Jump to content


Community Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cle23

  1. No. No they will not. I am sure there are a few fringe people fighting for that, but there are no major LGBTQ groups fighting to include pedophiles. Just because people (mostly "conservatives") keep repeating the "What's next, pedophiles/animals/etc?" arguments doesn't mean that it is actually happening.
  2. I honestly think for the longest time it was called "gay marriage" because it was not allowed. At the time, they were different. Now, in the eyes of the government, they are not, so I feel there is no need for them to be different. I was not accusing you of anything hateful either in response. People can have differing opinions, I just try to show WHY it may be important to people on the other side of the argument.
  3. Many pedophilia groups have tried to incorporate themselves into the LGBTQ community, but that does not mean that the LGBTQ community wants them there. Most of the pedophilia groups try to get themselves closer so that it will become more normalized, but again, that doesn't mean the LGBTQ groups are accepting of it. A vast majority of pedophiles are heterosexual in their adult relationships, and those that aren't tend to be uninterested in either adult sexes. There are obviously some homosexual pedophiles as well, but it is a very small percentage.
  4. Die Hard is not a Christmas movie. It has become a tradition at Christmas, but a movie must be Christmas themed in some way to be a Christmas movie.
  5. . - the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship - the state of being united as spouses in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law -an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities -an intimate or close union Who is using 2 words? You literally have said multiple times in this thread that we should make a new, separate word for "gay marriage," and then in turn also say using 2 words to define something is lazy. The above definitions all meet and describe any "type" of marriage. It works for everything. My wife and I are married. My brother and his husband are also married. Our marriages, especially in the eyes of the government, mean the same thing. Also, if the word means so much to people in "traditional" marriages, why then do people think it wouldn't mean something to everyone else as well? Everyone gets married, and everyone is happy with that, except the people who want everyone to have to call it something different. If it means that little, let's change "traditional" marriage to another word. Does that work for you?
  6. I mean, to be fair though, the argument could be made for the opposite as well. "Conservatives" were in a giant uproar over violation of free speech when they felt they were getting their speech violated, but now are all for it if they approve of the guy who is now in charge of who gets censored. I don't think people should get censored, but I also don't think people should have free reign to make threats and spread crazy lies and disinformation intentionally wither. Fine line on how to handle that though.
  7. He would be dumb to not take it that job if offered. He has been in Ohio for most of his life, and Cincinnati is a decent team. Not a complete rebuild, and he would be familiar with their system I would assume following Fickel.
  8. I hate OSU, but this is dumb. Alabama lost 2 games. OSU lost once. Neither of them deserve to be there though.
  9. Fickell got beat by Tulane yesterday.
  10. It's different because the salary cap is negotiated with the NFLPA.
  11. My favorite part of the Trump stimulus checks is now every Republican I know is blaming Biden for the inflation when Trump had more stimulus money than Biden by far. Also, student loan forgiveness is stupid. You took the loan, now pay it back. I am all for loan reform, and believe it needs to happen, but we can't just forgive debt because we feel like it. Even if they want to go after predatory loans and make more affordable, I am ok with that, but straight up forgiveness is beyond dumb. The main issue with loans isn't the loan itself, but the fact that people who otherwise wouldn't qualify for an appliance loan are given hundreds of thousands of dollars just so universities can vastly overcharge for their "services." The value these schools provide isn't worth a tenth of what they charge.
  12. I agree cutting the supply would help, but how do we do that? Work at the border could help, but the cartels are multibillion dollar corporations at this point, and they will find other ways in. Not to say you don't try, but they ship via shipping containers, ports, plane, boat, and tons of other ways. Hell, Chinese fentanyl sellers are mailing drugs using the USPS.
  13. No, but again, the cartels aren't just showing up and forcing people to take their drugs. The demand is here, and it started mostly because of prescriptions. Now it has exploded well past just prescriptions at this point, but that is how it started. The cartels sell opioids because that is what the demand is there for, and therefore the money and power that comes with it. In the 80's the cartels sold mostly cocaine. Now, there is still a demand for that, but now it has shifted in favor of opioids because that is where the demand is. I am by no means an expert, but my understanding is that opioids are easier and cheaper to make as well.
  14. You are right, I have not. But the cartel doesn't go door to door and force you to take them. The medical community has pushed opioids for years and then it caught up to us. I had major ear surgery at 15, and the doctor refused to let me leave without Oxycodone Obviously there are other ways to help reduce use, but the main thing is to lessen the demand for the use. If there are huge numbers of buyers as there are now, the drugs will find their way here.
  15. My issue isn't with people wanting our leaders to do more. I think we can all agree that they need and should do more. The opioid crisis has been largely ignored for years now, with steps taken to help correct the crisis largely being a show more than substance. The wall doesn't and never was going to work. Looser immigration policy won't work. The best way to reduce the opioids coming into the country is the lessen the demand that we as a society and medical community have largely created.
  16. I agree that it would be wrong to blame Trump for CAUSING the virus. I do think he mishandled it once more information was known, but who knows how each President would have handled it. I also think his personality and constant blame game and administration issues were the cause of him losing the election, with the handling of the virus a part of that. I am not a Biden fan. Gun to my head, if I had to pick between he and Trump, I would probably pick Biden, but I did not vote for either in the past election because I did not feel either was worthy of the office.
  17. It is disingenuous to imply that Biden has caused our opioid crisis when opioids have been a crisis for 10+ years. I am not saying Biden is blameless, but opioids have gotten worse under every President, including Bush, Obama, Trump, and now Biden. Where were you guys blaming Trump as well? The issue is that opioids are a growing problem, not which President to blame the problem on.
  18. I am all for closing THAT loophole. But not removing all mail in ballots as a way to do it, as you suggested.
  19. Yes, because opioids have only become a problem recently.
  20. That is just recently though, not the long term data. The most recent presidential election, yes, it was much higher in democratic percentage, but that is also going along with a lot of the COVID situation, with democratic voters being much more likely to follow the guidelines. Hell, Trump encouraged people to ignore the guidelines, and obviously his voters were disproportionately Republicans. Historically the numbers have been much more even, though they do tend to lean Democrat some. In 2018, 25% of people voted by mail. Should we just invalidate 25% of votes then? You do know that mail in voting started in the Civil War era, right? But somehow only recently it became "fraudulent."
  21. I agree with most of what you said, except this: "Debates should be mandatory in an election, and no votes should be cast before one has occurred. " The debates are pointless. 95% of people have already decided well before the debate who they will vote for, mostly by whatever letter is by their name. Also, the debates are pointless in the sense that it is all just personal attacks on the other candidate and very, very little actual substance. I wish there was a rule that you can only speak as to what you plan to accomplish, with no attacks on each other at all. But that'll never happen as it'll drive down ratings. This isn't just a Democrat issue though. It happens on both sides. And the issue there being that there are millions of legitimate votes that wouldn't get counted if that was the case.
  22. To be fair, teams aren't leaving because of the quality, they are leaving for money.
  23. I could honestly see them having both teams wear dark uniforms if the snow is as bad as it calls for.
  24. But that is literally how every team handles the run. Bad teams rarely give up 4-5 yards every carry, but they consistently give up chunk yardage. It's like saying "Outside of the 2 late 4th quarter touchdown, the defense only gave up 10 points." You have to take the whole game into account. Chubb averages 5.5 yards a carry, but gets plenty of 1-3 yards runs to get there.
  • Create New...