The Constitution Party is not Constitutional.

[Theocrat]

You Know Not What You Say

Hehe. Glad to be of service. It was a lot of fun to take his link that was supposed to make me "lose the argument" and get even more information that supported mine.

Dude, all of the quotes you posted I agreed with. Did you not hear me when I said I support a separation of Church and State? You lost the argument a long time ago, anyway. You still have not given any proof contrary to what I've already shown you, namely, that America was founded on the Christian faith because the Founders were faithful Christians.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Dude, all of the quotes you posted I agreed with. Did you not hear me when I said I support a separation of Church and State? You lost the argument a long time ago, anyway. You still have not given any proof contrary to what I've already shown you, namely, that America was founded on the Christian faith because the Founders were faithful Christians.

I have lost this argument only in your mind. Several people have come forward in this thread glad that you have finally been put in your place on this subject.

Now, please keep your religion out of our government. Ok?

 

[Brassmouth]

These Chuck Baldwin posts are pretty awful. Especially any post talking specifically about the platform of the party rather than the person. Its like calling Ron Paul a warmonger because he is a Republican.

Ron Paul supporters by and large are open-minded and liberty lovers as long as everyone else agrees with their views.

Such hypocrites here.

You ever heard Ron Paul endorse the current GOP platform? Or say he joined the GOP because of the current platform? Didn't think so.

Baldwin = CP platform = bullshit

Their platform is libertarian. Libertarianism is minarchism, no?

Essentially, yes.



Thank you, OP, for posting this information. It reaffirms my belief that Baldwin is a detriment to our cause.

 

[RPTXState]

While you guys bicker over how lesser a lesser evil is, i'll be out blockwalking for a close JP race.

 

[Hamer]

You ever heard Ron Paul endorse the current GOP platform? Or say he joined the GOP because of the current platform? Didn't think so.

Baldwin = CP platform = bullshit


Actually yes Ron Paul has. Have you not heard him say that the republican party has lost it's way and they need to get back to their platform? have you heard him say he would like to get back to the platform GWB ran on in 2000?

Brassmouth = bigger bullshit

 

[literatim]

Now, please keep your religion out of our government. Ok?

Keep your atheism out of mine.

 

[RonPaulMania]

I have lost this argument only in your mind. Several people have come forward in this thread glad that you have finally been put in your place on this subject.

Now, please keep your religion out of our government. Ok?

You lost the argument because you haven't formed one in contradiction to the stated premise to prove it incompatible. You are arguing something you suppose in contradistinction, but not a contradiction to what you think you are arguing.

A class in minor logic would have made that clear, but people can't argue rationally because they haven't taken the time to learn basic rules of logic.

Just because people have confirmed victory doesn't mean it is so. Opinions are worthless. If you want to prove or disprove the premise show why it is in contradiction, not show your contradistinctions as if they disprove anything. You are basically arguing against something not argued.

Religion is part of government. OK? Do you understand the etymology of religere and the social conditions behind it? All societies are based on religious grounds as a religion is a stated view of how things are best done in society. The difference of how that religion is based is your intellectual world-view and philosophy. The majority of non-Christian arguments are based on a politic based on secularism, which is a religion as it has definite statements on what and how is best for the public.

 

[RonPaulMania]

If that is honestly how Ron Paul feels, which I doubt, then I would revoke my endorsement of Ron Paul as well.

Yes, that is his position, I quoted his article he wrote for Lew Rockwell which is conveniently located at the bottom of my signature.

I hope you do withdraw your endorsement for Paul. People like you are part of the reason why libertarianism as a whole will go nowhere. You attempt, very poorly, to dismantle Christian arguments on society based on secularist attempts to destroy the nation. People like myself see you as a threat to the good of the state, and you see me the same.

The difference being you fight against good, and I don't, and people who vote according to moral principles see the hypocrisy in your position and don't want to be affiliated with such people who attack anyone who disagrees with you.

This board has permeated anti-Christian beliefs with secularists, pagans, and anarchists. I hate to be the one to bear the bad news, but this country will never be on that foothold of embracing that without simultaneously self-destructing in the course it's already heading.

 

[Bradley in DC]

Neil,

I'm not very familiar with Baldwin, but I have read their platform (which is nothing like Dr. Paul's agenda on lots of issues of individual liberty and economics).

Does Baldwin support the CP platform's dirigiste trade policies? (central planning of the economy through tariff policies, etc.) It's their economics that are so scary.

Does he support their attacks on individual liberties? (Dr. Paul is trying to repeal the online gambling ban, etc., the CP wants to outlaw gambling--ok, doing this from memory from a long time ago, not so sure about these questions)

I think, but am not sure, that the CP platform want to eliminate ALL immigration into the country, legal and illegal. Does Baldwin agree with that? Dr. Paul at Google was very clear that if a company wants to hire someone, and that someone wants to work for that company, then the government has no right to interfere. When he ran for prez in 1988, he campaigned on eliminating the Border Patrol.

Thanks

 

[SimpleName]

Is it better than the Republicrat party? Yes, ok, so get the f out of my way, I am voting for something better than what we have....

Better of two evils is still picking evil. Lets not forget this. It is the huge point we try to get across to others all the time. We try to tell them they have alternatives if they get involved and fight for their beliefs to be represented. Your statement contradicts one of our main gripes about the "casual" voters and in fact, endorses their ignorance.

 

[Brassmouth]

You ever heard Ron Paul endorse the current GOP platform? Or say he joined the GOP because of the current platform? Didn't think so.

Baldwin = CP platform = bullshit


Actually yes Ron Paul has. Have you not heard him say that the republican party has lost it's way and they need to get back to their platform? have you heard him say he would like to get back to the platform GWB ran on in 2000?

Brassmouth = bigger bullshit

What part of the word "current" do you not understand? Are you suggesting Dr. Paul agrees with today's policies of the GOP? He said he agreed with the foreign policy Bush ran on in 2000. Think before you spew idiotic statements.

And learn how to use HTML.

 

[Brassmouth]

Now, please keep your religion out of our government. Ok?

Keep your atheism out of mine.

A constitutional government should do both. Secularism (AKA complete separation of church and state) is key.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Keep your atheism out of mine.

I am not an atheist. And you have the right to practice your religion. You DO NOT have the right to pursue legislation to respect the establishment of YOUR religion.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

You lost the argument because you haven't formed one in contradiction to the stated premise to prove it incompatible. You are arguing something you suppose in contradistinction, but not a contradiction to what you think you are arguing.

A class in minor logic would have made that clear, but people can't argue rationally because they haven't taken the time to learn basic rules of logic.

Just because people have confirmed victory doesn't mean it is so. Opinions are worthless. If you want to prove or disprove the premise show why it is in contradiction, not show your contradistinctions as if they disprove anything. You are basically arguing against something not argued.

Religion is part of government. OK? Do you understand the etymology of religere and the social conditions behind it? All societies are based on religious grounds as a religion is a stated view of how things are best done in society. The difference of how that religion is based is your intellectual world-view and philosophy. The majority of non-Christian arguments are based on a politic based on secularism, which is a religion as it has definite statements on what and how is best for the public.

You are wrong. Entirely. Almost beyond words.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Yes, that is his position, I quoted his article he wrote for Lew Rockwell which is conveniently located at the bottom of my signature.

I hope you do withdraw your endorsement for Paul. People like you are part of the reason why libertarianism as a whole will go nowhere. You attempt, very poorly, to dismantle Christian arguments on society based on secularist attempts to destroy the nation. People like myself see you as a threat to the good of the state, and you see me the same.

The difference being you fight against good, and I don't, and people who vote according to moral principles see the hypocrisy in your position and don't want to be affiliated with such people who attack anyone who disagrees with you.

This board has permeated anti-Christian beliefs with secularists, pagans, and anarchists. I hate to be the one to bear the bad news, but this country will never be on that foothold of embracing that without simultaneously self-destructing in the course it's already heading.

Good vs evil eh?

Wow. So, when do you want to see legislation to make "Witchcraft" and "Heresy" punishable by death again?

 

[marm1890]

O.K., I just don't get this kind of thinking. There are SO many things going on in our country, and all you have against Chuck Baldwin is his religious beliefs????WTF!! I am not a religious person at all, more of an agnostic, but this DOES NOT CONCERN ME! I am more concerned about this state of perpetual war we are engaged in, the Patriot Act, the BAILOUTS, the Federal Reserve, The I.R.S., the illegal immigration, the police state, chemtrails, big pharma, the endless supply of foreign aid, invasion of our privacy, and MORE!!! If Chuck Baldwin were the President and made it a law that I had to go to the freaking church every day, I would freaking like that better than all the abuses that have been heaped on me via the Republican and Democrat masters!! Geez, lets get our priorities straight here!

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Neil,

I'm not very familiar with Baldwin, but I have read their platform (which is nothing like Dr. Paul's agenda on lots of issues of individual liberty and economics).

Does Baldwin support the CP platform's dirigiste trade policies? (central planning of the economy through tariff policies, etc.) It's their economics that are so scary.

Does he support their attacks on individual liberties? (Dr. Paul is trying to repeal the online gambling ban, etc., the CP wants to outlaw gambling--ok, doing this from memory from a long time ago, not so sure about these questions)

I think, but am not sure, that the CP platform want to eliminate ALL immigration into the country, legal and illegal. Does Baldwin agree with that? Dr. Paul at Google was very clear that if a company wants to hire someone, and that someone wants to work for that company, then the government has no right to interfere. When he ran for prez in 1988, he campaigned on eliminating the Border Patrol.

Thanks

Last night on RevolutionBroadcasting.com, both Baldwin and his VP stated that they support the Constitution Party platform, and that they had no problem with any of it.

Mr. Baldwin also said he joined the party because of it's platform.

It's platform has some very scary stuff in it.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

Yes, that is his position, I quoted his article he wrote for Lew Rockwell which is conveniently located at the bottom of my signature.

I hope you do withdraw your endorsement for Paul. People like you are part of the reason why libertarianism as a whole will go nowhere. You attempt, very poorly, to dismantle Christian arguments on society based on secularist attempts to destroy the nation. People like myself see you as a threat to the good of the state, and you see me the same.

The difference being you fight against good, and I don't, and people who vote according to moral principles see the hypocrisy in your position and don't want to be affiliated with such people who attack anyone who disagrees with you.

This board has permeated anti-Christian beliefs with secularists, pagans, and anarchists. I hate to be the one to bear the bad news, but this country will never be on that foothold of embracing that without simultaneously self-destructing in the course it's already heading.

Oh, another thing on this. Religious persecution is EVIL of the highest regard. And when Christianity had dominion over the government here in this country, there was plenty of it.

 

[Neil Kiernan Stephenson]

O.K., I just don't get this kind of thinking. There are SO many things going on in our country, and all you have against Chuck Baldwin is his religious beliefs????WTF!! I am not a religious person at all, more of an agnostic, but this DOES NOT CONCERN ME! I am more concerned about this state of perpetual war we are engaged in, the Patriot Act, the BAILOUTS, the Federal Reserve, The I.R.S., the illegal immigration, the police state, chemtrails, big pharma, the endless supply of foreign aid, invasion of our privacy, and MORE!!! If Chuck Baldwin were the President and made it a law that I had to go to the freaking church every day, I would freaking like that better than all the abuses that have been heaped on me via the Republican and Democrat masters!! Geez, lets get our priorities straight here!

His religious beliefs don't concern me.

His political beliefs that include him being allowed to legislate according to his religious beliefs, do.

Think very carefully about what your saying.

You don't mind if he makes it LAW that we all have to go to church every Sunday?

What if he starts making other religions illegal? Will that be ok as well as long as he gets rid of the Federal reserve?

So we are willing to give up our rights of free speech, and our freedom of religion, and the constitution's protections for us that protect us from religious tyranny, in exchange for a more stable economy?

 

[marm1890]

Oh, another thing on this. Religious persecution is EVIL of the highest regard. And when Christianity had dominion over the government here in this country, there was plenty of it.

When was this? And what did the government do, exactly?