Hunting Forum

Front brain. So much for agreeing...

Wind was wrong...afraid he would smell us and run for Park only 5Km away....I could only see about 50% of his head from 17 paces....trunk hit his back when he went down instantly....glad I learned ear hole ain't no ear hole but a look like a{1}***** looking thing so I knew where to shoot!

Posted By YH on 22 Dec 2012 06:58 PM
ckell-

You Sir Are one of the Wolves spoke of in other theads, seeing you any other way is Denial. Evil can be very inteligent, deceptive and convenceing but still no less Evil.

That's interesting...
So- because I support DOMA, in your "mind", that somehow equates to me being evil?
While, to be sure, you have every right to voice your opinion, your overt stupidity doesn't really help your side's argument. Maybe sit back a while and watch your superiors have a go at me... you might learn something. But I doubt it.

YH, Evil is Evil, I am not speaking of it in Religious terms. Evil will use what ever disguise it can to hide it’s true intentions. YH you are and intelligent man as suggested by many of your post, until you start the name-calling, Overt Stupidity, is that the best BS you have, in an attempt to discredit me and hide your true intentions.

You state you are a Socialist, I have been program to see and hate socialism and it’s close relative Communism all my life, for the Evil it is and the Evil it has wrought on humanity.

 

TIT I find it hard to believe you would take this opportunity to mock me on this issue. Do we need to use another term/name for evil, so it well not have the religious connotations “you” seem associate with it. Do you believe there is no such thing as Evil? God, Jesus Christ, the Devil, are the way people came up with to explain the Evil that exist, and is in men’s hearts. Both of you can mock God all you want; it does no harm to me.

 

I did not use Religion as far as Gays go. I said it is not found in nature and is not natural. It is a defect, posibily a mental defect, if so, could be considered mentally retarded. So there should be no laws enacted supporting, or opposing the personal behavior of an un-natural, retarded, if you will, behavior.

No matter where you run to, or where you hide, Evil will will find you in one manner or another.

ckell, there are bad and good, evil and righteous in this world.....taught by ALL religions....all boil down to so called golden rule and ten commandments....all of which provide a good social more compass

What baffles me is how in the world are you, YH, from what I see, proud to be a socialist? I don't get that. I mean, socialism is all fine and dandy...until you run out of other peoples' money. Strange...this so-called socialism seems to be taking hold in the U.S. Boy, are we screwed.

Posted By ckell on 22 Dec 2012 08:18 PM

    I did not use Religion as far as Gays go. I said it is not found in nature and is not natural. It is a defect, posibily a mental defect, if so, could be considered mentally retarded. So there should be no laws enacted supporting, or opposing the personal behavior of an un-natural, retarded, if you will, behavior.
 

     

I agree...I'm pretty sure the back door isn't intended for...well, you know. I'm not going to get into the whole homosexual thing, though. We had a discussion on here quite a while back where I made my position on gays quite clear. The fact is, as ckell stated, they are citizens and so should have every right entitled to them as U.S. citizens. However, they shouldn't get "special" rights or (for lack of a better phrase) a lack of rights due to their rather weird behavior. What they do behind closed doors is up to them; just keep it there.

Posted By ckell on 22 Dec 2012 08:18 PM

Posted By YH on 22 Dec 2012 06:58 PM
ckell-

You Sir Are one of the Wolves spoke of in other theads, seeing you any other way is Denial. Evil can be very inteligent, deceptive and convenceing but still no less Evil.

That's interesting...
So- because I support DOMA, in your "mind", that somehow equates to me being evil?
While, to be sure, you have every right to voice your opinion, your overt stupidity doesn't really help your side's argument. Maybe sit back a while and watch your superiors have a go at me... you might learn something. But I doubt it.

YH, Evil is Evil, I am not speaking of it in Religious terms. Evil will use what ever disguise it can to hide it’s true intentions. YH you are and intelligent man as suggested by many of your post, until you start the name-calling, Overt Stupidity, is that the best BS you have, in an attempt to discredit me and hide your true intentions.

You state you are a Socialist, I have been program to see and hate socialism and it’s close relative Communism all my life, for the Evil it is and the Evil it has wrought on humanity.

 

TIT I find it hard to believe you would take this opportunity to mock me on this issue. Do we need to use another term/name for evil, so it well not have the religious connotations “you” seem associate with it. Do you believe there is no such thing as Evil? God, Jesus Christ, the Devil, are the way people came up with to explain the Evil that exist, and is in men’s hearts. Both of you can mock God all you want; it does no harm to me.

 

I did not use Religion as far as Gays go. I said it is not found in nature and is not natural. It is a defect, posibily a mental defect, if so, could be considered mentally retarded. So there should be no laws enacted supporting, or opposing the personal behavior of an un-natural, retarded, if you will, behavior.

Oh and as far as Jesus hanging out with the guys I surmise to question if Jesus may not have been gay. If you can prove to me there is a God, without pointing to a book written many year after the fact, translated and interpreded more times than Van Camp has Pork and Beans. (whole new argument). And He had Christain son, the son of God, not of man. And that son of God was gay, I will repent, become Ordained, and start officiateing/preforming gay weddings.
 
IMO Evil would exist without religion, relegion is/was a way of explaining the Evil that existed and exist. Morals may or may not be from Relegion, I tend to think they where Greatly influanced, and in many ways a  product of Relegion. But one can be Moral, have morals, and not be relegious. Can one be Evil and have Morals, and which way does that compass point.?
Don't think I ever said being Gay was Evil, just not normal, nor natural.

And yes YH I did and do see where you are going with this. You would love to see Our Constitution undermind. And will use any thing, say any thing to discredit it or anyone who opposes you. First the Question about DUI and Seatbelt laws, then threw in the Gay Marriage. IMO the DUI laws and seatbelt laws border on un-Constitutional. And I do not believe there should a Constitutional Amendment banning Gay Marriage, but I do not think it should be seen as any thing more than it is, un-natural and need not be validated by making/ calling it Marriage, legal or other wise. They have the right to be Gay, just not recognized as normal.

Now all this started because of an Evil act, committed by an evil preson, with a Gun. And the Anti-gun people jumped on that and are useing it in an attempt to undermine the 2nd Amendment of the Constituition. For any number of reasons. One being that taking guns out of the hands of law biding poeple will stop Evil people from being Evil. And your attempt, to show where other laws, may be un-Constitutional, to further your Socialist agenda, which would inclued disarming the US, and or justify your stance on Gay marriage.

I just hope my overt stupidity has not embarrassed my superiors, on my side as you say, and henderd their arguements, with your obviously superior intellect.

Hmmmmmm... so many bad points to choose from... where to start....

Overt Stupidity, is that the best BS you have, in an attempt to discredit me and hide your true intentions.
You state you are a Socialist, I have been program to see and hate socialism and it’s close relative Communism all my life, for the Evil it is and the Evil it has wrought on humanity.

I suppose, somehow, me calling you overtly stupid is somehow worse than you calling me evil- but let's put that aside for now...
Interesting choice of words- you have been "programmed". I would actually call that fairly accurate, and in point of fact, we are ALL programmed- you to hate and fear things you don't understand (that must be a long list), and me to think for myself. My parents are both Conservatives- yet they instilled in me the desire to make my own choices- and I then did the same for my daughter. I'm a socialist, in what I would consider it's purest form the Third Way (go look it up). I have absolutely no problem paying taxes to support others that are unable to support themselves; I have no issues with Gay marriage I support Social justice and I am a STRONG Union man. Yet, at the same time, one of the tenets I support is the individual's right to make his own way- entrepreneurship. I also support the minimization of government's infringement on an individual's rights, unless that individual's rights are usurping the rights of the majority.
Now, before you think I may be some kind of granola-chomping flower child, I'm also ex-Navy and I was a Senior Corrections Officer in the Yukon. I support a strong military, as well as more stringent sentencing for habitual criminals.
See, on the issue of gun control, I believe I'm sort of in the middle- I view the guns-only-for-the-military-and-police crowd to be one side of the pendulum. Some of you guys are the other. As much as you bemoan the ranting, screaming left wing extremists, there are those out there (like me) that view you guys as the ranting, screaming right wing extremists.
As for Gay marriage.... I'm off to the gym. We'll discuss later.
FYI- when a little red line appears beneath a word, it means that there is a spelling mistake. I'm not saying you're stupid because of your spelling mistakes (it's your views that cover that)... it just makes some of your posts difficult to read.

