What can we agree on?

[Deadshot]

Both the Conservatives and Liberals fall into the traps set by their respective parties. We sometimes forget that in the end we're all Americans. Seems like we argue and argue about Bush vs. Clinton or one liar vs. another, but what do we agree on?

Can we all agree that we need some type of Health Care plan where everyone from children to the elderly get Health Care?

Can we agree that while illegal immigrants, mostly, come here to better their lives, we need to cut the flow.To stop this flow we MUST PUNISH the businesses that hire them. Thus eliminating SOME of the jobs?

Can we agree that we all want terrorists stopped, but that we should use ALL methods (Military, Economic, Diplomatic, etc.) to stop them?

Just wanted to see if we could come together on some stuff...

[AnnEsthesia]

I am sure we could come together on one or two issues, maybe... if you are talking about majority. To get everyone, down to the most out there people, to agree on anything... you are dreaming, my friend.

[BoogyMan]

Both the Conservatives and Liberals fall into the traps set by their respective parties. We sometimes forget that in the end we're all Americans. Seems like we argue and argue about Bush vs. Clinton or one liar vs. another, but what do we agree on?

Can we all agree that we need some type of Health Care plan where everyone from children to the elderly get Health Care?

Can we agree that while illegal immigrants, mostly, come here to better their lives, we need to cut the flow.To stop this flow we MUST PUNISH the businesses that hire them. Thus eliminating SOME of the jobs?

Can we agree that we all want terrorists stopped, but that we should use ALL methods (Military, Economic, Diplomatic, etc.) to stop them?

Just wanted to see if we could come together on some stuff...


What a refreshing topic Deadshot! :D

I would agree that some immigrants come here to better their lives, but the way to do so is legally, any other entrance to the country is an immediate red flag that things are not as they should be.

I agree whole heartedly with your terrorism commentary as well.

Plus, there is always Dr. Who!

[Deadshot]

I might be, but it's the American dream...

[Truth_and_Power]

Can we agree that we need EITHER:
1. Change the laws aka domestic worker program
2. Enforce the laws as they exist today

?

In other words, we can agree that CHANGE is preferable to what we have now. I mean I know personally If you make #3 - Status Quo, I would prefer either 1 or 2 over that.

[exigent]

Kudos for this thread, Deadshot.

If anything we can agree on the safety and security of our families and friends and our love for our country. Its the specifics that get tangled.

I can agree that military action is necessary to fight terrorists, as wells as other means mentioned by op. I also think that we've bitten off more than we can chew.

I can agree that our health care is an embarassment. Maybe socialized health care isnt the answer, how about much much more affordable health care?

All politicians are weasels.

[BoogyMan]

All politicians are weasels.


I can certainly agree with you on that point Exigent!

[exigent]

Can we agree that we need EITHER:
1. Change the laws aka domestic worker program
2. Enforce the laws as they exist today

?

In other words, we can agree that CHANGE is preferable to what we have now. I mean I know personally If you make #3 - Status Quo, I would prefer either 1 or 2 over that.


History has shown that when the status quo is questioned, there often follows much opposition...

[Truth_and_Power]

Can we agree that we need EITHER:
1. Change the laws aka domestic worker program
2. Enforce the laws as they exist today

?

In other words, we can agree that CHANGE is preferable to what we have now. I mean I know personally If you make #3 - Status Quo, I would prefer either 1 or 2 over that.


History has shown that when the status quo is questioned, there often follows much opposition...


Well I guess we'll have to wait and see if anyone likes what we have now? Prehaps the disagreement is over HOW to change, and to WHAT, as opposed to whether change is needed. If we all agree that change is better than stasis, that's the beginning of a compromise.

[ttriber]

What a refreshing topic Deadshot! :D

I would agree that some immigrants come here to better their lives, but the way to do so is legally, any other entrance to the country is an immediate red flag that things are not as they should be.
Plus, there is always Dr. Who!

Illegal Immigrants are breaking the law by just being inside the USA while not being a legal citizen of the US. I came to the USA in search of Freedom from the Dictator 90 miles south of Florida but I did it legally. So why should these illegals come in here without any documentation and deserve to get jobs or deserve to live here when they can't even provide the right documentation.

This is the way I see it

Democrats- They want the illegals to come and get documentation since the majority of hispanics vote Democrat because of the welfare programs and the govt. freebies the democrats insist on. Excluding me of course I am proud to be in the minority here in Miami that vote republican after the whole Bay of Pigs Debacle.

Republicans- Mostly fed up with the issue and want most of them deported . The problem is who is going to deport millions of people out of the USA? When their are some buisnesses thriving with them since they don't have to deal with minimum wage or Union's that are also really screwing up our middle class.

That is the way I see it and it will be an on-going debate untill both parties can reach a point where each is satisfied.

As to your other Question What can we agree on? We can agree to disagree maybe we have one thing in common and it is that. Hehe

[exigent]

Republicans- Mostly fed up with the issue and want most of them deported . The problem is who is going to deport millions of people out of the USA? When their are some buisnesses thriving with them since they don't have to deal with minimum wage or Union's that are also really screwing up our middle class.


WAY off topic.

BTW How did Bush's immigration reform bill go that would legalize 12 million immigrants?[hr]

That is the way I see it and it will be an on-going debate untill both parties can reach a point where each is satisfied.



Absolutely no help to the thread.

[AnnEsthesia]

Yea exigent, but the murmur now is that Bush is not a republican... he is really a democrat. lol

[exigent]

Yea exigent, but the murmur now is that Bush is not a republican... he is really a democrat. lol


He is the worst of both worlds. Judging by his actions and policies of the past 6 years I dont really know how to classify him, except with words that will just get bleeped out here...

But for all intents and purposes, he is Republican. His immigration bill negates all

[AnnEsthesia]

I know, but I was told on another forum that he is not a republican, he is more of a liberal, so the repubicans are not responsible or to blame for him.

[exigent]

so the repubicans are not responsible or to blame for him.


lol, oh yeah. They take credit for his glorified victories...killing some middle management terrorist during a trillion dollar war, but not for his losses. Typical and I'm absolutely not surprised.

[Deadshot]

Yea exigent, but the murmur now is that Bush is not a republican... he is really a democrat. lol


May you be damned to a beating by Karl Rove for even mentioning that Bush is a democrat...:lmao:

[AnnEsthesia]

Karl Rove could not beat my score at dice, let alone my rear end. ;)

[PatrickHenry]

I will call for agreement on human rights and for liberty.

But don't ask me to love America. I don't.

I love God, I love people, and I love liberty.

[flaja]

Can we all agree that we need some type of Health Care plan where everyone from children to the elderly get Health Care?

Maybe, but surely you don’t expect us all to agree on how to achieve this?

Can we agree that while illegal immigrants, mostly, come here to better their lives, we need to cut the flow.To stop this flow we MUST PUNISH the businesses that hire them. Thus eliminating SOME of the jobs?

Can we all agree that it is not America’s responsibility to better the lives of people that willfully violate our laws?

Can we agree that we all want terrorists stopped, but that we should use ALL methods (Military, Economic, Diplomatic, etc.) to stop them?

No because not all of your methods work. Terrorists are not terrorists because they lack political freedom or economic opportunity as the likes of GWB say- many Americans living in inner cities also lack political freedom (because of the 2 party strangle hold on political office) and economic opportunity. Terrorists are terrorists because they are belligerent, evil people who have no respect for human life, the rule of law or religious freedom.

[AnnEsthesia]

Terrorists are not evil when they are born. They are indoctrinated and brainwashed. Really, have you ever met a baby that was trying to slash your throat? I haven't.

[flaja]

Terrorists are not evil when they are born. They are indoctrinated and brainwashed. Really, have you ever met a baby that was trying to slash your throat? I haven't.


Genesis 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

Humans must learn how to be good. Evil is inherent in them.

[AnnEsthesia]

Sorry, the bible is not proof. People are not evil at birth.

[BoogyMan]

Terrorists are not evil when they are born. They are indoctrinated and brainwashed. Really, have you ever met a baby that was trying to slash your throat? I haven't.


Genesis 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

Humans must learn how to be good. Evil is inherent in them.


I have to take issue with this assertion Flaja. Saying a person's heart is evil from his youth is not the same as evil from birth nor is it the same as inherent evil.

Consider Genesis 1:31 after God had made man.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

[flaja]

Terrorists are not evil when they are born. They are indoctrinated and brainwashed. Really, have you ever met a baby that was trying to slash your throat? I haven't.


Genesis 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

Humans must learn how to be good. Evil is inherent in them.


I have to take issue with this assertion Flaja. Saying a person's heart is evil from his youth is not the same as evil from birth nor is it the same as inherent evil.

Consider Genesis 1:31 after God had made man.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.


Why don’t you ask Satan what happened on the 8th day?

[AnnEsthesia]

Well, considering that Christians cannot decide on one coherent interpretation of the bible, using it as proof of anything is just silly.

