Jump to content

Jimmy42Jack0

Members
  • Posts

    4,809
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jimmy42Jack0

  1. You still run into the same issue, though: Why do people in favor of "Merry Christmas" have the right to take up arms, but those who favor some other phrase not have the same right? Because those who don't want to say Merry Christmas can say Happy Holidays, but those who choose to say Merry Christmas are sometimes coerced into changing. They aren't forced, but if you look down at something enough, it has the same effect more or less. so basically...do as i say, not as i do or else god will smite you...that about cover it?
  2. The Sun-Sentinel has an online poll on 'happy holidays' vs. 'merry Christmas'. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/monday/sfl-happy-holidays-buzz-poll-11292010,0,1074654,post.poll Given that Broward is one of the most liberal and most Jewish counties in the country I'm surprised 75% of the people who voted on their poll voted for: "The name of the holiday is "Christmas," not "holiday." We need to put Christ back in Christmas, despite all the people and media who want to take it away. In my opinion I see no good reason in saying 'happy holidays' instead of 'merry Christmas'. actually it was the christians who put christ into christmas...jesus of nazareth was not born on december 25
  3. I heard next year Obama will be forbidding giant inflatable christmas santas in our front yards. i heard that next year...our president doesnt care what you do during the holidays I heard that next year you'll come up with a more creative comeback...but I doubt it. LOL...whatever you say champ
  4. I heard next year Obama will be forbidding giant inflatable christmas santas in our front yards. i heard that next year...our president doesnt care what you do during the holidays
  5. after a rough day, this empty complaining made me feel alot better...thanks fellow board members
  6. but the military hasnt acknowledged that at all...neither has the justice department or obama But they have. The official military policy is that gay people can serve as long as they aren't open. It doesn't mean that the policy is right, in fact, it's an argument against the policy. If they can serve closeted, then the military is already acknowledging that they can serve. and if they arent closeted, then they are discharged...meaning any slip of the other rifle and they are gone thats still not equality for all the men and women who fight for this country deserve better than that It's almost like you don't have any grasp over what he's saying at all. Yes, they are discharged, but is that a result of them not being "good soldiers" or a result of there being a concern about how camaraderie will sustain itself? The former is not the emphasis, while the latter appears to be. I don't think you understand the counter-argument. And secondly, nowhere did he imply that this would maintain a sense of equality. i understand what he is saying...he is justifying DADT it has nothing to do with being a good soldier or not...it has to do with the christian right not being accepting of gays...and the christian right and the military go hand in hand together and have for a long time in this country and of course he didnt say it would maintain a sense of equality because it isnt equal to begin with you cannot be equal if you less rights than another person but i take consolation in that the military made the same arguments about letting blacks serve...and then women...same argument, different decade
  7. He's a clown. Fox News would definitely bring him on as a liberal expert. what is your problem? if you have nothing to add to a discussion then just shut up My problem is that you do liberals a disservice with hour crap arguments and inability to string together a coherent thought. You make people like me look bad. You are everything every conserative wants liberals to be. instead of worrying about me, why dont you make an argument that might make you look good... but i think you already know i could care less what you think...why? because liberals dont have to agree with each other...thats the fun in being one...unlike the sheeple that represent the tea party and GOP The irony in this post is so incredibly sweet. You, my good sir, have got to be the biggest sheep I have ever seen. Ever. you are calling me a sheep? do you see anyone falling all over theirself to agree with me?...do i seem to be agreeing with any of you? and im the sheep?....good god kid, do you even know what a sheep is?
  8. Why does that impact this discussion? If we find proof that Van Steuben was gay will everyone think it's ok for gay people to serve openly? no but its proof that being gay has no effect on your ability to be a good soldier...it never has and never will The fact that the military acknowledges that gay men and women can serve as long as they are not open is proof that they can be good soldiers. you need no further proof than that, but you are doing your argument a disservice by citing a questionably based historical "fact." but the military hasnt acknowledged that at all...neither has the justice department or obama why do you think these people are fighting the repeal? and no...im not...it is a historical fact that the baron was gay...its not my problem you wish to discredit the source ive provided and also ignore the fact he did more than bunk with his french protege...upon futher review, this fact is also acknowledged in the book "conduct unbecoming" Thanks be to Wikipedia! Since I'm hoping that you actually read the book yourself and did not lazily take that tip from Wikipedia, could you please enlighten us as to how the author supports his argument? Obviously he needed to have shown some evidence that this was historical fact in order to be taken credibly. so you are acknowledging that im right? does it matter where a historical fact came from as long as its verified by several sources? sigh...i guess wishing common knowledge was a little more common is a bad thing...but of course to a tea partier...that would be true...right penguino? did you get you excited when one of your little facist psycho stomped on that woman at the rand paul event?
