| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:20 pm Post subject: What conservatives have on their minds |
 |
|
The 10 most searched terms on conservapedia:
1. Main Page [1,915,484]
2. Homosexuality [1,585,721]
3. Homosexuality and Hepatitis [517,503]
4. Homosexuality and Promiscuity [421,281]
5. Gay Bowel Syndrome [395,623]
6. Homosexuality and Parasites [388,673]
7. Homosexual Couples and Domestic Violence [373,329]
8. Homosexuality and Gonorrhea [331,732]
9. Homosexuality and Mental Health [292,816]
10. Homosexual Agenda [270,932]
http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Statistics |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And those were just by the GOP members of Congress. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| And those were just by the GOP members of Congress. |
What's up with these Republicans, anyway? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| And those were just by the GOP members of Congress. |
What's up with these Republicans, anyway? |
Insecurity |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| Insecurity? Who do you refer to? |
these Republicans |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ah, you are saying that they are republicans because they are insecure about their homosexuality? As in it is overcompensation? I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| Ah, you are saying that they are republicans because they are insecure about their homosexuality? As in it is overcompensation? I agree. |
I'm not saying they're insecure because they're republicans. I'm saying they're insecure becasue they're 'closet' homosexuals. Though, yes, democrats aren't as insecure probably because they are more comfortable around homosexuals. Republicans should just introduce laws wiping marriage from the books, meaning letting the churches define marriage as opposed to the state, and be done. Yep, republicans have lost their ways; I agree. High time to relearn conservative values boys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony_Balony
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| thepeel wrote: |
| Ah, you are saying that they are republicans because they are insecure about their homosexuality? As in it is overcompensation? I agree. |
I'm not saying they're insecure because they're republicans. I'm saying they're insecure becasue they're 'closet' homosexuals. Though, yes, democrats aren't as insecure probably because they are more comfortable around homosexuals. Republicans should just introduce laws wiping marriage from the books, meaning letting the churches define marriage as opposed to the state, and be done. Yep, republicans have lost their ways; I agree. High time to relearn conservative values boys. |
Whats the derision on republicans? Why not call these people closeted homosexuals that think they will find refuge in the Republican party? there are more hets than homos. The numbers don't work.
Exactly why did these searches happen? If you find a Jew looking into info on NeoNazis, does that make the Jew a closeted NeoNazi. What if I look up ham sandwiches on the net? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While I agree that the state has no role in defining or legislating relationships, I think the repubs also ought to come to terms with the fact that some men like to have sex (exclusively, or in addition to women) with other men. It is a sexual preference, and none of their business. They need to get over it.
Barney Frank smacks them all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8X0aJkjZnc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
While I agree that the state has no role in defining or legislating relationships, I think the repubs also ought to come to terms with the fact that some men like to have sex (exclusively, or in addition to women) with other men. It is a sexual preference, and none of their business. They need to get over it.
Barney Frank smacks them all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8X0aJkjZnc |
Exactly! Some republicans and social conservatives shouldn't be legislating the definition of marriage. I say let the churches define marriage. While countries like Holland, Spain and Canada have been legislating homosexual marriage into their statutes, I've been taking the opposite view. The state shouldn't be getting involved with the institution of marriage.
But what about tax benefits?
Why don't we take taxes out of the equation? I'm a single heterosexual. Why should I be punished for not being married? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, I am personally against income taxes and would prefer consumption and pollution taxes. But that aside, the tax code should not give preferences to social arrangements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| But that aside, the tax code should not give preferences to social arrangements. |
I don't know. Offspring are important to the economy generally, and a burden on the individual household particularly.
I'm not an advocate of rewarding funds to those who have children, but people who have children are contributing to any society where the birthrate is below replacement level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| thepeel wrote: |
| But that aside, the tax code should not give preferences to social arrangements. |
I don't know. Offspring are important to the economy generally, and a burden on the individual household particularly.
I'm not an advocate of rewarding funds to those who have children, but people who have children are contributing to any society where the birthrate is below replacement level. |
It's my belief that if we take taxes out of the equation more people, or couples if you will, will be more motivated to produce offspring. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony_Balony wrote: |
Whats the derision on republicans? Why not call these people closeted homosexuals that think they will find refuge in the Republican party? there are more hets than homos. The numbers don't work.
|
I don't think it's anything against republicans per se. I just think it's something against certain republicans that profess certain values. As for closeted homosexuals in the republican party, you'd have to talk to Larry Craig about that. There are more heterosexuals than homosexuals. That even extends to the rank and file republicans.
| Tony_Balony wrote: |
| Exactly why did these searches happen? If you find a Jew looking into info on NeoNazis, does that make the Jew a closeted NeoNazi. What if I look up ham sandwiches on the net? |
I don't know why these searches occured nor do I know why a Jew would want to look for information about neonazis. However, if you like ham sandwiches, I'd try and sell you some cheese. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
