Division of the States

Shard · Post by **Shard** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 3:05 pm

Now I know a lot of folks aren't United States citizens, but I'd like to hear outside opinions about this too. For those who are, please don't take any of my statments personally or as a personal attack - when I imply 'people' I mean to say 'people other than me'.

If we can keep any discussions about this to the points relevant I'd be happy. (So, let's not go off about gender, marriage, terrorism, and religion specifically even though they'd be related.)

***

With the local and federal elections tomorrow I thought I'd go into some concerns that have been plaguing me for a while about the USA and its condition...

What bothers me is that there seems to be a fairly distinct, clear line (or at least, 'what's being made visible by voting trends, media attention and such) between the parties in the USA. Essentially the Republican party appears to be wearing itself thin stretching between extremes, while the Democratic party waffles but remains steady.

I've seen too many right-wing Republican ads and information that is pervaded by religious (catholic/christian) ideas, and it now seems that in order to be a good Republican these days it requires one to belong to a church or at least pay lipservice to the 'ideals' of christianity. (Leaving aside for the moment what I think of modern American christianity... that's for another time.) And more disturbing to me, though, is that those ideals *also* enforce an 'if you are not a republican christian you cannot also be patriotic' attitude.

Now, obviously, I'm a reasonably liberal Democrat (with some pock marks and swerves along the way). My personal religion is "I am my own god please don't give me a pamphlet and no I don't need to confess anything to save my nonexistant soul". My level of patriotism however is what I'm concerned most with regarding the division of the USA's population.

I firmly believe in the constitution of the USA as being one of the finest documents ever drawn up. I will stand behind it, I will hope to enforce it. It's being lost to us, along with our bill of rights, and any other official documents indicating the basic freedoms that this country was ostensibly founded upon.

*That every citizen in the country is to be treated equally for legal and economic reasons
*That there is a clear distinction between the church and state that does not allow one particular religion to dominate the way citizens live or behave
*That we will not be taxed for unreasonable reasons nor without legal and political representation
*That we have the right to act to change our constitution, laws and political governing system as we wish to do so.

Specifically what I'm worried most about is that the Bush administration has ignored most of that and more. Offering tax breaks to religiously-based companies (and the filthy rich but that too is another story), requiring countries that need assistance to comply with religious-based ideals (the AIDS problem and 'abstinence' based programs), and the worst concerns of all: that of privacy.

We are granted here in the USA the right to be safe from being searched, arrested and detained without a warrant. We are given the right to a fair trial. We are given the right to speak out against our government in a peaceful way - and if it comes down to it we are also *required* to maintain a private militia to *overthrow* the government as the citizenry see fit.

That's the essential problem: that we've been told 'terrorists!' and not allowed to gather for protests, to be arrested for protesting or attempting to maintain privacy, been detained *even though no trial date has ever been set* *nor any warrant served* *nor any charges actually brought*... What is WRONG here?

Why are the citizens of the USA being jerked around like this?

As a voter for the last 20 years, I've been part of a community that represents *only itself*. I think the last biggest turnout of voters in the country was a whopping 32%. Something around there, at least. No more than 40%. We represent ourselves when we vote, yet we've been lumped in with the 60-70% of the population that just doesn't care enough or thinks that one vote can't make a difference...

It does. And what worries me is that a lot of people who don't vote could change the entire face of the country if only they'd get off their butts.

What exactly will it take to get these people to move and vote? When their last right to a private dinner with their Significant Other is denied because they're the same gender? When they are not allowed to buy gas because they don't make enough money? When their children cannot get a reasonable education at a public school - because funding and grants intended for public schools was diverted to *private, religious* schools instead?

The division seems strange to me because I'm not able to understand the Republican ideas today. I see guys with "Bush/Chaney 04" stickers on their SUV's, and I don't have to guess: they're part of the 'rich republicans' that simply want the tax breaks to continue for their income level. I see the same sticker on a beat up old truck that has a Vietnam Vet sticker or similar thing on it and I have to wonder: lazy? Too blinded by 'patritoism' (ie: institutionalized insistance that 'God Loves This Country' which is ... well, patently wrong according to any doctrine I've ever read; "it was this way 30 years ago it can't be different now") to see the ruin that the current Republican party has wreaked?

Does one have to be a Christian to be a Republican?
Can a Republican that is 'poor' actually understand how they're being screwed?
Is the Constitution of the USA a document that's going to be simply ignored or will the population at large realize how many of our rights have been destroyed, amended or outright contradicted and *change it back*?

***

Now, what I see may happen is someday another kind of civil war will be fought - physically - here. It's almost drawn on the same lines as the first, but the demographics run more 'Right-Republican**-Religious' versus 'Moderate/Liberal-Democrat-Constitutional'.

It is our right as citizens to protest, it's even our right to lead an *armed* resistance to a government which has ceased to represent us.

In my opinion it's coming to the latter. We've been protesting, and been ignored. It's money versus poor. Playing the 'if you're not Christian you aren't One Of Us and cannot be Patriotic' card too often. I know way more 'good' christians that know better than to insert religion into schools, government and politics. It has its place - that place is constitutionally guaranteed to *not* be in schools or government.

I want to protect my rights. But if I do so, I get a dozen 'true patriots' (ie: right wing republican christians) that tell me I'm 'against' the government. It is *my right* and *my PATRIOTIC DUTY* to do so! It makes me ill that too many people simply don't do what they're supposed to revel in doing:

Voting.

If you don't think your vote counts, leave the country and go somewhere where you can't. Or where *women can't*. Or where gays are killed outright. Or where one religion *does* dictate policy. If everyone voted it would be a very different place indeed. I think we could avoid a huge bloody conflict if only we could respect the constitution and use our votes to change things.

I don't fully believe that the 35-odd percent of us voting *adequately or accurately* portray the desires, needs and requirements of the whole country. Does the whole rest of the country not understand the situation? Are they all that freaking stupid? Are they lazy? Are they not 'allowed' to know? Are they too busy? ... I don't get it. I hope it doesn't come to an armed revolution, but ... I'm not afraid of it because frankly I'd be on the side defending the piece of literature that I hold dear...

So.... what do you think? Has one side gone too far? Is it time for a multi-party government in the USA? Can there be enough people who care about the situation to change it? Are other countries pointing and laughing or worried?

** - Many Republicans trying to maintain a center or moderate line are being forced out of office in favor of more right-wing or so-called 'conservative' people, I am *not* talking about 'all' Republicans because I know some very sane, educated and sensible 'moderate' Republicans who are just as disturbed by things as I am.

DNS · Post by **DNS** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:35 pm

Most of them are disillusioned with it all. As for me? I'm not yet legally aloud to vote, but I will be paying a visit to the polls when it comes down to it.

As for all your points.. about 80% of the nation agrees with you. Unfortunately, 80% of the nation is made up of pawns, and why should kings listen to pawns?
Everything here has happened before. history has this lovely tendency to repeat itself. And as it is, a miniscule percentage of the popoulation is commanding it's wealth, and that line is getting clearer every day. Inequality is blatant. Granted, it's getting better, but it will likely always be getting better.
If you look at historical trends, we as a nation are following some pretty disturbing ones.
I suggest someone pass around pamphlets of the readings the people who founded this nation reffered to so lovingly. A government is built upon the donated power of the people, and those people have the right to overthrow the government if it starts encroaching on the rights of it's citizans.
you did a nice job of detailing that.
a problem-- how far will people go? Just how much are we dissatisfied?
Being realistic, if it were to go to a military effort, it would fail. It takes a lot of organization to overthrow a government, and that would be noticable. Ignoring the illegality and hardship it would take to get enough weapons and arms, which wold be bloody hard to ignore, anyone seen to be preaching that sort of thing would be taken off as a terrorist who hates the united states and killed.
And, of course, the peacefull methods of changing things are hard to organize as well and even harder to get to work.
Unless the 20% of the nation that's ruling this place changes somehow, it's only going to get worse. Because they don't care about anything in the longterm, or anything besides their present and lifetime status. Or the lifetime status of anyone else.

/random observations that don't actually have a point.

I don't really have a point.

But i will say this; I just read something interesting in a recent issue of Harper's magazine. A study on chimps. There was this research facility set up in the jungle, and there was a trash heap outside of it. There were two groups of chimps, who were rivals, and the dominant group had staked out territory including the trash heap, cuz that's where all the good food was, and would defend it. The alpha males from the second group would come and steal from the heap when the first group wasn't there. Something in the trash heap ended up killing all the males in the dominant group, and most of the males in the second group. The result was that the less militaristic chimps became the leaders, and as they grew and became fathers of the offspring, things were very different. Things were more relaxed and peacefull, and generally good for all.
People and animals are amazingly similar. Hell, people are animals.

/random thoughts

Kesava · Post by **Kesava** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:49 pm

Speaking from an outside point of view (a Canadian in Australia) I can say that people are extremely concerned with what's happening in the USA - not necessarily because they /like/ the US (no offence) but because the US is such a huge powerhouse that what effects them has ripples that are going to effect other countries as well. Take the terrorists, and Canada (this is one of my issues). We've been, in a round-about way, accused of allowing terrorists into Canada and then across the border to the USA, and as such, there were discussions of increasing security across the LONGEST undefended border in the world. Now I can't speak for the other Canadians here, but personally, if I have to have a passport to drive across the border for a weekend of shopping, I'm much more likely to stay in Canada and shop than bother with all that jazz.

But I digress.

I can vote, thank goodness, and seeing as my Grandfather fought in the Second World War to ensure that I would be able to vote, you can be sure I do. At the age of 21, you can be sure my views are still developing, and my grasp on politics is still somewhat slippery, but it's my right to vote, and I do. Unfortunately, not a lot of people think like that. A lot of people may disagree with the way the government is running things, but they think 'what will my vote do to change that'? And they're right - one vote doesn't mean anything in the long run. However, you add up 20 million people saying 'what will my vote do' and you can change a whole damn lot.

Like I said, though, people don't think that way. Especially when you're from a prairie province like I am, with a total population of just over a million people, where the entire province voting the same way probably doesn't have much of an impact. Which is another point that really gets me - the way Western Canada is perceived by some - but that's another story.

My point? I'm not really sure I have one. Yes people care, but they have this misguided notion that their vote won't matter, and yes other countries care, because when a country like the USA decides to do something, it's going to effect others whether they want it to or not.

caesiusdraco · Post by **caesiusdraco** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:55 pm

Warning: Indirect Quasi-hostile rant ahead! Includes profanity, severe annoyance, and other such unhappy things

Personally, I'm about ready to give up on both of them and vote for Nader or move out of this country.

I mean, the President begins secretly collecting telephone numbers and monitoring calls, something EXTREMELY against the US constitution, and no one does ANYTHING?

Including the Democratic party? One democrat calls for censure of the President, and no one backs him up? Even Kerry! Some president he would have made....

I'm tired of there being a clear cut line between the States, because suddenly being a Republican means being anti-gay, or anti-abortion. And no that it's bad to disagree with something. I mean, to each their own, but when it gets to the point where you need to have control over someone else's life to make yourself happy, things have gone too far.

Anyone remember when being Republican just meant that you had the right to interpret on your own what the Constitution meant to you? I don't either. I think all of us are too young for that.

Seperation of church and state might techically still exist, but there's no longer seperation between church and government. We're now dealing with a political party that is fueled almost wholly by the religious right.

Now, I don't hate many things in this world, because I don't think hate does any good. But, I vehemently HATE the religious right. I think they're the one thing in the world that annoys me more than PETA, and for anyone who knows me, PETA annoys me A LOT.

I think it's creepy how easy they play smoke and mirrors. Someone crashes planes into buildings, and we rush to war. It was a horrible tragedy, no doubt. But, if we're so egged into motion by terrorism, then why do we sit back while abortion clinics are blown up with doctors and patients inside? While people beat gay people to death in the streets? It's okay if our own citizens do it, but it's unacceptable for a few crazy, middle-eastern radicals to fly a plane into a few of our buildings.

And I laugh my ass off, because the Republican party is so supportive of the religious right in America, and who are we fighting in Iraq? The ISLAMIC RELIGIOUS RIGHT! How much more ironic does it get?
Sure, these are a lot of illiterate crazy people recruiting other illiterate crazy people, but that doesn't change their equivilency.

