• 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!

Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

Blemonds said:
Your question is bizarre. That's why I asked your point. My position on original sin is that it was original sin. And no, I wasn't wrong before
Click to expand...

Yes you were.
Do we still have original sin?
 
Travis007 said:
so you are not OK with Rev Wright and the BLT teachings that Obama adhered to ?
Click to expand...

i don't give a **** about some talking point that you heard on Hannity. i turned him off years ago.
 
johndylan1 said:
Jesus said "before Abraham was I AM". To know what that meant to His contemporaries, look at the response from His hearers. Note the context at the end of verse 53. Then the response verse 59; the response of stoning is punishment for blasphemy, claiming to pre exist Abraham and using a reference to the omnipresent (I AM).

John 8: 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’[a] 55 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.
Click to expand...


Oh brother...:doh What nonsense.
 
Helix said:
it should be illegal. sorry. Jim Crow ****ed it up for the whole class, and if you ask me, i say good riddance to it.
Click to expand...

Jim Crow was the law forcing businesses to discriminate.
 
Helix said:
i don't give a **** about some talking point that you heard on Hannity. i turned him off years ago.
Click to expand...


but thats not the source of Obama's BLT background.....

any time you want to discuss this sounds fine to me..
 
Henrin said:
1.)Then it is your duty to defend their logic that is obviously faulty.
2.) You can start by defending the claim that the thirteenth amendment only protects from conditions found in black slavery.
3.) Have fun.
Click to expand...

1.) i have no duty to defend the people that dishonestly claim that there is forced servitude with anti-discrimination laws. That would be stupid, Ill be sticking with facts, rights the constitutions and court cases over failed and proven wrong opinions
2.) again, no need because that straw man already failed and has nothing to do with reality facts or the topic.
3.) its always fun destroying opinions pushed as truths and using facts to prove them wrong.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) i have no duty to defend the people that dishonestly claim that there is forced servitude with anti-discrimination laws. That would be stupid, Ill be sticking with facts, rights the constitutions and court cases over failed and proven wrong opinions
2.) again, no need because that straw man already failed and has nothing to do with reality facts or the topic.
3.) its always fun destroying opinions pushed as truths and using facts to prove them wrong.
Click to expand...

What? I was obviously talking about the Supreme Court. Please review the court cases you're using to defend your argument.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) i have no duty to defend the people that dishonestly claim that there is forced servitude with anti-discrimination laws. That would be stupid, Ill be sticking with facts, rights the constitutions and court cases over failed and proven wrong opinions
2.) again, no need because that straw man already failed and has nothing to do with reality facts or the topic.
3.) its always fun destroying opinions pushed as truths and using facts to prove them wrong.
Click to expand...
The anti-slavery laws are very similar to slavery and rape. Slavery because they force people to act against their will or suffer harm and rape because like rape, the laws are about power and control.
 
Blemonds said:
Deflection not necessary. Quoted posts sufficed
Click to expand...
then feel free to stop deflecting and simply qoute the factual contradiction, we are waiting, since its factually its never been done. just reposted lies like the one above :D
 
AGENT J said:
then feel free to stop deflecting and simply qoute the factual contradiction, we are waiting, since its factually its never been done. just reposted lies like the one above :D
Click to expand...
Asked and answered ( a long time ago I might add)
 
Henrin said:
What? I was obviously talking about the Supreme Court. Please review the court cases you're using to defend your argument.
Click to expand...

1.) dont need to they stand on thier own footing
2.) not using them to defend any "argument" im simply stating facts which they prove.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom