Government Throwing The Hammer

[fai0607]

This could be considered as a little rant, but recently the NYC city council passed a law that increased the tobacco-product purchasing age to 21. Before that, they restricted our guns even further and they tell us we cannot buy a large soda if we wanted to. But this post is more smoke base, what right does the government have to tell me what I can and cannot buy? Where I can and cannot smoke? (In a non-public setting, I mean. I agree with public smoking bans). They're giving hookah lounges in the city and the state of New York one hell of a hard time, banning smoking establishments. What right do they have to tell me I cannot smoke in a place where the entire purpose of being in there is to smoke hookah? It does not harm non-smokers from the outside, and hell I don't think there is any harm in "second-hand hookah smoke". So what's the problem? Why does the government want to "look out for our best interest" and post some bull research about hookah and claiming its just as harmful if not even WORSE than cigarette smoking?

 

I respect non-smokers and they should not have to be subjected to our hobby, which is why we have hookah lounges and smoke indoors because good luck trying to tell the majority of brain-washed people through government propaganda that shisha smoking is NOT equivalent to smoking 200 cigarettes, and try to explain to them that you don't smoke the shisha, you "bake" it which is essentially vaping.

 

I'm so sick and tired of anti-smoking groups throwing the hammer at us and restricting our hobby to indoors which is impossible for this college student. I made the right move to Colorado and I'm not bashing my home state at all, but the bans and restrictions of liberty is getting way too ridiculous. Luckily, my campus is smoker-friendly outside and we are permitted to have our hookahs outside. There is nothing like having a small group of friends with our hookah in the middle, smoking and talking together whilst studying. These groups are so active to demonize shisha and hookah smokers and of course uses "what about our children and teenagers?". I understand if you don't want a cigarette smoker blowing ash in your face, but to go as far to give hookah and cigar bars trouble? It's like they just don't want ANYONE to EVER smoke anything with a smidge of tobacco in it. They want to surpress OUR liberties because THEY don't do it. Again, I agree with the public cigarette smoking laws. They do have some good ideas and laws in place, but now they are widening their scope to attack hookah.

 

My post went all over the place but I really needed to vent. The government needs to back off, especially anti-tobacco groups that are largely misinformed. The majority of shisha make up is 75% glycerin and molasses, with only 25% (majority of shisha brands, I believe) is tobacco. They love to link anything that even has a smidge of tobacco back to the dangers of cigarette smoking. Tobacco has been framed as this cancer-causing agent that is just pumped with chemicals and all of this other stuff and if anyone touches anything tobacco-related, then they should be shunned by the doctors and society. Apparently, medical insurance will be more expensive for tobacco and shisha users because "of the increased likelyhood of nicotine dependence and cancer". Tobacco laws now affect me because shisha is a tobacco product, and if that medical accusation is true, it's starting to infringe on us. The taxes (and I'm sure our Canadian friends can agree with us) are always increasing and it's getting to the point where we're just funding government propaganda by buying any tobacco product. It's time we stop associating and comparing shisha with cigarettes, because I personally do not find it addictive in the slightest and 0% nicotine dependence.

 

Let us decide if we wish to indulge in this "extremely unhealthy" activity instead of taxing the shops to death and obtaining tobacco a hardship (moreso experienced by our Canadian friends, as I am going to Canada for a semester in uni and importing tobacco all adds up).

 

/rant

Edited November 4, 2013 by fai0607

[Fatalshizot]

Welcome to the right my friend ;) Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[Rani]

Welcome to the right my friend ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You think the right is about less government involvement???? LOL.......Oh, my........ Now that's funny.

 

It's the right that thinks women should have no control over their own bodies.  Not only do they want to outlaw abortion, but they don't want us to have birth control or sex education.  If the right had their way, all women would be barefoot, pregnant and unable to vote, leaving every "worldly" concern up the men who they think know better.  Oh, and while you're forcing those children to be born, let's make sure they starve to death without any social safety nets, okay?