That's why I loved 'V for Vendetta', and I got really pissed when everyone panned it as a 'liberal's wet dream'. Fucking wake up and look around people! And here people go complaining about the liberal who doesn't know what the hell she's talking about, but seriously, think about it.
Groups are already working on books they don't find "acceptable" removed from thier schools, like "Catcher in the Rye" or "Brave New World" or "1984" and have suceeded in a lot of places. The president breaks the constitution and suffers no consequences. We're talking about passing a CONSITUTIONAL ammendment banning gay marriages.

Everyone always says 'Oh, that's ridiculous', 'Oh, that will never happen.'

Why the hell not? Because you don't want it to? Are you just going to sit on your ass and not vote, or vote for a certain party just because you don't want to see two men or women having sex with each other?

I mean, big brother's already listening on the other end of the phone, how long until gay couples really ARE in jail? Or until the government regulates what we can and cannot read?

And all these people who just sit idly by and don't vote, and just say 'It's never going to happen, not in AMERICA'. They're just going to let it creep up on them, piece by piece, until they look around at what they thought could never happen, and wish they could go back and make another choice, or actually DO something.

And you never can.

Shard · Post by **Shard** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:40 am

*hugs* Yup.

Frank Zappa did a song: "It Can't Happen Here". Says it all, really.

And yes, I agree: when did it equate to any of those things? About 35 years ago, it wasn't like this but slowly has changed to the Republican 'ideal' including pretty much everything you've said and more. When we live in a country that's gaining quickly on the middle east in terms of zealotry and political-religious indistinction, I really worry.

.... Myself? I'd rather see the country divide into two completely different sections of people. Of course, then, we'd have the Handmaid's Tale all over again...

And yes, V and movies like 1984, Brazil and others should still scare people. I mean... Just because it took an extra 15 years, 1984 *still happened* and is *still* all but being used as a ROAD MAP for the political right.

In my town, San Diego, the home of Duke Cunningham and his 3 million dollar tax write-off/military deal-maker of a house, the two camps for his replacement are really showing off the huge differences between the 'liberal/moderates' and the 'extreme right'.

I think it's Brian Bilbray and Diane Busby - Bilbray's campaign is essentially one long smear campaign, and because she's an Independant she's got no money to fight back 'in kind'. Her campaign has been very quiet, in fact I don't even KNOW of any tv ads, meanwhile the opposition (including 'unsponsored' ads by the Republican committee that Bilbray is not 'allowed' to have under his own belt because of campaign fund restrictions, way to get around it guys) runs ads literally back to back every 20 minutes.

And they all rely upon: Hate (she "endorsed the Amnesty program for the border!" -... note well that nearly 3/4 of the people allowed to vote on that bill / measure voted that way, not JUST her), Fear (she's "a LIBERAL" *gasps* oooohhh nooooeeesss! her liberal ways are going to RUIN this country!), and ignorance of the voting population (.... I'm a liberal! so are pretty much all my friends! way to run a campaign guys!). The hate part is what pisses me off the most. It's literally taunting people who believe that either amnesty or some other beneficial program to allow the illegal immigrants who cross the borders by the MILLIONS every year, telling us that we're VERY BAD because we're ALLOWING them to ... to... become CITIZENS!!

Oh Noes! *sigh*. I almost want to start an action against the campaign people AND candidate who's using them, with the ACLU (and yes, I know, some people even liberals can't stand them, but I was a member for years and they certainly come in handy because... oh yeah, they're lawyers!) to slap a 'hate crime' lawsuit on em. If you see the ads you'd know what I mean. It's sickening this campaign.

And then we get to do this all over again in November... *barfs*

I wish that there was actually a way to put *non politicians* in office to affect some changes. But as it is, for the last century or more, the USA has been breeding politicians to do only their job. No one can get in, it's like a little club.

... shootemall.... *cough*

Astra · Post by **Astra** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:30 am

All right well you know it's my duty to play the devil's advocate (pun intended) in these sort of conversations. Free speech and all that. If we all agreed it would be boring.

Now while I agree with you on some respects, I think you all are being a LITTLE unfair to Christians in general. First off don't confuse all Christians with the religious right. Second, think of why the religious right is the way it is.

