colourwheel

There is much more to be gained by abusing an all-seeing information dragnet without oversight than there is to be gained by abusing a car or a gun? Do you know this for a fact? I hardly can see how this kind of statement can actaully be justified since there are beyond count gained by abuse of just guns alone...

Ok now I didn't ever intend to get into this discussion because regaurdless that this info has been leaked now I hardly see it as shocking news since this has been going on for over a decade. Ever since 2001 and the evolution of technologies I could already see an Orwellian future happening. If we start to worry about "potential for abuse" for anything you might as well start to be paraniod about people driving cars, acquiring firearms, holding your money in a bank, etc... Because there is a potential for abuse when you talk about almost anything. Do I think what they are doing is right? no! but if you start to worry about potential for abuse for anything you might as well leave the country and hide out in an isolated island away from technology, everyone, and everything.

Troaches I am not going to argue with you anymore on this you are obviously not going to see things the way I see things and couldn't hardly even begin to understand how things are for me as female immigrant who is bisexual. But you might want to ask yourself this though, how you would feel about the tea party if you were in my shoes? Just because something is an editorial you should just totally dismiss the entire thing and think of it as complete fiction? I think you are missing the point about these articles regaurdless if you think they are all editorials.

Just for Troaches a non editorial on tea party new.... :rolleyes: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2011/04/tea_party_extreme_social_agend.html Ironic they want to defund "Planned Parenthood" yet in some states controled by tea party advocates force women to have to undergo two unnecessary transvaginal probes to just take a pill. Just imagine if legislation was put on the table for men to have a tube stuck up their penis just to take viagra... Don't see that happening but maybe that will give men in power an idea about what they are forcing women to do in some states already now. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/06/12/2141521/scott-walker-abortion-clinics-ultrasound/ http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/01/scott-walker-recall-tea-party

Maybe people should wake up and judge for themselves at what the tea party has been doing recently and see who is actually in power who are tea party members... http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53013.html http://progressppl.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/the-tea-partys-social-agenda-detracts-from-its-economic-roots/ http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/news/2010/11/29/8601/return-of-the-culture-wars-tea-partys-social-and-religious-agenda-and-how-progressives-can-respond/ Don't take my word on how I view the tea party anyone can do as much research as they want and decide for themselves.

I wasn't suggesting only social conservatives belong to the Tea Party. Look carefully at what the tea party has actually acomplished when putting people into legislative political power. The Tea Party as a whole has only accomplished putting people into legislative power railing social legislation against abortion rights, gays and lesbians, equality in the work place, and immigration... Are these things really what the Tea party stand for? Also what exactly has tea party advocates accomplished in legislative power that does not lean to social agenda?

@Lord Garon You don't need to appologize to me. Cya too :smile: and sleep well. and thanks for being fan of my oblivion work again :thumbsup:

Sorry if it seems I am painting anyone as right-wing religious zealots, this was not my intent. But you have to ask yourself how do you implement political change? You put people into political office. The Tea Party might not be for social agendas but the people who are put into office by the tea party have very extreme social agendas in my opinion. If the Tea Party wants to stay true to their core beliefs their memebrs need to completely disassociate themselves from trying to elect officials with social legislation agendas completely. If not you have only the people who you advocate to put into power to blame why people might think of your party as being advocates that push for social legislation against abortion rights, gays and lesbians, equality in the work place, and immigration.

It's obvious from looking back at even the last half decade, people who will bann gay marriage, abolish abortion, tear down pay equity, and stop immigration in our country. If you ask me, it shouldn't even be an issue of who should have that power reguardless of religious or personal beliefs. It should be a non- issue all together for people to marry someone of the same sex, have the right to an abortion, be paid equally in the work place, and let immigration in america thrive... If the Tea Party wants to become a more popular movement they need to stop putting people in office who push for these types of social agendas, other wise the tea party will die in the long run when it seems to only be attracting a majority of old white males, regaurdless of it's original cause or purpose..

Tea Party groups may not put gay marriage issues on their platforms, but they are very clear about who should regulate the legalizing or banning of gay marriage.

