From: Howard Brazee on
On Fri, 28 May 2010 09:13:16 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

>I find it extremely interesting when a liberal talks about morals.
>Liberals always look at and base their morals in the context of
>situational ethics.
>
>Legal is allowed, illegal is not allowed. The rule of law shall
>determine guilt or innocence. If you don't like the current law, get the
>current law changed. Ignoring the current law because you personally do
>not approve of it does not grant you immunity from prosecution.

So it's the Liberals who are saying "what part of illegal don't you
get"?

And when Beck tells us to quit your Christian church if it's for
"social justice", then this isn't an example of situational ethics?

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison
From: Howard Brazee on
On Fri, 28 May 2010 10:15:47 -0400, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

>> > Bert advocates "gunning down" illegal aliens regardless of race or
>> > national origin who cross our borders. I don't care if they are Samoan,
>> > Canadian or English, the key is illegal aliens.
>> >
>> Oh, you're an equal opportunity murderer of women and children! That's
>> much better.
>
>What's your solution? Give them a bottle of water and a bus ticket to
>their US city of choice?

How about considering What Would Jesus Do, instead of having
situational ethics deciding who to hate?

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison
From: BAR on
In article <e58f1b90-84ad-4b0c-a663-bb3809131c22
@y12g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says...
> > > > What is your solution? I see lots of words from you but no solutions.
> >
> > > A lot of very smart, knowledgeable people have written and spoken at
> > > length about illegal immigration and what to do about it. Why don't
> > > you crawl out from under your rock, do a little research and find out
> >
> > Why don't you state your position on the issue.
>
> What the hell do you care what my position is? And why should I waste
> my time explaining it to you? Anybody who thinks the solution to
> illegal immigration is to kill the immigrants, and who is too dumb to
> understand what the consequences of that would be, is not going to be
> open to rational, objective thought.

You have no solution. Just like Baker you are waiting for the government
to come up with a new plan and once they do you will jump on that
bandwagon and support it.
From: BAR on
In article <4c005a90$0$4851$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:38:37 -0400, BAR wrote:
> > In article <alangbaker-46A6BD.16292828052010(a)news.shawcable.com>,
> > alangbaker(a)telus.net says...
> >>
> >>> Why don't you state your position on the issue.
> >>
> >> My position is that I don't know all the answers, but killing people
> >> out of hand is just plain wrong.
> >
> > You don't have a position. You don't have a solution. You are waiting
> > for someone to enact a solution and then you will jump on the
> > coattails and ride it.
>
> Which is better: Acknowledging the complexity of a problem and put some
> effort into understanding it, or blurting out the most ridiculous you
> can think of?

The problem is not complex. The solution is on the large side but it is
fixable. The solution requires a firm hand and strong will.
From: BAR on
In article <4c005d51$0$4835$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 19:28:05 -0400, BAR wrote:
>
> > How is your visa? Has it expired?
>
> I win yet again.

So your visa is up to date? Don't you have a green card yet?