 

It's the right who thinks if you're gay you don't deserve any rights. You're an abomination before God and shouldn't be allowed to live let alone marry.

 

It's the right who think any religion other than Christianity is invalid.

 

It's the right who burned pagans at the stake, though that may have been just right wing women haters in action since all those burned as witches were women.

 

it's the right that believes skin color determines fitness to have the same rights and responsibilities they claim for themselves.

 

It's the right that has produced the ultimate lunatics including Osama Bin Laden, Hitler, the Taliban, the Tea Party (let's not even start on the COWARDS at the original Tea Party who wouldn't bare their faces, instead dressing up like Native Americans and caused whole villages to be wiped out as result), Rush Limpdick, Ann Bat Shit Crazy Coulter as a short list.

 

The left has a few people who are over the line as well, but the claims by the right that lefties think all wealth should be redistributed and so on has never once been an actually goal.  Communism is NOT on the left's agenda, not by any means and never has been.  And those people it has produced?  Jesus Christ for starters.  How about Martin Luther King?  Buddha.  Mother Teresa.  Gandhi.  The Dalai Lama.    

 

I despise the right wing because they only want for themselves and if you don't fit into their tiny little niche, you are treated as less than human.  And the thing I find the saddest?????  We NEED conservative voices balancing the liberal ones, but there don't seem to be any true conservatives anymore.  Only people so far right they think if you're not a middle aged white male, you should have zero rights.  If you actually look up the terms conservative and liberal in the dictionary you see that while liberals rush ahead into necessary growth, conservatives take a slower steadier time.  We can't go back to the 1950's when all those non-white male people WERE second class citizens, we need to move forward into the global world as it's changing.  But nooooooooooo, they want to funnel more wealth into the 1% while making it harder to GET TO the 1%.  The windows of opportunity are closing and it's the right dragging the doors together.

 

Slight wandering, but a rant page deserves a rant.  And if you check the anti-smoking crusaders, you'll find they're almost entirely part of the right wing, neo-Nazi, Christian assholes trying to control the rest of your life.

 

'Rani

[fai0607]

Right, Left, I don't care who. The two parties are so polarized and focused on taking the other party down they lose focus on real issues. But that's besides the point.

 

I just want my liberties back.

[Pavo21]

acutlly you guys are all wrong, this is the real hammer being thrown

 

[URL=http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Blitzbolt/media/3C3CC9EE-6B15-4484-9B3C-97E7B534C483-2320-00000154BE9370E4_zps3cc702cb.jpg.html][/URL]

 

lol my son at my other sons baseball game today lol, he found the sledge hammer for the pitching machine.

 

but yah rants like this are all over the place its always the same thing but power to you for expressing it, and rani i love everything you type. its just awesome!

[Fatalshizot]

Holy bajesus rani lol. Alright realistically both sides have some terrible view points and realistically a truly great government would be non-denomination/bipartisan whatever. All I'm saying is look at the states with the most restrictions. Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[Fatalshizot]

I was just gonna let it go but your post really bugs me.dictionary definitions CLEARLY are not the sole representation of any item. Being an Asian combat veteran atheist didn't conform me to your stereotypical view of right supporters, but then again what would the left be without jumping to conclusions :) there is no reason any person without a sever disability should be reliant on the government hands down. I am all about progression, SELF progression. I worked at mc Donald's all through high school, payed for my own damn college with NO help from my family. But many people are too damn weak to put forth the effort to being a decent citizen. I believe we should help people but it should not be an obligation, for being a "rightist" I've fed starving children, gave families shoes and clothes for the winter. Just the other day someone left an abandoned Pitt on my road that's been beat to hell and I took her in and got her the vet treatment. People should do things that they are willing to and not forced. You can have as many abortions as you want and I could care less, if it doesn't effect me than I don't care, have a god damned marathon. ohh and my healthcare is being dropped as well. Well classes are about to start so I guess it's time for this heartless neo-nazi Asian to checkout. Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[mustang67n]

Welcome to the right my friend ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You think the right is about less government involvement???? LOL.......Oh, my........ Now that's funny.

