MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 7, 2015 15:23:03 GMT -5
But let me guess your stances on capitalism and gay marriage and welfare and etc etc etc
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Oct 8, 2015 9:35:35 GMT -5
Natural Law has nothing to do with what anyone stands on any issue. It is what nature (and ultimately the Creator) intended.
We all know crony capitalism that exists in South American countries is not good. People will argue that our regulated capitalism is not good. But is socialism better? Is communism better? I think most Americans would agree that the answer is no. In socialism the idea is to tax the wealthy heavily. The problem is if you do then the wealthy will: a. hide their money; or b. move to a non-socialistic society. Once the wealthy people are gone you only have a majority of people dependent on the state and with no way to pay for it the state must take control and communist government takes over and tells people what they must do to survive. We currently have a mixed form of capitalism/socialism. Social Security was started by FDR. Welfare and Food stamps (EBT) programs have seen a great deal of fraud over the decades that these programs have been implemented. Private charities including Churches used to be the main source to provide for the poor. Have we seen improvement in the minority communities because of these Federal welfare and food stamp programs or has unemployment and poverty increased?
In which cities are the conditions worsening and how do we stop it? Are "sanctuary cities" acceptable? How do we monitor green cards, visas and illegal aliens? These are questions that political leaders must answer and find solutions to.
Marriage is a states rights issue since it was never defined in the constitution. The Supreme Court made an error in WRITING instead of interpreting the law. Constitutional attorneys will probably at some point have this revisited and overturned by a future Supreme Court decision. Roe v. Wade could also be overturned, not on religious terms but on scientific evidence. My stance doesn't really matter on this issue. It doesn't really affect how many people live their lives.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 8, 2015 9:46:09 GMT -5
That couldn't have diverged further from your original invoking of natural law if you tried.
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 8, 2015 11:50:03 GMT -5
Natural Law has nothing to do with what anyone stands on any issue. It is what nature (and ultimately the Creator) intended. We all know crony capitalism that exists in South American countries is not good. People will argue that our regulated capitalism is not good. But is socialism better? Is communism better? I think most Americans would agree that the answer is no. In socialism the idea is to tax the wealthy heavily. The problem is if you do then the wealthy will: a. hide their money; or b. move to a non-socialistic society. Once the wealthy people are gone you only have a majority of people dependent on the state and with no way to pay for it the state must take control and communist government takes over and tells people what they must do to survive. We currently have a mixed form of capitalism/socialism. Social Security was started by FDR. Welfare and Food stamps (EBT) programs have seen a great deal of fraud over the decades that these programs have been implemented. Private charities including Churches used to be the main source to provide for the poor. Have we seen improvement in the minority communities because of these Federal welfare and food stamp programs or has unemployment and poverty increased? In which cities are the conditions worsening and how do we stop it? Are "sanctuary cities" acceptable? How do we monitor green cards, visas and illegal aliens? These are questions that political leaders must answer and find solutions to. Marriage is a states rights issue since it was never defined in the constitution. The Supreme Court made an error in WRITING instead of interpreting the law. Constitutional attorneys will probably at some point have this revisited and overturned by a future Supreme Court decision. Roe v. Wade could also be overturned, not on religious terms but on scientific evidence. My stance doesn't really matter on this issue. It doesn't really affect how many people live their lives. Everything you just wrote is YOUR OPINION and conjecture on your part, not fact and not "natural law". As MisterD said you couldn't have strayed further from your original comment. You saw your chance to get up on your tiny little soapbox and preach your point of view and you ran with it. This drivel from you is exactly why we moved over to this board and ultimately, why your Explorer Steve website died died.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Oct 8, 2015 12:11:52 GMT -5
Of course, everything I wrote is my opinion and questions I would like politicians to answer in as much detail as possible. MisterD asked for my stance on a few topics; my views are shared by many citizens. There are books on Natural Law for those who want to learn more about it.
Natural Law would define marriage as between a man and a woman. This union would provide offspring and keep the next generation going. A marriage between 2 gay people cannot produce offspring.
I probably threw you off since you asked what my stance was. My point is as an American citizen versus what Natural Law states is somewhat similar. The point is I support Natural Law but also realize there is a constituion of the United States that must be followed.
I noticed some are obsessed with this Explorer Steve guy. He must have really struck a nerve.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 8, 2015 12:56:59 GMT -5
Explorer Steve had an almost pathological need to turn every topic into his own political rantings. Like he could take a discussion about Rasheed Quadri's jumper and somehow hijack it into a monologue on the evils of social programs. He was really insane. You're obviously not him so I'm sure you understand what I mean.
(Also, if a close friend of mine got married knowing she couldn't conceive, that's going against Natural Law as well and I should chastise her, correct? Or does she get a pass because the equipment lines up?)
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 8, 2015 14:20:53 GMT -5
Of course, everything I wrote is my opinion and questions I would like politicians to answer in as much detail as possible. MisterD asked for my stance on a few topics; my views are shared by many citizens. There are books on Natural Law for those who want to learn more about it. Natural Law would define marriage as between a man and a woman. This union would provide offspring and keep the next generation going. A marriage between 2 gay people cannot produce offspring. I probably threw you off since you asked what my stance was. My point is as an American citizen versus what Natural Law states is somewhat similar. The point is I support Natural Law but also realize there is a constituion of the United States that must be followed. I noticed some are obsessed with this Explorer Steve guy. He must have really struck a nerve. You're pushing the line on here Steve (and yes, everyone here knows you're Steve no matter what you try and say). And it's your personal interpretation of what an American citizen is, not what an American citizen really is. American citizens come in all stripes, so to say an American citizen versus what Natural Law states is somewhat similar is the furthest thing from the truth. Stop with the thinly veiled agendas. You've been fairly well behaved in this incarnation of you (coachd aka Explorer Steve), you don't want to go off the rails now.
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Oct 8, 2015 20:36:52 GMT -5
Of course, everything I wrote is my opinion and questions I would like politicians to answer in as much detail as possible. MisterD asked for my stance on a few topics; my views are shared by many citizens. There are books on Natural Law for those who want to learn more about it. Natural Law would define marriage as between a man and a woman. This union would provide offspring and keep the next generation going. A marriage between 2 gay people cannot produce offspring. Wouldn't "natural law" dictate marriage, which is entirely a social construct, null and void, considering almost every animal species on the planet for millions of years does not engage in any sort of lifelong union and animals most mate with many partners? Or is "natural law" essentially just a very specific interpretation of one particular religion?
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 8, 2015 21:03:38 GMT -5
Yup. Homosexuality far more "natural" than monogamy.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Oct 13, 2015 8:38:13 GMT -5
I would like to take credit for some of the great work Exp Steve did especially during the 20 year dark period of La Salle hoops. 1. Archival videos of great Explorer moments shared with the world; 2. his work on the history page of the old website; 3. his encouragement of the students who ran the website.
I talked to him at a game before the Sweet 16 run. He said G was ready to quit after Murray but he and a few others gave G words of encouragement. Moneyball didn't bring World Championship to the A's because it lacked a major ingredient... chemistry. G understands that now.
|
|
|
Post by SICguy84 on Oct 13, 2015 8:43:01 GMT -5
Can Explo. Steve take Cabrey in a Palestra concession line brawl?
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 13, 2015 9:32:56 GMT -5
Does anyone remember "Mister D" (with a space) from those boards? I was talking to him recently and he told me he was actually the one who convinced Duren and Wright and all of the major transfers to come to La Salle but then told them not to tell anyone because he didn't want to take credit. He also knew that Murray wouldn't be nice to his teammates but didn't say anything because he's so influential it could have ruined not just the basketball team, but the entire university. And when Dr. G was being rumored for the Illinois job, Mister D convinced him that La Salle is the best program in the world and that he should stay so everyone can be happy and have fun together so he stayed. That is also something he didn't want me to tell everyone but I couldn't help myself. Also, Mister D is definitely not me (you can tell by the space in the names) and those stories are 100% accurate.
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 13, 2015 11:40:14 GMT -5
I would like to take credit for some of the great work Exp Steve did especially during the 20 year dark period of La Salle hoops. 1. Archival videos of great Explorer moments shared with the world; 2. his work on the history page of the old website; 3. his encouragement of the students who ran the website. I talked to him at a game before the Sweet 16 run. He said G was ready to quit after Murray but he and a few others gave G words of encouragement. Moneyball didn't bring World Championship to the A's because it lacked a major ingredient... chemistry. G understands that now. I have to assume this all occurred in that alternate reality known as Explorer Steve World.
|
|
|
Post by theneumann64 on Oct 13, 2015 13:42:30 GMT -5
I would like to take credit for some of the great work Exp Steve did especially during the 20 year dark period of La Salle hoops. 1. Archival videos of great Explorer moments shared with the world; 2. his work on the history page of the old website; 3. his encouragement of the students who ran the website. I talked to him at a game before the Sweet 16 run. He said G was ready to quit after Murray but he and a few others gave G words of encouragement. Moneyball didn't bring World Championship to the A's because it lacked a major ingredient... chemistry. G understands that now. So you've maintained all along you didn't know who Steve was, but now you know all about him and spoke to him several years ago at length?
|
|
|
Post by 1stflooredwards on Oct 13, 2015 15:00:33 GMT -5
I've always maintained that Explorer Steve/Coach D is actually SICguy 84 or calsufan or Mister D since they seem to be the ones who respond the most to his posts and ultimately end up prolonging stupid threads.
Just a theory.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 13, 2015 15:50:52 GMT -5
I swear on my autographed copy of the second amendment that I'm not Steve.
