Liberals for pussyfication?

[TheB055]

Hello ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start this off by saying NOT ALL LIBERALS ARE THIS WAY, but it appears majority of them are unfortunately. I would also like to state that I am a conservative, as well as a republican, however I have an open mind on majority of things. So what's this about? Liberals Advocating politcal correctness, too an extreme extent. Here are some ideals I have an Issue with, so feel free to debate me, or agree with me. I'm not a dick, nor a dickwad, I will try to debate and reply as intelligently as possible. Here's a basic overview of both sides ideals
http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

1. The pushing of Feminist agenda. Don't get me wrong ladies and gentlemen, I am all for gender equality, just not the common Feminist idea of "Equality". It seems to me their verison of equality is "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine." In other words, they want rights slighty skewed in their favor(NOT ALL OF THEM). We've all heard this line before "Women have been subjected and oppressed by the patriarchy of men since the dawn of time, and it's sad to see sexism alive in the U.S" Well, we are equal in the essence we aren't equal, men get somethings easier and women get other things easier. Lets use health care coverage as an example, The affordable care act makes it easier for women to keep and get health care as said here http://familiesusa.org/product/being-woman-just-got-little-easier-how-affordable-care-act-benefits-women

According to this study men get harsher sentances in court then Women http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html

But perhaps the biggest issue I have with the pushing of feminist agenda thus far is women being allowed in direct combat jobs in the Mililtary. "Women are just as capable as men for Combat roles." Ok this is where I draw the line on their ignorant bullshit. Now allow me to clairfy before I rant, I do think women should be allowed in the millitary, not in combat roles though, and here' why. For one, Physical Fitness. Men have a natural born fitness that makes us wayyyy more capable for fighting then women. Don't believe me ladies? Look at the breasts upon your chest, What about your menstrual cycle? Let's forget the physical aspect and focus more on history for a moment. Do you think The battle at Normandy would've been better won with women storming the beach alongside men? Do you think the battle of midway would've been fought better with women on the guns? use this article to way your arguement before you debate me please. http://sistersinarms.ca/history/women-in-combat-pros-and-cons/

2. Slave Repirations. I need not explain why this is total horseshit, if you agree with this you're an audist who want's nothing more than a moral highground to be taken, or some more free money.

3.Gun Control. "Guns kill people" This is a lie, and it can be proven, and has been proven. The gun is a mere aid in the killing, without the person behind it the gun is literally useless. Do we put the gun on trial for murder? Illionis has made is extremely difficult to purchase guns, and in 2011 they were the murder capital of the U.S with 500 murders recorded. Guns discourage people from doing stupid shit is the gist of what I'm getting at. (I do believe however a phycological evaluation should be required to make sure an individual is mentally sane enough to posses a firearm without posing as a threat to the public.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

4. Mordernazation of Our wonderful constitution. If this were to happen, it would be the most politcally correct left wing piece of paper ever written. I need not explain why this is a bad idea. It would be an era of weak minded humans. "ERRR but da constitution be racist! Look at the 3/5 slave act!' Take you're whiny bullshit somewhere else Tyrone, this does not apply any more, invalid arguement.

So please thoughts and opinions, debate me.

[Camarohusky]

Could you please go back through each of your 3 points (#2 is a total crock) and upgrade the arguments and reasoning beyond the 8th grade level?

I mean, did you seriously say that titties are the reason women can't fight in combat?

Also, please, don't impute false arguments to the other side just so you have something to stand on. it doesn't work and everyone can see right through what you are doing.

[TheB055]

What you're saying doesn't make any sense m8, you gave absolutely no information as to what you wanted me to elaborate on. And no, I didn't Use titties as an only excuse, and it's obvious you really didn't read at all at what I said, It seems like you saw a topic that offended your political standing, briefly skimmed through my rant, and commented absolutley nothing constructive at all. I will try and elaborate upon why women shouldn't be in Combat roles. (I also provided A link for a source, but you wouldn't know that, because you didn't read jack shit.)

1. Males are physically supierior and have a natural born advantage for fighting
2.The breasts comment was refrencing a womens physical limitations, and how their physical build is for nuturing not fighting(however this was never clairfied this is my fault) And I also refrenced history as my backing for my arguement. Gave easy examples most people would understand.

And what the fuck do you mean 2 is a crock? I reffrenced my source with a link in the beginning m8. If you're talking about my reasoning behind it is "crock", ? terrible reply m8, terrible.

[TheB055]

Why is gay marriage a no no topic? I don't understand?

[Camarohusky]

At 3/13/15 06:51 PM, TheB055 wrote: And no, I didn't Use titties as an only excuse, and it's obvious you really didn't read at all at what I said, It seems like you saw a topic that offended your political standing, briefly skimmed through my rant, and commented absolutley nothing constructive at all. I will try and elaborate upon why women shouldn't be in Combat roles. (I also provided A link for a source, but you wouldn't know that, because you didn't read jack shit.)

Yes, you did. Now, what I did was read a ranting post that referenced four very different topics with only two things in common: an "I hate liberals" tagline, and very shallow reasoning.

