States revolt against Obama's refugees. "We won't accept ANY!"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 16, 2015 10:58 PM GMT
    Kansas joins Wisconsin, Mississippi, OH, FL, Georgia, IL, IN, LA, AR, MI, AL, TX, Maine, Nebraska, North Carolina, more governors in refusing to accept Syrian refugees after Paris attacks

    "ZERO!"

    http://fox4kc.com/2015/11/16/after-paris-attacks-governors-of-four-states-say-they-dont-want-to-accept-syrian-refugees/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 12:00 AM GMT
    History repeating?

    washer.jpg

    cartoon1903.jpg

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Nov 17, 2015 12:41 AM GMT
    REFUGEES bout 2 B REFUSEES.

    Fuck these gutter people. They can go to Turkey, can't they? What's that? Turkey doesn't want them either? THE HELL YOU SAY.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 1:27 AM GMT
    icon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 5:30 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards


    Another brilliant post from the left.

    Is there ANYONE on the left that can communicate above a 4th grade level????





    1) First Amendment and Religion
    http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion

    The First Amendment has two provisions concerning religion: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion. The precise definition of "establishment" is unclear. Historically, it meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England.

    Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if (1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular, (2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and (3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state.

    The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest. For instance, in Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the Supreme Court held that a state could force the inoculation of children whose parents would not allow such action for religious reasons. The Court held that the state had an overriding interest in protecting public health and safety.

    Sometimes the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause come into conflict. The federal courts help to resolve such conflicts, with the Supreme Court being the ultimate arbiter.


    2) The United States was not founded on Christianity, it was forced upon the people by Christian radicals (Illuminati) who, like today, misinterpret and spin everything (constitution v bible)

    3) Suggest deporting all declared, radical Christians, to the middle east so that they can fight their holy war with Islam themselves. While the rest of us true Americans watch you fight it out. Stop dragging the rest of us into YOUR war



  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Nov 17, 2015 6:19 AM GMT
    YOU GET NOTHING! YOU LOSE! GOOD DAY SIR!

    Funny as all shit that one of the states is ILLINOIS, the very same place that GAVE us Blow-bama in the first place.
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Nov 17, 2015 6:22 AM GMT
    ELNathB said
    southbeach1500 said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards


    Another brilliant post from the left.

    Is there ANYONE on the left that can communicate above a 4th grade level????





    1) First Amendment and Religion
    http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion

    The First Amendment has two provisions concerning religion: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion. The precise definition of "establishment" is unclear. Historically, it meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England.

    Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if (1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular, (2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and (3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state.

    The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest. For instance, in Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the Supreme Court held that a state could force the inoculation of children whose parents would not allow such action for religious reasons. The Court held that the state had an overriding interest in protecting public health and safety.

    Sometimes the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause come into conflict. The federal courts help to resolve such conflicts, with the Supreme Court being the ultimate arbiter.


    2) The United States was not founded on Christianity, it was forced upon the people by Christian radicals (Illuminati) who, like today, misinterpret and spin everything (constitution v bible)

    3) Suggest deporting all declared, radical Christians, to the middle east so that they can fight their holy war with Islam themselves. While the rest of us true Americans watch you fight it out. Stop dragging the rest of us into YOUR war





    I don;t give two fucks about anyone's practice of religion. In this case, we just saw a horrific act of terror and only a dickwad would say it's unreasonable to question the wisdom of waving thousands of these people in at this moment.

    We'll take refugees; we just don't have to take them all NOW. Put on the brakes a little, mmkay?

    You lost me with the "illuminati" thingy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 10:32 AM GMT
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    What the fuck is an assault weapon? I keep hearing liberals using this term but nobody can define it. Do you just call any gun that looks too scary an assault weapon or is there a technical objective definition of the term?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 1:41 PM GMT
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    hqdefault.jpg
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Nov 17, 2015 1:54 PM GMT
    AaronH20P said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    What the fuck is an assault weapon? I keep hearing liberals using this term but nobody can define it. Do you just call any gun that looks too scary an assault weapon or is there a technical objective definition of the term?


    No one knows what an assault weapon actually is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 2:35 PM GMT
    I'm glad Texas Governor Abbott decided against taking them... That is one thing I'm behind him on... But here in Texas, we are ready for them....

    Come and take it!!!!

