Ted Haggard

[Danzig]

my take on marriage is if you get married in a church, than obviously it's between you, your partner, your pastor, and god...
BUT, constitutionally, ALL are created equal. as such all should be treated as equals...not treated like the creatures in 'animal farm', where all are equal--but some are more equal than others!! so 'civil unions' should apply to all adults. ALL of them. matter of fact, civil recognition of a religious ceremony---well, let's just say if you really believe in separation of church and state, where does that leave marriage--and explains why you must buy a marriage license, that covers the civil part of it i suppose.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

IF you don't stand for SOME morality...then it will just become chaos

no timm...laws are there to prevent chaos. obviously most laws are based on moral values--prostitution for example. but my idea of what is morally right or wrong won't jibe with yours, or many others.
is playboy porn? i don't think it is...but ask others. some will think so, while others would agree with me that it isn't. gambling is a moral issue. as is drinking. moral tells you not to drink, legal says don't drink unless over 21, and don't drive. just because you might have a drink, that doesn't lead to chaos.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

Deb, I agree with you. I wish there were a viable 3rd party that could actually compete...

I voted Republican because I swing more to the conservative side, and I realize that the line between republicans and democrats is getting to be a gray area, but really, what other choices do I have? I want to vote, but it seems that you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. It's frustrating...

i think what ticks me off more than anything regarding green party, libertarians and the like...lack of debate! it really irritates me that the 'real' candidates absolutely refuse to debate their opponents. it's ridiculous. as tho any willingness to debate would bestow legitimacy to another party and would lose them some votes. well, actually it would! lol i really think that those who provide the debates, who set them up and moderate them, should consider allowing the other opponents to have a voice as well.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

IF you don't stand for SOME morality...then it will just become chaos

Timm,
The trap is when you define "morality" for others.
Is it just as wrong to kill inoccent (co-lateral damage) children with a cruise misile in Baghdad as Amish children in an Amish school.
To me, what's wrong is wrong.
I'll take that stand.
I just won't be launching any "air strikes" to make that point.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

i think what ticks me off more than anything regarding green party, libertarians and the like...lack of debate! it really irritates me that the 'real' candidates absolutely refuse to debate their opponents. it's ridiculous. as tho any willingness to debate would bestow legitimacy to another party and would lose them some votes. well, actually it would! lol i really think that those who provide the debates, who set them up and moderate them, should consider allowing the other opponents to have a voice as well.

Danzig,
I agree with your statement. Unfortunately, the greens and Libertarians aren't invited to the "big show" debates.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

no timm...laws are there to prevent chaos. obviously most laws are based on moral values--prostitution for example. but my idea of what is morally right or wrong won't jibe with yours, or many others.
is playboy porn? i don't think it is...but ask others. some will think so, while others would agree with me that it isn't. gambling is a moral issue. as is drinking. moral tells you not to drink, legal says don't drink unless over 21, and don't drive. just because you might have a drink, that doesn't lead to chaos.

Well,Ziggie maybe you can explain our present state of chaos...where men/women basically hook up with anything that moves,gangs, indiscriminate "recreational" drug use, medical companies putting out drugs that not only dont work,but kill. Not to mention the escalating violence on children,by adults and their peers alike. And then there's the people that deface works of art and any new car they can't afford,car-jackings....the whole "I want this and I'm gonna have it no matter what" I could go on...

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Well,Ziggie maybe you can explain our present state of chaos...where men/women basically hook up with anything that moves,gangs, indiscriminate "recreational" drug use, medical companies putting out drugs that not only dont work,but kill. Not to mention the escalating violence on children,by adults and their peers alike. And then there's the people that deface works of art and any new car they can't afford,car-jackings....the whole "I want this and I'm gonna have it no matter what" I could go on...

my god man, where do you live??

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

my take on marriage is if you get married in a church, than obviously it's between you, your partner, your pastor, and god...
BUT, constitutionally, ALL are created equal. as such all should be treated as equals...not treated like the creatures in 'animal farm', where all are equal--but some are more equal than others!! so 'civil unions' should apply to all adults. ALL of them. matter of fact, civil recognition of a religious ceremony---well, let's just say if you really believe in separation of church and state, where does that leave marriage--and explains why you must buy a marriage license, that covers the civil part of it i suppose.

Here in NY, marriages don't have to happen in a church. A Justice of the Peace can unite a "couple"...man and woman.
There are some things I really don't understand that the government decides...like why do I have to buy a license for my dog, but not my cat?
Does the government really make money off the dog owners but provide special favor to cat owners?
And why is there sales tax on potato chips but not potatoes? (here in NY)
Crazy stuff!

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

my god man, where do you live??

Beautiful Southern California

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Timm,
The trap is when you define "morality" for others.
Is it just as wrong to kill inoccent (co-lateral damage) children with a cruise misile in Baghdad as Amish children in an Amish school.
To me, what's wrong is wrong.
I'll take that stand.
I just won't be launching any "air strikes" to make that point.

you know exactly what I'm talking about,but you wish to politicize the problem. This country was founded with societal morals and they've slid a long way. I dont call the new morality where everything goes is morality at all...it's chaos.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

you know exactly what I'm talking about,but you wish to politicize the problem. This country was founded with societal morals and they've slid a long way. I dont call the new morality where everything goes is morality at all...it's chaos.

Timm,
I agree with you that there's plenty of chaos going on.
Do you think it originated with the "breakdown of the traditional family", with about 50% of marriages ending in divorce? Or was the model for "morality" set by more powerful forces that bring their sense of "morality" to others through e-mails to pages, or rewriting the Geneva Conventions, or imposing their concept of "democracy" on others through "shock and awe"?
Chaos, indeed!

"Everything doesn't go." If you don't speak against it, the chaos will continue.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

you know exactly what I'm talking about,but you wish to politicize the problem. This country was founded with societal morals and they've slid a long way. I dont call the new morality where everything goes is morality at all...it's chaos.

timm-- i think it's an issue that one way or another has to become politicized. this whole ted haggard and mark foley thing is hilarious because they're the people doing the very same they've built their lives around condemning.

it gets political when people vote against abortion and for a war. they say that abortion is wrong because the 'child has no voice' but the childern in iraq who are blown to smithereens in the name of democracy don't have much of a say either, yet they support doing anything we have to in order to get what we want in Iraq. It's a potent example.

i do get what you're saying about politicizing the conversation, but this is one of those issues that sort of necessarily has to be politicized. these people who want to legislate morality so that we do not live in a chaotic "anything goes" society -- they are well served to make sure they aren't doing the same things they are denouncing, ya know?

[timmgirvan]

I've never even thought about the govt. being the model for morality. How long are you gonna chew that bone,man? Election's over..all the bad guys go home....now its on the No Policy Dems to straighten out all the messes....I wish them Luck and Godspeed!!

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

I've never even thought about the govt. being the model for morality. How long are you gonna chew that bone,man? Election's over..all the bad guys go home....now its on the No Policy Dems to straighten out all the messes....I wish them Luck and Godspeed!!

Timm,
This isn't about elections anymore, though I really do think people cast their votes based on what they thought was the "right" thing to do.
The way out of the chaos, seems to me, is to find "consistancy".
Yes, consistancy in one's "moral" beliefs and "moral" actions, whether it be the individual or the government that represents the society (of individuals) from which it gains its power to govern.
My point is that if isn't happening in one place, how is it possible for it to exist in any other?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

timm-- i think it's an issue that one way or another has to become politicized. this whole ted haggard and mark foley thing is hilarious because they're the people doing the very same they've built their lives around condemning.

it gets political when people vote against abortion and for a war. they say that abortion is wrong because the 'child has no voice' but the childern in iraq who are blown to smithereens in the name of democracy don't have much of a say either, yet they support doing anything we have to in order to get what we want in Iraq. It's a potent example.

i do get what you're saying about politicizing the conversation, but this is one of those issues that sort of necessarily has to be politicized. these people who want to legislate morality so that we do not live in a chaotic "anything goes" society -- they are well served to make sure they aren't doing the same things they are denouncing, ya know?

It's the WRONG example,Brian! OK..so these 2 Bums get caught..so that makes the message bad too? I don't think it does. You can check your States' Preamble to its' Constitution to see what was set down by our leaders. It might surprise you. The breakdown of this society is a result of family breakdown and that society became lawless and unwilling to follow its leaders. The recalcitrant child imposing its' will....

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Timm,
This isn't about elections anymore, though I really do think people cast their votes based on what they thought was the "right" thing to do.
The way out of the chaos, seems to me, is to find "consistancy".
Yes, consistancy in one's "moral" beliefs and "moral" actions, whether it be the individual or the government that represents the society (of individuals) from which it gains its power to govern.
My point is that if isn't happening in one place, how is it possible for it to exist in any other?

DTS: It won't happen in Congress if it doesn't happen at Home and work first!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

It's the WRONG example,Brian! OK..so these 2 Bums get caught..so that makes the message bad too? I don't think it does. You can check your States' Preamble to its' Constitution to see what was set down by our leaders. It might surprise you. The breakdown of this society is a result of family breakdown and that society became lawless and unwilling to follow its leaders. The recalcitrant child imposing its' will....

absolutely does not make the message necessarily bad-- that's another debate we've had

however, the big point of what I was saying is gentlemen like these two are the main reason that people are very uncomfortable when talking about fixing the moral breakdown in this country. how do we fix it? we listen to our role models...our pastors and congressmen? and then they betray us by being hypocrites.

these examples of people who can't practice what they preach make people uneasy about ANYONE with a moral agenda.

morality starts at home and it is parents who need to instill a moral upbringing in their children. we can disagree over how to define that morality, but i know we can all agree on most of the things (ie we don't teach our kids to have sex at age 12, we don't teach them to get drunk and high in 8th grade, we teach them that killing people and stealing is wrong...things like that). it's depressing, it almost seems like there is no way to fix it. how do we start to fix it when the family is the core teacher of morality and values, but the family is breaking down at unprecedented rates and our families are outsourcing their parenting to day care centers so that we can go to work to keep up in the rat race of debt we're in and not get evicted from the house that the family spends a total of one hour a day together in?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

absolutely does not make the message necessarily bad-- that's another debate we've had

however, the big point of what I was saying is gentlemen like these two are the main reason that people are very uncomfortable when talking about fixing the moral breakdown in this country. how do we fix it? we listen to our role models...our pastors and congressmen? and then they betray us by being hypocrites.

these examples of people who can't practice what they preach make people uneasy about ANYONE with a moral agenda.

morality starts at home and it is parents who need to instill a moral upbringing in their children. we can disagree over how to define that morality, but i know we can all agree on most of the things (ie we don't teach our kids to have sex at age 12, we don't teach them to get drunk and high in 8th grade, we teach them that killing people and stealing is wrong...things like that). it's depressing, it almost seems like there is no way to fix it. how do we start to fix it when the family is the core teacher of morality and values, but the family is breaking down at unprecedented rates and our families are outsourcing their parenting to day care centers so that we can go to work to keep up in the rat race of debt we're in and not get evicted from the house that the family spends a total of one hour a day together in?

i agree that it all starts at home. problem comes in when too many parents are too 'busy' to take care of their kids..want to be the kids best friend, rather than a parent and do their job. don't wanna make your kids follow rules (and children are very much creatures of habit and routine--whether they follow a good or bad routine) and set limits, don't want to be the bad guy? don't have kids. kids can make plenty of friends at school, they only get one set of parents.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

DTS: It won't happen in Congress if it doesn't happen at Home and work first!

Timm,
As you know, I've spent a good portion of my life trying to "educate" children.
Some of my toughest ones have been from completely dysfuntional families.
Small triumphs, some failures. Every victory is a winner to me.
Whether those home settings were the cause or the effect of something from a higher societal level is difficult for me to determine.
IMHO, one won't be fixed without fixing other, maybe simultaneously.
Where to start? Your guess is probably as good as mine.
The key is that consistancy must exist at all levels.

[timmgirvan]

I can see that the problems are becoming clearer to you also. And yet the school system proposes to give 11-12 yr old girls a shot to lessen the chance of STD's or pregnancy. Doesn't that sound like they are subliminally promoting a lifestyle?