Autumn Dusk Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 Truth be told, I was inspired watching a history special on the college students of the 1950's and 1960's. They ended the Red Scare and persecution of "suspected" communists. They tried to end wiretapping (yes, it did exist before Bush). They changed more for civil rights than had been done in half a century. Contrary to the belief that MLK jr. was the start of the civil rights the NAACP was founded in 1909. His youth, with others, brought the fight to the forefront. There were Hispanics in the west coast fighting against segregation in their society. They don't get much media attention but they changed SO much. Why can't we do the same? Our lax society trapped behind the screens of computers trying to buck the misinformation of our parent's generation. We have the youth, the votes and the power to change things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRSannie Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Autumn, if not youth then who? You are right, your generation has the power to change things, as previous generations have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 (edited) [quote name='petrus_scholasticus' post='1474012' date='Mar 8 2008, 01:06 AM']I personally am willing to side with Ann Coulter and say that Hillary Clinton would be a more sensible choice than John McCain.[/quote] Have you been sparring without headgear?????? Who is more likely to pick a pro-life justice for SCOTUS? Who would sign a "Freedom of Choice Act" were it to be passed by Congress? Who has a more pro-life voting record in the Senate? Edited March 8, 2008 by Norseman82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell_b55 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 I endeavoured in all the above to remain detached and I do not think that I have crossed the bounds of Christian charity. Nothing that I have said has been personally criticising. The equivocation I referred to, I detected in another post, not this one, it couldn't happen in this one, since none of my arguments have been met with actual arguments. Equivocation would infer having actually interpreted what I said, which has not occurred. In fact, I have not received anything in the way of a point by point rebuttal. Until I receive one I have nothing further to say. No we are not orators, nor are we bound by rules for parliamentary assemblies, but my point remains valid this can be a medium for oratory, which is nothing more than the art of public speech. This is a public forum, I can orate in it. Robert's is also a good guide just in principle, and you don't seem to have an argument against what he says, so why should I dismiss it on the principle that we aren't bound by it. Please provide one example where I made a personal attack against Autumn. In fact, I have done nothing, but point out the flaws in what she is saying not who she is. How is this being uncharitable, I only follow the example of the scholastics, and the Graeco-Roman philosophers before them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell_b55 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 (edited) hot stuff, I might just join you. Do you think I can bi-locate if I try really hard or do you think I just have an enormous cerebral haemorrhage? Edited March 8, 2008 by petrus_scholasticus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 [quote name='petrus_scholasticus' post='1474252' date='Mar 8 2008, 03:11 PM']hot stuff, I might just join you. Do you think I can bi-locate if I try really hard or do you think I just have an enormous brain haemorrhage?[/quote] verily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autumn Dusk Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 [quote name='petrus_scholasticus' post='1474246' date='Mar 8 2008, 03:44 PM']I endeavoured in all the above to remain detached and I do not think that I have crossed the bounds of Christian charity. Nothing that I have said has been personally criticising. The equivocation I referred to, I detected in another post, not this one, it couldn't happen in this one, since none of my arguments have been met with actual arguments. Equivocation would infer having actually interpreted what I said, which has not occurred. In fact, I have not received anything in the way of a point by point rebuttal. Until I receive one I have nothing further to say. No we are not orators, nor are we bound by rules for parliamentary assemblies, but my point remains valid this can be a medium for oratory, which is nothing more than the art of public speech. This is a public forum, I can orate in it. Robert's is also a good guide just in principle, and you don't seem to have an argument against what he says, so why should I dismiss it on the principle that we aren't bound by it. Please provide one example where I made a personal attack against Autumn. In fact, I have done nothing, but point out the flaws in what she is saying not who she is. How is this being uncharitable, I only follow the example of the scholastics, and the Graeco-Roman philosophers before them.[/quote] The fact that you didn't read the concept of the tread, is in itself insulting. All I want is to pick one somebody to do one something and not worry about the rest of the stuff (as the president doesn't have ALL that much power, we have protection from congress). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell_b55 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 (edited) I read the concept. I'll let my objections to its first principles be for the time being. Who do you propose? Edited March 8, 2008 by petrus_scholasticus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autumn Dusk Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 How about this?!?!?!?!!!!!!!???? [quote name='Autumn Dusk' post='1473928' date='Mar 8 2008, 12:21 AM']It is said that half of America dosn't vote. What about if, for the hell of it, we agreed to pic a pro-life candidate and make him president. No debates, no fights, just uniting behind a person to prove that we could make it happen.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitchell_b55 Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 (edited) Who? Not what? Who do you propose as such a candidate? If you have an idea, it might be well to have thought it out beyond just the proposition. Who do you suggest that we unite behind. I'm trying to be fair here, your making it difficult by not showing me the same respect. P.S. You appear to by getting emotionally bent out of shape, if you would read my words and not look at my face, then you might be able to see beyond 'me'. I am not the focus of your attack and if I am then you will accomplish little. I'm not going to be damaged by it, except in reputation, and my stance will remain without opposition. Edited March 8, 2008 by petrus_scholasticus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autumn Dusk Posted March 8, 2008 Author Share Posted March 8, 2008 The idea is to have people propose a candidate...are than any acceptable. Start listing names. I'm not getting emotionally out of shape by this. That you even worry about your reputation in this is slightly sad. If you feel that you are being damaged in reputation then stop digging yourself in a hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 [quote name='petrus_scholasticus' post='1474246' date='Mar 8 2008, 02:44 PM']I endeavoured in all the above to remain detached and I do not think that I have crossed the bounds of Christian charity. Nothing that I have said has been personally criticising. The equivocation I referred to, I detected in another post, not this one, it couldn't happen in this one, since none of my arguments have been met with actual arguments. Equivocation would infer having actually interpreted what I said, which has not occurred. In fact, I have not received anything in the way of a point by point rebuttal. Until I receive one I have nothing further to say. No we are not orators, nor are we bound by rules for parliamentary assemblies, but my point remains valid this can be a medium for oratory, which is nothing more than the art of public speech. This is a public forum, I can orate in it. Robert's is also a good guide just in principle, and you don't seem to have an argument against what he says, so why should I dismiss it on the principle that we aren't bound by it. Please provide one example where I made a personal attack against Autumn. In fact, I have done nothing, but point out the flaws in what she is saying not who she is. How is this being uncharitable, I only follow the example of the scholastics, and the Graeco-Roman philosophers before them.[/quote] I'm not sure who this post was addressed to, but it did contain some of the points I hit on. I did make a point responding to your argument that abortion was a non-negotiable teaching. Now I'm not sure if you missed it here, or started the other thread in the debate table to cover it. You should dismiss Roberts because it has no effect here. You can't demand that anyone abide to the Robert's rules. You can if you want; thats great. But theres no reason why Autumn can say whatever however she wants (as long as its line with phatmass guidelines). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 [quote name='hot stuff' post='1474254' date='Mar 8 2008, 03:29 PM']verily[/quote] hot stuff I miss you avatars I especially liked the one with beaker that blew up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRSannie Posted March 8, 2008 Share Posted March 8, 2008 I tried once--Alan Keys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now