[NortheastCynic]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC

[BoogyMan]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC


Excellent question NC, and one that cuts to the heart of the argument that Flaja is making. God said that what he made was good, which doesn't prevent man from being deceived by evil.

[flaja]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC


Because man followed Satan's lead and willfully chose to rebel againt God.

[NortheastCynic]

Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

Don't peg me for an optimist.

I don't think people are evil, just stupid and self-important [not selfish, self-important], but overal, I believe they mean well.

-NC

[BoogyMan]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC


Because man followed Satan's lead and willfully chose to rebel againt God.


Yet God called man good, indicating that man is good and by his own bad choices makes mistakes. Such a simple point clearly illustrates that God made man good. The idea of total hereditary depravity is an egregious falsehood that cannot stand in light of the truth.

I would love to continue this discussion with you in th religion forum Flaja. Start a thread if you are interested so that we do not further derail this thread.

[lily]

Because man followed Satan's lead and willfully chose to rebel againt God.


Correct me if I'm wrong here, Flaja......but are you referring to original sin? That's what I'm getting from your posts, that all infants are born evil, which would make your original statement true. If not baptized they will go to Hell.

[ViolaLee]

What can we agree on?

ChessWarsNow and I just agreed that the US should not sell arms to Saudi Arabia.

[flaja]

Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

When Adam and Eve willfully chose to disobey God they brought the curse of sin onto the human race. Thus every human is by nature evil from birth.

[stannis]

Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

When Adam and Eve willfully chose to disobey God they brought the curse of sin onto the human race. Thus every human is by nature evil from birth.


Every human shares in the original sin, but does that necessarily make them 'evil'? Most people live in a way that's neither very good or bad.

[flaja]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC


Because man followed Satan's lead and willfully chose to rebel againt God.


Yet God called man good, indicating that man is good and by his own bad choices makes mistakes. Such a simple point clearly illustrates that God made man good. The idea of total hereditary depravity is an egregious falsehood that cannot stand in light of the truth.

If the fact that God made man good guarantees that man is not evil because of Adam's fall- if man isn't totally depraved because of heredity, why was it necessary for God’s own Son to be sacrificed to atone for man’s sin?

[Deadshot]

Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

When Adam and Eve willfully chose to disobey God they brought the curse of sin onto the human race. Thus every human is by nature evil from birth.


Do you honestly believe in the literal interpretation of the Adam and Eve?

[BoogyMan]

Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

When Adam and Eve willfully chose to disobey God they brought the curse of sin onto the human race. Thus every human is by nature evil from birth.


Not so. Your assertion here would make Christ, who lived a sinless life, a sinner from birth.

Total hereditary depravity is not supportable by scripture and nothing more than a doctrine of men.

[flaja]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, Flaja......but are you referring to original sin? That's what I'm getting from your posts, that all infants are born evil, which would make your original statement true. If not baptized they will go to Hell.


The concept of inherited sin has little support in the Bible and most doctrine pertaining to inherited sin is likely mankind’s invention. A just God cannot convict a newborn child of sin when that child has had no conscious opportunity to sin. But the inevitability of that child’s death and the fact that death is punishment for sin cannot be avoided or dismissed. An infant’s death may be a general punishment for the human race rather than anything the infant had done personally.

Every human has inherited the penalty for sin that fell on Adam and Eve, but the reasons why have likely not been fully revealed to man and remain an inexplicable mystery of God.

Every human, when given the opportunity to act on his own free will, will sin and has sinned. Every human has a sinful nature from birth and will retain that sinful nature as long as he has not been redeemed by Christ.

Physical death and spiritual death are the penalties for sin.

Humans are the only living things on earth that are capable of sinning because they are the only living things with the conscious will that allows them to follow God or follow Satan. But, every living thing on earth is subject to physical death. Animal sacrifices provide no atonement for sin because animals have no conscious ability to sin and therefore cannot be guilty of sin and thus cannot be worthy of death, but they do have symbolic value in that they emphasize the seriousness of sin and its penalties.


Baptism as a physical act, like all other physical acts, cannot gain anyone entry into Heaven. We are saved by faith, not works. Faith in Christ is our guarantor of salvation; baptism is unnecessary.[hr]
Do you honestly believe in the literal interpretation of the Adam and Eve?


Why should I not?

If I don’t accept the existence of Adam and Eve, why should I accept anything else in the Bible?[hr]


Meaning that we aren't inherently evil...We simply can choose an evil path.

When Adam and Eve willfully chose to disobey God they brought the curse of sin onto the human race. Thus every human is by nature evil from birth.


Not so. Your assertion here would make Christ, who lived a sinless life, a sinner from birth.