  9. but the military hasnt acknowledged that at all...neither has the justice department or obama But they have. The official military policy is that gay people can serve as long as they aren't open. It doesn't mean that the policy is right, in fact, it's an argument against the policy. If they can serve closeted, then the military is already acknowledging that they can serve. and if they arent closeted, then they are discharged...meaning any slip of the other rifle and they are gone thats still not equality for all the men and women who fight for this country deserve better than that
  10. He's a clown. Fox News would definitely bring him on as a liberal expert. what is your problem? if you have nothing to add to a discussion then just shut up My problem is that you do liberals a disservice with hour crap arguments and inability to string together a coherent thought. You make people like me look bad. You are everything every conserative wants liberals to be. To be fair, this guy's a dream - but he's waaaay beyond what a conservative wants a liberal to be. why? being able to pick GOP propaganda isnt something they look forward to but im guessing you are excited about the usual rhetoric in their contract with america
  11. He's a clown. Fox News would definitely bring him on as a liberal expert. what is your problem? if you have nothing to add to a discussion then just shut up You haven't added anything but comic relief to this discussion since two pages ago. glad i could get a laugh...and you learned something since now you know that the baron was gay and a very capable soldier
  12. He's a clown. Fox News would definitely bring him on as a liberal expert. what is your problem? if you have nothing to add to a discussion then just shut up My problem is that you do liberals a disservice with hour crap arguments and inability to string together a coherent thought. You make people like me look bad. You are everything every conserative wants liberals to be. instead of worrying about me, why dont you make an argument that might make you look good... but i think you already know i could care less what you think...why? because liberals dont have to agree with each other...thats the fun in being one...unlike the sheeple that represent the tea party and GOP
  13. Why does that impact this discussion? If we find proof that Van Steuben was gay will everyone think it's ok for gay people to serve openly? no but its proof that being gay has no effect on your ability to be a good soldier...it never has and never will The fact that the military acknowledges that gay men and women can serve as long as they are not open is proof that they can be good soldiers. you need no further proof than that, but you are doing your argument a disservice by citing a questionably based historical "fact." but the military hasnt acknowledged that at all...neither has the justice department or obama why do you think these people are fighting the repeal? and no...im not...it is a historical fact that the baron was gay...its not my problem you wish to discredit the source ive provided and also ignore the fact he did more than bunk with his french protege...upon futher review, this fact is also acknowledged in the book "conduct unbecoming"
  14. He's a clown. Fox News would definitely bring him on as a liberal expert. what is your problem? if you have nothing to add to a discussion then just shut up
  15. It doesn't. We just find JimmyJacks antics amusing. why dont you continue with that ridiculous theory that global warming is a myth
  16. Why does that impact this discussion? If we find proof that Van Steuben was gay will everyone think it's ok for gay people to serve openly? no but its proof that being gay has no effect on your ability to be a good soldier...it never has and never will
  17. :lol What a joke. I don't know whether to laugh or to weep. might as well weep since you are wrong
  18. the game is great and as you can see in the campaign...its dedicated to telling the true story of what is going on over there bravo EA on a great game and working with the men and women who keep this country safe
  19. you clearly didnt read the further reading http://www.gaymilita...om/history.html "General Washington sent Benjamin Franklin to Paris to meet with Prussian military genius Lieutenant General Frederick Von Steuben, to ask him to come and train the American troops. Realizing that his reputation as a homosexaul was becoming a bit of a problem in Europe's kingdoms, he agreed. Von Steuben arrived at Valley Forge, that cold winter of 1778, with a young French nobleman who was his 'assistant' and lover. As he spoke almost no English, Washington assigned two young inseparable officers, who were fluent in French and were lovers, to work with Von Steuben to translate his work." you lose...have a nice day Wow. You're amazing! So your reputable historic source was first Yahoo Answers and now it's a website called GAYmilitarysignal.com? Who the hell is the author of that article? You don't know right? You found it on a (terribly made) internet webpage, so it must be true. I mean, they misspelled homosexual (homosexaul.) I've never actually met a liberal from Massachusetts, are they all like you? ok...since you arent too bright, clearly i challenge you to find anything on the internet that would insinuate that the baron was a straight as an arrow... since you seem so adament in challenging my knowledge of history...try disproving historical fact and this has nothing to do with massachusetts liberal...its a fact...disprove it Can I use Yahoo Answers? How could you have proven a fact that doesn't exist? You sure as hell haven't proven its validity. It's