It is official...Mormons are politically diverse

[Guest]

Conservatives are pro-freedom? What are you smoking?

Not pot, the cons claim the right to make that choice for you.

Civilized society has every obligation to protect others from YOUR "irresponsible" actions as much as possible without infringing on basic liberty.

I would agree as the libertarian and conservative in me that pot should be available as healing tools as it originally was primarily used for. However, there is a fine line between that and pot use that effects others. I've never known a pot head that wasn't a brain dead idiot, slow of mental processing, etc.

Society doesn't let people drive who take Medications that effect behavior that can effect others, so why do you think Pot Heads should have the right to???

They also claim a right to your personal property on penalty of kidnapping to fund wars.

What kind of dumb statement is this??? It doesn't even make sense. Clarify please.
However, to try and guess what you're trying to say, I'm guessing you're talking about "taxes"??? We are not "pro-IRS"..... Liberals are however. We are for the Flat Tax or the Fair Tax.

As to war, if the strongest and most skilled of us don't stand against evil, then there is no safety for anyone, anywhere, at any time. I don't disagree that the wars were done badly, but that's because of Liberals and liberal political correctness inhibiting going in and getting the job done and then getting out.

Further, the world didn't complain (well actually the liberals at the time did) when we took out Germany, or Japan. South Koreans didn't complain when we freed them from the North. Compare the North and South today, two different worlds. Vietnam wouldn't have complained if we hadn't been stopped by the liberals, for they would be like South Korea today, and millions after the war wouldn't have been murdered when we left.

They use these wars to keep certain brown people enslaved by their dictators and kings. Not to mention overthrowing democratic elected governments.

And you ask "who" is on drugs....???
We have done nothing but FREE "brown people" from dictators. (see above). LIBERALS are the ones who want to leave brown people enslaved by dictators. And those so-called "democratically elected" governments aren't even so in many cases. Like with South Korea and South Vietnam THEY WERE the Democratically elected, which is why we helped them. While both North's were ran by dicator's.

Woe unto those who can good evil and evil good. You are seriously confused buddy.

They claim the right to define marriage over a minority, through force.

Liberal strawman, false presentation of the facts to then falsely judge.

What "right" would heterosexuals have to claim the word "Gay" in the now modern sense of it to describe themselves??? We wouldn't have a right.

Likewise, you or they don't have a right to "re-define" to "co-opt" a term that NEVER EVER belonged to you or they. What you don't get is that if were were 'actually' intolerant and trying to use "force" against you/they, we would tell you you can't be gay, can't be married etc.

YOU ARE PERFECTLY FREE TO CREATE YOUR OWN DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE....

But you have no right to STEAL BY FORCE other's definition of marriage.
You however are perfectly FREE to create your OWN definition. As I've said many times, I hear "Gayarriage" is available????

If we were intolerant, and using force, we would be preventing you from having YOUR OWN form of marriage. But we aren't doing that are we??? We are only doing what is perfectly in OUR RIGHT to do, and that is to protect what BELONGS TO US.

Your "rights" end the moment they infringe on "others" rights..... You are infringing on our rights by trying to steal an ideology, an institution, a definition, a word that DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU....

YOU are the "first" offenders.... Not us. Our PROTECTING our rights, is not us infringing on yours. Learn some actual truth for a change!!!

One other thing..... You are so FOR gays having the "right" to marry how they want, yet, you could care less about peoples RIGHT to defend themselves however they want. See below, and stop being a hypocrite. The liberal version of "rights" is you simply getting your way. It's not based in actual "equality" and character. If it was, you would be just as for a persons right to protect himself and his family however he wants, within of course reasonable regulations, such as Rocket Launchers and other high powered weapons being regulated, etc.

They are in favor of gun laws that contradict the 2nd amendment (tell me where concealed carry appears there?).

Poppy-cock.... Watch this (especially Ted's first statement) and learn something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCHtw6WbbnM

The RIGHT to "defend yourself" in whatever way you need to is a GOD GIVEN RIGHT!!!
No man has a right to infringe on that!

And you think you the liberal are for "Freedom"??? Please......!!!
You are Fascist to the core!!!

They wage a war on drugs, imprisoning the highest number and rate of prisoners in the whole world.

Well ya.... With FREEDOM there are going to be a greater number of people "abusing" that freedom.

Oh I know, you the liberal would rather we cut peoples hands off and stone them to death! :(
And you wonder "why" we have the highest incarseration right? It's because we respect peoples rights to a much greater degree than much of the rest of the world.

They support taxes, fees, regulations etc. all of which are an initiation of force on peaceful people in order to steal their money at the threat of violence.

Are you really on drugs...??? It's liberals who support taxes, fees and ESPECIALLY REGULATIONS on everything and anyone. It's not a conservative that banned "Big Gulps" in New York, or the traditional Light Bulb soon to be illegal, on and on and on.... WAKE UP.... and use your head instead of swallowing liberal brainwashing lies. You are on the wrong side if you think WE are these things!!!

WE WANT TO ELIMINATE THE IRS!!!! Liberals don't though. Harry Reid the LIBERAL once falsely said Taxes were "voluntary"..... WAKE UP!!! No conservative said this. It is THEY who threat violence for force compliance and theft of your money.

They seek to use force to regulate the airwaves and regulate porn away from consenting adults.

Again, "some" basic regulations which create a stable society based on the rule of law and basic decency is key to a prosperous and moral society. Regulate is also different than BAN.... We don't "ban", but Liberals DO ban!!!

There is a time and place for everything.... Porn being broadcast on open air is not the proper place.

They Threaten and initiate force on peaceful humans to fund corporate welfare. (let's see, who did TARP? Oh yeah, Bush, McCain, and that guy Ryan.

FYI, and "emergency" action to prevent an entire financial system crash was a perfectly reasonable action to do. What was and is not reasonable which is what LIBERALS have done, is "actual" corporate welfare by quadrupling such actions, well beyond our means, etc.

If you don't like what we did, you should really despise what liberals have done. But, you're a liberal, so you give a pass. You should have condemned and mentioned Obama and liberals before and during him that did bad things. But, you ignore the EXTREME bad thing, while focusing on the SMALL conservative action.

Look at yourself will you???

They threaten and force people to buy a product they may not want and implement socialized medicine. (Hmmmmmmm........Didn't that cat Romney do something like this that Obama copied?

Conservatives haven't and do not do any such thing..... Liberals and Obama do and have.

And stop believing Liberal Propaganda lies..... Romney Care was NOTHING like Obama care.
Romney's plan was a "private sector" solution, not a government one and take-over.

Why don't you watch Romney's presentation on the issue and learn some actual facts for a change.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299476-1

Worst of all, they suspended habeus corpus, rule of law, the 4th amendment, due process.

More drugs??? No ones "rights" have been infringed..... War combatant's were caught in war, they then go through a Military Tribunal, where they present their case, and the government presents it.

4th Amendment right, nor due process in the full CIVIL extent cannot be done, because there is no "gathering of evidence", "taping off the crime scene" etc. etc. War is bad guy, your charged, you present your case, and then if guilty your convicted. There are not "rights" violated there.

You gibber-gabber about things you don't even know anything about. Just repeating liberal propaganda, as if that's the same thing as truth and fact.

They start illegal wars and assassinate US citizens.

1. There were no "illegal wars"..... Fanatical Islam had been at war with America and the West for years. We just finally responded. Nothing "illegal" about that.

2. Individuals engaged in "war" activities no matter who they are, citizen or not, are not being "assassinated" when killed. They are an enemy target, and have every right to be dead.

When the North and South during the Civil War went to war against each other, they WERE NOT "assassinating" each other..... FOOLISH MAN!!! :(

They spied illegally on US and foreign citizens and then passed laws to retroactively pardon telecom companies who broke the law for them.

Nope.... No illegality nor immorality here. Those who were only "spied on" where those who were communicating with people they shouldn't be, AND who were suspected of criminal activity. They were/are fully moderated by the Justice System and Judges. What was done was little different than the methods used to go after the Mafia over the past many years.

No knock raids, wiretapping, spying, all without warrants.

There WERE warrants.... Not traditional ones yes, but they had "permission" which is all a warrant is you know. Again, little different than what has been done by Law Enforcement against all kinds of criminals over the years. The difference is it was now a new federal power, which by the way essentially already existed with the FBI, CIA, etc.

Being held without charges, citizens or not.

Criminal activity is different than war activity. Learn the difference. And there most certainly WERE/ARE "charges".

The US F-ing Patriot Act and let's not forget the TSA is also a conservative baby.

You are clearly ignorant.... Conservatives are the main and only body with Libertarians who are absolutely AGAINST the TSA. And the Patriot Act is mostly misrepresented by you liberals. Yes, there are a "couple" of things I believe should be improved. But it's powers are entirely limited. The "conspiracy's" liberals and even some libertarians believe are nothing but malarky.

Conservatives are one side of the statist coin, liberals are the other.

