Dumbest take yet

Really? Your really want to go there after the whole jab mandates? Which states and party were trying to force their will on EVERYONE'S body? That is a real "my body, my choice" argument, not the abortion one which involves killing ones own child (another body).

lmfao @ bitching about a vaccine

again, consistent with the idea that Rethuglicans = Christaliban / Y'all Qaeda

This. I'm fact nothing should be illegal unless it harms someone else.

I think republicans do need to watch it with that stuff but I think they are just doing the opposite of what these liberal ideas are. I just prefer republicans because I feel it’s more down to earth. Everyone at your job and everyone you know who is normal is a Republican. I don’t dislike blacks or gays or immigration but I do feel like we need to hold everyone to the same standards. Democrats want to allow sone people do crimes because they feel sorry for them. Poor Jane was left out at the club because she was queer so now we have to have gay parades every Thursday in school. It’s just stupid abd who could possibly trust democrats now? They are sick

The Bible, the more religious they are, the more right wing they are. The left is the total opposite. The less religious, the more liberal they become.

Depends what state you are in. Here, everyone is Democrat. Bro a lot of places used to execute gays and some still do.

Marriage is a legal institution. How can you be small government or big government about something that is a legal entity that is your job to define?

Every country in the world, no matter how powerful the government is defines marriage

Exactly. Should be old English common law: only harming someone or their property is a crime.

This makes absolutely no sense. Not wanting to be forced to take an experimental drug for a flu had nothing to do with religion. It's about freedom.

And it's not a vaccine. You are 2 years behind the facts.

Ahh yes. Alternative facts.

Marriage is a religious institution. When it became political, there was no longer separation of church and state. If it were not for the religious idea of marriage, nonreligious individuals would likely not care. Because it became state controlled, it suddenly became a "right", but marriage isn't a right in n itself m, it's a personal choice that people are free to make.

Yep, they'll attack one another on TV, but thats just theater to gin up hate and pit us against one another. They're all friends behind closed doors and at their fancy dinner parties.

They had a falling out. But they are all part of the same class that oppresses and exploits the rest.

My fellow commie in disguise, Ernie said it best.

u sure u arent a comrade boyo

I don't think you understand the stance of less intervention bro.

That stance is predicated upon not giving citizens handouts. You earn and achieve through hard work and effort. The government steps back and lets those who want it go and get it.

That's not the same thing as no intervention across the board. In fact, it's the Democrats who want to defund the police. The police is intervention. Republicans have long supported a strong police force. Likewise a strong military.


The problem here has nothing to do with Republicans being hypocrites. What has happened is you're too stupid to understand what is meant by "smaller government intervention" and have extrapolated it across all areas of society thinking Republicans want everything to be the Wild West free for all situation.

If anything it's the Democrats who want to strip away all rules for everyone. Republicans on the other hand pride themselves on order and structure. What they aren't interested in doing is stepping in because you are lazy and incompetent and struggling in life or give you special treatment because you're inferior. That's where they won't intervene.

Edit:

Also before you start talking about abortion taking away rights that's also not accurate. Republicans argument is that abortion is murder. It is not your right to murder, hence why it should be outlawed. To strip someone of the right the bear arms is in effect stripping away a civilian right. Plenty of people owned guns and no one was murdered or harmed. There is not a single abortion that didn't end in murder though. Do you see the difference? One is actually an already established crime and the other is not. No rights are being infringed upon by pushing to stop that act. It's the Democrats who have twisted it into some loophole about it not being murder because it's unborn. Regardless of which side of that argument you want to fall on it doesn't change that Republicans aren't trying to strip civilian rights based on their stance. It's about whether the action is murder or not, with the Republicans pointing to the fact that it is.


As for your comment about marriage this is a situation where it's become intertwined with benefits received from the government. They should absolutely be allowed to set the rules for this one and say what qualifies as a marriage. If I marry a pig (not an HTC woman but an actual pig) should I get the tax benefits from marriage? Why not if we should all be allowed to marry as we please? I've said my vows to my pig and now I'm married end of story.

The reality is marriage became intertwined with government as a means to promote a stable family unit which had benefits across the country at the time of inception. It still does, but only when it's done properly. A bunch of gays shacking up is not a stable family unit. For one they can't procreate so there's not actually a family unless they dupe the courts into giving them a kid, which should be closely monitored if not outlawed in it's own right because children are meant to be raised by father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother. You're messing with the fundamentals of nature otherwise.

So what is the argument that government should open up marriage to same sex couples? Because it's their lives and they should be free to do as they want? Well no, that stopped the second the government was on the hook for recognizing that marriage and giving benefits to it.

Gays have never been prevented from having a marriage in ceremony. Only in recognition of the state. No one is stopping them from getting "married" and never have stopped them from it. What they won't get are tax breaks, or at least shouldn't get. The government gives those benefits to opposite sex couples because the dynamic is beneficial to the country to have a stable family unit. There's no reason to encourage same-sex marriages. Not by the government. There's nothing to be gained from that union by the country plain and simple.

Explain how "small govt" Bush was small govt.

Explain how Trump was small govt.

Both spent like commies sans any benefits and dramatically expanded the power of the executive and of the federal govt.

LOL!
i know this feel.
5'8"
about 175 but 15% BF.
when i went out in a group with chick friends all the 6ft+ dudes waited until i went to take a piss or get more beer before they approached the women with me.
then scattered like roaches when i came back.
I was only banging one of them at the time and wasn't even with that one.
but i lifted and didn't skip leg day.
you could see it in my hammies from behind.

i wouldn't of said boo if one approached any of those women.
one of the chicks started dating some 6'3 dude who felt threatened by me.
he tried to screw around with me wrestling like and i just picked the focker up and had his feet a food off the ground.
he screamed like a little girl and everyone laughed at him.
he didn't even talk to me after that and the chick eventually dumped him because he was such a pussy.

I don't know if its just trolling or not because the sentiment went from being an edgy "haha" tongue-and-cheek joke to taken more serious, but there is a growing sentiment among conservative circles on the internet (pundits/podcasters/twitter/youtubers) and even here on the misc (which majorily leans right politically) that women shouldn't be allowed to vote, they shouldn't be allowed to have jobs or drive and they should be married off as soon as they hit puberty to be broodmares and barefoot and pregnant cooking meals in the kitchen.

This growing admiration of people like "andrew tate" who believe in treating women like your "property" and saying things like Islam was right about womencertainly doesn't help your case.What about preeclampsia where the life of the mother is in danger? What if its conception due to incest or rape...and if you believe the woman should bring to term the child of her rapist, would you want your mother or sister to bring to term the child of their rapist if they were sexually assaulted?

then you have the kooks that don't even understand human physiology that want to ban the removal of ectopic pregnancies or think women should be executed if they get an abortion, and because they have the loudest voices, people associate the entire anti-abortion movement with people like them.The overwhelmingly majority of republicans are against any kind of recreational drug decriminalization which means they are in favor of letting the government choose what you can and cannot put in your body.

Yup, according to democrats, it's oppression to block their oppression.

Big gov must rule over all or you're the oppressor.

Not sure your point. Give me one field where "competitors" don't hang out in real life. Yankees/Red Sox. Wendy's/mcdonalds, etc

Why would you be friends with someone who you believe is bringing about the downfall of western civilization? Unless you don't actually believe the chit you say on TV and its all an act.

Ding ding ding

Has Don Lemon or Hannity said this? Yeah,that is the only way I couldn't be friends with someone.If they said I was a bad person for a polical opinion

My best friend is a libertarian while I praise Stalin. Politics only matters so much.

It's more about "limited government" instead of small government. So the federal government should have limits on what it oversees. Innocent lives is one of the things government should protect, so it's acceptable to step in for abortion. It's within the limits of what the federal government should protect.
Republicans usually don't say that two people can't live together n stuff. Just that that's not the definition of marriage. Government shouldn't really be involved in marriage.

Iam conservative, voted for trump in 16, 2020 and will in 24. I believe the govt has no right in saying who can marry who and if women want to murder their children that’s between them and God I have no right to intervene. I do reserve the right to voice my opinion though.

I also want LESS government and less brainwashing from the media, people need to watch less tv and use their brains/logic more.

I understand the appeal of commies and recognize it's the only way humanity could ever realistically leave the planet, but I'm too cynical to believe it could ever successfully be implemented by inherently greedcel humans. Maybe an AI government will figure out how.

Nothing I said was opinion but only truth. When the ministry of Truth has to change multi decade generation of vaccines to try and cover it... That should tell you something.

Anyway, you're just a worthless troll so don't expect any more responses, you're not worth it.

you said your brother converted to Muslim..why do you slander Christians, but your brother is vindicated?