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 13, 2015 18:35:16 GMT -5
I've always maintained that Explorer Steve/Coach D is actually SICguy 84 or calsufan or Mister D since they seem to be the ones who respond the most to his posts and ultimately end up prolonging stupid threads. Just a theory. No doubt you also subscribe to the Tooth Fairy, Loch Ness Monster and Easter Bunny theories as well.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Oct 14, 2015 5:25:35 GMT -5
I've always maintained that Explorer Steve/Coach D is actually SICguy 84 or calsufan or Mister D since they seem to be the ones who respond the most to his posts and ultimately end up prolonging stupid threads. Just a theory. The long con. Like 15 years long.
|
|
|
Post by 1stflooredwards on Oct 14, 2015 12:50:34 GMT -5
I've always maintained that Explorer Steve/Coach D is actually SICguy 84 or calsufan or Mister D since they seem to be the ones who respond the most to his posts and ultimately end up prolonging stupid threads. Just a theory. No doubt you also subscribe to the Tooth Fairy, Loch Ness Monster and Easter Bunny theories as well. C'mon Cal, everyone knows there is no such thing as the Tooth Fair and the Easter Bunny.
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Oct 15, 2015 16:14:02 GMT -5
It is like those who believed in Big Foot back in the 1970's or Global Warming caused by "the evil combustion engine" in today's world.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 15, 2015 22:34:01 GMT -5
So you've maintained all along you didn't know who Steve was, but now you know all about him and spoke to him several years ago at length?
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 16, 2015 7:45:31 GMT -5
It is like those who believed in Big Foot back in the 1970's or Global Warming caused by "the evil combustion engine" in today's world. Steve, keep politics off the board.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 16, 2015 8:10:31 GMT -5
To be fair, he wasn't the one who started it this time.
|
|
|
Post by calsufan on Oct 16, 2015 9:35:55 GMT -5
To be fair, he wasn't the one who started it this time. True enough, but he's working his politics more and more into this thread. I don't see anyone else doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2015 8:00:06 GMT -5
But let me guess your stances on capitalism and gay marriage and welfare and etc etc etc But let me guess your stances on capitalism and gay marriage and welfare and etc etc etc "Pro choice" supporters often try to compare their personal stance on capitalism, gun control, the death penalty, or even the ethical treatment of animals, to their characterizations of anti abortion opponents, as a way of defending their moral high ground. What can this possibly mean? Is a cooped up chicken valued higher than a fetus? (What about fetal pigs, where do they fall in this?) Are we supposedly good enough to afford ourselves the ability to spare a few unwanted babies, because of our otherwise good political views? (sic: Planned Parenthood has been responsible for 7 million abortions in US over the last ten years.) Meanwhile, there is no actual valid "pro life" stance if one also supports the death penalty. In America, there have been about 1,400 criminals put to death since 1976. Despite 56% of Americans being in favor of the death penalty, this truly is being used a matter of last resort (except in Texas!). The constitution protects against cruel and unusual punishments... I believe that if the death penalty is outlawed because of protections under the constitution and natural law, then abortion should at least be considered a violation of natural law, if not constitutional law, as well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2015 8:10:15 GMT -5
It is like those who believed in Big Foot back in the 1970's or Global Warming caused by "the evil combustion engine" in today's world. The more you open your mouth the more your reputation suffers. You can believe whatever you want to about global warming, and you don't have to go along with the "conspiracy" if you'd rather be... different. But don't you realize everything you now claim- about anything- will be tainted by your disreputable remarks about global warming aka climate change? Do you really want to be like Sarah Palin, who when asked about her foreign policy experience, made an idiotic statement about seeing Russia from her house, and now can't be taken seriously ever again? She probably thought she was funny, too. But you aren't funny at all when you're disreputable like this, and you certainly don't win over any favor by being the obstinate objector about scientific matters.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Oct 21, 2015 20:20:34 GMT -5
But let me guess your stances on capitalism and gay marriage and welfare and etc etc etc "Pro choice" supporters often try to compare their personal stance on capitalism, gun control, the death penalty, or even the ethical treatment of animals, to their characterizations of anti abortion opponents, as a way of defending their moral high ground. What can this possibly mean? Is a cooped up chicken valued higher than a fetus? (What about fetal pigs, where do they fall in this?) Are we supposedly good enough to afford ourselves the ability to spare a few unwanted babies, because of our otherwise good political views? (sic: Planned Parenthood has been responsible for 7 million abortions in US over the last ten years.) Meanwhile, there is no actual valid "pro life" stance if one also supports the death penalty. In America, there have been about 1,400 criminals put to death since 1976. Despite 56% of Americans being in favor of the death penalty, this truly is being used a matter of last resort (except in Texas!). The constitution protects against cruel and unusual punishments... I believe that if the death penalty is outlawed because of protections under the constitution and natural law, then abortion should at least be considered a violation of natural law, if not constitutional law, as well. Off the rails.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,445
Likes: 6,368
|
Post by MisterD on Oct 22, 2015 10:13:13 GMT -5
Plurium interrogationum.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2015 20:12:54 GMT -5
Maybe. Which part? or all of it. I understand I'm of the minority opinion, but don't say I'm off the rails just because you and I have disagreed.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Oct 25, 2015 7:34:24 GMT -5
Maybe. Which part? or all of it. I understand I'm of the minority opinion, but don't say I'm off the rails just because you and I have disagreed. It's not a disagreement (though I do disagree). It was a rant, eerily close to a nonsensical rambling to me.
|
|