The Constitution Party.
https://www.constitutionparty.com/principles/platform-preamble/
The important thing is that I refused to vote for evil.
Statue of Margaret Sanger, the Founder vof Planned Parenthood
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
The Constitution Party.
https://www.constitutionparty.com/principles/platform-preamble/
The important thing is that I refused to vote for evil.
Yep, what's more and by aCW's own 'standards' - he's also a homosexual activist as he doesn't support the measures that aCW thinks must be applied to homosexuality under law.
Now, just watch as aCW feebly and pitifully squirms, deflects, "mocks" his way out of addressing this. Can sometimes be entertaining but then pompous clowns tripping themselves up always is to some degree.
“…Marriage is ultimately not a legal question but a religious one, and therefore, if the President of the United States, all 100 members of the United States Senate, all 435 members of the United States House of Representatives, and all 9 Justices of the United States Supreme Court declare same sex marriage to be legal, it is still not legal. It cannot ever be legal because God has defined what marriage is and what God has declared to be illegal mankind is not empowered to declare legal. God’s definition of marriage is the only definition that ultimately matters…”
-Darrell Castle
http://independentpoliticalreport.c...le-is-not-more-libertarian-than-gary-johnson/
Hardly a LGBTQ flag waver Art.
As I stated previously:
Castle agrees with Trump on many issues and doesn't seem real keen on the rights of anyone who doesn't agree with his religious views. The biggest difference: He doesn't seem to be a lunatic like Trump ... then again, that's not saying much.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Hardly one for legislating "righteous laws" that makes homosexuality a crime either, which by your own standards qualifies him as being a 'homosexual activist'. His stance on drugs is hardly in keeping with your own either:
"This next question ties in with drug policy. Do you see a role for the federal government in regulating and/or prohibiting things such as prostitution, gambling, smoking, polygamous relationships or any other activities made by consenting adults?"
"No I really don’t. The states are free of course to regulate if their people prefer but I see no Constitutional role in such things except possibly to control the spread of pandemic disease or something of that nature."
In fact, the guy sounds more of a libertarian than anything else. In fact that's how he seemed to describe himself:
"Libertarians should support me because I am more Libertarian than the two candidates of that Party. They are both CFR members, both open borders and both pro abortion. I am the opposite on those issues while holding Libertarian like views on many other issues."
http://libertyhangout.org/2016/07/interview-with-darrell-castle-constitution-candidate/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Castle
Or is this all fake news and made up?
Being that Donald Trump has no biblical based moral code, I would say that Donald Trump (depending on what he thinks his political base wants to hear) might agree with a few things that Darrell Castle and the Constitution Party has said.
As you well know, Ted Cruz was my candidate throughout the Republican primaries and my vote for the Constitution Party and it's candidate was a last second protest vote against the Republicrat Party and it's pro homosexual/pro abortion/sexual anarchist candidate.
Regarding the rest of your rant: While the founders of our once Christian nation had no idea that the nation that they founded would someday embrace homosexuality, abortion, pornography and recreational drug use, constitutionalist scholars believe that those issues should be left up to the respective states.
Please share you vast constitutional knowledge by showing that the Founding Fathers believed that those things should be left up to the federal government to decide.
I'll wait...
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Yeah, and Cruz threw in his lot with Trump and you gave him a pass on that because he apparently had 'virtuous' reasons for 'supporting evil' - even though nobody should do that - also according to you.
Ah, the deflection and rabbit trails right on cue. You supported a homosexual activist and a libertarian aCW, by your own parameters no less!
:nono:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
As you well know, Ted Cruz was my candidate throughout the Republican primaries and my vote for the Constitution Party and it's candidate was a last second protest vote against the Republicrat Party and it's pro homosexual/pro abortion/sexual anarchist candidate.
If you would like to go back to the thread that has given you nightmares on a regular basis and review what Ted Cruz did and what I said, then let's do it. If not, please don't lie and take things out of context.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Regarding the rest of your rant: While the founders of our once Christian nation had no idea that the nation that they founded would someday embrace homosexuality, abortion, pornography and recreational drug use, constitutionalist scholars believe that those issues should be left up to the respective states.
Please share you vast constitutional knowledge by showing that the Founding Fathers believed that those things should be left up to the federal government to decide.
I'll wait...
Since you don't want to review the Constitution Party's view on states rights...
When you call Margaret Sanger a racist-Jew hating-baby murderer and say that homosexuality is a sick and disgusting behavior (one that can be changed through spiritual and psychological therapy), then and only then can you counsel me on who I promoted for President and who was my last second protest vote.