If the Tea Party is a political movement and not a social movement, why is there so many people in legislative power who are tea party advocates that push for social legislation against abortion rights, gays and lesbians, equality in the work place, and immigration?

OMG! you got me Troaches... All of this stuff you listed is all "my" parties fault... ;D /sarcasm Just to let you know I've honestly been a registered republican my whole life. I mean come on seriously you put all this blame on one specific political party? Do you even remember before obama was even president most of this stuff you listed has been going on for years even before the democrates controlled the senate or congress and even the white house? Despite all this lets not totally derail the topic anymore... If you want to start your own debates about these issue you say are all "my" parties fault go ahead... would be interesting...

I would if there was actually something to debate about on behalf of the people who do claim to represent me.... Attention has successfully been diverted away from my own party? Did I ever state in this thread who my own party is? I think you are assuming too much about me personally. But giving you the benifit of the doubt, of assuming you know who represents me, what unethical and illegal practices are you talking about?

Please don't get me wrong here. I am not judging any individuals associated or targeting anyone on their political views. More or less a public awareness to let people know what "leaders" (if you can call them that) are preaching on behalf of an organization you might or might not be associated with. One might think Tea Party values can "save" this country, but when you look at the people in power associated with the tea party they advocate social legislation involving anti-gay and lesbian laws, abolishing abortion rights, and undermining sexual equality all based on religious/personal beliefs, not to mention also denigrating immigrants in america as well as trying to control womens bodies. If this wasn't the case I think I "might" be a member of the tea party too, MAYBE.... :teehee: Maybe I am wrong about this, me being bisexual woman who wasn't born in america yet has been an american citizen "almost" my whole life, feels like the tea party as a whole concidering the people who are in actual legislative power probably views someone like me as a 2nd class citizen. BTW: Thankyou for being a fan of my oblivion mods, Lord Garon :thumbsup:

The past few weeks, Glenn Beck has been the talking head for Tea Party activists preaching they must become the new leaders of civil rights movement. claiming they are being discriminated against, persecuted, and denied equal protection under the law by a biased and corrupt government. Beck seems to have this delusion they will eventually be the force that saves this nation some how. Glenn Beck went to Washington DC for the anti-IRS/anti-immigration Tea Party rally outside the Capitol. On his TV program last night, he delivered a speech to his audience that "this is a civil rights movement; you many not understand it now, but believe me, you will." As calling upon the Tea Party to "start moving as a civil rights movement," Beck announced that he is going to be working with Alveda King, the anti-gay, anti-abortion Religious Right activist niece of Martin Luther King, who will start teaching "classes that model exactly what her uncle Martin taught her to do." "We have to be willing to have the dogs be unleashed on us," Beck said because "after what I saw today on the way they're handling things at the Capitol, you're not very far from having the same kind of oppression coming our way". Now is it just me or does this seem completely ridiculous beyond belief? I mean what imaginary civil rights that have been taken away specifically calls to rally the Tea Party to become a civil rights movement? Does anyone else feel a huge amount of hypocrisy when trying to claim to be a civil rights movement when denigrating others civil rights for people such as gay and lesbian rights? It would be interesting to see what others think about this reguardless of taking a side on this subject....

One thing I wish to add to this topic. There is no evidence that links machines replacing manual labor jobs leads to laziness or obesity. There is evidence Obesity is cause primarily by poor nutrition, lack of exercise, and health literacy. Mostly all of these three things combined lead to a person becoming obese. Ussually the laziness in people commonly is caused from poor nutrition because they are not consuming the right things that give them enough energy to be actively physical for long periods of time. Where as leading to lack of exercise also contributes a lot to obesity as well from lack of energy. Nutrition and exercise go hand in hand. Adding to this, manual labor does not exactly sufficiently equate to physical exercising unless you are someone working in the hard labor field lifting heavy objects constantly. Even for the past few centuries man has created mechanical devices to lift and move heavy object beyond anything a single person can lift alone yet we still have people in these fields to operate or manage these machines. Humanity will never be completely out of work because machines are doing things people use to do manully and neither will it lead to laziness and/or obesity. I feel there is just not enough evidence to support these claims to even worry about it...

