Santorum wants to impose 'Judeo-Christian Sharia'

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

WARNING OPINION PIECE AHEAD!

Few quotes:

Plainly put, Rick Santorum wants to convert our current legal system into one that requires our laws to be in agreement with religious law, not unlike what the Taliban want to do in Afghanistan.

To me, "Santorum Two" truly poses an existential threat to the separation of church and state, one of the bedrock principles of our nation since its inception. Not only did Thomas Jefferson speak of the need to create "a wall of separation between church and state," so did Santorum's idol, Ronald Reagan, who succinctly stated, "church and state are, and must remain, separate."

LINK

Last updated 5 January 2012 at 2:30 PM EST

[Skybird]

Fundamentalism always stinks and always is against reason and humanism - no matter whether it comes in the dress of Islam, Christian sectarians or Jewish orthdox. When I see what the ultras are trying in Israel currently, I only want to vomit all day long. Primitives.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Fundamentalism always stinks and always is against reason and humanism - no matter whether it comes in the dress of Islam, Christian sectarians or Jewish orthdox. When I see what the ultras are trying in Israel currently, I only want to vomit all day long. Primitives.

I love discussions like this. It always misses the point and ignores the NEED
for stricter laws and more simpler ways of dealing with the solution. Thanks
to the cowardly and corrupt (at the top) who imposes their "reason and
humanism" which is nothing more than New Marxist Liberalism. Looks good on
paper but in the real world is total chaos and ends in disaster.
If murders, rapists and all forms of criminal scum are getting away their crimes
at the bottom, what do you think those at the top are getting away with?
Those who's religion is only greed and self indulgence are incapable of doing
anything good, in the long term.
In other words what is needed are men of action not of talk. Those who
can not or will not show self control (at top or bottom) must finally be dealt
with in the harshest terms possible.

ZeeWolf

[MH]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

Blah blah....with in the harshest terms possible.

ZeeWolf

ZeePincher in the house...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by MH

ZeePincher in the house...

Drug abuse? Death penalty.
Gay? Death penalty.
Critical of the government? Death penalty.
Wrong religion? Death penalty.

Heard it all before.

In other words what is needed are men of action not of talk. Those who
can not or will not show self control (at top or bottom) must finally be dealt
with in the harshest terms possible.

Oh look the nazi is back with mein kampf
I thought you said this forum was full of jews and was part of a jewish conspiracy...so why are you posting your lunatic fascist crap here?

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Drug abuse? Death penalty.
Gay? Death penalty.
Critical of the government? Death penalty.
Wrong religion? Death penalty.

Heard it all before.

No, it works. Clearly we will have peace once everyone is dead.

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by ZeeWolf

"reason and
humanism" which is nothing more than New Marxist Liberalism.

Yeah, there is only approximately 300 years of difference between the phenomena. I'll let you discover yourself which was born first.

Also, a dictionary wouldn't hurt if you want to throw terms around.

[ZeeWolf]

Originally Posted by Hottentot

Yeah, there is only approximately 300 years of difference between the phenomena. I'll let you discover yourself which was born first.

Also, a dictionary wouldn't hurt if you want to throw terms around.

Dear Dr. Hottentot,
Why is it when I throw terms around I am sent straight to the dictionary. But
when some "New Marxist" liberal throws terms around they are put at the head
of the class and hailed as "Enlightened" Isn't this the way Pavlov's dog
was "Enlightened"?

Sincerely comrade ZeeWolf

[mookiemookie]

He's puritanical. His views on birth control are frightening. They go back to some patriarchal Leave it to Beaver type 1950s time warp.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

He's puritanical. His views on birth control are frightening. They go back to some patriarchal Leave it to Beaver type 1950s time warp.

He wants to stop using federal funding (read..my tax dollars) for birth control. Sounds good to me. Pay for your own damn birth control pills.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

He wants to stop using federal funding (read..my tax dollars) for birth control. Sounds good to me. Pay for your own damn birth control pills.

And when people can't, you get to pay for all those new babies on welfare. Hooray for cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And he's for allowing states to ban birth control. That's absolutely idiotic. The guy's a fundie, and as Skybird said - fundies of all stripes in a position of power are scary.

[Bubblehead1980]

[QUOTE=mookiemookie;1816596]And when people can't, you get to pay for all those new babies on welfare. Hooray for cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And he's for allowing states to ban birth control. That's absolutely idiotic. The guy's a fundie, and as Skybird said - fundies of all stripes in a position of power are scary.[/QUO

Ah religious fools are just about as bad as people like obama. Sad state of affairs my party and this country is in.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I just can't believe Iowa would push Santorum up over Paul lol , religious fools.

I'm impressed with Paul's showing precisely because Iowa is such a backwards place. To come in a respectable third there is no small feat.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

And when people can't, you get to pay for all those new babies on welfare. Hooray for cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And he's for allowing states to ban birth control. That's absolutely idiotic. The guy's a fundie, and as Skybird said - fundies of all stripes in a position of power are scary.

I don't believe any of it. It's a made up projection of a future without federally funded birth control. It's a fraudulent argument. People can pay for their own birth control. A few people unwisely choose not to use birth control at all, and make babies they cannot afford. Federal funds won't change that. What liberals want is to create another entitlement using taxpayer funds, thus creating dependancy on government. This is nanny state lunacy. Government, using tax dollars on thousands of wasteful programs won't save everybody from themselves. Never has. This is why liberals have no business putting their hands on the levers of government.....they abuse it.

As far as states banning birth control, he's for allowing states the right to choose which laws they want to pass. Even if it is about birth control. Birth control is not a right or power enumerated in the US federal constitution. Therefore, he is correct. Leave it up to the states to pass their own laws. Let the courts determine the constitutionality.