Jump to content

Republicans Want Smaller Government.


Recommended Posts

If the government's job is to censor things that we deem dangerous to our children, where does it stop? Where do you draw the line?

Movies?

Video Games?

Music?

Guns?

Books?

Personally, I prefer to live in a free country. One where the government isn't censoring things. But maybe that's just me...I'm not a bed wetting libtard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

All I learned is how much some people around here love to beat off to the extent that they don't give a crap about putting porn in kid's faces. .

I'll some up my position on this thread in case you hadn't seen it:

SMH @ people who don't want to be slightly inconvenienced for the sake of children because of their need to beat off.

I'm sorry I suggested inconveniencing your jerk fest for the sake of children (not just my own). We disagree. That is all.

blink.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously don't understand my position on this issue. Go back and read again. This time, slowly.

And btw movies and video games already have a rating system. A 6 year old can't walk into a XXX movie theater. But he can find the same movie on a computer somewhere very easily.

I've already stated my position clearly many times. There's no point in me doing it again as it's a complete waste of time spelling it out for people with either no reading comprehension or just a desire to misrepresent and be a doosh.

BTW, your whole argument was that they could access it places you couldn't watch them (friends, school, etc). So your rating system argument is irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At some point parents have to take some responsibility for what their kids are exposed to.

These days, most parents let their kids play on the internet unsupervised, play video games relentlessly, and use social networking as a toy. Perhaps the parents are too busy...but this is a big part of what's wrong with our society. We're letting the liberals in the media raise our kids. When is the last time you watched Family Guy? Last time I clicked on it, I saw the brother having sex with the sister....and the family dog trying to have sex with the mother. Good wholesome family entertainment that runs all day long....yep...good stuff for kids.

You do realize that I've been arguing that it's the parents job and not the government's in this whole thread, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

At some point parents have to take some responsibility for what their kids are exposed to.

These days, most parents let their kids play on the internet unsupervised, play video games relentlessly, and use social networking as a toy. Perhaps the parents are too busy...but this is a big part of what's wrong with our society. We're letting the liberals in the media raise our kids. When is the last time you watched Family Guy? Last time I clicked on it, I saw the brother having sex with the sister....and the family dog trying to have sex with the mother. Good wholesome family entertainment that runs all day long....yep...good stuff for kids.

So you also want the government to censor TV?

Keep going, Mao.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of the rating system they don't let 6 year olds into XXX movie theaters. All I ask is that the same logic be applied to the web. Hardly a controversial position and the FCC already does this for TV and radio so it's not like big brother is taking over the world.

And since you like twisting my words I'll repeat again that I'm a limited government supporter where government's role in part is to protect the innocent. That applies to this case.

Where in the **** did I put words in your mouth? Seriously, man...you have some sort of odd complex where you believe everyone that disagrees with you is a lib and every time your position is summarized, it's putting words in your mouth.

I am against Government censorship. Period. It's not about beating off easier, as you've reiterated five thousand times in this thread. It's about the Government overreaching it's power. Because I believe, once you open that door, it's going to be **** hard to close it. Again, where do you stop once you start censoring things that kids can get their hands on? Stop with the rating system ****, because if you honestly believe a 10 year old can't get their hands on a copy of Grand Theft Auto, you're delusional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, and I agree with you. Parents these days pretty much suck.

I have 2 kids and my wife and I had to absolutely monitor what they did online. The computer was for homework research ONLY. NO Facebook, no Myspace, no IM's.

Of course the kids can always go to their friends' house and do whatever they want...so it was frustrating. Kids can find porn as easily as anything else, so their ideas of what sex is, has been shaped by that, as much as anything else. It's maddening, but the solution is not to have the Obama regime filter the internet. The solution is to not let kids near the computer unless you're in the room with them. That's a pain in the butt, but its what good parents have to do these days.

See, I was with you until the Obama part. This discussion isn't about him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of the rating system they don't let 6 year olds into XXX movie theaters. All I ask is that the same logic be applied to the web. Hardly a controversial position and the FCC already does this for TV and radio so it's not like big brother is taking over the world.

And since you like twisting my words I'll repeat again that I'm a limited government supporter where government's role in part is to protect the innocent. That applies to this case.

Yet you just said Family guy would corrupt kids.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of the rating system they don't let 6 year olds into XXX movie theaters. All I ask is that the same logic be applied to the web. Hardly a controversial position and the FCC already does this for TV and radio so it's not like big brother is taking over the world.

And since you like twisting my words I'll repeat again that I'm a limited government supporter where government's role in part is to protect the innocent. That applies to this case.

I watched most of the first episode of Game of Thrones. I just don't really like how these HBO shows just throw in tons of gratuitous sex and violence for no real reason. Most of it doesn't really further the story at all. Before you call me a prude note that I have kids at home and no TV in the bedroom so kids could walk out and see what's on TV at any moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the beat off session has turned into a big lib circle jerk. Annoying seeing my views constantly misrepresented. Putting words in people's mouths is such a doosh tactic. Onto the next topic.

