[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25161716]coulda sworn the democratic party was always for civil liberties and social programs to help the people...which would make them less racist inherently[/QUOTE]
It really depends on what you consider more or less racist.
If you think laws giving special treatment to minorities is condescending, well then it's another story.
Also Democratic Party for civil liberties? Don't make me laugh bro
[QUOTE=s0beit;25161760]It really depends on what you consider more or less racist.
If you think laws giving special treatment to minorities is condescending, well then it's another story.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I guess, but it definitely doesn't make them more inherently racist than Republicans
[editline]03:53PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=s0beit;25161760]It really depends on what you consider more or less racist.
If you think laws giving special treatment to minorities is condescending, well then it's another story.
Also Democratic Party for civil liberties? Don't make me laugh bro[/QUOTE]
is my definition of democratic party wrong or something
[editline]03:54PM[/editline]
because i don't really know...to be honest
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25161780]because i don't really know...to be honest[/QUOTE]
They often take away rights you don't "need", or because they think you are stupid for practicing them, subjective matter.
Or more likely if a corporation benefits from the practicing of said right in any way.
[editline]protip[/editline]
Protip: I'm not defending Republicans either, so you can stop writing your essay on how s0beit is a greedy cold hearted racist right about now.
[QUOTE=s0beit;25161847]They often take away rights you don't "need", or because they think you are stupid for practicing them, subjective matter.
Or more likely if a corporation benefits from the practicing of said right in any way.[/QUOTE]
give examples; you're being very vague
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25161780]is my definition of democratic party wrong or something
[/QUOTE]
Yes.. southern democrats were by far and large the most racist politcal affiliation before the civil rights act of 1964. Before then republicans was known as the party with the stance of freedom.. a free market and a free people.
Now the question comes of why did Lyndon B. Johnson sign into law the act?
It's up to you to decide but I believe he only did it because he had to due to Kennedy and also because it would keep minorities voting democrat for a hundred years.
Today the real problem with the republican party is the pseudo-republicans who are the remnants of the southern democrats.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;25162051]give examples; you're being very vague[/QUOTE]
It's the laws that are vague not i, it really depends upon what County, City or State you reside in.
Many people consider smoking a cigarette stupid, owning a weapon stupid and vicious or almost barbarian, not wearing a seatbelt or helmet downright retarded but unlike them, i don't believe laws enforcing you to "act right" are a mark of a free society.
These are also almost always laws that the burden of responsibility falls upon the user, don't bring up murder laws and robbery laws because I'm not speaking about actions that violate the rights of others.
[QUOTE=RinVII;25161313]It was a huge stance of the party yes.
Also the democratic party [B]is STILL [/B]inherently the more racist party.
Inb4 Obama, Lyndon B Johnson, and shitstorm.[/QUOTE]
Quoted for truth
[QUOTE=Ridge;25162654]Quoted for truth[/QUOTE]
Says the guy who links to the [url=http://cofcc.org/]CofCC[/url], whose slogan used to be "Council of Conservative Citizens - Advocating against minorities and racial integration." :911:
The Democratic and Republican parties swapped places around 1890 I believe.
Well, what's important is what they stand for now, not 150 years ago.
[QUOTE=Explosions;25163078]The Democratic and Republican parties swapped places around 1890 I believe.[/QUOTE]
I hate when people say this...
Lincoln if alive today would still be republican.
The parties didn't swap places, the makeup of the parties did, at least to some extent and that was during the 1960s as I stated earlier.
Most southern democrats went republican.
[editline]11:59PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=TH89;25162706]Says the guy who links to the [URL="http://cofcc.org/"]CofCC[/URL], whose slogan used to be "Council of Conservative Citizens - Advocating against minorities and racial integration." :911:[/QUOTE]
It's still the truth regardless.
[QUOTE=s0beit;25161847]They often take away rights you don't "need", or because they think you are stupid for practicing them, subjective matter.
Or more likely if a corporation benefits from the practicing of said right in any way.
[editline]protip[/editline]
Protip: I'm not defending Republicans either, so you can stop writing your essay on how s0beit is a greedy cold hearted racist right about now.[/QUOTE]
Cause like, we totally didn't vote against the PATRIOT Act which was proposed by Republicans or anything.
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE=RinVII;25163194]I hate when people say this...
[/QUOTE]
But it's true.
[QUOTE=R3mix;25163249]Cause like, we totally didn't vote against the PATRIOT Act which was proposed by Republicans or anything.
:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Democrats didn't idiot.
It was passed almost unanimously.
[url]http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/patr-f27.shtml[/url]
Oh and look they extended it as well.
[QUOTE=RinVII;25163427]Democrats didn't idiot.
It was passed almost unanimously.
[url]http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/feb2010/patr-f27.shtml[/url]
Oh and look they extended it as well.[/QUOTE]
Now now, let's not go off bias websites. :rolleyes:
[url]http://educate-yourself.org/cn/patriotact20012006senatevote.shtml[/url]
( Take a look at 2006. )
[QUOTE=RinVII;25161313]Also the democratic party [B]is STILL [/B]inherently the more racist party.[/QUOTE]
Uh, I don't really think so. They used to be in the past, but now they aren't.
[QUOTE=R3mix;25163501]Now now, let's not go off bias websites. :rolleyes:
[URL]http://educate-yourself.org/cn/patriotact20012006senatevote.shtml[/URL]
( Take a look at 2006. )[/QUOTE]
Yeah that sure was a bias website..
Look at 2001 dipshit.. of course the Democratic party would retreat to voting against it because of the public outrage.
It's a shitty act yes and a violation of our civil liberties but Democrats are just as guilty.
[QUOTE=RinVII;25163817]Yeah that sure was a bias website..
Look at 2001 dipshit.. of course the Democratic party would retreat to voting against it because of the public outrage.
It's a shitty act yes and a violation of our civil liberties but Democrats are just as guilty.[/QUOTE]
Everyone was voting yes in 2001 because of September 11th, the general public and even senators were fooled by the CIA And Bush Administration by these so called " WMD's " And " Terrorism in IRAQ, " etc. You get the point.
[QUOTE=RinVII;25163194]Lincoln if alive today would still be republican.[/QUOTE]
Don't say this kind of shit, it's stupid
[QUOTE=R3mix;25163249]Cause like, we totally didn't vote against the PATRIOT Act which was proposed by Republicans or anything.
:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=s0beit;25161847]
Protip: I'm not defending Republicans either, so you can stop writing your essay on how s0beit is a greedy cold hearted racist right about now.[/QUOTE]
It's really funny how people react to their party being assaulted, they choose to point out the wrongs of the other political party rather than actually defend their positions.
BUT.. BUT... THE REPUBLITARDS!
Please. I don't play that game, frankly, i hate you both.
[QUOTE=s0beit;25163925]It's really funny how people react to their party being assaulted, they choose to point out the wrongs of the other political party rather than actually defend their positions.
BUT.. BUT... THE REPUBLITARDS!
Please. I don't play that game, frankly, i hate you both.[/QUOTE]
Frankly, you're an idiot for saying that Democrats take away people's rights when they're the people who stand for people's rights. Unless you have some sort of evidence, your entire argument just faded rapidly.
[QUOTE=R3mix;25164041]Frankly, you're an idiot for saying that Democrats take away people's rights when they're the people who stand for people's rights. Unless you have some sort of evidence, your entire argument just faded rapidly.[/QUOTE]
I just stated my arguments and you completely ignored them.
You can't just say "they're the people who stand for people's rights" as a mantra and get away with it.
[b]Fucking prove it[/b].
[editline]e[/editline]
[QUOTE=R3mix;25163845]Everyone was voting yes in 2001 because of September 11th, the general public and even senators were fooled by the CIA And Bush Administration by these so called " WMD's " And " Terrorism in IRAQ, " etc. You get the point.[/QUOTE]
Yes that is a perfectly acceptable reason to throw your principles out the window... oh wait
[QUOTE=s0beit;25164068]I just stated my arguments and you completely ignored them.