Again, I'll wait...
As you well know, Ted Cruz was my candidate throughout the Republican primaries and my vote for the Constitution Party and it's candidate was a last second protest vote against the Republicrat Party and it's pro homosexual/pro abortion/sexual anarchist candidate.
If you would like to go back to the thread that has given you nightmares on a regular basis and review what Ted Cruz did and what I said, then let's do it. If not, please don't lie and take things out of context.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Regarding the rest of your rant: While the founders of our once Christian nation had no idea that the nation that they founded would someday embrace homosexuality, abortion, pornography and recreational drug use, constitutionalist scholars believe that those issues should be left up to the respective states.
Please share you vast constitutional knowledge by showing that the Founding Fathers believed that those things should be left up to the federal government to decide.
I'll wait...
Since you don't want to review the Constitution Party's view on states rights...
When you call Margaret Sanger a racist-Jew hating-baby murderer and say that homosexuality is a sick and disgusting behavior (one that can be changed through spiritual and psychological therapy), then and only then can you counsel me on who I promoted for President and who was my last second protest vote.
Again, I'll wait...
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Eh? What thread's that? :liberals: I can think of one that was handy to actually help get to sleep...
Bring that convo here dude. Your double standard was not 'taken out of context', it was simply a double standard on your part. You outlined the standards and your good buddy Cruz got a free pass because...reasons.
Nobody's 'counselling' you oh flustered, blustery one. You're being mocked for the pompous, dimwitted clown that you are is all. It's no surprise that you wouldn't answer when asked who you voted for cos you knew you couldn't defend why you voted for a guy who by your own parameters is a 'homosexual activist' and a libertarian, not without the oh so obvious double standard in play anyway.
Pssst, go deflect by calling someone 'Aaron' or imply that they're one of Wiz's sock puppets again.
:thumb:
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
When you call Margaret Sanger a racist-Jew hating-baby murderer and say that homosexuality is a sick and disgusting behavior (one that can be changed through spiritual and psychological therapy), then and only then can you counsel me on who I promoted for President and who was my last second protest vote.
Again, I'll wait...
While I'll allow you to pass speaking out against homosexuality (my 4 part thread has been hard enough on Art already), at least you can call Margaret Sanger a racist.
Here's Sanger's own words:
https://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/sangerkkk2.jpg
Surely you can call one of the modern day founders ofyour the sexual anarchist movement a racist can't you Art? The evidence is right in front of you.
When you call Margaret Sanger a racist-Jew hating-baby murderer and say that homosexuality is a sick and disgusting behavior (one that can be changed through spiritual and psychological therapy), then and only then can you counsel me on who I promoted for President and who was my last second protest vote.
Again, I'll wait...
While I'll allow you to pass speaking out against homosexuality (my 4 part thread has been hard enough on Art already), at least you can call Margaret Sanger a racist.
Here's Sanger's own words:
https://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/sangerkkk2.jpg
Surely you can call one of the modern day founders of
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
While I'll allow you to pass speaking out against homosexuality (my 4 part thread has been hard enough on Art already), at least you can call Margaret Sanger a racist.
Here's Sanger's own words:
https://saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/sangerkkk2.jpg
Surely you can call one of the modern day founders ofyourthe sexual anarchist movement a racist can't you Art? The evidence is right in front of you.
Oh, stop being a dingbat. Your bore fest of a thread is only hard on yourself dude. Learn to live with your own proclivities and stop projecting them onto others man. You'll lighten up a lot and will feel better within yourself as well. You're not and never have been interested in dialogue on here. You just need to get out of your own self made closet and accept who you are. Sanger is no hero of mine and your rabbit trails and double standards are as boring and predictable as they ever were.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Surely you can call one of the modern day founders ofyour the sexual anarchist movement a racist can't you Art? The evidence is right in front of you.
Come on Art, call Margaret Sanger a racist. She met with the KKK and received a dozen invitations afterwards to speak to like minded groups.
Surely you're not afraid to acknowledge thatyour the sexual anarchist movement has deep ties to racism are you?
Surely you can call one of the modern day founders of
Come on Art, call Margaret Sanger a racist. She met with the KKK and received a dozen invitations afterwards to speak to like minded groups.
Surely you're not afraid to acknowledge that
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
I'm only surprised you didn't put up that fake photoshopped pic again. Where it came to 'eugenics' then race wasn't the factor for Sanger and she was at odds with those who regarded race itself as a negative trait. She wasn't a fan of the Nazi's by that same token. Of course there's dopey conspiracy theorists who "think" otherwise but they're the sort who post fake pictures and stories on the...oh, wait...
