completely out of the water.

Now onto your response to all of my questions:

well thats exactly what it sounds like to me when you are saying bush prays to God every day... as if its a bad thing. The reason he feels God supports the war is because he feels like God has put it on his heart to go through with it. He prays for answers, the war in Iraq was a solution to a problem. He feels that it was God's will that this happen. That it was the correct decision for the well being of our country. Thats what I think of it atleast. But if we talk more on this subject this thread will be turning into a religious debate.

You did not respond to one of my questions. All you did was spit out what you had been repeatedly spewing the whole time. Then you try and change the discussion to keep from getting into a religious debate. Yet if you would have read anything I had said, it should have been obvious that I was not trying to start a religious debate, I was trying to figure out just what the hell it was you were ranting about and defend my right to say whatever I want.

Now on to discussion number 2:

Values are shaped by religion. When you make a decision it is based on your values. So no matter what religion will enter into everything. But to say because someone  has a religious belief and that shapes their values and that shapes their decision is violating the separation of church and state would be totally retarded. There is no separation of church and state, in fact the separation clause applies to a state sponsoring a religion or hindering a religion. Its not like bush is saying everyone has to be in his denomination, and its not like bush is dumping on everyone who practices Islam.

I have highlighted all the important parts of your post to make it easier to understand my point.

My values are not shaped by religion whatsoever. I am a baptized catholic by birth, but I do not practice it as of now. My values are shaped by life’s lessons I have been "fortunate" enough to experience.

If you do not practice a religion then it can't very well shape your values now can it?

Interesting, didn’t you just get done saying that religion shapes your values, and that it enters into everything?

Then perhaps you should rephrase your position, so that it doesn't sound like you're saying all values are shaped by religion.

No I am saying that bushes values are shaped by his religion. You are saying you are a catholic but not practicing. Bush practices his religion so it shapes his values, you do not practice your so it can't shape yours. I have said bush's values are shaped by religion. Not all values. Pay attention. I was continuously referring to the commander in chief.

Earlier you said that religion shapes your values and that it enters into everything? Maybe you should pay attention to what you're saying.

I have been responding and you have not been getting the message. Don't call me a joke when you are putting words in my mouth or misunderstanding what I am saying.

I have been saying throughout this thread that Bush makes decisions based on values, his values were shaped by his religion. This does not mean he is making a deicison to further his religion. But somehow you interpreted that to mean all values are shaped by religion???

Now I have come to the conclusion, that I generated a perfectly understandable response after going back through all of that. I have also come to the conclusion that it was in fact you who is putting words into my mouth and misunderstanding everything I have said. This is based solely on the fact that you got into this conversation with me in the first place, when I think it was bluntly obvious that I was not arguing that a president should not be allowed to shape his values based upon his religion.

I stick by my opinion about this conversation, and your ability to follow.

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

Then here it is. If gay marriage is legalized as a federal law, the south will go nuts

Why should anyone care what a bunch of ignorant cousin fuckers think? If they want to try and leave again let them. See how long it takes for them to come crawling back....

THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of an asshole, hypocritical liberal.

"Oh you bigot, why don't you be open minded and allow gay marriage"
"I disagree"
"I HATE YOU BECAUSE YOURE FROM THE SOUTH SO YOU OBVIOUSLY FUCK YOUR COUSIN."

I see the irony, but Arta, of course, won't.

[Arta]

Today it seems to me like some minor thing will drive a married couple to divorce, things that can be fixed.

How is that any of your business?

THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of an asshole, hypocritical liberal.

...

I see the irony, but Arta, of course, won't.

That may make Forged a hypocrite. It bears no such inference on me.

[Forged]

"Oh you bigot, why don't you be open minded and allow gay marriage"
"I disagree"
"I HATE YOU BECAUSE YOURE FROM THE SOUTH SO YOU OBVIOUSLY FUCK YOUR COUSIN."

I am from alabama, and live in texas.  Don't make assumptions...

If I recall correctlly I never called anyone a bigot.  I just said someones personal afairs where their own, and should not concern you.  How is someone marrying someone of the same sex effecting you?

[quasi-modo]

Today it seems to me like some minor thing will drive a married couple to divorce, things that can be fixed.

How is that any of your business?

Okay, I see that absolutly nothing is my business, nothing that is happeneing in this country is any of my damned business. My brother's friend was killed the other day because a swingset collapsed on him. I am not allowed to comment on how tragic that is because it did not happen to me or someone related to me.

[Forged]

Today it seems to me like some minor thing will drive a married couple to divorce, things that can be fixed.

How is that any of your business?

Okay, I see that absolutly nothing is my business, nothing that is happeneing in this country is any of my damned business. My brother's friend was killed the other day because a swingset collapsed on him. I am not allowed to comment on how tragic that is because it did not happen to me or someone related to me.

People's personal relationships are none of your fucking buisness.

[quasi-modo]

Now I have come to the conclusion, that I generated a perfectly understandable response after going back through all of that. I have also come to the conclusion that it was in fact you who is putting words into my mouth and misunderstanding everything I have said. This is based solely on the fact that you got into this conversation with me in the first place, when I think it was bluntly obvious that I was not arguing that a president should not be allowed to shape his values based upon his religion.

Yes you dug up every post and let me go back to the beginning. You make it sound like Bush praying is a bad thing, its the way it came off. You said in there that you do not think it is a bad thing, but the enitial post read that way to me.