 

It's the right that thinks women should have no control over their own bodies.  Not only do they want to outlaw abortion, but they don't want us to have birth control or sex education.  If the right had their way, all women would be barefoot, pregnant and unable to vote, leaving every "worldly" concern up the men who they think know better.  Oh, and while you're forcing those children to be born, let's make sure they starve to death without any social safety nets, okay?

 

It's the right who thinks if you're gay you don't deserve any rights. You're an abomination before God and shouldn't be allowed to live let alone marry.

 

It's the right who think any religion other than Christianity is invalid.

 

It's the right who burned pagans at the stake, though that may have been just right wing women haters in action since all those burned as witches were women.

 

it's the right that believes skin color determines fitness to have the same rights and responsibilities they claim for themselves.

 

It's the right that has produced the ultimate lunatics including Osama Bin Laden, Hitler, the Taliban, the Tea Party (let's not even start on the COWARDS at the original Tea Party who wouldn't bare their faces, instead dressing up like Native Americans and caused whole villages to be wiped out as result), Rush Limpdick, Ann Bat Shit Crazy Coulter as a short list.

 

The left has a few people who are over the line as well, but the claims by the right that lefties think all wealth should be redistributed and so on has never once been an actually goal.  Communism is NOT on the left's agenda, not by any means and never has been.  And those people it has produced?  Jesus Christ for starters.  How about Martin Luther King?  Buddha.  Mother Teresa.  Gandhi.  The Dalai Lama.    

 

I despise the right wing because they only want for themselves and if you don't fit into their tiny little niche, you are treated as less than human.  And the thing I find the saddest?????  We NEED conservative voices balancing the liberal ones, but there don't seem to be any true conservatives anymore.  Only people so far right they think if you're not a middle aged white male, you should have zero rights.  If you actually look up the terms conservative and liberal in the dictionary you see that while liberals rush ahead into necessary growth, conservatives take a slower steadier time.  We can't go back to the 1950's when all those non-white male people WERE second class citizens, we need to move forward into the global world as it's changing.  But nooooooooooo, they want to funnel more wealth into the 1% while making it harder to GET TO the 1%.  The windows of opportunity are closing and it's the right dragging the doors together.

 

Slight wandering, but a rant page deserves a rant.  And if you check the anti-smoking crusaders, you'll find they're almost entirely part of the right wing, neo-Nazi, Christian assholes trying to control the rest of your life.

 

'Rani

Couldn't agree with you more, Rani, Though I don't necessarily think "The Left" is all right either.

@fatal.. to say "welcome to the right" doesn't seem to fit, tbh. Especially with your recent post, it sounds less like you're "Right" than you are somewhere in the middle. And to claim one way or the other, without REALLY being one way or the other, seems dishonest.

We need less "lefts" and "rights" and more inbetweens, more freethinkers. I'm not dissing you, just dissing your initial post. It's the idea of HAVING to choose between a side that is really tearing this country apart, IMO. If everyone came in with an open mind, and their OWN opinions, this country would run a hell of a lot smoother. The BS comes from our senators and congressmen "fitting into" their stations; and them, before that, being voted into their positions based on them fitting into that profile.

It's all BS. and people need to stop fighting just because they 'claim' to be left or right. and fight for what they believe in, minus the media sway, minus the BS, minus conforming to one set of ideals or another. What happened to having your own ideals?

 

I guess my point is.. our entire system is screwed.. and we let it be that way.. and more-so, we don't do anything about it.

 

 

Rani, your posts always enlighten me, and add wood to a fire that sometimes dissipates inside me. I don't always agree with what you say, but gosh darnet it encourages me.

