ADVERTISEMENT

Jim Jordan (Redux Joe Paterno, Dennis Hastert, Larry Nassar)

Except we are talking about something else entirely.

And don't assume because I don't think immigrants are a problem, or that Muslims are terrorists, or that unless you oggle me in a bathroom I can't bring myself to care where you pee that I am not a gun owner.

And while you struggle with sides... "America First" --- The Nazi's aren't so bad---- I believe in Putin more than America's deep state (Reagan just rolled over in his grave)--- Europe is our foe--- just a few to wrap your arms around.

But that's right, if its negative and about the people you agree with, its fake news.
I can't make heads or tails out of what you are trying to say. Clear concise communication eludes me on almost all of your posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purescurve
Thankfully your hateful, spiteful faux moralistic world view is on its way out. And no, we won’t miss you when you are gone.
Instead of answering my question and addressing my statement, you choose to show your "tolerance" instead. I know, you are tolerant of everyone that agrees with you.
 
Instead of answering my question and addressing my statement, you choose to show your "tolerance" instead. I know, you are tolerant of everyone that agrees with you.

You are correct. I do not tolerate hateful/spiteful behavior, nor do I tolerate those who attempt to legislate their brand of morality.

You and I will get along just fine when and if you ever become enlightened to the fact that your rights end at the tip of your nose.

Btw, I have healthy relationships with many people that I don’t necessarily agree with. Most of the time their opinions and actions are none of my business.
 
You are correct. I do not tolerate hateful/spiteful behavior, nor do I tolerate those who attempt to legislate their brand of morality.

You and I will get along just fine when and if you ever become enlightened to the fact that your rights end at the tip of your nose.
Of course. Only you have the right to a moral position. Your morality succeeds everybody else's morality. Only you have a right to "legislate your brand of morality". Only yours counts. Trashing Jordan with false claims is your moral right. Carry on.
 
Of course. Only you have the right to a moral position. Your morality succeeds everybody else's morality. Only you have a right to "legislate your brand of morality". Only yours counts. Trashing Jordan with false claims is your moral right. Carry on.

You are a kook. I don’t judge others morals, nor have a desire to legislate the morals of others.

My morality is, “judge not least you be judged.”

It’s not my business to judge the morals of others and I’ll be damned if you get away with it on my watch. You are a kook.
 
You are a kook. I don’t judge others morals, nor have a desire to legislate the morals of others.

My morality is, “judge not least you be judged.”

It’s not my business to judge the morals of others and I’ll be damned if you get away with it on my watch. You are a kook.

Ha! Except that in post #444 you did exactly what you said you do not do. Your words... "I do not tolerate hateful/spiteful behavior, nor do I tolerate those who attempt to legislate their brand of morality." Really?!?!

How do you tolerate, or not, someone else unless you in fact judge others? Are you the supreme official on what is hateful or spiteful? Or could others have legitimate, even different, ideas of what is moral or not? Is your brand of morality superior to all others?

How do you arrive at the conclusion that someone else is a "kook" without judging them? Who put in you in charge of the "watch"? Good grief, climb down off of your high horse and take a look in the mirror.

This is to say nothing about the many posts in this thread where you certainly appear to judging Jordan.
 
Ha! Except that in post #444 you did exactly what you said you do not do. Your words... "I do not tolerate hateful/spiteful behavior, nor do I tolerate those who attempt to legislate their brand of morality." Really?!?!

How do you tolerate, or not, someone else unless you in fact judge others? Are you the supreme official on what is hateful or spiteful? Or could others have legitimate, even different, ideas of what is moral or not? Is your brand of morality superior to all others?

How do you arrive at the conclusion that someone else is a "kook" without judging them? Who put in you in charge of the "watch"? Good grief, climb down off of your high horse and take a look in the mirror.

This is to say nothing about the many posts in this thread where you certainly appear to judging Jordan.

You guys are thick.

I can judge someone’s words or actions as being hateful, spiteful or deceitful as a matter of course.

That isn’t the same as intolerance, or attempting to impose my morality. For instance, if I tried to pass a law that said stupid people shouldn’t be allowed to breed, I’d be attempting to impose my morality.

I’m not doing that. I’m simply asking you to understand that your morality ends at the tip of your nose.
 
You are a kook. I don’t judge others morals, nor have a desire to legislate the morals of others.

My morality is, “judge not least you be judged.”

It’s not my business to judge the morals of others and I’ll be damned if you get away with it on my watch. You are a kook.
Nothing like hanging yourself. You probably don't even realize it.
You are a kook. I don’t judge others morals, nor have a desire to legislate the morals of others.
You want your morality to be legislated - "same sex marriage" and anyone that wants "traditional marriage" shut down. Wise up.
 
So basically we should make room for people who want to deprieve gays of rights because their religious world view matters?

The Bible tells you the morality of how to treat your slaves and some how you use it in modern application for how to treat people you know nothing about?? Listen up. You get your moral compass from a 2000 year old book. That book, in your mind, said slavery is legal and therefore in your world, we have to make room for your rights??

You lack independent thought and ethics.

Cry your snowflake ass to sleep. Better yet, show up to Carver wearing a tee shirt that says “yes to slavery, no gay marriage”. Because that’s what your 2000 year old book says.

Perverting religion vs equality. Hmmm?? And you wanna call out other people?

And they never will get it. They have perverted the message of Jesus to fit their hateful spiteful world views. I’ll fight them tooth and nail but have given up on educating them or even having meaningful dialogue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BanjoSaysWoof
So basically we should make room for people who want to deprieve gays of rights because their religious world view matters?