    Cheers,

    Sean
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:09 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 saidHistory repeating?

    washer.jpg

    cartoon1903.jpg

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292

    photo_slideshow_max.jpg?1417105292


    Yes, history IS repeating itself as you have made clear.

    It is obvious that some people think that we Americans are superior to everyone else and the that the lives of other people do not matter. Strangely I see this same attitude even among other Christians, some of whom even have a very literal view of the Bible but somehow think that the laws "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." do not apply to them. It is unclear how they rationalize around that.

    It is also clear that many people are incapable of rational risk evaluation. If we spent half as much on road safety and preventing medical accidents as we spend on airport security we would save far more lives but somehow a few hundred deaths in an airplane crash are considered more important than tens of thousands of road deaths and tens of thousands of deaths resulting from preventable medical accidents. Considering that, it is not surprising that people exaggerate the risks that a few of the refugees will create undue problems.

    In any case, most of these refugees are attempting to escape from war torn areas where they and their families are in extreme danger. The indifference of people to their plight is appalling. Moreover, this is not a matter of conservative vs liberal.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:11 PM GMT
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    ^^^ Good points! ^^^
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:17 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards


    Another brilliant post from the left.

    Is there ANYONE on the left that can communicate above a 4th grade level????


    ^^ That is a good example of people who either cannot or will not think clearly. Instead, they attempt to use name calling to bolster their positions.

    When I was in high school, we studied propaganda techniques, presumably so that we would be armed against being influenced by them. Name calling is a very common propaganda technique. It's intent is to deflect thought from the real issues and instead cause people to be influenced by the presumed incompetence of those who hold a particular viewpoint.

    Now name callers commonly use the labels "liberal" or "conservative" to obfuscate matters. Those of us who understand propaganda techniques tend to write off people who use them.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:30 PM GMT
    ELNathB said
    southbeach1500 said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards


    Another brilliant post from the left.

    Is there ANYONE on the left that can communicate above a 4th grade level????





    1) First Amendment and Religion
    http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religion

    The First Amendment has two provisions concerning religion: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment clause prohibits the government from "establishing" a religion. The precise definition of "establishment" is unclear. Historically, it meant prohibiting state-sponsored churches, such as the Church of England.

    Today, what constitutes an "establishment of religion" is often governed under the three-part test set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if (1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular, (2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and (3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state.

    The Free Exercise Clause protects citizens' right to practice their religion as they please, so long as the practice does not run afoul of a "public morals" or a "compelling" governmental interest. For instance, in Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944), the Supreme Court held that a state could force the inoculation of children whose parents would not allow such action for religious reasons. The Court held that the state had an overriding interest in protecting public health and safety.

    Sometimes the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause come into conflict. The federal courts help to resolve such conflicts, with the Supreme Court being the ultimate arbiter.


    2) The United States was not founded on Christianity, it was forced upon the people by Christian radicals (Illuminati) who, like today, misinterpret and spin everything (constitution v bible)

    3) Suggest deporting all declared, radical Christians, to the middle east so that they can fight their holy war with Islam themselves. While the rest of us true Americans watch you fight it out. Stop dragging the rest of us into YOUR war



    The organization "Americans United for the Separation of Church and State", of which I am a member, has very strong reservations about the "Lemon test" and sees it as dangerous. Because of the fungibility of money, money given to religious organizations to be used for secular purposes may in fact be used for religious purposes which would be unacceptable; it would force at least some taxpayers to support a religion which which they do not agree.

    Although I am a Christian, I believe in strict separation of church and religion. Centuries of history clearly show that when they are not kept separate they often have a corrupting influence on each other. Moreover, the conflicts in the Near East are another example of what can happen when religion and state are not kept separate; I am referring to the conflicts between different branches of Islam.

    As to your point #3, although I understand and agree with your sentiment, I think that actually carrying out your suggestion would be completely unacceptable.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:41 PM GMT
    AaronH20P said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    What the fuck is an assault weapon? I keep hearing liberals using this term but nobody can define it. Do you just call any gun that looks too scary an assault weapon or is there a technical objective definition of the term?


    Probably I would be considered to be a liberal. However, I also question exactly what the definition of "assault" weapon is. It really doesn't seem to make sense. Surely a clearer term could be found.

    Moreover, I do not see what liberal vs conservative has to do with it. Rather, I see using those terms as nothing more than name calling AND making undo generalizations. The terms "liberal" and "conservative" are scarcely any clearer than the term "assault weapon".

