• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

University Tells Student to Remove Cross Necklace

And Joe (Boo) likes it, and thinks your childish antics make your point....Only in a world of meatheads would that be true.

I like it because its accurate. Even you go off the socialist deep end. It's hard to have rational debate with those whose vision is so clouded.

Lets take you're 80% Christian claim. Even if true, no one should suggest that means they can't be argued with. However, I suspect a good number in that 80% don't really know nor practice Christianity to any significant degree. Talked to one a while back who adamantly declared the Christian faith, but though the trinity was silly.

But when you call the president a socialist, or any such term, you've left reasoned debate. And that was the point he made. And he was quite accurate with it.
 
I like it because its accurate. Even you go off the socialist deep end. It's hard to have rational debate with those whose vision is so clouded.

Lets take you're 80% Christian claim. Even if true, no one should suggest that means they can't be argued with. However, I suspect a good number in that 80% don't really know nor practice Christianity to any significant degree. Talked to one a while back who adamantly declared the Christian faith, but though the trinity was silly.

But when you call the president a socialist, or any such term, you've left reasoned debate. And that was the point he made. And he was quite accurate with it.

Pf course. It's not as though a Christian woman was denied the right to wear a cross around their neck or that Obama got government involved in major parts of the economy. Obama is a real free marketeer, all right!
 
Pf course. It's not as though a Christian woman was denied the right to wear a cross around their neck or that Obama got government involved in major parts of the economy. Obama is a real free marketeer, all right!

As I said, she'll win. The world will never be free of idiots. And government has been involved in the economy almost since day one. But socialism has an actual definition. Being hyperbolic hurts debate.
 
As I said, she'll win. The world will never be free of idiots. And government has been involved in the economy almost since day one. But socialism has an actual definition. Being hyperbolic hurts debate.

Socialism has just one definition? That all depends on the Socialist, doesn't it? I've heard dozens.

What's your definition?
 
Socialism has just one definition? That all depends on the Socialist, doesn't it? I've heard dozens.

What's your definition?

No. A word can't be so malleable as to have no meaning at all.

so·cial·ism noun \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\

Definition of SOCIALISM

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
 
No. A word can't be so malleable as to have no meaning at all.

so·cial·ism noun \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\

Definition of SOCIALISM

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

So Obama would appear to qualify under 1. and 3. and parts of 2. So where's the beef?
 
So Obama would appear to qualify under 1. and 3. and parts of 2. So where's the beef?

No. Not even close. That you even suggest that shows how skewed your vision is. Because such a view is so far removed from reality reasoned discourse is all but impossible.
 
I am an atheist and I could care less if someone wears a small cross around the neck, David star or a muslim equivalent of the cross/star.

This is a totally personal expression of religion that bothers nobody, this is completely different from prayers over the com system, etc. which does infringe on the rights of people on a public school to not have to be confronted/bothered by these kinds of things. I would also have an issue with preaching communism, muslim or other religious and or political speeches coming over the public announce systems at school.
 
No. Not even close. That you even suggest that shows how skewed your vision is. Because such a view is so far removed from reality reasoned discourse is all but impossible.

Have you read your definition and looked at Obama's record?
 
So Obama would appear to qualify under 1. and 3. and parts of 2. So where's the beef?

Wow. :shock:

I think this is the problem with many Conservatives, they just don't know any better. You really do think the left is all about socialism don't you?
 
Wow. :shock:

I think this is the problem with many Conservatives, they just don't know any better. You really do think the left is all about socialism don't you?

No, no, of course not!

But remind please. What are they for?
 
Yep, and calling him a socialist is a major leap.

No, it's a small step.

Have you read his background? His bio? Familiar with some of his programs?

Why should you be in denial? I would think you'd be pleased? Why would anyone vote for him if they didn't believe he didn't lean towards the left?
 
No, it's a small step.

Have you read his background? His bio? Familiar with some of his programs?

Why should you be in denial? I would think you'd be pleased? Why would anyone vote for him if they didn't believe he didn't lean towards the left?

No him well. He's not a socialist.

Obama's No Socialist. I Should Know.

The funny thing is, of course, that socialists know that Barack Obama is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not even be a liberal. Socialists understand him more as a hedge-fund Democrat -- one of a generation of neoliberal politicians firmly committed to free-market policies.

The first clear indication that Obama is not, in fact, a socialist, is the way his administration is avoiding structural changes to the financial system. Nationalization is simply not in the playbook of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his team. They favor costly, temporary measures that can easily be dismantled should the economy stabilize. Socialists support nationalization and see it as a means of creating a banking system that acts like a highly regulated public utility. The banks would then cease to be sinkholes for public funds or financial versions of casinos and would become essential to reenergizing productive sectors of the economy.

Obama's No Socialist. I Should Know. - Washington Post
 
No him well. He's not a socialist.

Obama's No Socialist. I Should Know.

The funny thing is, of course, that socialists know that Barack Obama is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not even be a liberal. Socialists understand him more as a hedge-fund Democrat -- one of a generation of neoliberal politicians firmly committed to free-market policies.

