Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 256:
Line 256: + + + + + + +
→Pervasiveness: Got to nip it in the bud
----
----
*'''If''' I post that "America is the last, best hope for all those clamoring for freedom, we should not, we will not, ''under any circumstances'' fall into that liberal trap of thinking it is necesarry to back up a truism. We are Conservatives, we believe in common sense! What would be next? ''"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their ''Creator'' with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."'' Should we feel the need to support that sentence? Does anyone here actually believe a conservative, Christian encyclopedia needs to offer proof? How silly! We have no obligation, morally or intellectually to play by the liberal's moronic and self-serving "rules". Because we are what we are, I would like to remind everyone, certain "conventions" that have been instituted by the liberal elite will not be conformed to here. Period. If some are worried this will make us look "bad", I say to them: Bad to whom? Liberals? Do we care? No! Stop the madness of conforming to their expectations. ''We hold certain truths to be self-evident, gentlemen.'' --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 22:37, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
*'''If''' I post that "America is the last, best hope for all those clamoring for freedom, we should not, we will not, ''under any circumstances'' fall into that liberal trap of thinking it is necesarry to back up a truism. We are Conservatives, we believe in common sense! What would be next? ''"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their ''Creator'' with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."'' Should we feel the need to support that sentence? Does anyone here actually believe a conservative, Christian encyclopedia needs to offer proof? How silly! We have no obligation, morally or intellectually to play by the liberal's moronic and self-serving "rules". Because we are what we are, I would like to remind everyone, certain "conventions" that have been instituted by the liberal elite will not be conformed to here. Period. If some are worried this will make us look "bad", I say to them: Bad to whom? Liberals? Do we care? No! Stop the madness of conforming to their expectations. ''We hold certain truths to be self-evident, gentlemen.'' --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 22:37, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
::I agree, TK, but we can describe the political viewpoints of those who:
::#oppose certain freedoms such as that of accumulating large amounts of private property and/or selling goods and services at whatever price buyers are willing to pay (i.e., socialists)
::#insist that '''their''' freedom must be respected and tolerated to the point that they would ban outright any spoken or written expression of disapproval (see [[hate speech]])
::The difference between conservatives and liberals relevant here is that conservatives are willing to let both sides in the debate be heard - while liberals insist on censoring the opposition. That is what the ''Boston Globe'' did by dismissing as a "bigot" anyone disagrees with their argument that homosexuality is equivalent to race or ethnicity.
:::The counter-argument they don't want anyone to hear is that while race is known to be completely inherited, homosexuality is still being studied and even homosexual scientists '''insist''' that there is a huge non-biological component. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 15:11, 20 May 2009 (EDT)