On another tact, Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, based on several inferences in the New Testament. I don't know this for a fact, but have been told that this was one of the tenants of the Anglican (Episcopal in the US) church's belief that their priests could be married. Of course we all know that the Anglican church was originally started by Henry VIII, in order to validate his divorce from Catherine of Arragon, in order to marry Ann, so the whole marriage thing may just be hearsay.

Okay- I'm back.
Now, then....
Your assertion that I'm trying to "undermind" your Constitution is ludicrous. I suggest maybe it's time you actually read not only a few of my posts, but the aforementioned document, as well. I think your Constitution is fabulous... I also happen to think that laws like DOMA which clearly violate both the language and intent of it should be overturned- and I would suggest that, given the fact that the Supreme Court is now going to give it a good look, soon will be. DOMA allows each state to refuse to recognize Gay marriages from other States- yet Article 4 of the Constitution stipulates they must.
This whole issue is an echo of Loving v. Virginia back in the 60's, which in essence overturned laws against interracial marriage.
More to the point... if you want to defend the Constitution, do so- but not just when it agrees with your point of view. If you want to keep your guns by citing the Bill of Rights, awesome... but don't you think picking and choosing what parts of your Constitution are okay is the height of hypocrisy?

Oh, Yeah-

And what's up with the Army? IAW the Constitution, it's illegal. The Navy's golden, but the Army? Not so much...
And, before you argue that it only stipulates that Congress needs to re-fund the standing army every two years, let's take a page out of your book, and look at what a couple of the Founding Fathers said was the intent...

"I am for relying for internal defense on our militia solely till actual invasion, and for such a naval force only as may protect our coasts and harbors from such depredations as we have experienced; and not for a standing army in time of peace which may overawe the public sentiment; nor for a navy which, by its own expenses and the eternal wars in which it will implicate us, will grind us with public burthens and sink us under them." --Thomas Jefferson

“A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.” - James Madison

And... AND, I believe I read somewhere that the government is supposed to arm the militia. Guess they could arm you with sticks, if they so desired...

YH, as you pointed out the Constitution does not authorize the establishment of a standing army; it also does not prohibit such authorization. But, since there were many items that couldn't be foreseen and predicted at the time it was written, there have (as previously been pointed out) several legislative laws established that serve as the "law of the land" even though they may not be protected or established by Constitutional law. The fact is that the Second Amendment is Constitutional law, along with the First Amendment. Any attempts by the POTUS, the Congress, or the SCOTUS to change Constitutional law requires a referendum to be put on a national ballot in the individual states for approval. This means that Executive Orders are in direct conflict with the Constitutional process, and legislative laws that are designed to specifically defeat any portion of the Constitution are also illegal. The laws about government arming of the militia have been altered many times over the years, but the original founding of the National Guard was actually an attempt at consolidation of the various state militias. This is why each state has it's own National Guard structure and leadership under the umbrella of the Federal military branches.

And What if is the start of this thread .What if all had the same opinion.Just think about how boring it would be on here .

Hmmmmmm... so many bad points to choose from... where to start....

Look in the mirror!

Now, wasn't that easy?

Yh I was waiting for you to say somthing about my calling you Evil, as far as the name calling goes. My calling you Evil was more questioning your intentions, than an attack on your inteligents as yours was on me. You come to a site where you know you well draw fire for your views. You have the right to express those views, but if any one questions them, you start questioning their inteligents right off the bat. You seem to try and draw out emotions with insults and such. So it is reasonible to say you don't really come here to share views, but to anger those who do not share your ideas. There is no point in debateing with you, when it would seem one of your main intentions is to insult, demean, such things as that, to pick a fight. Maybe that isn't evil, but it isn't good, so I leave it at that.