You can't just say "they're the people who stand for people's rights" as a mantra and get away with it.
[b]Fucking prove it[/b].[/QUOTE]
[url]http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-repeal-ban-gays-military/story?id=11685658[/url]
Repeal was put forward by democrats.
[editline]08:42PM[/editline]
Republicans voted against it and won, therefore denying the rights of a certain people for their sexual orientation.
[QUOTE=I Broke The Sun!;25164123][url]http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-repeal-ban-gays-military/story?id=11685658[/url]
Repeal was put forward by democrats.
[editline]08:42PM[/editline]
Republicans repealed it, therefore denying the rights of a certain people for their sexual orientation.[/QUOTE]
Denying what rights?
There are rules set forth for military service which they willingly accept, i personally don't see the practical applications for being "openly" gay in the military, but ok, i agree that people should be able to act in the way they want or say what they want (even though signing a contract willingly sort of revokes that right, whatever).
However you have still not refuted my points earlier. You pointed to an abstract instance which has nothing to do with my initial arguments.
Both sides are wrong
:frogdowns:
[QUOTE=s0beit;25164213]Denying what rights?
There are rules set forth for military service which they willingly accept, i personally don't see the practical applications for being "openly" gay in the military, but ok, i agree that people should be able to act in the way they want or say what they want (even though signing a contract willingly sort of revokes that right, whatever).
However you have still not refuted my points earlier. You pointed to an abstract instance which has nothing to do with my initial arguments.[/QUOTE]
On the contrary, he's pointed out LGBT Rights, the fact Republicans voted against, while Democrats voted for repeal and proposed the Bill all voting yes for repeal. Rules and Contracts aren't meant to violate the United States Constitution pal, why do you think Laws that do are thrown out by the Supreme Court? Read up on American Government before you even try arguing with me.
[QUOTE=R3mix;25165123]On the contrary, he's pointed out LGBT Rights, the fact Republicans voted against, while Democrats voted for repeal and proposed the Bill all voting yes for repeal. Rules and Contracts aren't meant to violate the United States Constitution pal, why do you think Laws that do are thrown out by the Supreme Court? Read up on American Government before you even try arguing with me.[/QUOTE]
The argument is whether these things go against the constitution...that's why these laws get by
[QUOTE=R3mix;25165123]On the contrary, he's pointed out LGBT Rights, the fact Republicans voted against, while Democrats voted for repeal and proposed the Bill all voting yes for repeal. Rules and Contracts aren't meant to violate the United States Constitution pal, why do you think Laws that do are thrown out by the Supreme Court? Read up on American Government before you even try arguing with me.[/QUOTE]
Arguing? Where?
You haven't stated one decent point refuting my initial arguments yet.
Also there are plenty of forms of contractual obligations which restrict free speech... personally i don't care either way, this isn't an argument about gays in the military as much as you want it to be.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;25164221]Both sides are wrong
:frogdowns:[/QUOTE]
Pretty much my point, get off your high horses people.
[QUOTE=PelPix123;25167007]You haven't made any arguments. You've been yelling "Democrats are racist and take away people's rights" and they've been yelling "no they don't." [I]Neither[/I] side has presented any argument[/QUOTE]
You don't know how to read.
[quote]
It's the laws that are vague not i, it really depends upon what County, City or State you reside in.
Many people consider smoking a cigarette stupid, owning a weapon stupid and vicious or almost barbarian, not wearing a seatbelt or helmet downright retarded but unlike them, i don't believe laws enforcing you to "act right" are a mark of a free society.
These are also almost always laws that the burden of responsibility falls upon the user, don't bring up murder laws and robbery laws because I'm not speaking about actions that violate the rights of others.[/quote]
They have made laws in regard to all of those things and plenty more dictating how to run your life "properly". They know better, they are the experts.
[QUOTE=PelPix123;25167132]You don't know how to write.[/QUOTE]
Interesting that you too have nothing to contribute to this of any substance.
Democrat?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