[Fatalshizot]

That is the way this political system works, I may be more In the middle but that is a wasted vote in this point and time. Do you see a libertarian president anytime soon? For me the right mainly means anti-government influence though there will always be exceptions. Anyone is able to stand up on there own two feet by their own means. I'm 23, going to college, work, own 3 vehicles, have a 3 month old son, and am looking to BUY a house all on my own means. I have no sympathy for those trying to leach off our failed system. I'm pretty sure I'm the only one worried about the debt crisis in America. Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[mustang67n]

That is the way this political system works, I may be more In the middle but that is a wasted vote in this point and time. Do you see a libertarian president anytime soon? For me the right mainly means anti-government influence though there will always be exceptions. Anyone is able to stand up on there own two feet by their own means. I'm 23, going to college, work, own 3 vehicles, have a 3 month old son, and am looking to BUY a house all on my own means. I have no sympathy for those trying to leach off our failed system. I'm pretty sure I'm the only one worried about the debt crisis in America.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's great for you. And I commend that, however I think there should definitely be help for those who have nowhere else to turn. We were founded as a nation who helps one another, a "nation by the people for the people" if a certain percentage of our people (pretty high right now) isn't doing so well, don't you think, based on our FOUNDATION that we should try to help them? Or do we just lose our morals as a nation along the way of making the few rich?

 

I'd be more supportive of a system with no gov. control whatsoever, but then, there's really no point in a government then, is there? Our nation is entirely too big for us to simply ignore our poor. If that's the case we might as well just call them peasants since we're treating them as such, and call the upper class noblemen (though, that's an ironic name for them, considering how they do [and did in the middle ages] treat those lower than them).. Or is this too "right" for you. The closer you go to the right, the closer you get to a feudal system. If that's what is striven for, then so be it.

Obviously an extreme representation, as nobody wants to be oppressed like that.. But ignoring those beneath us is EXACTLY that; oppression.

Likewise the "left" has it's own extreme; that of less "freedom" and more control from the gov. But.... isn't that exactly what happens with the extreme "right", simply a different method?

Either point of view, it's the same outcome, A middle-ground is necessary and our checks and balances system obviously doesn't work, because as recent history has show, it simply causes filibustering and a government shutdown; that doesn't do ANYONE any good, one way or the other.

 

Something new is needed, else we will go nowhere fast.. A dark age of the modern age, if you will... But a dark age of only our country, probably wouldn't turn out so well for any of us, regardless of our own quarrels. It's time we take care of ourselves..

 

 

 

 

More topic related though, tobacco laws and bans frustrate the hell out of me! I understand not smoking in public places, and setting an age limit (18 seemed fair).. but to make it 21, and to increase taxes, and to not allow private business... that's well beyond the reach any government should be able to make.

[Fatalshizot]

I'm not saying the country will be perfect by any means but I firmly believe in freedom. Should being kind be government mandated? What if it were actually up to the people? Most of us would more than likely support our own communities rather than just throwing it into a huge pot that gets distributed to crap you don't care about. If you want to get "extreme" nations without any government have survived and evolved into us today,now I know this would support our lifestyles today as far as road upkeep and maintaining order. In the midst of pure anarchy, government is formed by those strong enough to exude their power by whatever means they have. So basically one side is like thunderdome and the other like aborigines. As I said I am no extreme but if one pure extreme existed which the right already has, it is proven to survive and still does today. I'm not trying to argue, I was just angry at the unnecessary name calling and slander. Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[Fatalshizot]

Wouldn't* Sent from my iPhone using [URL=http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1]Tapatalk[/URL]

[mustang67n]

I'm not saying the country will be perfect by any means but I firmly believe in freedom. Should being kind be government mandated? What if it were actually up to the people? Most of us would more than likely support our own communities rather than just throwing it into a huge pot that gets distributed to crap you don't care about. If you want to get "extreme" nations without any government have survived and evolved into us today,now I know this would support our lifestyles today as far as road upkeep and maintaining order. In the midst of pure anarchy, government is formed by those strong enough to exude their power by whatever means they have. So basically one side is like thunderdome and the other like aborigines. As I said I am no extreme but if one pure extreme existed which the right already has, it is proven to survive and still does today. I'm not trying to argue, I was just angry at the unnecessary name calling and slander.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I definitely agree with that.. I'd vote for splitting our nation up into smaller nations if it ever came up.. I know you mean the states having more control, which is cool. But I don't see that working any better than it has as of late. Too big of a country to try to unite under unified laws. An open borders, allied, group of nations. Smaller gov's protected by a larger scaled, allied, defense.