Liberals seem to have it in for Christianity. They say it's to avoid mixing church and state, but at the same time, they seem to bend over backwards to the needs of the muslim, jewish, pagan, etc population. and yet when a Christian wants some of the same rights they are suddenly EVIL BAD CHURCH AND STATE MIXING PEOPLE. So the Christian right responds in kind by being extremist and obnoxious.

What always gets me is when people get in a conniption fit over saying "under god" in the pledge of allegience. It doesn't say under Jesus. It doesn't specify WHO's god. It just says under God. So therefore when atheists protest it, they are really snubbing EVERY RELIGION except their own. Somehow that doesn't seem to me to bring about the air of tolerance they advertise about themselves. The pledge of allegience example is perhaps a bad one, because the under god bit was added, I believe, in the 1950's. But there's a lot more god-symbolism in the government that dates back to the founding fathers, who were all Christian and drafted the constitution as Christians with Christian motives in mind, and the left is going to have to learn to deal with that.

Unfortunately I have met a lot of atheists who are just as intolerant, arrogant, and self satisfied as the most extreme religious republican. They are equally convinced that their oppinion is right and that everyone else can rot. Like the type of people who would have locked Galileo away as a false scientist because he believed in God, instead of the other way around

Post by **Dray** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:04 pm

*snorts* I doubt that people will get off their asses to throw rocks at people's heads if they can't even get out of their houses to vote. :\ Then again, people seem to /like/ conflict, in the end. >.O" we're forgetting what we have, maybe.

Canada's pretty well in the same boat as the US, we might as well be their puppets. We can't do anything, government-wise, that might 'displease' our southern neighbors, like, say, keeping our water-supply up here when it's needed, or our fuel (though in Alberta it's a Good Thing to sell it all off, Yee haw!) or else we get harped at. T.T"

Then again, I don't know enough to really put in an intelligent point of view. I got nothing.

Shiolar · Post by **Shiolar** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:04 pm

My two small units of currency of choice...

Although several people have already pretty much said what I was going to say. But, I was thinking about this most of today.

As a British guy, and bearing in mind that England and the US are on the same 'side', I still have to say that the current government of the US frightens me. From my perspective, the overtly religious Bush and his cronies are somewhat like rabid dogs foaming at the mouths, running around biting everything. It scares me that the US, probably the most powerful nation in the world, is lead by a load of religious lunatics. In many respects, they're as bad as the Islamic 'terrorists' they started a war against.

I have nothing against religion in itself. I was raised as a Christian. But with that said, some of the evillest people I've ever met in my life were Christians, and they used that as an excuse for their actions. Because they were acting on the will of god...

It's funny, though, because if I'm talking to an American online, I can usually get a good idea of whether they're Republican or Democrat. It's rather scary that it's become so divided in the US that you can determine it that easily. It's no where near so clear-cut over here... But maybe that's because we have three parties, all of which overlap on several things. Or maybe it's because so many people are so sick of all three parties that there aren't many strong supporters for any of them. The MP for the area I live in gets voted in each time purely because he's a local guy who is, apparently, quite likeable. No one else really has a chance. (Course, our election system is rather different to the US one...)

The thing with political campaigns is they are getting rather... childish. We had a similar thing over here last year for the General Election. Not in this area, but further north in the country, I heard it got quite nasty. I think maybe it's because so many people are so apathetic when it comes to voting, so the politicians have to resort to more and more desperate attempts to get people to vote for them. Apparently turnout for the last election over here was appalling. Something like 6%, I think. Something like that...

But the thing is, I think too many people simply aren't aware of who they should be voting for and why. There's a lot of ignorant people out there, and if they vote at all, it'll be for whoever they think everyone else is voting for. Which over here, at least, is whoever the newspapers and the TV and the radios are saying they should vote for.

I'll have to admit that I rarely bother looking up the details on the candidates; there's not really much point, because my vote only controls the MP for the area I live in, and in this area, there's no chance of anyone but Matthew Taylor getting in. So I either vote for him, or I may as well not bother. *shrugs* On one election, some minor one for the new councillors on the local council, I think, I just closed my eyes and pointed at a name, and voted for that guy.