The Bible tells you the morality of how to treat your slaves and some how you use it in modern application for how to treat people you know nothing about?? Listen up. You get your moral compass from a 2000 year old book. That book, in your mind, said slavery is legal and therefore in your world, we have to make room for your rights??

You lack independent thought and ethics.

Cry your snowflake ass to sleep. Better yet, show up to Carver wearing a tee shirt that says “yes to slavery, no gay marriage”. Because that’s what your 2000 year old book says.

Perverting religion vs equality. Hmmm?? And you wanna call out other people?
I have read the Bible a little bit in my day and I do not ever recall anyone saying slavery is OK and saying the Bible condoned it.

For future reference, if anyone here really wants to solve a problem or be understood or find common ground, it is best to give your opinion and reasons and not explain why someone else's reason or opinions are "hate- filled", "moronic", "stupid", hypocritical etc.

I am constantly amazed when a liberal tries to describe what I think and feel and believe. It is so far from the truth. I am equally amazed when a conservative tries to explain what a liberal thinks, feels and believes. I know a lot of liberals and even though I do not agree with some of their views, they are usually good people. I also know a ton of conservatives and none of them are anything like what a liberal describes them as.

If we can both realize that someone else is trying to manipulate our thoughts and beliefs, we might actually be able to get a long. Just like a lot of people complain about Flo and how they use click bait and say things to rile people up because it makes them money. The same is true with the news and talk radio. No one ever talks about getting along and the strengths of other peoples views. All they ever do is tear the other side down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CowboyUp61
The Bible doesn’t reference slavery? Or do you mean people who fought to keep slavery legal didn’t try to justify it on biblical grounds?

You simply live in a world where actual factual information means nothing. Google it.

Wait, google is a liberal misinformation company.

Hmmm maybe you’re in to something.
 
Nothing like hanging yourself. You probably don't even realize it.
You want your morality to be legislated - "same sex marriage" and anyone that wants "traditional marriage" shut down. Wise up.
Actually he wants morality not to be legislated. Previously marriage morality was legislated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: el dub
Actually he wants morality not to be legislated. Previously marriage morality was legislated.

Thank you for attempting to educate my position. I want the government out of our bedrooms and bodies.

I do not wish to live in a Theocracy where our government is controlled by a faction of the church. I do not wish to live in a country like Saudia Arabia, or Iran where religion dogma sets social standards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sara Henryson
The Bible doesn’t reference slavery? Or do you mean people who fought to keep slavery legal didn’t try to justify it on biblical grounds?

You simply live in a world where actual factual information means nothing. Google it.

Wait, google is a liberal misinformation company.

Hmmm maybe you’re in to something.
OK so now you are telling us what people over 100 years ago thought and did. No one is here to listen to what they have to say. What does it accomplish to say that over 100 years ago some people believed something and so now people believe the same thing? Do you even realize what you are doing?

I am not here to argue or convince you tho think the way I think. All I am saying is if you want to understand someone's opinion, you should let them give it to you and not tell them what it is. Your world view is different from mine and how you perceive things is different. Do either of us want or believe slavery is a good thing. I am going to guess - NO. Do either of us care if a gay person lives with another gay person, adopts or has children and a family. I am going to guess NO.

As a side note. My statement was that "I do not ever remember someone saying slavery was OK and the Bible condoned it." Now that does not mean that someone has never told me that over 100 years ago, people believed it or used the Bible to justify their beliefs. I am talking about now -present day. If you want to argue with someone from the 1800's, good luck. If you want to have a conversation with someone in the 2018's and if you want it to be productive, I am only suggesting a way to do it.

It is your life and your impending ulcer. Live it anyway you please.

Also, I am more and more skeptical about what I read in history books. Can you imagine the difference in the history books if Rush Limbaugh wrote one and Whoopi Goldberg wrote one. If we stick to what we think, feel, and see, and experience, we will have more productive discussions also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wasdt21
I've only just know opened this thread. Can someone give me the TLDR. No way am I going through 12 pages of this. What's the story with Jim Jordan? I don't care about anyone's politics. I just want to be caught up on the story. Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: SansSouci2
where is the guy who posts penis drawings to get threads closed? We need him :(

That would be @ih8iast8 . . . since he hasn't responded, you get this:
1473035_34081.jpg

;)
[He loves it when I do that.]
 
  • Like
Reactions: el dub
Actually he wants morality not to be legislated. Previously marriage morality was legislated.
All laws are about "morality" This country was founded upon a certain set of moral standards that were believed to be for the betterment of society. Changing, removing, or adding to the law is "legislating morality". It has to be done by a legislator doesn't it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old_wrestling_fan
All laws are about "morality" This country was founded upon a certain set of moral standards that were believed to be for the betterment of society. Changing, removing, or adding to the law is "legislating morality". It has to be done by a legislator doesn't it?

Sorry. Legislating morality in this context is in regard to victimless crimes. That is the morality I’m talking about.

And btw, the country was founded on freedom of and from religion. We are not a theocracy and I will fight till my dying breath to preserve the right to be free from others religious mandates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lambertt and el dub
Sorry. Legislating morality in this context is in regard to victimless crimes. That is the morality I’m talking about.

And btw, the country was founded on freedom of and from religion. We are not a theocracy and I will fight till my dying breath to preserve the right to be free from others religious mandates.
Sorry. Legislating morality in this context is in regard to victimless crimes. That is the morality I’m talking about.

Totally meaningless. There are victims. All of society becomes a victim. The traditional family is the very glue that holds society together.

We are not a theocracy and I will fight till my dying breath to preserve the right to be free from others religious mandates.

Please refrain from drinking while you are posting. NO BODY has laid claim that we are a theocracy. We never have been and never will be. There is no serious movement to create one. Nice strawman you built and attacked.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT