Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Sites | Writers | Advertise | My Orble | Login


I think the Liberal party have found their Kim Beazley.



53
Vote
   


I beg your pardon but I will not be wanking over Ron Paul and highlighting what a great man he is while ignoring his sheer stupidity. So lets get right down to it (Paul-tards watch out: facts ahead).

From the good doctors own mouth:

The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life.


The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance. Throughout our nation’s history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people’s allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation’s Christian heritage. Christmas itself may soon be a casualty of that war.

Source


"The tired assertion of a separation of church and state has no historical or constitutional basis"

Source


The collectivist left, however, seeks to impose the viewpoint that public life must be secular, and that government cannot reflect morality derived from faith. The collectivist left is threatened by strong religious institutions, because it wants an ever-growing federal government to serve as the unchallenged authority in our society. People of faith tend to put their religious convictions ahead of any allegiance to the government, particularly when that government displays such hostility towards religion in general. In other words, the collectivists fear that some Americans' deeply held religious beliefs will stand in the way of the continued growth of secular big government. So the real motivation behind the insistence on a separation of church and state is not based on respect for the First amendment, but rather on a desire to diminish the influence of religious conservatives at the ballot box.

The Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom must not depend on the whims of IRS bureaucrats. Religious institutions cannot freely preach their beliefs if they must fear that the government will accuse them of "politics." We cannot allow churches to be silenced any more than we can allow political dissent in general to be silenced. Free societies always have strong, independent institutions that are not afraid to challenge and criticize the government.

Source


Oh lets not forget he introduced a bill that would give immunity to religious organizations from the courts,

The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court--

(1) shall not adjudicate--

(A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;

(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or

(C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and

(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).

Ouch.


But for the real kicker, he cosponsored a bill that would bring prayers back to public schools. Hoora!
46
Vote
   


This Woman is Senile

November 23rd 2007 10:27
After numerous presidential debates it's more than obvious that Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama are NOT slinging dirt at each other. Sure they poke at each others credibilities and qualifications for the job but it's nothing more than typical political rivalries and dare I say 'respectable'?

This is of course in sharp contrast with the other Democrats who are attacking Hillary Clinton and to a lesser extend Barrack Obama. Thats also just natural since thats all they have running for themselves.

But I simply cannot understand what the hell this woman is going on about with her post 'Really Angry?'. In it she entertains the idea that theres something going on betwteen Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama. None of it makes sense of course, she is unabashedly and literally making stuff up and expecting to be taken seriously!

In closing I am now sincerely think this woman needs help. Her musings are bordering on clinical paranoia. No, no buts, she's fucking insane!
45
Vote
   


AOL Did Not Rig Online Poll

November 23rd 2007 07:18
There’s a very simple and logical explanation as to why Ron Paul was not winning the AOL poll and has nothing to do with a conspiracy as reported by Digg here that got to the front page, and this one too. One would think there’s some sort of AOL hatched conspiracy going on here. The latter was quite funny:

AOL is running a poll on thier website at news.aol.com. The poll is for your favourite GOP presidential candidate. Some people thought it was strange that Ron Paul was loosing an online poll. After a little investigation, the real spammers were found.

[ Click here to read more ]
44
Vote
   


Nancy Pelosi evil hitler
Neo-Nazi, Jew, Lesbian and Hater of All Things Free Nancy Pelosi
I have finally discovered what the democrats have been conspiring to do to get into power in the White House. Since we all know they cannot possibly win in a fair election they will end up resorting to dirty tactics, it is already amply proof that trying to win sympathy votes by way of putting Hillary Clinton up (poor her, hubsand cheated on her) won't get them far enough. Trying to get illegals to vote for them will only get them half-way there (since there aren't enough illegals to win the dems victory). So what about impeachment?

So what will they do instead? Use their undeserved (stolen even) majority to impeach both President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney so that, as according to the presidential line of succession Nancy Pelosi will become President


[ Click here to read more ]
31
Vote
   


Dr. Doctor Ron Fucking Paul
How can he create such a system where people will just shut the fuck up and say 'praise be to Ron Paul' while still preserving first amendment rights? Well that’s an interesting thing, see, liberals agree with him on the Iraq war and nothing else, conservatives agree with him on everything but he'll push it a bit too far even for their tastes and neo-Cons hate him outright but will find a niche in his system of government (bypass government control, fool the people direct).

Those he classes as higher can speak down on those who are classed lower, the list is as follows


[ Click here to read more ]
40
Vote
   


Ahmed's Blogs

465 Vote(s)
11 Comment(s)
9 Post(s)
9112 Vote(s)
491 Comment(s)
176 Post(s)
7307 Vote(s)
108 Comment(s)
125 Post(s)
2824 Vote(s)
115 Comment(s)
41 Post(s)
30498 Vote(s)
2089 Comment(s)
474 Post(s)
Moderated by Ahmed
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]