IDK maybe i'm just dreaming. But I see that working a hell of a lot better than a few hundred knitwits trying to run millions of people from a tiny corner of the country where the media is all skewed.

[Rani]

That is the way this political system works, I may be more In the middle but that is a wasted vote in this point and time. Do you see a libertarian president anytime soon? For me the right mainly means anti-government influence though there will always be exceptions. Anyone is able to stand up on there own two feet by their own means. I'm 23, going to college, work, own 3 vehicles, have a 3 month old son, and am looking to BUY a house all on my own means. I have no sympathy for those trying to leach off our failed system. I'm pretty sure I'm the only one worried about the debt crisis in America.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

We don't have a debt problem in America.  We have a revenue problem.  Look at it this way.  Say you make $50,000 a year for your household.  You can pretty easily, without straining handle 10% debt to income ratio, or $5,000 in outstanding debt at any given time.  But the brilliant neurosurgeon across town makes $5 million a year.  At the same debt to income ratio, he can comfortably sustain $500,000 in outstanding debt.  (Most people can actually handle up to about 25% before it becomes too much but let's use the 10% to keep it simple.)  Now what happens when that neurosurgeon loses his job due to an accident that injures his hand and he can't operate anymore?  Now he's got $500,000 in outstanding debt he can't repay.  As it goes for individuals, so it goes for businesses and even countries.

 

Up until Reagan, we had a great debt to income ratio.  We were growing, there were great tax advantages for reinvesting your money into new business and employee benefits, etc.  Everybody was growing.  But Reagan came up with what even he would come to call "voodoo economics" and turned the entire system on it's ear.  He took some of the reins off Wall Street, and made it more financially advantageous to hoard cash instead of reinvesting.  Until Reagan it was even illegal to bank out of the country!  And now look...... The uber wealthy boast about depositing into the Cayman's or Switzerland, etc.  They label it capital gains because it's reinvested off shore and Romney was the perfect example of how they use the system.  He paid (really publicized if you recall)  a total of 13% in income tax.  Don't get hung up on the dollar amount because it was still only 13% of his income.  But since capital gains which he claimed all his income under is taxes at 15% that means had he not claimed capital gains his income tax exposure would have been minus 2%.  We would have given him a refund!  Giving a billionaire a refund...... You don't give Kobe Bryant a basketball, and you don't sell ice water in Iceland and you don't give tax breaks to people who don't need them!  But that's exactly what we've done.  We've made it advantageous to hoard cash, pay almost nothing back into circulation, and then turn around and do it globally.  I'm not saying the wealthy should pay more than their share, but when the wealthy are paying 13% while the average working guy is being taxed 28% and higher, there's something major wrong with the system.   Oh, and by the way, every single Republican president since Eisenhower has left office with a bigger debt than when he took office.  Every.  Fucking.  One.   And..... Enough thread jack on my part........

 

Here's the thing...... I actually think Europe does it better than we do.  They tax the hell out of tobacco, but they don't stop you from buying or smoking it.  For every American who smokes, there are a dozen Europeans who smoke.  Last time I was in France (four years ago) they were still smoking on the street in the cafes, and on the bus, and just about everywhere else.  They made it expensive to discourage it, but actually more free to use it.  If you look carefully at our laws as opposed to the "social democracy" type countries, we have many fewer personal freedoms than they do.  Yeah, we still have our guns, but what does it say about our government that we're too frightened of it to give them up?  Again, there's something wrong with the system.  I can't remember who, but I read an article several months ago in which some Canadian high official said America would have been better off if we'd just made George Washington king because it was becoming painfully obvious that we were a failed experiment in uncontrolled capitalism.  Looking around me, I'm think he just have been right.

