Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread

Again, learn to read Faith.What Trump is being called on was his assertion that illegal aliens crossing the Mexican border constitute a risk to the US and cause violent crime.That is simply false on every single level.First, about half of the illegal aliens in the US are not Hispanic.Second, there is absolutely no evidence that illegal aliens commit violent crimes at a rate higher than citizens.Trump simply lies and his supporters are simply too ignorant to call his lies or are as racist as his position.

And what do you think about the same-sex marriage?

Hi Faith, I'm just jumping in here for a quick point ... Unjust laws only get changed when enough people protest them. Take the massive US incarceration rate that is an embarrassment for a nation that claims to be a light for freedom, justice and equality.Most of the young black inmates are there for two reasons: (1) structural racism (and the zombie paradigm of superpredators), and (2) for possession of marijuana and the "three-strike" legislation.We can argue about the merits of marijuana, but it is less dangerous than alcohol and it does have some valid medicinal uses. It should not be used as an excuse to lock people up when prescription drugs ARE addictive and cause other problems.Here's the question: if use of marijuana is legalized across the nation as it currently is in Colorado, what should be done with all those prisoners whose only crimes are marijuana possession 3 times? Should they continue to be imprisoned (at taxpayer expense)? Should they be released? Should they be released with a "sorry we made a mistake"? or should they be released with a full pardon (cleaned record) and even reparations for imprisonment?EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : subt

It would be nice to have some statistics about this, but I certainly don't trust your claim over Trump's. 1) But the ones coming over the southern border are, which is what he was addressing.2) Funny, I haven't seen anybody addressing his facts, just attacking him for his opinion on moral grounds, PC style. If you want to address the facts, do so, but if he has another set of facts, it would be right and Christian of you to respect his right to his point of view instead of attacking him as a person. 1) And you are in possession of that evidence and it is trustworthy?2) Illegal aliens are not citizens and not to be compared to citizens.3) A major aim of immigration laws is to keep out criminals, period, the rate of their criminality is irrelevant. And there we have it, full-blown Political Correctness which always resorts to calling someone you disagree with a racist or a liar. Oh and of course Trump is Svengali and his supporters are "ignorant." Gosh what a fine moral and intellectual standard you set for our public political discourse.THAT's the moral evil in this discussion. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Jar did address the facts when he cited crime statistics. You simply dismissed his address out of hand and indicated that nothing would ever convince you otherwise. So what's the point of anyone even presenting facts to you? How is anyone going to discuss anything with you if that is going to be the result?Do you suppose that this is how all Trump supporters behave?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Sorry if I missed it and perhaps it's worth repeating, or maybe not. I'm more concerned with the disgusting PC element of the discussion.But one person's set of statistics is never the last word anyway so why are you pretending it is?Perhaps you missed this in that post: In other words he probably has a different source of statistics and what makes yours righter?ABE: If you want to argue facts and totally leave out the personal attacks do so. Nobody is doing that, the whole tenor of the argument against Trump is personal and moral and not about facts at all.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Are you arguing that our immigration laws are immoral? I don't want to get off onto other legal issues.

I think it's a brand-new PC style "right" that has been forced down the throats of the majority of citizens who oppose it, against millennia of contrary opinion by the majority of cultures worldwide, and has become law without the consent of the people, with power to criminalize all those who disagree.Very PC. Perfect case of totalitarian tyranny.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Faith's responses and arguments have solidified a few I have had for a while. Many of the people on the religious right do not follow the people they do because they embody or articulate the religious view they hold. The support for Donald Trump completely destroys this idea. They follow the people they do because they feel it gives them some sort of moral cover for the hate they have. Donald Trump's followers expose the hypocrisy and hate of the religious right movement. They can make all the high moral claims they want , but the tortured reasoning they use just continues to expose them for haters and hypocrites.Faith is a prime example.Edited by Theodoric, : Typo

How does your head not explode?

Wow.1. "Marble-headed" is a pretty mild ad-hominem attack. For some, it's nearly a term of endearment. Heck, compared to the crap I sometimes get on this forum, I might even consider being called "marble-headed" a compliment.2. I didn't actually, specifically, call YOU "marble-headed." (I suspect guilty conscience is at work here.) I made two statements: 3. And lastly, . . . Really Theo? I'm showing evidence of MASS-MURDER, a MILLION innocent Iraqi civilian deaths, gross human right violations, sexual violence precipitated and supported by Hillary's actions. Amazingly, all these horrific crimes don't upset you the least, as you are more than happy to spend your time and money supporting Hillary. But what sets off your suddenly ultra-sensitive indignation is the term: "marble-headed."Really?4. Theo writes: This is exactly how forum participants will view your post. Instead of debating, you feigned an upset tummy, then ran away.I'm disappointed. Not a typical Theo post.

And the personal attacks continue, yet you wonder why you are not worth engaging.

Thanks RAZD. I knew about the message codes, but was too lazy to look them up. I did not know about the thread code. That would have been useful. Cool, thanks for learn'n me. That's not why we started our debate. You wrote that you would be HAPPY to have Hillary win the primary: That's a far difference to what you are currently writing.

That copout doesn't work in a democracy. In a democracy, YOU are the government, so Jesus was most definitely preaching to the government. You have a responsibility to cast your vote in a Christ-like manner.

Yes, but only where "PC" means something like introducing truth in the face of a xenophobic rant that flies in the face of the actual facts. You've indicated that as long as a single immigrant commits a crime, the its okay to lambast all of them. There is nothing PC about calling you on that.It turns out that it is also illegal not to discriminate against gays. Do I see you defending that state of affairs on pure legal grounds? Similarly, being illegal is not the last word on the issue of immigrants either. I did not claim that it was. I am disputing your claim that no one is addressing your claims with facts. Your response was not that you simply rejected jars attempt to supply facts, but that you rejected all future attempts to provide statistics.