User Profile: RealLiibertarian

RealLiibertarian

Member Since: June 11, 2012

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [-1] July 31, 2015 at 12:10am

    How do you figure that, Amanda? You’re the one that wants to censor the magazine racks, not me. We do not have a duty to hide things from your kids, that’s your job to figure out, not ours to do it for you. You have the freedom to use another checkout line, not take your kids, or (horrors) actually explain sex to them. That’s the problem with the so called conservative movement. It’s just big government in another form. You think Cosmo and similar mags are bad for society, so you want them hidden and access limited. How is that different from the Dems thinking soda is bad for society, so access should be limited. Me, I don’t like engineered society, no matter how you want to dress it up as good for society. And ‘for the children’ is never a valid excuse.

  • [-1] July 30, 2015 at 9:09pm

    And where are zoning laws mentioned in the Constitution? What right does the government have to tell me what I can do with land that I own?

  • [-2] July 30, 2015 at 8:58pm

    Oh Moose. Really? Really?? That’s the best you’ve got? I can do far cruder than that, and in 3 or 4 different languages. To paraphrase the old saying, I get weirder and cruder than that with my breakfast cereal You really must get out more and learn from the rest of the world.

  • [-4] July 30, 2015 at 6:25pm

    Yannow, Amanda, there’s plenty in the magazines at the checkout that I find offensive, starting with the rags about reality TV, aliens who took over their daughter, and sports, all of which prove that a significant portion of the American public has the IQ of a turnip. But it’s their right to publish and other’s right to buy, and marketing says that they can put their magazines where they have the best chance of being purchased. Free speech and free enterprise, both of which are more important than somebody being offended.

  • [-6] July 30, 2015 at 6:12pm

    And you prove that the religious types are against freedom.

  • [-7] July 30, 2015 at 4:36pm

    I am so sick of the neo puritans in this country. Get an effin life and stop being offended by sex. If you don’t like it, hide in your room under the covers, but leave the rest of us alone.

    Responses (14) +
  • [1] July 30, 2015 at 10:22am

    But they are quick to interfere with businesses that they don’t like.

  • [1] July 30, 2015 at 10:08am

    Let’s not forget the Muslim taxi drivers who won’t let dogs in their cabs or who won’t pick up people coming out of nightclubs or liquor stores.

  • [3] July 30, 2015 at 10:06am

    Then you are not reading too well, RJJ. How many people on here have said they will follow the bible before they will follow the law? How many people on here have said that Islam or Satanism, or even Wicca should not be allowed in this country? If you are not seeing it, it’s because you have a bias towards what they are saying.

  • [-6] July 30, 2015 at 9:51am

    It’s all fine, claiming this as a religious freedom issue, but it’s one sided. Christians want the right to conduct their business as they wish. Fine, I’m good with that. But let someone try to open a porn shop, Wiccan shop, or gentlemen’s club near a church and watch the Christians stomp all over that businessman’s right to operate his business. The Christians still want things both ways. They want to be free from any restrictions on how they operate, while restricting any business that they find”sinful” or objectionable. This is the type of hypocrisy that makes Christian attitudes an object of ridicule.

    Responses (4) +
  • [4] July 30, 2015 at 9:23am

    Having read some of the responses on this site over the years, I’m surprised that it’s only 5%. There are a lot of people around here that think christianity should be mandated and who think the Bible trumps the Constitution.

    Responses (4) +
  • [1] July 30, 2015 at 9:18am

    The problem is that this issue needs to be separated from the religious mumbo-jumbo. Of course businesses should have the right to do business on their own terms, but the religious freedom is a minor issue in the grand scheme. Between having to register your business with town, state and fed, multiple states if you sell across state lines, tax filings, equal opportunity, zoning issues, neighbors who don’t like your business or your product, there are way too many government intrusions into how businesses are run. Put it in economic terms as being a hazard to business and I think we’d get better results. Continuing to push the religious BS will not get you anywhere. Sane people don’t see gay marriage as a problem and accept the USSC decision as settling the issue.

    Responses (3) +
  • July 29, 2015 at 2:04pm

    Can’t prove a negative. How about you prove that they do exist, scientifically, and without using the Bible.

  • [-2] July 29, 2015 at 2:02pm

    Since different religions have very different definitions of what “sin” is, the state would be in violation of the First Amendment if it decided to promote one religion’s definition of “sin” over another. But of course, you just want the state to endorse the Christian definition. Sorry, doesn’t fly.

  • [-6] July 29, 2015 at 1:51pm

    The only people who believe in, and continue to push the concept of, sin, are those who wish to control others. Live your own life, believe what you want to believe, and stop trying to control and manipulate people by threatening them with a punishment that doesn’t exist, for a crime that doesn’t exist.

    Responses (9) +
  • [-8] July 29, 2015 at 9:50am

    BS303- a choice has to be made, whose rights are paramount. I will always choose the rights of the born mother over the unborn fetus. I also don’t go googoo over babies or think they have special rights or privileges

  • [1] July 29, 2015 at 8:48am

    Jdare- and why would you think I would agree with those prohibitions? There are way too many laws telling us how to live that have nothing to do with crime. laws made to make people comfortable, or to outlaw behaviour that some people find offensive, but affect noone else need to be repealed. It is not the government’s right or place to direct morality or engineer society. The whole concept of government interest is a crock.

  • [-4] July 29, 2015 at 8:05am

    Not born, no birth certificate, not a person, no rights. Get over it and stay out of everybody else’s business.

  • [-9] July 29, 2015 at 8:02am

    Your avatar says it all. You want us all to be controlled by the state and for the government to tell us what we can and can’t do with our bodies. Absolutely not. The state, on any level, has no right to interfere with a woman’s personal decisions and no right to get between her and her doctor. Not your body, not your business.

    Responses (13) +
  • [11] July 28, 2015 at 12:47pm

    Why does it have to be beneficial to society? I don’t consider most of the 10 Commandments beneficial to society. If it’s religious faith, then one is no better than another, and not subject to such criteria

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love