 

'Rani

[Rani]

I'm not saying the country will be perfect by any means but I firmly believe in freedom. Should being kind be government mandated? What if it were actually up to the people? Most of us would more than likely support our own communities rather than just throwing it into a huge pot that gets distributed to crap you don't care about. If you want to get "extreme" nations without any government have survived and evolved into us today,now I know this would support our lifestyles today as far as road upkeep and maintaining order. In the midst of pure anarchy, government is formed by those strong enough to exude their power by whatever means they have. So basically one side is like thunderdome and the other like aborigines. As I said I am no extreme but if one pure extreme existed which the right already has, it is proven to survive and still does today. I'm not trying to argue, I was just angry at the unnecessary name calling and slander.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Sweetie I really love the fact that you believe that..... But in another twenty years, you're going to have one of those "What was I thinking" moments.  People are not that generous.  There are exceptions, but they're more rare than a 100 carat flawless blue diamond.

 

'Rani

[Chreees]

Fact of the matter is you shouldn't trust ANY politician. Until we stop allowing money and religion to run our country, and abolish the two-party system, nothing will change.

 

That's all I've got to say on the matter...

[mustang67n]

Fact of the matter is you shouldn't trust ANY politician. Until we stop allowing money and religion to run our country, and abolish the two-party system, nothing will change.

 

That's all I've got to say on the matter...

agreed

[ChicagoRSX]

Fact of the matter is you shouldn't trust ANY politician. Until we stop allowing money to run our country, and abolish the two-party system, nothing will change.

 

That's all I've got to say on the matter...

There, I fixed it.

 

But I think it was Lewis Black who put it best,

 

"You have the Democratic party, a party of no ideas; and the Republican Party, a party of bad ideas.

[mustang67n]

I think he had it right the first time. Religion has no place in government.

[ChicagoRSX]

I think he had it right the first time. Religion has no place in government.

But religion doesn't run our government. Money sure the hell does.

[fai0607]

Yikes I didn't mean this to blow up into a huge "Left vs Right" debate, but I expected that a political debate would have ensued from my original post. I feel relieved that people really do care about what is going on out there and aren't blind like the people around my age. A lot of people I know are, as they say, registered to the "I don't get a fuck" party. Hell one of my friends completely dismissed politics as unimportant because he literally said "How does it affect me? How does it affect you? It doesn't.". It's mindblowing how little some people my age care and do not recognize how important politics really is.

 

I'm a left of center person registered as a Democrat. However, my views are more or less moderate. I hold many liberal and conservative views a like, a balance. The Democratic Party is too left for my taste and let us not even get into the Republican Party which got hijacked pretty much. A third party (such as Liberterian) would be ideal, but unfortunately highly unlikely in this two-party system. We just have to find middle ground and retain views from BOTH sides and not having a strictly liberal or conservative view. But that's asking too much isn't it?

 

Back to what is more relevant to my post, Rani, your experience is France is almost exactly like my experience in China. In China, it is courtesy to offer your guests a cigarette or beer. Literally people ages 12 and over can purchase a cigarette and smoke anywhere. Now I do believe that there should be some restrictions as to WHERE you can smoke (like plane or near a school for example), but I'm starting to lose hope in the sense that the government, if not the anti-smoke groups alone do not want anyone to smoke. I'm absolutely frustrated that there are Surgeon General warnings on shisha, simply because of WHAT is in it (the tobacco) instead of HOW it is consumed.

 

I'm taking a class in Sociology right now, and this pretty much makes sense. Tobacco is framed in the American society as an addictive devil that serves no benefits or safer alternatives. People who consume ANY tobacco product (mind you, I only smoke hookah but the anti-smoking groups like to throw us in with tobacco smokers) are positioned in society to be addicted to this devilish substance, and frowned upon. People who consume tobacco are also positioned to be "selfish" and "not thinking about the children", amongst other things that make people who touch tobacco seem sub-human.

