Political ramblings straight from the heartland
Virtually none of these arguments mean anything! They are all oversimplifications and generalizations of different positions. Many of the things that Ken thinks that should be allowed are unconstitutional.How can you compare pornography on TV or the internet to Nativity scenes in a public park? They aren't even remotely comparable! TV and internet are not public property. Also, the government cannot specifically promote a religion (here is the text: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"). Some people say a Nativity on public parks does promote a particular religion (I do, and so have many or most judges). In many cases Nativity scenes can be displayed if they allow other religions or positions to display in a park as well (no preference). However, this has lead to many arguments and lawsuits (from all sides) so it's easier to let have no displays (and cheaper on taxpayers).Ken also claims you can say homosexuality is okay, but not mention god in a classroom. A student can pray in class, but a teacher cannot lead them. Yep! In a public school, they cannot promote one religion over another.I can understand people being pro-life; it is a different issue than the death penalty, however. The reason many people are against the death penalty is that they do not like the government putting people to death (with abortion, it is not government doing the same). Many studies it is shown to be applied unequally, and it is likely many innocent people have been executed. People do not want the decision in the government's hands. I find it funny that so many people want a smaller government, but they are okay with the same inept government having the say of life or death over its citizens.Gah, there are so many things that are wrong with these positions. I could go on for a while, but it's pointless. Many have a grain of truth, but then Ken stretches them too far and oversimplifies everything. Do some people get paid for not working and steal from taxpayers? Yep! It's not fair. They should be investigated and have their funding taken. But not everyone on welfare does that, and it's not likely a high percentage. Can both black and white people be racist? Yep! However, Ken makes it seem like social problems and crime are all the worst problems in the US, when we have a failing economy and people out of work.How can Ken have such a huge persecution complex? It's not not so bad. The US is still the greatest country in the world. So vote! Make your voice heard. However, get the facts right and don't make claims you can't back up.If you want, I could write a letter doing the same thing with an opposite spin. However it really would serve no purpose. This letter is just complaining, it provides so answers.
You yourself do not make any sense whatsoever.
I only see one problem with mine, a typo in the last sentence. It should read "no" instead of "so." As for content, I do not see any problems. I provide support and arguments for both sides, and I point out where Ken does not make sense. If you can show me where I am wrong, I would gladly discuss it. I took the time to write out a thoughtful answer.I will state again, that letter is only complaints. It does not provide evidence or answers. It is just pretty much baseless assertions. Sure, Ken can have an opinion and he can state it to whoever he wants. That is his right. However, even if he uses that right it does not mean he can't be called out where he is wrong.Also, apparently me saying "The US is still the greatest country in the world" does not make any sense whatsoever to you. I thought you would have agreed according to this blog, despite the current leadership. Something tells me you didn't even fully read my response.
"Virtually none of these arguments mean anything!" Remember THAT one?
Yep, and in my reply I stated that all of his complaints are generalizations and sweeping statements about individual issues (though some of which cause his assertions carry water). He doesn't have any answers. This article is just complaints on how Ken sees the world, and in many cases it's not based on reality.Also, I still don't see how his arguments do anything to advance the discussion. They still do not mean anything! I support that fact, and I discussed it at length earlier.
If his arguments do nothing to advance the discussion then why have you made such a BIG deal about them? Obviously he's made some valid points that you can't seem to wrap your boxers around. That's not my problem.
Thanks for the comment