Nope..... We are completely opposite ideology's and actions..... Your ignorant "relativism" is not fact and reality.

[_ldsfaqs]

Actually FAQS you and BC are as much a cafeteria Mormon as you may think I am. You reject what the Church says when it is something you don't like. You do at as much as I do. We just pick different things. You, Droopy and BC have a politica hobby horse that you want the Church to follow and you want to make it part of the Church doctrine and policy. But the Church itself says it does not oppose any political party. Plain and simple. Yet you twist mince and gyrate to make it so.

Nope.... The church's words were "clear" and "concise".....

As to each of us "cherry picking" what we want. Sorry, that's simply not true. I see ALL that the Church is, good and bad. Problem is, most what you believe is bad isn't actually so, because you pervert and misrepresent. You also don't see a TON.... But I do see all you claim, though as I already mentioned, most you pervert because you ignore key facts and information.

I gave a clear example of how LDS Theology is compatible with Conservatism and not Liberalism. And there are MANY others, from the obvious Abortion to Liberal perversion of Environmental Radicalism to Conservative and the Churches "good stewardship" activities embracing a balance between environment AND progress. Or from Liberal Communism to the Churches United Order which Conservatism also ideologically is compatible with. Or the Churches embracing of the Founding Fathers are "inspired" and the country's founding docs inspired, compared to Liberal ideology which consider the founders "old-fashioned" and the founding docs as needing to be ignored and revised. After all, like Obama said, the Constitution is only negative rights and is obsolete.

I can go on and on and on..... showing how Liberlism is NOT EVEN CLOSE to Church Ideology & Doctrine. Scouts, Church & Conservatives for, Liberals against. Church and Conservatives preserve marriage, liberals against preserving it, and want to redefine it..... Church/Conservatives for Free enterprise and democracy. Liberals for Statism, Maxism, Socialism, etc.

Again, on and on and on..... Liberal Ideology is completely anathema to LDS Theology.

It also doesn't matter where I go in the world either. The vast majority of the Churches members are Conservatives, even if sometimes they may not know it.

[_Eric]

When I was an adolescent and then a teenager I played a lot of basketball (at least everyday except on the Sabbath of course) in club leagues, ARC, parks and recreation, junior Lakers, and scholastic teams. Even Church ball on Thursday nights and with the old guys on Monday Wednesday and Friday mornings at 6:00 AM -- by far the best part about Mormonism.

Around that age (before he was traded) I used to have a Latrell Spreewell jersey from when he played for the Warriors. For those not in the know, this is a big deal now. Spreewell wasn't nearly the player he was right before this all took place. But I digress.

This was an authentic jersey (not a replica) and now is worth quite a pretty penny on Ebay. Of course when my crazy physically abusive step-devil FARMS Liohana Member step-devil Ara heard the news about Spreewell and coach Carlisle's altercation, he forced me to not only throw away my prized jersey, but actually made me set fire to it in our backyard fire pit and punished (grounding) me severely for several weeks after that. Again, just for owning the jersey and apparently subsequently idolizing) such an "evil" man instead of a Mormon player from the Jazz or some other lame athlete.

ldsfaqs/Obiwan/Mr.Lee reminds me of a much, much, much less intelligent version of my step-dad. While my step-dad, to his credit, is educated and can articulate himself in ways Mr. Lee/ldsfaqs simply cannot, I see a lot of similarities in their closed minded, ignorant belief systems that they simply won't even consider reconsidering.

Mr. Lee/ldsfaqs doesn't like what he calls liberals, and he loves the part of his silly little religion (the one that believes in the magic power of olive oil) that reaffirms what he already believes, so he completely obsesses over it and appoints himself judge of Good Mormon vs. Bad Mormons.

Just like how step-devil Ara didn't like Black people, especially wealthy (and in his opinion and own words "cocky" Black people like Latrell Sprewell, Allen Iverson, and any other famous African American that lacks the demeanor and political opinions of Colin Powell, he had to self appoint himself the judge of character - the judge of good athletes versus criminal athletes - and tried to decide who were Good Basketball Players versus Bad Basketball Players. Tattooed players, like Mr. Lee ldsfaq's liberal assassins, are the ultimate enemy and embodiment of pure evil.

In short, despite the fact that ldsfaqs makes almost no sense -- ever -- and seems severely emotionally disturbed (remember when he said every assassination attempt was perpetrated by a "liberal"?) I see some striking parallels in the same black and white, reactionary, racist thinking in my step-dad and other older racist Mormons I've come to know being raised by an LDS apologist step parent.

[_ldsfaqs]

As usual, anyone who debunks liberal and anti-mormon bigotry and ignorance is "mentally disturbed".

I've provided FACTS...... You've provided NONE. Whether it's in reference to "basically all US Presidential Assassins being liberal" or otherwise.

I've listed every assassin, and showed that the ONLY ONE that came "close" to being conservative was simply one that was BORN a Republican, but did his attempted killing to empress an actress, not for political reasons, especially since the idiot tried to kill a REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVE President. Same for John Wilkes Booth. You idiots try to claim he's "conservative". Strange..... Why would a conservative try to kill a conservative president? But, I didn't stop there, I explained the details of his life and beliefs that clearly WERE NOT "conservative".

So, am "I" mentally disturbed, or is it really YOU??? It should be obvious. I've posted the facts, you've posted NOTHING to claim any let alone most or otherwise of them were "conservatives".

[_beastie]

I can go on and on and on.....

Please do. The more you go on and on, the worse your side looks.

And that, by the way, is why you keep getting banned from MDD, just like ZLMB.

[_Jason Bourne]

Nope.... The church's words were "clear" and "concise".....

Indeed they were. And the clear point is the church does not oppose ANY political party. I did not say there may not be elements from the platforms of many world wide political parties that the Church opposes. Of course it opposes gay marriage and abortion, part of the platform of the US Democratic party. But it has opposed the Republicans at times as well. It oppposed the MX missle and Spencer Kimball gave a speech called Gods of Steel that could be used by many pacifists as a platform to oppose war and arms build up.

As to each of us "cherry picking" what we want. Sorry, that's simply not true.

Sure it is. You are doing it right now.

I see ALL that the Church is, good and bad. Problem is, most what you believe is bad isn't actually so, because you pervert and misrepresent. You also don't see a TON.... But I do see all you claim, though as I already mentioned, most you pervert because you ignore key facts and information.

Please show me where, how and what I have misrepresented about the Church.

It also doesn't matter where I go in the world either. The vast majority of the Churches members are Conservatives, even if sometimes they may not know it.

Church members in Europe, Russia, Nigeria, Brazil are conservative? My SIL is Brazilian and he is not conservative nor would I bet most that most Brazilian LDS members are at least by your standards.

[_ldsfaqs]

I can go on and on and on.....

Please do. The more you go on and on, the worse your side looks.

And that, by the way, is why you keep getting banned from MDD, just like ZLMB.

More "story's".....

1. I was only banned from ZLMB "once" if I remember right, because if I'm remembering right "Calmoriah" didn't like my using CAPS and quotes as much as I did. When ZLMB died, I was not "banned". I can still post there, last I checked anyway.

2. I was banned from MADB because of the current "fascism" that is occurring there.
I did not write and post there, like I do here. Here I'm free to directly condemn, there I simply provided argument. Anyway, I explained how I last got banned in a couple of threads, and it clearly wasn't due to me breaking a rule or doing something wrong. At MADB I was actually well behaved because the rules required it.

[_beastie]

More "story's".....

1. I was only banned from ZLMB "once" if I remember right, because if I'm remembering right "Calmoriah" didn't like my using CAPS and quotes as much as I did. When ZLMB died, I was not "banned". I can still post there, last I checked anyway.

2. I was banned from MADB because of the current "fascism" that is occurring there.
I did not write and post there, like I do here. Here I'm free to directly condemn, there I simply provided argument. Anyway, I explained how I last got banned in a couple of threads, and it clearly wasn't due to me breaking a rule or doing something wrong. At MADB I was actually well behaved because the rules required it.

Lee,

Of course they didn't tell you they banned you because you are an embarrassment to your side. Sadly, it's just a logical conclusion. LDS moderators on Z were fairly tolerant of LDS posters, and LDS moderators on MDD are flagrantly biased for LDS posters. The LDS mods on Z wouldn't ban LDS posters for something as inconsequential as using too many caps, and the fascism on MDD is directed solely towards critics and LDS posters who embarrass them for some reason.

I don't really expect you to understand this. I'm not even sure why I bother explaining it to you. It's painfully clear to others.

[_Chap]

...

I don't really expect you to understand this. ...

But beastie - ldsfaqs doesn't do "understanding". He does "knowing".

It's a fish and bicycle kind of thing.

[_beastie]

...

I don't really expect you to understand this. ...

But beastie - ldsfaqs doesn't do "understanding". He does "knowing".

It's a fish and bicycle kind of thing.

I must have missed that conversation....thankfully.