On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 20:16:26 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:11:55 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

Values are not high on the list of most liberal's 'values'.

===

That's a little wide of the mark in my opinion and I'm disappointed to
hear you say it. I've known many liberal minded people with values
as good as any you could hope to find, others not so much. Same with
conservatives. My point is that values and political leaning don't
correlate very well in my experience except maybe in the eyes of the
ultra conservative media. Differences of opinion should not be
mistaken for lack of values.

It's a shame that some of those value oriented liberals you know aren't in politics or on judicial
benches (whoops, those are the same thing for liberals).

I suppose the big difference lies in how we define 'values'. I would imagine that my definition
would be much different than that of Krause, jps, Kevin, et al.

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

On 12/5/12 11:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:

I suppose the big difference lies in how we define 'values'. I would imagine that my definition
would be much different than that of Krause, jps, Kevin, et al.

How did those racist positions of you and your party work out for you in
the last election?

In article ,
says...

On 12/5/12 11:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:

I suppose the big difference lies in how we define 'values'. I would imagine that my definition
would be much different than that of Krause, jps, Kevin, et al.

How did those racist positions of you and your party work out for you in
the last election?

We are about to see what happens, here in the USA, what happens when the
equality of opportunity is substituted with equality of outcome. So far,
around the world it hasn't worked out well. You could always hold up
Cuba as an example and I respond that Cuba is in a time warp, they are
still in the 1950's with respect to infrastructure and services.

The Cubans don't need to view this page, they know all about it but, you
should view it and understand its contents.

http://gasengine.farmcollector.com/G...nding-Breaker-
Point-Ignition-Systems.aspx

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 20:16:26 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:11:55 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

Values are not high on the list of most liberal's 'values'.

===

That's a little wide of the mark in my opinion and I'm disappointed to
hear you say it. I've known many liberal minded people with values
as good as any you could hope to find, others not so much. Same with
conservatives. My point is that values and political leaning don't
correlate very well in my experience except maybe in the eyes of the
ultra conservative media. Differences of opinion should not be
mistaken for lack of values.

It's a shame that some of those value oriented liberals you know aren't in politics or on judicial
benches (whoops, those are the same thing for liberals).

I suppose the big difference lies in how we define 'values'. I would imagine that my definition
would be much different than that of Krause, jps, Kevin, et al.

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

A human couldn't possibly be more narrow minded than you.

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can understand your comments.

On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist.

On 12/6/2012 7:55 AM, ESAD wrote:
On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it,
but hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there.
I don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist

Hey ESAD!......... ESAD

ESAD wrote:
On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist.

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close the
door in their face.

On 12/6/12 4:30 PM, Califbill wrote:
ESAD wrote:
On 12/6/12 7:46 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can understand your comments.


Funny post, really, and it shows how disconnected you are.

Please explain how liberals have made marriage a sham and while you are
at it, tell how atheists are "imposing" their beliefs. Atheists don't
give a damn about your religious beliefs so long as you don't try to
impose them on others. Atheists aren't imposing their beliefs on
anyone...there are no door to door atheist.

Atheists are using the court to enforce their beliefs. The door to door
missionary is at least honest about their views, and you can just close the
door in their face.



I'm not aware of any court cases in which atheists are trying to force
their non-belief in a creator on anyone else. Atheists do use the courts
to attempt to keep religion out of the public schools and to keep
religion out of public facilities and out of public budgets, actions
they are entitled to take. There is nothing dishonest about this.