The first clear indication that Obama is not, in fact, a socialist, is the way his administration is avoiding structural changes to the financial system. Nationalization is simply not in the playbook of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his team. They favor costly, temporary measures that can easily be dismantled should the economy stabilize. Socialists support nationalization and see it as a means of creating a banking system that acts like a highly regulated public utility. The banks would then cease to be sinkholes for public funds or financial versions of casinos and would become essential to reenergizing productive sectors of the economy.

Obama's No Socialist. I Should Know. - Washington Post

Well there you have it. The Washington Post says he's not a Socialist so it must be true! We'll overlook his background, his bip and his deeds and go by the Washington Post. That certainly requires a great less thinking on the subject.
 
Well there you have it. The Washington Post says he's not a Socialist so it must be true! We'll overlook his background, his bip and his deeds and go by the Washington Post. That certainly requires a great less thinking on the subject.

As a social democrat I have to agree with the Washington Post, Obama might be pretty much left of centre if you want to view him like that, but he is still safely in the middle of the democratic party and does come nowhere near socialist policies.

Obama believes in capitalism, something that is not acceptable for a socialist (even though it is acceptable for me as a social democrat)

Obama believes in private ownership of companies, socialism does not believe in private ownership of the means of production

Obama does not believe in planned economy, whereas a socialist does

Obama is a Christian (not a Muslim) and that is also not in accordance with socialism (Marx said that religion is the opium of the people)

Obama is not a centrist democrat, but as a social democrat I am considerably to the left of him and socialists are miles to the left of me.

Also, what does this have to do with having a cross around your neck?
 
As a social democrat I have to agree with the Washington Post, Obama might be pretty much left of centre if you want to view him like that, but he is still safely in the middle of the democratic party and does come nowhere near socialist policies.

Obama believes in capitalism, something that is not acceptable for a socialist (even though it is acceptable for me as a social democrat)

Obama believes in private ownership of companies, socialism does not believe in private ownership of the means of production

Obama does not believe in planned economy, whereas a socialist does

Obama is a Christian (not a Muslim) and that is also not in accordance with socialism (Marx said that religion is the opium of the people)

Obama is not a centrist democrat, but as a social democrat I am considerably to the left of him and socialists are miles to the left of me.

Also, what does this have to do with having a cross around your neck?



Given that ten of thousands should have been arrested after the collapse in 2008, I think it's safe to assume there are not only no "socialists" in America, there are no patriots either.........................
 
Given that ten of thousands should have been arrested after the collapse in 2008, I think it's safe to assume there are not only no "socialists" in America, there are no patriots either.........................

I think there are plenty of patriots and socialists in the US, I think there are even a lot of socialist Americans who view themselves as patriots (and for all I know, they might as well be).
 
If your not disturbing anyone else, you can prayer out loud. But as there is usually others who also have rights, being polite is not too much to ask. The law states that state employees can't lead a prayer. There is nothing preventing students other than the rights of others to not be annoyed. So, he's exaggerating a lot.

Fine, then it should be illegal to bring a cell phone to a movie. That's equally annoying.
 
I think there are plenty of patriots and socialists in the US, I think there are even a lot of socialist Americans who view themselves as patriots (and for all I know, they might as well be).

And you're entitled to your opinion. There are no patriots left in America, though there are hordes of religious zealots trying to further their own religious agendas under the guise (very thin) of "patriotism"........................
 
Well there you have it. The Washington Post says he's not a Socialist so it must be true! We'll overlook his background, his bip and his deeds and go by the Washington Post. That certainly requires a great less thinking on the subject.

No, the explanation and definition does. And trust me, anyone calling him a socialist stop thinking a long time ago.
 
Fine, then it should be illegal to bring a cell phone to a movie. That's equally annoying.

Yeah, and they tell you not to, and you can be asked to leave the theater. Neither, BTW, are against the law. :roll::roll::roll:
 
As a social democrat I have to agree with the Washington Post, Obama might be pretty much left of centre if you want to view him like that, but he is still safely in the middle of the democratic party and does come nowhere near socialist policies.

Obama believes in capitalism, something that is not acceptable for a socialist (even though it is acceptable for me as a social democrat)

Obama believes in private ownership of companies, socialism does not believe in private ownership of the means of production

Obama does not believe in planned economy, whereas a socialist does

Obama is a Christian (not a Muslim) and that is also not in accordance with socialism (Marx said that religion is the opium of the people)

Obama is not a centrist democrat, but as a social democrat I am considerably to the left of him and socialists are miles to the left of me.

Also, what does this have to do with having a cross around your neck?

If Obama is sharing his beliefs with you then you may be correct. As to the rest, you'd have to look back over the thread.
 
If Obama is sharing his beliefs with you then you may be correct. As to the rest, you'd have to look back over the thread.

This has nothing to do with beliefs or "looking back over the thread". I follow American politics and Obama might not be a great president but still, his policies do not qualify as Socialism.
 
This has nothing to do with beliefs or "looking back over the thread". I follow American politics and Obama might not be a great president but still, his policies do not qualify as Socialism.

Do you think he is an advocate of the free market? Or is he the first post-American president?
 
Back
Top Bottom