Also the fact that you said to me that all values are shaped by religion in there when I never said they were. I said values are shaped by religion, I was referring to the values of the president and the values of those who pracitce a religion. Values enter all decisions, and Bush's values are shaped by religion. That is the spot that I am referring to where you put words into my mouth and completely missed what I was trying to say.

[quasi-modo]

Today it seems to me like some minor thing will drive a married couple to divorce, things that can be fixed.

How is that any of your business?

Okay, I see that absolutly nothing is my business, nothing that is happeneing in this country is any of my damned business. My brother's friend was killed the other day because a swingset collapsed on him. I am not allowed to comment on how tragic that is because it did not happen to me or someone related to me.

People's personal relationships are none of your fucking buisness.

When did I comment on any one person's relationship with another person? The fact is that divorce rates are higher then they have ever been. They never used to be that way, so what is the problem? Why are the rates so much higher then they used to be? It seems to me like people are now using marriage like an extended form of dating. They get married,  finally decide they do not like the person after a few months (cough: celebrities) and then have an annulment or a divorce.

I am not saying if a wife walks in and finds a husband in bed with another person that she should not leave him, something like that is a perfectly fine reason to get a divorce. I am saying that people should marry only when they have the intent of spending the rest of their life with the other person and should try to work out their problems because people are divorcing over stupid crap. Many of my friends have parents who are divorced and you would not believe some of the retarded reasons they get divorced over.

[Arta]

That's unbelievably arrogant. As if you're qualified to judge other people's relationship decisions.... get a grip!

[Adron]

When did I comment on any one person's relationship with another person? The fact is that divorce rates are higher then they have ever been. They never used to be that way, so what is the problem? Why are the rates so much higher then they used to be? It seems to me like people are now using marriage like an extended form of dating. They get married,  finally decide they do not like the person after a few months (cough: celebrities) and then have an annulment or a divorce.

I am not saying if a wife walks in and finds a husband in bed with another person that she should not leave him, something like that is a perfectly fine reason to get a divorce. I am saying that people should marry only when they have the intent of spending the rest of their life with the other person and should try to work out their problems because people are divorcing over stupid crap. Many of my friends have parents who are divorced and you would not believe some of the retarded reasons they get divorced over.

OK, my interpretation of what you're saying: It's too easy to get married. People get married without having fully thought through the consequences, as an extended form of dating. We need to make it harder for people to get married.


I don't see you saying there's any problem with divorces, just that marriage has been devaluated by being too easy to enter. Perhaps people should be required a 1 year waiting period before marrying? Something to stop all those lightheaded infatuated couples from jumping into something that isn't really right for them?

[Banana fanna fo fanna]

That's unbelievably arrogant. As if you're qualified to judge other people's relationship decisions.... get a grip!

Jesus Christ Arta, what the hell is wrong with you!? It's okay for you to judge other people's decisions, but not for him to?

OK, my interpretation of what you're saying: It's too easy to get married. People get married without having fully thought through the consequences, as an extended form of dating. We need to make it harder for people to get married.

It's probably more a changing of social trends than actually making a law, but this statement is true:

I don't see you saying there's any problem with divorces, just that marriage has been devaluated by being too easy to enter.

[Hazard]

That's unbelievably arrogant. As if you're qualified to judge other people's relationship decisions.... get a grip!

Jesus Christ Arta, what the hell is wrong with you!? It's okay for you to judge other people's decisions, but not for him to?

May I point out more hypocriticism?

[quasi-modo]

When did I comment on any one person's relationship with another person? The fact is that divorce rates are higher then they have ever been. They never used to be that way, so what is the problem? Why are the rates so much higher then they used to be? It seems to me like people are now using marriage like an extended form of dating. They get married,  finally decide they do not like the person after a few months (cough: celebrities) and then have an annulment or a divorce.

I am not saying if a wife walks in and finds a husband in bed with another person that she should not leave him, something like that is a perfectly fine reason to get a divorce. I am saying that people should marry only when they have the intent of spending the rest of their life with the other person and should try to work out their problems because people are divorcing over stupid crap. Many of my friends have parents who are divorced and you would not believe some of the retarded reasons they get divorced over.

OK, my interpretation of what you're saying: It's too easy to get married. People get married without having fully thought through the consequences, as an extended form of dating. We need to make it harder for people to get married.


I don't see you saying there's any problem with divorces, just that marriage has been devaluated by being too easy to enter. Perhaps people should be required a 1 year waiting period before marrying? Something to stop all those lightheaded infatuated couples from jumping into something that isn't really right for them?

Maybe not something that extreme. But maybe if we made it harder to get a divorce so that people will work out some of their problems or something. I mean make sure people getting a divorce have a good reason before they go throuhg with it... or else they get hassled for a long time trying to get one.

[quasi-modo]

That's unbelievably arrogant. As if you're qualified to judge other people's relationship decisions.... get a grip!

Wait wait wait, you are acting like I am judging individual marriages and saying the people should not be married. I am just pointing out a trend. I think that marriage should be like it used to be. I think the vows should be taken seriously. Evidently they are not.

[Adron]

I think that marriage should be like it used to be. I think the vows should be taken seriously. Evidently they are not.

Well, one way could be having marriages negotiated by the parents.

Another one to bring back huge dowries, a solid financial investment in the marriage. This would fit really well in with the general capitalism too - what better way to revalue marriage than to assign monetary value?