What it comes down to is the fact that government and politicians are all so corrupt that whatever they promise now they probably won't follow through with, and they'll do whatever they want to, right up until the public start objecting, and then they'll do whatever pleases the most people. Which is invariably going to be the most stupid and ignorant people out there; they outnumber the people with half a brain or more by a good quantity. Politicians are all so busy trying to keep their jobs that they're not really doing their jobs anymore. For them it's all about staying in office (or acquiring said office)...

And as Shard said, most politicians were bred for the position. Over here, a lot of them have been to expensive private schools, so it's no surprise that they have no clue how the real world actually works. How can we really expect them to understand what we want when they've lived lives so massively different from ours? It's not like they've ever had money troubles or ever had to fight for what they believe in...

And I think I've rambled on quite enough...

DNS · Post by **DNS** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:19 pm

one thng that struck me~

Liberals seem to have it in for Christianity. They say it's to avoid mixing church and state, but at the same time, they seem to bend over backwards to the needs of the muslim, jewish, pagan, etc population. and yet when a Christian wants some of the same rights they are suddenly EVIL BAD CHURCH AND STATE MIXING PEOPLE. So the Christian right responds in kind by being extremist and obnoxious.

If you do look at the motivating factors for the sorts of politicians we're all talking about, it IS christianity, and specifically eveangelical christianity, which amuses me because that sort of practice goes against almost every one of the religion's tenants EXCEPT for the ones about what sort of people nott o like. But I mean, the constitutional ammendment in the bill of rights to ban gay marriage (Which itself is ironic, the bill of rights limiting a right on the basis of gender) push is definately christian focused. A lot of others are too.
Liberals seem to bendover backwards for those religion because they aren't as powerful. I don't nessicarily approve, and if I see a pagan, jew, muslim or athiest acting arrogant and pushing their views, particularly intollerant ones, the same way, then I smack them. I have before, for the pagans. I'm animistic/pagan myself, and I firmly believe in keeping ,y own thoughts to myself, unless someone specifically asks for them.
I doubt liberal's attacks on evangelicals cause their extreme behavior. If anything, it's the other way around. If only because the liberals are a wide variaty of people and they wouldn't be able to organize themselves to attack something like that. As it stands, there's only one group thinning that crucial line between church and state, with their odd constitutional ammendments and their push to limit rights in the name of 'the greater good'.
And as for the muslims-- what they need is a representative, because there are a helluvalot of people who don't have the ability to think without clumping all people together as a general sort. Just like not all christians are hte extremist right homophobic assholes that we've been reffering to, not all muslims are the extreme radical jihad-happy people who cover themselves in explosives and run into things in hopes of causing mayhem. Actually, the muslims everyone hates right now are a relatively tiny sect, when put into preportion.

My point is-- liberals are going after christians like that because of their actions, not their beliefs. It's crucial that one DOES NOT mix church and state, or else you get lovely happenings like the scarlet letter and the crucible, and that's fairly tame. I've forgotten the one better example I had. aand, that's essentially what the radical right are doing, what with that constitution.

A thing that really gets me is the fact that our government is.. defunct. We have conservatives in every branch, and that's so.
Dangerous. That kind of unbalance is dangerous. And it's being executed very methodically. It's almost ingenious, and it worries me.

Shard · Post by **Shard** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:24 pm

Astra:

Yup, I am not really talking about "all" Christians - because frankly the good ones are NOT extremists like Bush. I know a lot of tolerant, friendly, sensible christians, but we all *hear* about the ones who aren't.

There's basically a kind of 'target shaped circle' of the folks we hear about and ones we don't. The great majority, like 60% of the people in the country (probably the world) are neither so extreme they are considered 'far right' or so ... wishywashy they could be considered 'bleeding heart liberals'. But if you look at it like it's a CD - the center ring is one extreme, and the outer half inch is another. Then you can pie-chart it out to 'democrat' 'christian' 'furries' and anything else that forms a group of people - and you'll still be getting the same breakdown of extremists.

I'm referring to the innermost and outermost rings of this breakdown, the ones who you hear about arguing on tv a lot.