Just like anything like the washing machine example, man will build new jobs and industries around new inventions regardless of manual labor. The day where as machines are taking away all jobs completely will endup being a failed economical disaster. If no one is making money then what is the point of robots doing work when their is no exchange of money in the society anymore. Even if we endup having robtos doing everything there would have to be a system created where people will be able to make income. If you have machines creating products and no one is making any money then no one would even be able to buy the products the machines are making...

Despite automation of robots doing manual labor for humans, humans are already perishing from obesity in america. More than one-third of U.S. adult population suffer from obesity leading to heart disease, strokes, type 2 diabetes, and certain types of cancer, some of which are actually preventable of death. Medical costs associated with obesity were estimated at $147 billion a year in 2008. Taking this in concideration a majority who suffer from obesity are actually people with low income who can't afford the medical costs associated to their own conditions. Those who are obese and have offspring are highly likely to give birth to obese children leading to a never ending cycle of generations of obesity. Humanity is already facing the gut check of the future "literally" in america, when obesity has hardly declined in the last decade and seems every year obesity is just climbing in numbers... Leading cause of obesity is poor nutrition, lack of exercise, and health literacy. Not the automation of robots doing manual labor for humans.

Isn't a washing machine an example of technological automation replacing what was once a manual job and a source of employment? If you oppose the automation of jobs then you should be paying someone to hand wash your laundry in a tub. I can understand where one would be trying to get at where we have machines doing some things people use to do manually... but in replacement we have created improved customer service industry around tedious and redundent labor such as washing clothes manually. His example of the washing machine has only built a new and stronger industry around dry cleaners and laundromats as well as sales of the machines themselves and other laundry cleaning products. Even before there was the invention of the washing machine people would pay others to wash their clothing manually and use their facilities to take baths. I hardly see even if something new was created where as humans would no longer be needed to do manually would be any less of a threat as the invention of the washing machine. If anything the invention of washing machine has created more jobs and personal income to those in the industry than one can even realize.

The topic title "Should People Have to Work?" kinda leaves it ambiguous. Taking in concideration even if people don't "have" to work and there will be those who "need" to work, there will always be those who "want" too regaurdless of having or the need to.... There are people in this world who are wealthy beyond belief who will never ever "have" to work a day in their life even in preservation to keep their families well provided. Then have to ask yourself.. "why do they still work?" The answer is pretty simple if you ask me.... Humans by nature, we are born greedy and selfish creatures. It's human nature questing for power, glory, and wealth. It's human nature to procreate. Humans have the instinctive need to spread their genes even when there is no logical reason or need to.... Humans thrive on greed and selfishness as sad as it may seem. Everyone tries or wants to be the better person than the person next to them, whether they admit it or not...

Think we already live in a world where people don't "have" to work. The problem is some people "need" to work just to survive and make ends meet. One of the things I suspect is the reason behind this is social engineering. Even in grade school you start off with speration of classes such as jocks, nerd, geeks, punks, emos, etc... Even in College people tend to find a group they are comfortable with and tend to only relate to. No different after education either. You have heard the phrase used before when a friend finds someone who they think are attractive and then someone says.... "they are out of your league." Some what implying that the person who your friend is interested in would never have a chance or ideally a socially fit match to date that person. Just like we have economic classes from poor, to lower class, to middle class, to higher class, to the extremely wealthy..... Unless the world somehow eliminates greed, prejudism, racism, etc... we could never have a utopia where people wouldn't "have" to work. Even if we do live in a world where it could be possible for machines to do all the work for us.

Ricin is part of the waste leftover after production of castor oil, rather than being included with the oil.

If you think so ;D ....But, I was taught in college, anyone who claim to have won a debate then has explain why, hasn't won anything.... ;D

Then you agree, the right to bare arms was never an unalienable right... Also you should note that "inalienable" and "unalienable" are different ... Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred. Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.

life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are unalienable rights, not legal rights :rolleyes: