In fact, no one should be allowed to vote, we ought to go back to the old Monarchical system.

Cheers

I don't mind non-PC humor.  I do have a problem with hypocricy.

The same left wingers who bitch and moan if we don't have honey seeping from our pores about Islam ("the religion of peace") have no problem saying the nastiest things about Christians.

It's part of an overall pattern. Some poor aid worker gets murdered by these monsters in Iraq but oh no, a Marine double taps a terrorist -- fighting from a mosque -- while playing dead and we get 3 days of front page news coverage.

What we're sick of is the double standards.  If Jerry Falwell had made a comment suggesting that jews shouldn't get to vote, even in jest, you can bet they'd be calling for his head.

Trent Lott, a republican, lost his leadership role because he made a joke saying we'd be better off today if Strom Thurmond hda been President. 

I guess it's a "values" issue, I guess Democrats can't understand that.

population? % of voters is what's important.  it appears (averaging the number of voters dominionists claim to represent as well as their detractors' estimates, adding the two averages and dividing by 2) they can mobilize between 10-20 million votes...or like between 11-20% of the voters in the last election.  the percentage of republican voters is considerably higher.  interestingly enuff, thats about the same percentage that claimed to have been motivated by 'moral values' isnt it? 

if youre going to characterize my emotional state or my position on anything based on my statements, please have the good grace to base your analysis on what ive said...not what you wish i'd said.  it's not christians im concerned about (scared?? hahahahahah you do get wound up huh?) it's only those christains who wish to remake the country into a christian theocracy.

there's a large gulf separating those who advocate making/amending/discarding laws and replacing our civil state with a religious one. 

shutting up would be tantamount to NOT opposing them at all.  thanks for the advice but since youre not likely to follow it yourself (nor would i expect it of you), i'll pass.

According to the exit polls, about 30% of the country supported gay marriage, which means that 30% of the country must be huge homosexuals who want to turn the nation gay, since not one of them could possibly be mild-mannered, just like with the people who chose moral values as the top issue.

Maybe it's just me, but there seem to be many people (at least enough to warrant acnkowledging) that would love to change the nation into either an anarchist state, a socialist state, a communist state, etc. In fact, one might say that unions want to turn the nation into a communist state. Think about how much power they want to give to the worker (let's say so much that they'd happily cripple the corporations for which they work as well as the nation as a strike as seen in the mid '90s if my economic professor's history is correct) and how they try to influence the votes of union workers (as well as give contributions to candidates). When you think about it, the same people claiming Christians are trying to take over the nation into a theocracy should also be complaining that unions are trying to turn the nation into a communist state.

unions provide a valid basis for comparison but only to the extent that there 'was' a strong union voting bloc that was catered to and manipulated by the democrats until the late 60s.  the first sign of its impending demise was nixon's 1968 victory. in the early 70s, america's industrial base imploded; factories shut down for good and without union jobs you dont have union workers.  theres only one 'real' union left to the best of my knowledge but it's likely on its way out too.  from the 50s on, there's no historic basis for assuming the unions had any interest in overthrowing the government or even changing the system.  they--like todays longshoremen--were doin too well for themselves. 

as far as the socialists, anarchists, etc., go, theyd have difficulty filling a sports stadium much less a substantial number of seats in the house and senate. 

So only if you are a large voting block with common interest are you to be banned?  As far as I see, none of the 'religious right' has advocated turning the US into a theocracy.  They are voting to impose their morals, as is every other person, including the group above.  Yet you would deny them their right for the simple reason you do not agree with them?  You truly are a hypocrit.  Or a communist.  You choose.  No one can vote or legislate unless they agree with you.

Pathetic.

have i advocated banning anything or anybody?  please go back and read #18. 

Jesus Christ is, therefore, the Ruler of Nations, and should be explicitly confessed as such in any constitutional documents. The civil ruler is to be a servant of God, he derives his authority from God and he is duty-bound to govern according to the expressed will of God.

The civil government of our nation, its laws, institutions, and practices must therefore be conformed to the principles of Biblical law as revealed in the Old and New Testamentst--mission statement of the national reform movement as expressed in it's publication, 'the christian statesman'

im neither as far as i can see. im intent on preserving our secular consitution and our civil government is elected not annointed--something the dominionists and their supporters clearly oppose.  

do i really need to point out the largest party likes to refer to itself as conservative but...set new records for deficit spending, advocates amending the constitution to abridge state's rights as well as the privacy of citizens when it suits the party's ideologues, has recklessly enaged in international regime change and ummm noooo im not gonna say anything about anyone being a sheep following anyone cuz thats elitist, condescending and guaranteed to ensure you lose elections n shit. 

you've a very strange perception of socialism.  liberal democrats in this country = rightwingers in almost any first world nation except this one.

So one group wants to turn the nation into a theocracy. I'm sure at least one other group in the entire nation wants to turn the U.S. into whatever it desires (i.e. socialist state, communist state, anarchist state, etc.).

So, it's the size that matters? How many people in the nation belong to this group? (Sure there might be a higher percentage of them voting than they are in the populace, but that's the populace's fault for not rocking the vote as they said they would. It's not their problem that they actually bother to vote and nobody else does.)

A very Salient point.  I dont see anyone trying to deny them their voice, even tho a majority dont agree with them.

lemme see some contemporary documentation of any bonafide union with a charter that calls for replacing our constitution with the communist manifesto.  while youre looking, check out the 2004 texas republican party platform...specifically the plank that calls for pretty much the same thing as the nrm's statement. otherwise mb's fantasyworld union=communism analogy is not merely unsalient...it's just plain old pointless