But it does seriously worry me that there *is* such a breakdown within politics. *politics and religion should be separate*. Because look at the countries that allow their politics to specifically be ruled by their religions: many in the middle east, Ireland, many south-east asian countries. And America.

Generally speaking (and I may be talking out my butt here because I haven't given much study to it for the obvious reason that there's little to no conflict visible) a lot of other countries, european mostly, don't tend to mix their government with their religions. Whether that's because of anti-religious movements in the past (Soviet Union) or because they've made a conscious effort to do so, we *don't hear much about em*. Until the breakdown of the USSR we didn't hear anything about any violence between anyone in many of those splintered countries. Now? One's a kurd and the other's something else, and death follows simply because no one is going to tell them neither one is right.

...

So what do people think about what might happen IF the USA became two nations, divided? Yes, it would tear families apart again, and would be difficult to completely divide the physical nation. But what if? Because ... well heck, I'm in California. We've got nuclear power and a huge naval / military presence already.

We've got oranges and freakin avocados. We'll live.

lol!

Astra · Post by **Astra** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:24 pm

I know I probably shouldn't have gotten into this thread at all ... I don't want everyone to think that I myself am a right wing Christian radical nut-job. I'm not. I was brought up Christian and would like to believe in the ideals (the actual ideals not the political church ideals) but am really more agnostic as far as religion goes. I consider myself moderate in most respects, the only reason some of you may think I'm conservative is because most people here are so obviously liberal that I usually find myself being the lone voice stating the other side's point

. I don't agree with Bush on most respects actually but I also know that he's only got two more years in office and then we're done with him forever. There is just so much hypocracy in politics, on BOTH sides, that really both parties just disgust me. I refuse to toe the party line because there are things that I agree with on both sides and there are (much more often sadly) things that piss me off on both sides. So yeah there's my rant now you guys can go back to discussing why my country sucks.

DNS · Post by **DNS** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:29 pm

Ditto on that last point, astra, which is why I reffer to people as liberal and conservative, rather than democrat or republican.

and I don't think you're radical~ If I disagree with you, I'll say so, but yes.
[To my knowledge] you don't mind me, and I'm a flamingly pagan lesbian, so you can't be that bad. What gets me about people is intollerance, and you ahven't shown me any thusfar, so you're good.

And, for the moment, it's my country too.

Shard · Post by **Shard** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:30 pm

I don't agree with Bush on most respects actually but I also know that he's only got two more years in office and then we're done with him forever.

Actually he is going to push for his brother Jeb - the governor of Florida (which recall is the state which 'decided' *coughTHREWcoughcough* the election several years ago?) to run for president.

A monarchy!

Whee!

And it's perfectly okay to me to have a devil's advocate here - that's why it's in the debate section.

It'd be very VERY nice to have some MODERATE political people in office for a change. We need to recover, but what's happening and will continue to happen is this lash back between the parties. The Republicans pass law X. The next Democrat comes in and repeals it. The Republicans next up pass another very similar law W next time, Dem's repeal it and pass Y instead. And so on and so on... bleah.

If we were 'stuck' using the highest-vote-getter as president and the NEXT highest as VP... yeah we'd be spinning around 'getting nothing done'. But ... sometimes I wonder whether that'd be a bad thing for a few years.

DNS · Post by **DNS** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:33 pm

If we were 'stuck' using the highest-vote-getter as president and the NEXT highest as VP... yeah we'd be spinning around 'getting nothing done'. But ... sometimes I wonder whether that'd be a bad thing for a few years.

the lesser of two evils, perhaps? X.x Wouldn't cause quiiite so much damage.

caesiusdraco · Post by **caesiusdraco** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:42 pm

Personally, I have nothing against Christianity. I recognize the fact that there are, indeed, perfectly good people out there who believe in Jesus' message.

I DO, however, have problems with people who use God as an excuse to practice hate and fundamentalism.

And, of course, every religion has its fundies. But, the Christian right wings get most of the beef because they actually have political power. You don't see a whole lot of crazy pagans influencing the President.

I'm not saying that being a religious psycho of any type is okay, just that some have more impact than others.

So, sorry if anything I said came off as sweeping generalization. By no means did I intend it that way.