as if right now I sent you on the task of proving that some obscure general under Washington was straight when there's really no reason why that would come up in historical facts. All you need to know is that no credible historical source says Van Steuben was gay. Of course, all the crazy websites that you come up with will disagree becauuse they're trying to use bulls*** facts as a way to win an argument. Ridiculous. You state a fact and I tell you to prove it, and (countless laughable sources later) you end with 'prove that I'm wrong!' so basically because you are saying that the information isnt on time.com or foxnews.com that it isnt true? you really are clueless after all but back to the point...there is nothing that says a gay soldier cant do his job as effectively as a straight one its the same non-sensical argument they used against other minorities and women when they wanted to be a part of our armed services
  20. Helloooooo Harry Reid. What has Harry Reid said that qualifies as loony when put next to "Gays and unwed sexually active women (Not men, though!) should not be allowed to teach in public schools." He pretty much said things that most would consider to be racist a year ago.His rationale is based on his prejudices, and they tell him that all races are not equal, essentially. That's crazy and I won't apologize for thinking that. did you really just rationalize bigotry? amazing
  21. you clearly didnt read the further reading http://www.gaymilita...om/history.html "General Washington sent Benjamin Franklin to Paris to meet with Prussian military genius Lieutenant General Frederick Von Steuben, to ask him to come and train the American troops. Realizing that his reputation as a homosexaul was becoming a bit of a problem in Europe's kingdoms, he agreed. Von Steuben arrived at Valley Forge, that cold winter of 1778, with a young French nobleman who was his 'assistant' and lover. As he spoke almost no English, Washington assigned two young inseparable officers, who were fluent in French and were lovers, to work with Von Steuben to translate his work." you lose...have a nice day Wow. You're amazing! So your reputable historic source was first Yahoo Answers and now it's a website called GAYmilitarysignal.com? Who the hell is the author of that article? You don't know right? You found it on a (terribly made) internet webpage, so it must be true. I mean, they misspelled homosexual (homosexaul.) I've never actually met a liberal from Massachusetts, are they all like you? ok...since you arent too bright, clearly i challenge you to find anything on the internet that would insinuate that the baron was a straight as an arrow... since you seem so adament in challenging my knowledge of history...try disproving historical fact and this has nothing to do with massachusetts liberal...its a fact...disprove it
  22. Jimmyjack makes liberals look bad... GFY and have a nice day
  23. Yahoo answers? That's your reputable source? A cute thing about everyones source when answering the guy's question: they're either .com websites or a site with the word gay in it. Try again. You can still win the prize! The Times article doesn't even mention Von Steuben. I don't care qbout gay history in the military. I'm here to give you a hard time for misrepresenting historical facts to win an argument. you clearly didnt read the further reading http://www.gaymilitarysignal.com/history.html "General Washington sent Benjamin Franklin to Paris to meet with Prussian military genius Lieutenant General Frederick Von Steuben, to ask him to come and train the American troops. Realizing that his reputation as a homosexaul was becoming a bit of a problem in Europe's kingdoms, he agreed. Von Steuben arrived at Valley Forge, that cold winter of 1778, with a young French nobleman who was his 'assistant' and lover. As he spoke almost no English, Washington assigned two young inseparable officers, who were fluent in French and were lovers, to work with Von Steuben to translate his work." you lose...have a nice day
  24. while im not going to say that there are more or less looney tunes on one side or another...at least the far left generally steers clear of religion...which if you have studied human history and understand human emotion....is a great thing some in this country need to be reminded on a daily basis that there is a seperation of church and state and thats for the benefit of all americans
  25. baron von steuben was as queer as a 3 dollar bill...and trained the "troops" at saratoga with General Washington...if not for him...we arent a country...simple as that...so when i hear people say that DADT shouldnt be repealed...or that gays shouldnt be in the military...they really should swallow some history instead of the non-sense they hear at church That's actually not a part of history because the evidence is inconclusive. So in essence it isn't any more fact than the 'nonsense they hear at church.' Just sayin'... -_- uh...its a historical fact...not faith based discrimination...big difference Find me any reputable source that calls Von Steuben's homsexuality a fact and you win a prize. It's ridiculous how people read the first half of a sentence and run with it. Find it, please. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070704202748AAhSHEE the good general makes elton john look straight as an arrow...get rid of DADT, it doesnt do anyone any good gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve with honor...they are red blooded americans just like the rest of us and here is a brief history of gays and lesbians in the military http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1958246,00.html
×
×
  • Create New...