Posted By ckell on 23 Dec 2012 03:38 PM
You have the right to express those views, but if any one questions them, you start questioning their inteligents right off the bat. 

Posted By rthomas4 on 23 Dec 2012 12:32 PM
YH, as you pointed out the Constitution does not authorize the establishment of a standing army; it also does not prohibit such authorization. But, since there were many items that couldn't be foreseen and predicted at the time it was written, there have (as previously been pointed out) several legislative laws established that serve as the "law of the land" even though they may not be protected or established by Constitutional law. The fact is that the Second Amendment is Constitutional law, along with the First Amendment. Any attempts by the POTUS, the Congress, or the SCOTUS to change Constitutional law requires a referendum to be put on a national ballot in the individual states for approval. This means that Executive Orders are in direct conflict with the Constitutional process, and legislative laws that are designed to specifically defeat any portion of the Constitution are also illegal. The laws about government arming of the militia have been altered many times over the years, but the original founding of the National Guard was actually an attempt at consolidation of the various state militias. This is why each state has it's own National Guard structure and leadership under the umbrella of the Federal military branches.

RT-

RT4...I think there was something that looked into Jesus being married. I don't think there is anything to prove this, even in the Bible, however. Like you said, I would say it's just speculation.

YH...you said that you don't mind helping out those who can't earn a living. That's all fine and dandy; I'm all for that. Well, how about all of the free-loaders who CHOOSE not to earn a living? In the U.S., there are 4,300,000 people on welfare and nearly 47,000,000 on food stamps. The government spends almost 135 billion dollars on welfare per year, which doesn't include food stamps or unemployment. Heck, you're better off collecting from the government than you would be working at McDonald's. You would "make" more money if you were on welfare. People can "make" around 40,000 (give or take) by collecting unemployment, welfare, and food stamps. Granted, there are a lot of people who legitimately need help from the government, and they should be helped. But there are WAY too many people collecting welfare because they just don't want to find a job and work. So, why should the hard-working, tax-paying citizens of the U.S. give up there hard earned money in order to support some low-life piece of trash who sits on his/her butt doing nothing all day? You think that's okay? Wait, I take that back. They do a few things; buy, sell, and use drugs and alcohol...and make babies so we can pay for more lazy bums' welfare benefits.

You know, maybe you should see if you can get a position on Barack's cabinet. All you need to do is come up with a fake U.S. birth certificate, and with your socialistic views I'm sure he'd be more than happy to find you a position. You could give him advice on our welfare policies, our military and its strength, taxes, and gun policies. He'd absolutely love it!

You seem to concern yourself a lot with the U.S. and its politics. Maybe if you spent as much time on Canada's policies and laws, your country might be able to match America's power and prestige. Then again, you're socialistic views probably wouldn't be healthy for your nation. Oh wait, socialism is already in place in Canada. But who knows, with your good friend Barack in office, you may catch up to us pretty soon. I feel sorry for all of the Canadians who DON'T think like a socialist...I know a few...

Duck-
Don't concern yourself too much... while Canada can't match America's power, we more than surpass your prestige. Have a look at any story about the best countries to live, and see how many have the U.S. ahead of Canada...
I'm not an advocate of layabouts being on the dole. I'd just as soon see them, as well as inmates, performing forced labour. The big problem with that is.... let's say you have them clean up your highways. This will put highway workers out of work. It's a vicious circle.
As for the welfare rates, lets assume that NOT every person on welfare is a drug-selling bums. Here's a scenario for you... let's say your buddy that got the$10 ticket for not wearing his seat belt- we'll call him Jimmy Joe- is having a nice cold beer on his way home from the cockfights or monster truck rally one night, gets distracted by the 'possum living in his truck, and goes off the road, suffering a broken cervical vertebrae in his rosy-hued neck. Unfortunately for him, the pig feces factory he worked at has had to repeal health care benefits, as paying for Iraq and Afghanistan has kept your economy in the tank for so long. Universal health care has not yet been implemented, so the local vet sinks a couple of 1 inch Phillips head screws in there so his head doesn't fall right off. Now, he's gonna be one of them thar burdens to society. What standard of living would you like to see him have?