Do aspies generally dislike conservatives?

Post Reply New Topic

where are you guys gonna blast a deer if there are no forests?

if only righties would stop trying to disenfranchise me and mine at every turn, I would have nothing against them.

Jagermeister?ewwww,grosss.I have never drank that and never will.
So the hunters that support ducks unlimited are not conservationists?
I was not talking about your woods,they are your to butcher if you will.But I doubt you would do it.I doubt you even own a good saw,you've probably got a Mcculloch.
The sandwich remark was that a liberal will give you a bite to eat out of compassion,but a conservative will expect something in return.

I was slightly buzzed,that's true.I had been in the redwoods drinking good beer,IPA.
But it was my birthday.Now I head home,to flooding.And no wi fi on the train for two whole days.

A compassionate conservative will give you a bite of the sandwich, but if you want more you either need to get a job or start your own business so you can make or buy all the sandwiches you'll ever need. We do help people, we just don't like freeloaders.

No. A compassionate Conservative would follow Matthew 19:21. Anything less would be just a regular Conservative, and a non-Christian.

Barack answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, help me strip the middle class and wealthy of their earnings, and you will have treasure in the form of welfare. Then come, follow me.”

The liberal version:

No. A compassionate Conservative would follow Matthew 19:21. Anything less would be just a regular Conservative, and a non-Christian.

I don't think we're really concerned with religion. Even if we were, Matthew 19:21 isn't meant to politicize anything. You're taking something out of context. Matthew 19:21 is all about dealing with things that distract us from the gospel. The story of the rich man addresses an ancient belief that in order to be blessed in heaven, you had to be blessed on earth. The greater the earthly riches, the greater the heavenly reward. That's reflected in verse 27. Jesus was debunking the idea that material possessions are indicators of heavenly reward.

And Jesus didn't even intend to convey the idea that salvation requires all your earthy possessions be sold/given away, either. Jesus didn't say that the rich can't be saved. He merely said it was difficult for them. If selling all your possessions was required for salvation, Jesus wouldn't have said that "with men these things are impossible," meaning man can't save himself, but "with God all things are possible," meaning God can save all who willingly accept Him, regardless of any kind of status.

Preachers today teach that Jesus wants us all to be filthy rich.

I've been a Republican most of my life after being raised by Democrats. I'll tell you what changed that for me.

When I was a teenager we lived in TN. My stepfather worked the rail cars and warehouses unloading food pallets by the train load. If one was damaged, they usually split it up because it couldn't be sold. Then it became illegal.

When I moved up to WV. My grandmother and I were discussing all of the dented cans they throw away and she told me, there's a real easy way to see if the seal is broken or not. Brush the can with soapy water and it will blow bubbles or hold it beneath the water.
I told her about the pallets and stuff and said that if it hadn't been for that food we probably would have gone hungry. The job didn't pay enough.

I said, "Nanny, why don't they let people buy those dented goods. Like maybe set up stores with just dented items in it. The poor could pay reduced rates or volunteer to work so long and get free food in return. That way, they could retain their dignity instead of being on foodstamps and being treated like dog doo."

She being the Democrat that she was, said, "Why don't you write Rockefeller and introduce yourself. We went to school together and I think he needs to hear your ideas."

So I did and I emphasized the idea that it should be criminal to throw away all of that food and that the laws making it illegal to get it or buy it should be changed. I got a personalized letter back from him. He was governor at the time. I was so excited. At least, until I read the letter. He basically said, Thank you for writing. That's why we have the foodstamp program.

I got angry and told my grandmother that his dismissal was a snotty arrogant way of saying, your letter wasn't even important enough to read and I'm too busy to mess with a teenager's ideas. So I fired off a letter and told him so.

He sent me back an application for food stamps and a pamphlet on the benefits of foodstamps. I told my grandmother that I would never ever vote for a Democrat when I got old enough to vote and I haven't.

/\
No sensible person is going to automatically consider food from dented cans to be damaged.
It's a matter of the government's preference for raping the taxpayer over utilizing other resources under false pretenses.

No sensible person is going to automatically consider food from dented cans to be damaged.
It's a matter of the government's preference for raping the taxpayer over utilizing other resources under false pretenses.

You think no one pays for those cans?

And do you think the entire problem of food insecurity can be solved by giving the poor these things?

It's not realistic, and it treats the poor without the dignity they deserve.

How many poor people dying from food poisoning is acceptable?
You said yourself you have to test the cans to see if they are still safe. Who is doing this testing? And what if they make a mistake?

What if someone sues the food packing company for negligence?