    I wish people would think clearly and logically instead of engaging in name calling, including using the terms "liberal", "conservative", and "retard". They add nothing to discussions and serve merely to obfuscate matters. To those of us who do think clearly and rationally, they tend to discredit those who use such terms.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4862

    Nov 17, 2015 6:43 PM GMT
    JackNNJ said
    AaronH20P said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    What the fuck is an assault weapon? I keep hearing liberals using this term but nobody can define it. Do you just call any gun that looks too scary an assault weapon or is there a technical objective definition of the term?


    No one knows what an assault weapon actually is.


    That is about the only thing on which we agree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 7:17 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    JackNNJ said
    AaronH20P said
    mindgarden saidicon_rolleyes.gif Retards

    A) Governors don't have any power over this
    B) These very same retards are all for arming insane criminals with assault weapons.


    What the fuck is an assault weapon? I keep hearing liberals using this term but nobody can define it. Do you just call any gun that looks too scary an assault weapon or is there a technical objective definition of the term?


    No one knows what an assault weapon actually is.


    That is about the only thing on which we agree.


    AR-15
    P90
    Kalashnikov
    etc.

    Liberals know about guns too, hell some of us own and use them (for purposes other than concealed carry even).
    We're just a little more particular about who can BUY them.
    Example: it never actually occurred to me (yay parenting) but I was definitely unstable enough as a teenager to make anyone wary of letting me have a firearm. Looking back at that, I can see how easily that could've gone in either direction had the thought to lash out occurred to me. One one hand, a quick background check would've shown that i was under psychiatric treatment and taking a mild antipsychotic at the time. On the other, there are any number of places in South Louisiana I could've gone to and paid cash without so much as a glance at my ID.

    Oh, and as for a definition, here's the "understood" definition that we all know without having to look it up:

    "Assault Weapon": Any weapon, though generally referring to the category of firearms, whose design is solely aimed at achieving the maximum rate and efficiency of kills in a given time frame or situation. Ancilliary items may include design and construction to allow use in inclement environments such as being submerged in water or subjected to airborn particulates without risk of damage or failure. Easily included are most military grade weapons, specifically fully-automatic firearms which eject the spent cartridges, load the next bullet, cock the firing mechanism, and fire the fresh bullet automatically and repetetively by using the force of the recoil produced by the firing of the previous bullet and which allow for continuous and rapid rates of fire. Also included, to a lesser degree, are so-called "Semi-Auto" versions of full-auto firearms, generally due to their often being easily modified by end users to "Full-Auto" performance.

    A traditional bolt-action rifle or a .38 revolver would not, in contemporary terms, be referred to as an "assault weapon"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 8:24 PM GMT
    robbaker's latest cake

    2860176943_da0083818b.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 8:27 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8said

    2860176943_da0083818b.jpg


    Don't be

    icon_wink.gificon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 8:50 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    Ex_Mil8said

    2860176943_da0083818b.jpg


    Don't be

    icon_wink.gificon_eek.gif


    So predictable.

    Now if you'd said, "He was only fulfilling your order", that would have been quite good.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 17, 2015 8:56 PM GMT
    Ex_Mil8 said
    freedomisntfree said
    Ex_Mil8said

    2860176943_da0083818b.jpg


    Don't be

    icon_wink.gificon_eek.gif


    So predictable.

    Now if you'd said, "He was only fulfilling your order", that would have been quite good.


    I was on the phone and can't multitask.

    I don't LIKE being predictable.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14303

    Nov 18, 2015 2:57 AM GMT
    robbaker saidThe refugees should stay in their country and fight back .this country is turning into a turd world. Take care of the american citizens first there's americans who are homeless poverty etc.
    Thank you. +2,000,000
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14303

    Nov 18, 2015 3:16 AM GMT
    robbaker saidGood for those states . it's about time there are some states with common sense as opposed to liberal ones like nyc
    New York along with Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland will allow themselves to be overrun by these refugee scumbags. Oh yeah don't forget California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii, those four states are just as dumb.icon_mad.gif
  • rip12

    Posts: 63

    Nov 19, 2015 1:58 AM GMT
    gov larry hogan of md has said we will only accept refugees if the federal govt can certify (and presumably guarantee) they have been properly vetted and pose no risk to the public whatsoever

    seems reasonable to me and most people ive spoken to

    our illustrious federal govt doesnt see it that way

    go figure