Given that you support libertarians and homosexual activists as political candidates then it appears you're just as much a part of this supposed "sexual anarchist" movement as I am.
Or, get a life and get out of that closet you gay obsessed nut.
:e4e:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Come on Art, call Margaret Sanger a racist. She met with the KKK and received a dozen invitations afterwards to speak to like minded groups.
Surely you're not afraid to acknowledge thatyour the sexual anarchist movement has deep ties to racism are you?
Still no condemnation of the racist Margaret Sanger. Regarding the fake photo of Sanger speaking at a KKK rally: You seem more concerned about the photo than the fact that she spoke to the KKK.
Gee Art, if Sanger spoke to the KKK and received a dozen invitations by like minded groups to speak aftewards, one would think that the racists liked something she had to say.
Cite please.
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/02/...rgaret-sanger-was-part-of-euthanasia-society/
You do know that Jesus can help you escape your culture of death don't you Art? Are you too proud to ask Him?
Come on Art, call Margaret Sanger a racist. She met with the KKK and received a dozen invitations afterwards to speak to like minded groups.
Surely you're not afraid to acknowledge that
Still no condemnation of the racist Margaret Sanger. Regarding the fake photo of Sanger speaking at a KKK rally: You seem more concerned about the photo than the fact that she spoke to the KKK.
Gee Art, if Sanger spoke to the KKK and received a dozen invitations by like minded groups to speak aftewards, one would think that the racists liked something she had to say.
Cite please.
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/02/...rgaret-sanger-was-part-of-euthanasia-society/
You do know that Jesus can help you escape your culture of death don't you Art? Are you too proud to ask Him?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Funny, Martin Luther King didn't seem to think so, or many other prominent black people. Feel free not to go on another rant about MLK as it's not the time of year yet...
Gee aCW, maybe if you did some research instead of lapping up your loopy far right blogs...
Sanger's eugenic policies included an exclusionary immigration policy, free access to birth control methods, and full family planning autonomy for the able-minded, as well as compulsory segregation or sterilization for the "profoundly retarded".[119][120] Sanger wrote, "we [do not] believe that the community could or should send to the lethal chamber the defective progeny resulting from irresponsible and unintelligent breeding."[121] In personal correspondence she expressed her sadness about the aggressive and lethal Nazi eugenics program; and donated to the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda.[120] In addition, Sanger believed the responsibility for birth control should remain with able-minded individual parents rather than the state, and that self-determining motherhood was the only unshakable foundation for racial betterment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
Now I know Wiki isn't a far right propaganda blog and I don't support her ideals regardless on this but making her out to be a racist is dishonest.
Eh, euthanasia itself isn't a cut and dried issue for the rational and objective as it is, and you nor this 'site' counts.
For what, being straight?
Silly, silly little goof. Go get help yourself if you loathe your orientation so much cos straight folk don't act like this.
Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Still no condemnation of the racist Margaret Sanger. Regarding the fake photo of Sanger speaking at a KKK rally: You seem more concerned about the photo than the fact that she spoke to the KKK.
I see why you don't condemn the racist-Jew hating-sexual anarchist Margaret Sanger: as seen in your comments below, you don't want to acknowledge that she was one. I'll address the lunacy of that statement shortly.
Regarding MLK Jr.: Yes, the first co-recipient of the Margaret Sanger baby butchering award was a fan of hers. But then King was a fan of communists (he compared our brave soldiers fighting in Viet Nam with Nazis) was a sexual deviant who was...ahem...close friends with a homosexual, and amongst other things, didn't believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ.
BTW: The "Politically incorrect truth about Martin Luther King Jr." thread is open year round now, and it has much more information about Margaret Sanger than what's been written in this thread. Anytime you want to actually debate...
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Gee Art, if Sanger spoke to the KKK and received a dozen invitations by like minded groups to speak aftewards, one would think that the racists liked something she had to say.
Research as in quoting Sanger's own words?
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Cite please [that according to you, Margaret Sanger wasn't a fan of the Nazis].
When it comes to Sanger's close ties to the Nazi's, I'll go with Dinesh D'Souza's article which shows specific quotes from Sanger, over a wiki article.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/09/01/exclusive-dsouza-the-hitler-sanger-connection/
That being said: Let's review the wiki article that you linked, specifically the part about Sanger speaking at a women's KKK rally:
The women of the WKKK fought for educational and social reforms like other Progressive reformers but with extreme racism and intolerance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_of_the_Ku_Klux_Klan
Now I don't know if the word "extreme" has a different meaning in the UK then it does here in the US:
1.reaching a high or the highest degree; very great:
but when someone is invited to speak to a group of extreme racists and receives a dozen or so offers afterwards by liked minded groups, I kinda sorta get the feeling that the extreme racists of the Ku Klux Klan liked what Margaret Sanger had to say.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/02/j...nasia-society/
Except in the case of Sanger, one is directly tied in with the other (eugenics and euthanasia, i.e. exterminating "human weeds").
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarriro
You do know that Jesus can help you escape your culture of death don't you Art? Are you too proud to ask
Everyone needs to repent Art, as we're all sinners, but I do suggest that those who already have a millstone over their head not wait too long to do so.
Matthew 18:6
Still no condemnation of the racist Margaret Sanger. Regarding the fake photo of Sanger speaking at a KKK rally: You seem more concerned about the photo than the fact that she spoke to the KKK.
I see why you don't condemn the racist-Jew hating-sexual anarchist Margaret Sanger: as seen in your comments below, you don't want to acknowledge that she was one. I'll address the lunacy of that statement shortly.
Regarding MLK Jr.: Yes, the first co-recipient of the Margaret Sanger baby butchering award was a fan of hers. But then King was a fan of communists (he compared our brave soldiers fighting in Viet Nam with Nazis) was a sexual deviant who was...ahem...close friends with a homosexual, and amongst other things, didn't believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ.
BTW: The "Politically incorrect truth about Martin Luther King Jr." thread is open year round now, and it has much more information about Margaret Sanger than what's been written in this thread. Anytime you want to actually debate...
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Gee Art, if Sanger spoke to the KKK and received a dozen invitations by like minded groups to speak aftewards, one would think that the racists liked something she had to say.
Research as in quoting Sanger's own words?
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Cite please [that according to you, Margaret Sanger wasn't a fan of the Nazis].
When it comes to Sanger's close ties to the Nazi's, I'll go with Dinesh D'Souza's article which shows specific quotes from Sanger, over a wiki article.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/09/01/exclusive-dsouza-the-hitler-sanger-connection/
That being said: Let's review the wiki article that you linked, specifically the part about Sanger speaking at a women's KKK rally:
The women of the WKKK fought for educational and social reforms like other Progressive reformers but with extreme racism and intolerance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_of_the_Ku_Klux_Klan
Now I don't know if the word "extreme" has a different meaning in the UK then it does here in the US:
1.reaching a high or the highest degree; very great:
but when someone is invited to speak to a group of extreme racists and receives a dozen or so offers afterwards by liked minded groups, I kinda sorta get the feeling that the extreme racists of the Ku Klux Klan liked what Margaret Sanger had to say.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/02/j...nasia-society/
Except in the case of Sanger, one is directly tied in with the other (eugenics and euthanasia, i.e. exterminating "human weeds").
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarriro
You do know that Jesus can help you escape your culture of death don't you Art? Are you too proud to ask
Everyone needs to repent Art, as we're all sinners, but I do suggest that those who already have a millstone over their head not wait too long to do so.
Matthew 18:6
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Hey, you're back! What ya get booted for this time around?
Dude, your thread about MLK is a joke, and of course there would have to be some sort of gay innuendo surrounding the guy with you wouldn't there? There were several black people who supported Sanger. Were they also fans of 'ethnic cleansing' as well?
Research as in quoting Sanger's own words?
Have you read her autobiography?
Well of course you would, just as you'll go to one of your 'heroes' where it comes to spreading disinformation about the third reich being run by homosexuals. It's just typical you.
So much so there has to be a photoshopped pic of her at a rally?
Not in regards to euthanasia it isn't, not on a rational and objective level at any rate, either for or against.
How do you know you haven't, or is pride not that much of a deal in your book? You've yet to apologize for your homosexual innuendo, your lies about people having sock accounts along with other sleaze, even involving people's families that has gotten you kicked into touch on here. When you get around to showing some regret for all that crap then hey...
Hey, don't mean to butt in. Are not blokes men, are some women, born women, really guys? Is a guy a bloke? What is a guy?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Hey, not really sure what you're asking K. Can you clarify a bit more? 'Guy' & 'bloke' are just terms for men.
They call men and women guys now in the USA. In the UK, only men are called blokes. For me, calling a woman a guy is the same has calling a woman a bloke.