i am legitimately scared about trump becoming president

Post Reply New Topic

Not in my state they aren't. Perhaps in red states they are.
Unfortunately try its and either or. Parties have made it impossible for a moderate politician to exist. You can't be pro gun and support abortions. Those are belonging to opposite parties, the parties solely exist now just to divide us and turn us against each other, for what purpose I don't know.

These for starters but I can post more:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/why-a ... le/2551701

“But contemporary liberals like Michael Yaki and Ian Inaba aren’t interested in patiently advocating to educate, they demand the very silence Brandeis so eloquently rejected. Neither Yaki nor Inaba are household names, but they are indicative of the rising generation of liberal activists who have absolutely no qualms about depriving people with whom they disagree of their First Amendment right to freedom of speech.”

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/23/harva ... destroyed/

“In a recent column, Korn unambiguously insisted that the university should stop guaranteeing professors and students the right to hold controversial views and pursue research that challenges liberalism.

'If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals?' asked Korn in her column.”

http://www.wupr.org/2015/10/12/why-do-l ... ee-speech/

"Liberals preach inclusivity and diversity of all kinds, but not the diversity of thought. Opposing views are problematic wrong-thoughts that need to be ignored, or, better yet, purged. Liberals often claim that this is a misrepresentation of their views, and that they only care about banning “hate speech” and other forms of offensive speech. This is not just something that college liberals support; many older liberals have endorsed anti-hate speech laws. But when pressed to come up with examples of what actually constitutes the kinds of speech they want to ban, it becomes clear that liberals are really concerned with banning speech that they disagree with. The case of The Argus is a perfect example. Many students didn’t want to hear an opposing view, so they demanded that it not be expressed. This intolerance of other opinions can also be seen in the concept of “microagressions” – supposedly small, everyday instances or offensive speech. To some, saying things such as, “I think the most qualified person should get the job” count as microagressions. Clearly, the motivation here is not to ban speech that may harm someone, but to ban speech that may present an opposing view."


And as stated earlier, here’s some from our own ranks:

viewtopic.php?t=163007&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=150


viewtopic.php?t=269159&postdays=30&postorder=asc&start=0

Bundled Replies

that's a question, not a statement. you can tell from the ? at the end.
It was intended that way. Are you a punctuation nazi or just grasping at straws?


Heaven knows why you'd be soliciting a "concern troll" (your words) for examples.


One example???

And I'm not even going to take the time to verify it.



Not gonna cry are you?

Last edited by Raptor on 26 Jan 2016, 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

both sides marginalize the other. the minute one side gives up, the other side massacres it. it is like a mutual dance of scorpions.

http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed
There are plenty of specific examples where that is EXACTLY what happened.

Holy cow. I actually agree with you on something!
I don't want to ban all guns - some of my friends and relatives have guns, and some of them even have guns for excellent reasons. I just want some reasonable regulations.

I wouldn't put it in exactly those terms, but that's my biggest disappointment with Obama too. However, kudos to him for the successful diplomacy with Iran! Kind of shocking that it was easier for him to negotiate with the Mullahs than with the Republicans.

You can cherry pick from any group to prove your point. Sure, there are some dipsh*t liberals who go berserk for political correctness, to the point of limiting free speech, but mostly on college campuses. But you also have conservative crackers who have been working to censor public school books, removing anything besmirching the reputations of their godlike founding fathers, or who remove anything connected to racism, Jim Crow, segregation, and even soft sell slavery(!).

What you consider reasonable isn't what 52% of Americans consider reasonable.

"Always democrats", really?!
Are they the one asking to ban books in which there is homosexuality in the name of family values? Sound more like the GOP...

http://www.ala.org/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/51787/Banned-Books-Week-Celebrating-30-Years-of-Liberating-Literature/#vars!date=1983-01-18_09:35:34!

Funny enough Forever has been challenged because the “cast of sex minded teenagers is not typical of high schoolers today;”, guess it was from peoples not remembering their teenage years; then again the GOP has evolved in a party in which the candidate denying the true are the most popular.

I should add, it's always been the right that's tried to censor public school science books, to remove mention of evolution to please religious conservatives.

neither actually. are we a bit sensitive about being called on our claims? perhaps you shouldn't make any if being asked to back them up is upsetting to you.you're making the claim, you get to be the one solicited for examples backing up said claim
this is how arguments work, do try to keep up.when have you ever taken the time to verify anything?

Very strong argument. Both the left and right have attempted to censor works that go against their core beliefs. This is why it is folly to assume that one sect in the political spectrum favours censorship while the other does not. Everyone remembers Clarence Darrow, he was censored, though certainly not by the left.

The most intelligent statement ever. All Hail auntblabby!

Now from a part of reality called Louisiana, HB4 which if passed will become a State wide vote to change the Constitution. Very likely to pass.

Being as the People have a Right to bear arms, and open carry is part of that Right, except for a few limited places.

The People have a Right to Concealed Carry in their homes, in their automobiles, and at their place of work, and to transit between them.

HB4 reads, all persons of legal age who have not been convicted of a Felony, have the Right to carry a concealed weapon, subject to not being allowed in a few limited places. Those places are Courts, Police Stations, Jails, and State Government Offices.

Some have opposed it as Louisiana is a Shall Issue State. Everyone who is not barred from possessing firearms will be issued a permit. As part of that there is training required, gun safety, being able to hit what you shoot at, and pass a test of the Laws regarding self defense, defense of others, or your home and property.

Also, Louisiana Concealed Carry is uniform with the other States that have reciprocal Permits. So for now, until they pass Universal Rights, the Permit will be needed out of State.

The conflict is, why should a Citizen who has a Right to open carry, have to spend several hundred dollars, submit finger prints, take classes on Gun and Self Defense Laws, and training on a gun range, to do nothing different than put on a coat that covers the weapon?

While it does not get very cold here, it does rain a lot. Putting on a rain coat is a Class A Felony.

Women do not like open carry, it is not stylish or flattering, they are naturally sneaky, and hide guns in purses. Class A Felony.

I can see both sides, we should act to prevent accidental Felons. When a coat, bag of groceries, can make the difference between a Citizen and a Felon. Also Concealed Carry is legal from your home to automobile, in your automobile, from there to your place of work, and back again. It is a Felony to stop for gas.

On the other side, I have a Marksmanship Merit Badge. I got it when I was twelve. I am safe with weapons, and the shooting test took a 90% score to pass. I also grew up hunting and did not shoot dogs, cows, the people I was hunting with.

I have my doubts about someone who has never fired a gun carrying one.

One cannot regulate stupid.

in some states, once a felon has served his time s/he can petition the court to restore their civil rights [like to vote]- will this apply to Louisiana's gun law [restore gun rights upon completion of sentence for non-violent offense]?

oh good, some actual data from Raptor for once.

This is a veiled complaint about the "global warming conspiracy", how is this an issue of speech instead of science?the 'controversial views' in question? Rape apology and racism!


This one is actually about speech. ok great.


let's see what the article in question says....

....oh. guess it's not really about speech after all, just a weak victimblaming puff piece.
Raptor you are on fire today. that's 3/3 on cementing the argument that the right is a pile of regressive dinosaurs.

always democrats is it? ok, I guess these never happened then

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Repu ... t_activity
http://www.thenation.com/article/bush-z ... -national/