Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Tom Bishop

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 449  Next >
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 27, 2022, 01:40:15 PM »
You guys have been defending him and his choices for the last 50 pages, and seem to say that he is better than Trump. You certainly should defend Biden's lifetime of opposing gays as well.

Here is a link on Biden's prolific anti-gay past. Source links to the bullets are in the page:

- In 1973, Biden suggested that gay federal employees were "security risks"

- In 1993, Biden voted to block the immigration of HIV+ individuals into the United States

- In 1993, Biden voted for the bill that created "Don't Ask Don't Tell"

- In 1994, Biden voted to cut off federal funding for schools that taught "acceptance of homosexuality as a lifestyle"

For decades, Biden opposed same-sex marriage

- In 1996, Biden voted for the Defense Of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman

- In the 2000s, Biden claimed that same-sex marriage was a "state" issue and repeatedly said that marriage was "between a man and a woman"

Biden refused to characterize a Constitutional marriage amendment as "writing discrimination into the Constitution"

Biden suggested he was opposed to the "timing" of the marriage amendment, not its substance

 - In 2008, both before and after he became Obama's Vice-Presidential nominee, Biden said he opposed same-sex marriage

Biden is falsely claiming he was the first major leader to support same-sex marriage

- 12 years before Biden did, Vice President Dick Cheney opposed federal restrictions on same-sex marriage

Biden wasn't even the first Obama Cabinet member to support same-sex marriage

- In 2012, after Biden accidentally supported same-sex marriage, his staff and White House aides attempted to clean up and walk back Biden's remarks, saying he had not actually endorsed it

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 27, 2022, 01:01:39 PM »
Quote from: BillO
So, you think a person's only worth in a marital union is how many offspring they can produce, is that correct?

Society pays out subsidies as incentive to do something that benefits and furthers society, yes. Marriage has traditionally been a structure to foster the creation of families. Financial benefits were not simply given for the fun of it, because a judge said "good for you, you like each other, here is money!". Money was given for a reason, clearly. Like when a farmer receives farming subsidies upon merely buying an empty plot of farm land without any further action, society gives tax breaks for marriage to foster the preparation for the creation of a family. Society then gives a second level break upon the birth of children. Children are future tax payers, future service workers, future college graduates, future engineers and so on. The larger benefit to society is obvious.

My objection was a based on giving out financial benefits to people who want the recognition of marriage without providing equal benefit to society, not that they shouldn't be together or receive recognition. Joe Biden's objection was because he doesn't like the idea of two men or two women being married to each other. Again, Biden's reasoning in the video is "Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that!" and "Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's the game going on here?"

Why was Biden's reasoning better than mine?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 27, 2022, 02:45:55 AM »
Quote from: BillO
Why should any marriage be any different than any other marriage?

You can find the discussion of that in the thread I linked. I don't think society should necessarily be paying out the same amount of money to homosexual and heterosexual couples if they are not providing equal benefit to society. There were links in that thread showing that 93% of opposite sex married people have children, and that the only 11% of gay couples adopt, and that an adopted child of a lesbian couple has a 69% chance of ending up on welfare, and so on.

It is not an equivalent benefit to society, and so the financial benefits should not be equivalent. My reasons were purely financial, and have pointed out that I am not against the officious recognition of their union. However, Joe Biden's reasons for opposing the marriage of gays in the video I posted earlier was because "Marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that!" and because "Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's the game going on here??"

Biden clearly thought that two men should not be together and was against the officious recognition of their love on basis of them not being a man and a woman.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 27, 2022, 02:11:00 AM »
I've never said that gays shouldn't be allowed to form a union together or be recognized. I support civil unions. My issue with gay marriage was that they should not necessarily be paid for it.

I don't see how my particular beliefs have anything to do with Joe Biden opposing the marriage of gays for multiple human generations though.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 26, 2022, 03:08:21 PM »
I don't know what his impact was, but for the record, Biden “came out” on same sex marriage way before the SCOTUS ruling in 2015. Specifically, in May of 2012 (Granted, an election year, go figure):

Biden was asked by anchor David Gregory on May 4, 2012, whether he had rethought his longstanding opposition to same-sex marriage. “I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties,” Biden responded. “Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that’s what people are finding out is what all marriages, at their root, are about, whether they’re marriages of lesbians or gay men or heterosexuals.”

And even before Obama “came out”.

Were Biden’s statements genuine? Anyone’s guess.

Yes, such an early adopter, even before Obama, because no one was thinking about gay rights until the year 2012.  ::)

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 24, 2022, 10:06:40 AM »
Yes, because the claim here is that it has a 100% near term fatality rate.  ::)

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 24, 2022, 08:24:41 AM »
So the athlete deaths increase by a few every year, but then in 2021 it suddenly increases multiple fold in a single year like the FIFA increase, and coincidentally increasing in number throughout the year as the vaccines are rolled out in number throughout the year, sure.  ::)

If the vaccine lowers bodily immunity as it is alleged then it could result in things like infection or cancer. Many of those are heart issues. It takes a professional denialist to blindly deny athletes clutching their chest at cup tournaments as normal and expected.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 24, 2022, 04:15:10 AM »
If you scroll down to the bottom of that page the authors provide over a thousand linked sources for the data, of each person who died. It's clearly not fake.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 24, 2022, 04:06:21 AM »
Joe Biden was 70 years old in 2012. Kind of late there. Why did it take him 70 years to accept gay rights?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: May 24, 2022, 03:46:18 AM »
Hey look, your liberal hero Joe Biden opposed gay marriage.

You can tell that this was from a time when he was more coherent and had two brain cells.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 24, 2022, 02:46:51 AM »
Correlation equals causation in Tom’s world.

Correlation is not necessarily causation. But there is no causation without correlation.

The International Olympic Committee in Lausanne, Switzerland, studied documents from international data banks from 1966 to 2004. Those documents indicate 1,101 sudden deaths in athletes under 35 years of age, an average of 29 athletes per year, the sports with the highest incidence being soccer and basketball. (NIH Document)

A study by Maron on sudden death in US athletes, from 1980 to 2006 in thirty-eight sports identified 1,866 deaths of athletes with cardiac disease, with a prevalence of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

2005 to 2006 averaged sixty-six (66) deaths per year, with 82% of those occurring during competition or training.

Thanks to investigator readers for discovering these reports, and this story in Spanish. Momento Deportivo.

In 2021 and 2022 so far, cardiac disease has not been mentioned. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was mentioned twice, but those two reports were listed in the “not vax related” list. “Enlarged heart” was only mentioned three times, but there was no indication this was a long-term or recent issue (possibly due to vaccine injury).

The above shows that in prior years, there were 66 deaths per year, but there have been 86 reported in January 2022, so far.


Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 24, 2022, 12:49:01 AM »
Tom displaying a profound lack of critical faculty by assuming this is COVID vaccine connected.

Actually it plays perfectly into the litany of sports related heart incidents which started after introduction of the Covid vaccine.

2021 held the record for most FIFA players to die on the field. -

See: 5-fold increase in sudden cardiac deaths of FIFA players in 2021

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: May 23, 2022, 10:06:41 PM »
Yeah, the expert compared it to people who die from lightening strikes while golfing:

    "More people die from lightning strikes while golfing," says Dr. William Roberts, a professor of family medicine and community health at the University of Minnesota, and the medical director of the Twin Cities Marathon.

Meanwhile there has been a noted increase in sports related heart attacks, as well as increased heart attacks among young adults, to which Channel 7 Boston blames on "cannibis use" at the 1:45 mark here -

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: May 23, 2022, 03:17:55 PM »

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion
« on: May 19, 2022, 03:26:37 PM »
Ah yes, telling people to repress natural urges is surely the way to a healthy society. I expect nothing different from Madam Jewish Space Laser.

You can't seriously be arguing that acting on your natural urges is the best way to a healthy society. Young adults can have a natural urge to steal things from stores, cheat in school, skip classes to hang out with friends, and watch TV entertainment instead of doing schoolwork. People might also have a natural urge to speed and drive recklessly through town to meet an appointment, strike their pets and children when angry, issue threats to get their way, and on and on.

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Size of the Sun
« on: May 19, 2022, 01:35:58 AM »
Coincidentally, hydrogen and helium are lighter than air, and the Sun is right above the atmosphere in FE.

The surface of the Moon is also claimed to be made of Helium-3, possibly based on spectroscopy studies.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion
« on: May 19, 2022, 01:30:42 AM »
I don't see why this is so hard to figure out.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: May 16, 2022, 03:42:18 PM »

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Bye Bye Abortion
« on: May 15, 2022, 06:44:22 PM »
And what do bird eggs have to do with humans?

That's a simple one. If we recognize the life of a developing bird egg at any stage of development and are banning their destruction, then by this level of the recognition of life the we should also recognize human life at any stage of development.

You do not have absolute right over your property, and you do not have absolute right over your body. The US is a system of states which democratically enact their own health and property laws. If the people of a state want to tell women that they need to be personally responsible and can't abort babies anymore, then that is simply democracy in action.

Quote from: Lord Dave
So, to recap.
You are 100% in support of a government agency having legal say over a person's own body.

I think you mean the people of each state democratically managing their own health affairs. The government agency isn't an outside entity.

And yes, we have largely decided as a society that you do not have ultimate authority over your body. We ban drinking and driving, for example. You do not have a right to drink whenever you want. Having bodily autonomy does not mean any person gets to undermine the health, rights or autonomy of others.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 449  Next >