Total hereditary depravity is not supportable by scripture and nothing more than a doctrine of men.


As a man Christ has human nature and thus has the capacity to sin, but as God Christ has a perfect Divine nature and thus committed no sin.[hr]Why is this board compiling my posts all of a sudden?

[Truth_and_Power]

Can we all agree that it is not America’s responsibility to better the lives of people that willfully violate our laws?

Nope, I speed all the time and regularly break several other laws, but the goverment is still 1/300,000,000th mine and has a responsibility to look out for my interests.[hr]

Question.

If God made man in his image, how can they be inherently evil?

-NC


Because man followed Satan's lead and willfully chose to rebel againt God.


This is a dumb argument because it has raged for 100's of years. Google: Hobbes and Locke
At any rate, I think it's clear that religion is one thing we will NOT agree on so this is as off-topic as it gets. Please don't ruin a really great thread with religious bickering.

Actually it would be nice if a mod could split off the last 3 pages of off-topic.

[Marley]

1. Can we all agree that we need some type of Health Care plan where everyone from children to the elderly get Health Care?

No. "Health Care" is a service like any other service.

2. Can we agree that while illegal immigrants, mostly, come here to better their lives, we need to cut the flow.To stop this flow we MUST PUNISH the businesses that hire them. Thus eliminating SOME of the jobs?

No. Businesses are in the business of business, not law enforcement. Business pays for law enforcement already via taxes. Government must enforce the law. Businesses report the existence of illegal immigrants via payroll tax compliance. They already make government aware the law has been broken.

3. Can we agree that we all want terrorists stopped, but that we should use ALL methods (Military, Economic, Diplomatic, etc.) to stop them?

IF you mean Islamic jihadists waging war with the USA and the west, finally, yes.

[Deadshot]

1. Can we all agree that we need some type of Health Care plan where everyone from children to the elderly get Health Care?

No. "Health Care" is a service like any other service.

Technically your wrong, otherwise there would be no Medicare or Medicaid. We, as a nation, have already decided to help the helpless, we just need to help more of them.



2. Can we agree that while illegal immigrants, mostly, come here to better their lives, we need to cut the flow.To stop this flow we MUST PUNISH the businesses that hire them. Thus eliminating SOME of the jobs?

No. Businesses are in the business of business, not law enforcement. Business pays for law enforcement already via taxes. Government must enforce the law. Businesses report the existence of illegal immigrants via payroll tax compliance. They already make government aware the law has been broken.

But when Businesses don't report them and try to cheat the system we need the Government to act, they are not doing so, hence my point.

3. Can we agree that we all want terrorists stopped, but that we should use ALL methods (Military, Economic, Diplomatic, etc.) to stop them?

IF you mean Islamic jihadists waging war with the USA and the west, finally, yes.


So Economic and Diplomatic avenues are just as good as the Military ones, thanx for the agreement.

[Marley]

Neither Medicare or Medicaid provide any "care" at all. Both are financial programs, not service providers.

Sorry.

When businesses don't accurately or completely report their payroll they're breaking the law. Nothing to do with immigration or their employee's immigration status.

There is zero need for new laws or more burdens on non-government entities. Government needs to meet its duty of the social contract it agreed to when it taxes us in the first place.

Which means of defense depends on the situation. I do agree we should use all resources available, I said abosutely nothing about which, if any, is good, worse, or equal in effect.

[Deadshot]

Neither Medicare or Medicaid provide any "care" at all. Both are financial programs, not service providers.

Sorry.


I don't think anyone wants the Government to actually employ the medical profession, they want them to PAY for it!

When businesses don't accurately or completely report their payroll they're breaking the law. Nothing to do with immigration or their employee's immigration status.

EXACTLY, so why isn't the Government going after them?

There is zero need for new laws or more burdens on non-government entities. Government needs to meet its duty of the social contract it agreed to when it taxes us in the first place.


Then you disagree with not only the new Bush tax cuts, since that's altering the original bargain, but also the Clinton child tax credit, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a host of other "new laws" that have been passed concerning taxes over the last 200 years of this country's existence, right?:madlaugh:

[Marley]

So you agree, government is not the one to rely on for health CARE.

Most businesses report their wages paid to illegal immigrants. The government determines this fact cross referencing the SSA data base and notifies the employer. It's government's job to enforce it's laws, like any and all other laws, not some business.