Oh, and it's not my responsibility to glean your argument points from an article you post. That's not how sourcing works. Sourcing is meant to provide a referential course of proof for your argument, not the entire nuts and bolts of your argument.

1. Males are physically supierior and have a natural born advantage for fighting
2.The breasts comment was refrencing a womens physical limitations, and how their physical build is for nuturing not fighting(however this was never clairfied this is my fault) And I also refrenced history as my backing for my arguement. Gave easy examples most people would understand.

No, you gave shitty examples that are so patently bad and shallow that they are hard to even argue other than laughing off. Now, that does not mean you don't have somewhere to go here. If you wanted to make a serious post, you only need to do a few things.

First: Separate your points into their proper locations. Gary has already pointed out that two of your points already have threads. Want to make a feminism thread (there is one, I already made it a few months ago)? Search for it or make a new one. Don't see a gay marriage thread (it's been a while)? Again, search or make it anew.

Second: Make your arguments more mature. By dumbing down you rarguments and being so arrogant about them, you come off more as a "new enlightened high schooler" than as an actual person who wants to debate (even if they don't care to change their mind). You're NOT going to 'gotcha' us. Better people have tired. Hard. We are all here waiting to tear apart any argument with the slightest bit of weakness. Act like that when you write it, and you'll find a much better level of debate than if you just thow rantarrhea all over the page.

And what the fuck do you mean 2 is a crock? I reffrenced my source with a link in the beginning m8. If you're talking about my reasoning behind it is "crock", ? terrible reply m8, terrible.

No one in their right mind has actually considered this a thing for a long long time. At best you're imputing the opinion of a very small number of people to the entire group. This is a perfect examle of a very subpar argument you make. One of th ebase tenants of your post, the notion that liberals in general hols this idea, is absolutely false, and thus the argument makes you look foolish, not smart.

[TheB055]

1. I made it clear not all liberals held these ideals, these are just common ones.
2.The points weren't supposed to be related to eachother hence the sourcing in the begining of different ideals on both sides, which i also made clear Was my refrencing of the topics.
3. There's some really bad spelling errors near the end of you're rant back, I'm not sure what you were trying to say.

[TheB055]

and What were my shallow reasonings, you still neglect to name them, and why they are shallow, making your arguement invalid.

[Warforger]

At 3/13/15 03:15 PM, TheB055 wrote: 1. The pushing of Feminist agenda. Don't get me wrong ladies and gentlemen, I am all for gender equality, just not the common Feminist idea of "Equality". It seems to me their verison of equality is "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine." In other words, they want rights slighty skewed in their favor(NOT ALL OF THEM). We've all heard this line before "Women have been subjected and oppressed by the patriarchy of men since the dawn of time, and it's sad to see sexism alive in the U.S" Well, we are equal in the essence we aren't equal, men get somethings easier and women get other things easier. Lets use health care coverage as an example, The affordable care act makes it easier for women to keep and get health care as said here http://familiesusa.org/product/being-woman-just-got-little-easier-how-affordable-care-act-benefits-women

Healthcare shouldn't be equal amongst men and women because there are health issues inherent in being a man and in being a woman.

According to this study men get harsher sentances in court then Women http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html

But perhaps the biggest issue I have with the pushing of feminist agenda thus far is women being allowed in direct combat jobs in the Mililtary. "Women are just as capable as men for Combat roles." Ok this is where I draw the line on their ignorant bullshit. Now allow me to clairfy before I rant, I do think women should be allowed in the millitary, not in combat roles though, and here' why. For one, Physical Fitness. Men have a natural born fitness that makes us wayyyy more capable for fighting then women. Don't believe me ladies? Look at the breasts upon your chest, What about your menstrual cycle? Let's forget the physical aspect and focus more on history for a moment. Do you think The battle at Normandy would've been better won with women storming the beach alongside men? Do you think the battle of midway would've been fought better with women on the guns? use this article to way your arguement before you debate me please. http://sistersinarms.ca/history/women-in-combat-pros-and-cons/

Women in battle aren't that different to be honest. The Battle of Normandy was less "Throw your most physical fit and they'll win" and more "send in enough people to overwhelm their positions". That's an age old tactic in warfare, you send in the first company i.e. the forlone hope, they're not your best troops but they're good enough that even when they're being massacred they'll hold steady. No one has the idea that many of them are going to survive. Then after the enemy is worn out you send in your best troops, fresh and ready, to finish them off. There are many variations of this tactic, the most recent one I heard was a tank charge where you spear head it with all your worst troops in the old tanks that are breaking down and once the enemy has wasted their ammunition on them then your best tanks come in to finish the job. Do you think physical strength matters in that case? If they're women or not?

Or just put it like this, do you think it would've mattered if these people were women or men?

Either way the issue is solved by simply having physical tests and examinations. Some women are stronger than most men and are suited towards warfare, if your argument is that men are physically better then you don't even have to discriminate based on gender, just on physical aptitude.

2. Slave Repirations. I need not explain why this is total horseshit, if you agree with this you're an audist who want's nothing more than a moral highground to be taken, or some more free money.