 

At least, that was the impression I was under. I've known many people who will glare at a hookah smoker and preach to them about the dangers of it in the exact same way they would to cigarette smokers and it's not even in an endearing way. I'm not calling all non-smokers snobs, but boy do some of them really have that "holier-than-thou" approach simply because they believe they are a better human being for not smoking anything.

Edited November 5, 2013 by fai0607

[Chreees]

Are you kidding me?? I can't count the number of people who think we are a "Christian nation" and don't have any consideration for those who have different beliefs. These same people often misquote the founding fathers every chance they get.

All I'll ask is, when do you think "In God We Trust" was printed on our money, and "Under God" was added to our Pledge of Alleigance?

[Rani]

Are you kidding me?? I can't count the number of people who think we are a "Christian nation" and don't have any consideration for those who have different beliefs. These same people often misquote the founding fathers every chance they get.

All I'll ask is, when do you think "In God We Trust" was printed on our money, and "Under God" was added to our Pledge of Alleigance?

 

And have you noticed what they're all about lately?  Oh my Gods,.listen to the stuff they're "endorsing".  (I prefer the word spewing but.......)  I'm beginning to wonder why anyone would actually want to be a Christian anymore.  They don't like smoking.  They don't like drinking.  Or sex, even when it's with your own damned self.  Girl on girl?  That's not art, that's mortal sin.  Boy on boy?  You should die.  Apparently pedophilia is still okay according to the Catholic Church.  Christians have done more damage to freedom than any other faith.  Including the Taliban of today!  The Crusades?  Also known as "It's Tuesday, let's invade Jerusalem!"  The Spanish Inquisition.  Native American genocide.  The whole witch burning incident.  Hitler was actually a Christian, though it's probably still too soon for them to openly claim him, who used the excuse of Jews killing Jesus to start that whole Holocaust thing.  Once he got going though there were gypsies, gays, and pretty much anybody with brown eyes to keep the ovens running.  Why would anybody actually volunteer to be a Christian?  You can't have any fun and you don't want anybody else to have any either.  And God is much less important than the dude in the polyester suit pounding the pulpit and taking your money.

 

Seriously, there's a reason I basically fall into the Pagan with Buddhism in background slot if we must define ourselves.......... I want to hang out with the people dancing naked in the woods on the full moon with mead, a pot luck and tantric sex afterwards.

 

'Rani

[mustang67n]

Are you kidding me?? I can't count the number of people who think we are a "Christian nation" and don't have any consideration for those who have different beliefs. These same people often misquote the founding fathers every chance they get.

All I'll ask is, when do you think "In God We Trust" was printed on our money, and "Under God" was added to our Pledge of Alleigance?

 

I want to hang out with the people dancing naked in the woods on the full moon with mead, a pot luck and tantric sex afterwards.

 

'Rani

 

 

+1 to that, Rani! haha

 

 I also agree with everything else you said.. lol

[ChicagoRSX]

Are you kidding me?? I can't count the number of people who think we are a "Christian nation" and don't have any consideration for those who have different beliefs. These same people often misquote the founding fathers every chance they get.

All I'll ask is, when do you think "In God We Trust" was printed on our money, and "Under God" was added to our Pledge of Alleigance?

 

Well "in God We trust was added sometime in the 50's and I believe the same for the "Under God".

 

And Rani, your claim that Hitler was Christian made me do some research, I found this.

 

" It is generally accepted by historians that Hitler's post war and long term goal was the eradication of Christianity in Germany.^[2][3]The adult Hitler did not believe in the Judeo-Christian notion of God, though various scholars consider his final religious position may have been a form ofdeism. Others consider him "atheist". The question of atheism is debated, however reputable Hitler biographers Ian Kershaw, Joachim Fest and Alan Bullock agree Hitler was anti-Christian. This view is evidenced in sources such as the Goebbels Diaries, the memoirs of Albert Speer, and the transcripts edited by Martin Bormann which are contained within Hitler's Table Talk, an influential translation of which was completed by historian Hugh Trevor-Roper."

 

 

So I'm curious where you got your info from, if the Historians and biographers all say he was anti-christian, I'm inclined to believe that.