I have no problem with the latest income tax cuts, the "original bargain" needed a constitutional amendment to even be legitimate -- 94 years ago, not "200" Read the constitution sometime, pay attention to Amendment 16 -- and established tax rates of "1% on taxable net income above $3,000 ($4,000 for married couples), less deductions and exemptions. It rose to a rate of 7% on incomes above $500,000." So, you should now understand that your agrument is totally upside down on its head, Bush's tax cuts are returning closer to the "original bargain."

[Truth_and_Power]

So you agree, government is not the one to rely on for health CARE.

Most businesses report their wages paid to illegal immigrants. The government determines this fact cross referencing the SSA data base and notifies the employer. It's government's job to enforce it's laws, like any and all other laws, not some business.

I have no problem with the latest income tax cuts, the "original bargain" needed a constitutional amendment to even be legitimate -- 94 years ago, not "200" Read the constitution sometime, pay attention to Amendment 16 -- and established tax rates of "1% on taxable net income above $3,000 ($4,000 for married couples), less deductions and exemptions. It rose to a rate of 7% on incomes above $500,000." So, you should now understand that your agrument is totally upside down on its head, Bush's tax cuts are returning closer to the "original bargain."


I'm pretty sure those aren't things people will agree on. We're searching for things with near-unanimous agreement. Even the smartest of fish are aware that bush's tax cuts are not an area of near-unanimous agreement.

[Marley]

IT has nothing to do with smart or dumb.

It has to do with ignorance or knowledge.

Individual income tax was unconstitutional until the constitution was amended in 1913.

And the tax rates of the "original bargain" were 1% to 7%. Bush's proposal leaves rates much higher than that, we agree?

[Truth_and_Power]

IT has nothing to do with smart or dumb.

It has to do with ignorance or knowledge.

Individual income tax was unconstitutional until the constitution was amended in 1913.

And the tax rates of the "original bargain" were 1% to 7%. Bush's proposal leaves rates much higher than that, we agree?


READ THE FRIGGING TOPIC.[hr]Can we agree that the money in politics corrupts it?

[flaja]

IT has nothing to do with smart or dumb.

It has to do with ignorance or knowledge.

Individual income tax was unconstitutional until the constitution was amended in 1913.

And the tax rates of the "original bargain" were 1% to 7%. Bush's proposal leaves rates much higher than that, we agree?


Surely you are not saying that the income tax rates were written into the 16th Amendment? Giving Congress the power to set these rates by federal law was part of the 16th Amendment agreement.

Most Americans didn’t pay any income tax even after the 16th Amendment until World War II. Before then, if you weren’t someone like a lawyer or doctor you didn’t pay any federal income tax because your income didn’t reach the $5000 a year income tax threshold. The tax rates were raised on low incomes and withholding taxes were implemented during WWII because the government needed large amounts of cash fast.

[Deadshot]

Surely you are not saying that the income tax rates were written into the 16th Amendment? Giving Congress the power to set these rates by federal law was part of the 16th Amendment agreement.

Most Americans didn’t pay any income tax even after the 16th Amendment until World War II. Before then, if you weren’t someone like a lawyer or doctor you didn’t pay any federal income tax because your income didn’t reach the $5000 a year income tax threshold. The tax rates were raised on low incomes and withholding taxes were implemented during WWII because the government needed large amounts of cash fast.


Thanks for the history, can we agree that, more then likely, we'll NEVER get rid of income tax? Can we also agree that many of our taxes go to good things like schools, helping elderly and poor, national defense, science, FDA, CDC, CIA, FBI and a number of fine things?

[flaja]

Surely you are not saying that the income tax rates were written into the 16th Amendment? Giving Congress the power to set these rates by federal law was part of the 16th Amendment agreement.

Most Americans didn’t pay any income tax even after the 16th Amendment until World War II. Before then, if you weren’t someone like a lawyer or doctor you didn’t pay any federal income tax because your income didn’t reach the $5000 a year income tax threshold. The tax rates were raised on low incomes and withholding taxes were implemented during WWII because the government needed large amounts of cash fast.


Thanks for the history, can we agree that, more then likely, we'll NEVER get rid of income tax? Can we also agree that many of our taxes go to good things like schools, helping elderly and poor, national defense, science, FDA, CDC, CIA, FBI and a number of fine things?


If you exclude the libertarians from the conservative ranks, liberals and conservatives do likely agree that the things you mention are needed, but it is just as likely that we don’t agree on the extent to which these things are needed so we don’t likely agree on what our national priorities should be or how we should divide our resources to meet these priorities.

Furthermore, when you let special interest groups get involved, all bets are off. Your average liberal and I may agree that a national public school system is needed, but we likely don’t agree on the reason why and we certainly wouldn’t agree that organizations like the NEA should have as much input as they have.