It get's a bit bullshit this I agree with. I'm not against trying to desegregate blacks and helping them up through normal programs (not affirmative action though), but trying to act like all black people and all white people are the same is bullshit.

3.Gun Control. "Guns kill people" This is a lie, and it can be proven, and has been proven. The gun is a mere aid in the killing, without the person behind it the gun is literally useless. Do we put the gun on trial for murder? Illionis has made is extremely difficult to purchase guns, and in 2011 they were the murder capital of the U.S with 500 murders recorded. Guns discourage people from doing stupid shit is the gist of what I'm getting at. (I do believe however a phycological evaluation should be required to make sure an individual is mentally sane enough to posses a firearm without posing as a threat to the public.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois

Guns are intended to kill people, that was the intention of the very first gun. I think it's stupid to say that guns are not meant to kill people or have no part in it. And besides what does "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" supposed to mean? I don't see you trying to propose anything about trying to get people from killing people.

4. Mordernazation of Our wonderful constitution. If this were to happen, it would be the most politcally correct left wing piece of paper ever written. I need not explain why this is a bad idea. It would be an era of weak minded humans. "ERRR but da constitution be racist! Look at the 3/5 slave act!' Take you're whiny bullshit somewhere else Tyrone, this does not apply any more, invalid arguement.

The Constitution was pretty left wing for its time. No one's really looking to do that, the process is very difficult and it's not happening anytime soon. It was made that way for a reason.

So please thoughts and opinions, debate me.

I will say this; political correctness on the left wing and right wing is bullshit. I don't care if putting an American flag in your lobby is offensive to you and I don't care if reading an AP history textbook and seeing it's full of the US's dark history instead of Christianity and the Founders and you're offended that's the way things should be.

[TheB055]

This is ridiculous, the New grounds community should be at an uproar over this nonsense, Is there anything we could do about this?

[Ghoti]

At 3/13/15 03:15 PM, TheB055 wrote: 1. The affordable care act makes it easier for women to keep and get health care as said here http://familiesusa.org/product/being-woman-just-got-little-easier-how-affordable-care-act-benefits-women

Which happened in 20...13? I'm not sure. So even if you want that small advantage to count, it's so recent that it's practically irrelevant.

According to this study men get harsher sentances in court then Women http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html

Yeah there you go; ONE advantage to being the most historically mistreated class of humans.

But perhaps the biggest issue I have with the pushing of feminist agenda thus far is women being allowed in direct combat jobs in the Mililtary.

Any lady Marine could kick your ass. Why do you even care?

2. Slave Repirations. I need not explain why this is total horseshit, if you agree with this you're an audist who want's nothing more than a moral highground to be taken, or some more free money.

You can't just say shit like that and expect to be taken seriously. "You can't disagree, so, moving on."

You have no idea how hard powerful people in America tried to keep those of African descent in a subservient position. Justice in this country means that you can take people to court who have wronged you. If you knew the man who raped your grandmother and murdered your grandfather, you might file a fucking suit.

3.Gun Control. "Guns kill people" This is a lie, and it can be proven, and has been proven.

Oh my god you're so original.

Nobody is trying to take your precious stupid guns away, a line obviously needs to be drawn or else citizens could buy tanks and nukes. Yes, there are some people who could afford to.

4. Blah blah blah Tyrone, this does not apply any more, invalid arguement.

The Supreme Court's job is to interpret the damn thing, so you're kind of just wrong. The Constitution is open to interpretation and amendment, period. It was also written hundreds of years ago.

So please thoughts and opinions, debate me.

I tried to be nice but damn, son. The force of ignorance is strong with this one.

[aviewaskewed]

At 3/13/15 11:08 PM, X-Gary-Gigax-X wrote: It's a "settled" matter. You can have an opinion on it, sure, but if it's an opinion beside whatever comes out of a certain 4 users mouths, then it's rule-breaking hate speech. Just giving you a heads up.

That is absolute bullshit and I thank you to never spread that lie again, ESPECIALLY to new users. They can absolutely debate the idea of marriage equality, they just best be prepared to get a lot of negative responses if they aren't for it. The predominant leaning of the forum is left, and it is socially liberal, so matters that fall on the side of social conservatism will tend to not find sympathetic ears but there is NO RULE against airing those beliefs. This pisses me off on a personal level as a moderator of this forum. We have a set of rules, users and mods are to abide by them. If someone finds a mod not doing that here or elsewhere, I strongly encourage you to PM me and I promise you I will investigate the matter and bring it up with the admins. We do not tolerate abuse of our users here, but I also will not tolerate this kind of misinformation being put out there either.

As far as this thread, I'm going ahead with a non punitive lock, with a "but":

The topics you wish to discuss are already divided between other threads on this board, Gary has that bit absolutely right, we respectfully don't need you making a new thread just because you feel like you have an original thought on the matter. That's not how our boards work. I would also encourage you in the future that when you're going to make a topic, you do NOT use such inflammatory titles at the start, because it WILL cause problems and if you keep doing it I'm going to have no choice but to conclude your just here to start fights and then I have to waste both of our time here being the authority figure who punishes. I hate that, the users hate that, so let's just let this be a lesson learned thing and just have fun debating issues. Thank you.