Your views are stupid. I don't say that to anyone else on here, not even snak, and I've mocked snak through multiple profiles going back to the old MB. I make every attempt possible to avoid a simple invective in response to an argument, even when just talking about football. This is the rare exception. Your views are worse than poorly researched; you find clips on youtube or links to propaganda websites and present them on here as if their contents are indisputable fact, and you ignore or patronize everyone that so much as presents another point of view. In this case you've been arguing the completely nonsensical point that pornography encourages children to become serial killers, using that one Dobson interview as the sole bit of evidence to that point, and when another point of view was presented, you ignored the research, claimed that everything stated in the article was the author's opinion when the article itself had over 350 citations, mocked everyone else in the conversation for the blatant straw man that we were reading the mind of a dead man, then left the conversation after having the audacity to claim that everyone else was misrepresenting arguments but yourself. Now you've come back to continue pushing the point that people are "misrepresenting your views" after everyone left the thread. You are consistently the most insulting, condescending, ignorant person in the conversation, and you project that on everyone else in the conversation just to get a reaction so that you can later say that the conversation has declined to the point that you will no longer participate. I can't even remember the last time I saw such purely pathetic behavior on the internet, and I get around.

Edited by Serge
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your views are stupid. I don't say that to anyone else on here, not even snak, and I've mocked snak through multiple profiles going back to the old MB. I make every attempt possible to avoid a simple invective in response to an argument, even when just talking about football. This is the rare exception. Your views are worse than poorly researched; you find clips on youtube or links to propaganda websites and present them on here as if their contents are indisputable fact, and you ignore or patronize everyone that so much as presents another point of view. In this case you've been arguing the completely nonsensical point that pornography encourages children to become serial killers, using that one Dobson interview as the sole bit of evidence to that point, and when another point of view was presented, you ignored the research, claimed that everything stated in the article was the author's opinion when the article itself had over 350 citations, mocked everyone else in the conversation for the blatant straw man that we were reading the mind of a dead man, then left the conversation after having the audacity to claim that everyone else was misrepresenting arguments but yourself. Now you've come back to continue pushing the point that people are "misrepresenting your views" after everyone left the thread. You are consistently the most insulting, condescending, ignorant person in the conversation, and you project that on everyone else in the conversation just to get a reaction so that you can later say that the conversation has declined to the point that you will no longer participate. I can't even remember the last time I saw such purely pathetic behavior on the internet, and I get around.

Steve's alright man. He's just passionate about his beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve's alright man. He's just passionate about his beliefs.

That is BS and you know it. There's a difference between being passionate about your beliefs and being an insufferable prick, and Steve passed that line for every reason mentioned. Everything I said in that post is completely true, and that's not how a grown man is supposed to act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is BS and you know it. There's a difference between being passionate about your beliefs and being an insufferable prick, and Steve passed that line for every reason mentioned. Everything I said in that post is completely true, and that's not how a grown man is supposed to act.

Aw man. Give him a break. He's one of a handful who has those exact beliefs. LOL!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aw man. Give him a break. He's one of a handful who has those exact beliefs. LOL!!!

I'd be more prone to if he didn't maintain a contradiction deep in his psyche that allows him to be immensely condescending and blame other people in the conversation for making said conversation decline into insults. I can't regard him as a decent human being as long as he can keep that up.

Says the guy who just wrote an essay of personal attacks biggrin.png

I insulted you twice, I called your argument stupid and I called you pathetic. Everything else was objectively true. Those two insults were true, too, simply not in the objective sense that those statements can be quantitatively or qualitatively assessed.

Edited by Serge
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be more prone to if he didn't maintain a contradiction deep in his psyche that allows him to be immensely condescending and blame other people in the conversation for making said conversation decline into insults. I can't regard him as a decent human being as long as he can keep that up.

I insulted you twice, I called your argument stupid and I called you pathetic. Everything else was objectively true. Those two insults were true, too, simply not in the objective sense that those statements can be quantitatively or qualitatively assessed.

I guess it just doesn't bother me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Libs in this thread:

And they're going to take away my porn and my lotion. I won't even be able to spank me monkey...

157.gif

Steve's very first post in this thread.

Well if you had left all the attacks out I might have actually responded to your post. But I don't feel like talking to someone who just attacks and twists people's words around. It's pretty annoying.

ummmm....

Steve, why do you feel like you're exempt from the rules you impose on everyone else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you had left all the attacks out I might have actually responded to your post. But I don't feel like talking to someone who just attacks and twists people's words around. It's pretty annoying.

Yes you do, that's all you come here for, to post things no one that knows anything at all about the topic would ever agree with, patronize and insult everyone in the conversation, then leave when everyone gangs up on you. You'd be a great troll if you didn't believe so much of what you posted. As it is you're simply the source of your own ignorance and the cause of everything you complain about on here. Again, these things are true, I do not deal in lies and misinformation, simply because you attribute those things to me does not make it true, you are the only one in this thread that has consistently lied about other people's positions, as well as the only one that completely refuses to even entertain the idea that you do not understand everything there is to know about everything from Ted Bundy to child psychology.

Edited by Serge
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...