Two Buttons

I don't think there is such thing as an "unflawed" politician regardless of if they're democrat or republican

I agree. But in the context of what's happened in Virginia, the guy is unflawed

I honestly haven't been paying close attention to the news lately, so I know little of what is going on in Virginia.

Fixed.

An ad hominem requires me to have insulted you rather than your position. Since I've not insulted you nor anyone specifically, I believe I'm not guilty of the thing you're accusing me of.

And I'm definitely not a Democrat, any more than you're a Republican. Unless you're registered as such when you vote. I'm not. I'm an independent but I am thinking of registering for Republican since they can only churn out the worst scum of the universe that want to take away Social Security, Healthcare, and Education. Not to mention going after Abortion. A pretty racist, sexist platform if there ever was one.

You called the Republican racist and sexist. That's a personal attack and furthermore there's no basis or evidence to support that claim. I am a registered Republican so I guess that makes you a Democrat. Not one of the items you are accusing the RNC of taking away makes them racist, or sexist. The RNC is not in fact taking away healthcare or education and I am very familiar with the platform. Add SS to that also. Since there is a right to life then abortion should not be legal. Since the unborn are fully human then they should be protected by the government. One of the primary roles of government is to protection of rights. You might want to go to the platform of the RNC though. Just curious as to why you are thinking of registering as a Republican?

A personal attack requires a personal person. From what i understand, no Republican has been selected yet. So, I'm attacking a hypothetical candidate from the Republican Party.

Not an ad hominem. Not only that, but I'm attacking the platform, not the person. If the person supports prejudiced platforms, they're probably prejudiced.

Typically ad hominems are expressed when addressing the actual person in a debate rather than a debate about a person. Technically your Meme was an ad hominem since you called the Democratic Governor flawed. But, I didn't take it personally like you did when I called the next candidate to oppose him as someone who was likely going to be a racist sexist Republican.

As for why I would vote Republican? I'm not particularly impressed with the obstructionist, theocratic, self-titled elitists that are running things in the Republican Party. It went to hell the moment they became opponents to civil rights.

Sorry for the double comment - The Republicans did not oppose Civil Rights - a higher percentage of Republican voted for the 1964-65 Civil Rights and Voter Rights bills. There are what is known as "Establishment Republicans" AKA RINOS and they do not stand for Republican ideas. I am a Conservative and that is what the Republicans are suppose to stand for. Some are in it for the money but the party was formed to end slavery and has always stood for the protection of rights.

FYI, I described the top 3 Democrats in Virginia accurately. I didn't personally attack them. I should have said "deeply flawed".

No problem, and thanks for the history lesson. Now, I need you to pay attention: It went to hell the moment they BECAME opponents to civil rights. Since you were so kind as to enlighten me on past events, I'll enlighten you on more current events. The party of Lincoln that once stood for abolution and Civil Rights are NOW against Civil Rights. They've made that abundantly clear in the last decade.

I've stood against those on the right that continue to advocate their preference to end social security, end the right for women to choose between her life and the life of her child, against the right for anyone to marry, and against the right for anyone to fight for their country. These are not true conservative values. These are theocratic values. The very same ones we're fighting in the Middle East to STOP.

Well, that and oil, mostly oil. But I'll buy the "spread of democracy" bit.

Conservatism is about upholding the right of the individual over the government and when the government gets a say in what the individual does, you lose the real conservatives. That's why Republicans are split. There are still a handful of them out there who still fight for Civil Rights. Unfortunately, none of them are in my state.

The RNC is not for the abolishment of Civil Rights. Where are you getting this from? It's absolutely not true. They did lift some of the onerous outdated restictions on voter laws in recent years but that's it. There is no battle when it comes to an ectopic pregnancy in which the doctors takes the life of the baby in order to save the mother. It's imperative and moral to do so in that situation and no Republican is against that. Anyone can't marry. I can't marry my 16 year old daughter and 2 people of the same sex cannot marry. You can call it marriage if you want but it's like declaring that 2+2=8. It doesn't add up. Anyone shouldn't fight for the country. I assume you are referring to transgenders and since it is a mental illness, they shouldn't have a gun. The suicide rate for TG people is extermely high and they are not fit for service. These people need help and I am not advocating for mistreatment of them either. These are also NOT theocratic values. This is a Christian nation which is built upon Christian values and our form of a representative government is straight out of the Bible.

Lastly, the Conservative view is that the government is limited. That still means that their primary roles are national security and protecting rights among other things. The unborn is an individidual.

I would challenge you to look closer at the DNC which is at war against our rights. I am not just pulling this out of thin air but simply listening to the them. In the last presidential election, Hillary said that the enemy she's most proud of having is the NRA. Not ISIS - the NRA. She also said that we mus change our deep seated religious views. Really? There's the first two amendments right there. Look at what they tried to do to Judge Kavanaugh. No due process. Socialism. Infanticide. The RNC is not perfect but they are the primary tool for stopping the DNC from destroying the country. I used to be an independent until I saw all of the dirt and damage from the DNC. They rigged their own primary and they tried to take Trump out as well - by illegal means.

That is certainly a lot to digest.

I fundamentally disagree with you on everything you just said and I'm very sorry to say that your view of limited government protecting the rights of the individual is a complete and utter lie.

The NRA, last I checked, is not the second amendment. I didn't know that ISIS was such an exclusive enemy. You know, our President said that the media was the enemy of the people. Does that mean he thinks ISIS isn't the enemy also? No. Makes me think your argument against Hillary is purely from her position on a lobbyist organization and has nothing to do with ISIS or the second amendment, though you tried to infer it did. Good try, but no.

I can see it's going to take a long time to convince someone like you, everyone like you, that people who aren't like you deserve the same rights as you do.

You advocate that this is a Christian Nation and that it is built on Christian values while stating that we're not a theocracy. I'm very happy to tell you that THAT is theocracy. And you're right, we're not a theocracy but a democratic republic. If I have it my way, that's exactly the way we'll stay. If we have it yours, we'll be locked in land wars forever just like our friends and enemies in the Middle East.

And no one will win.

No one will be happy.

No one will live to be their fullest potential.

That's a lot of inference of stuff which don't represent anything I said. To CONSERVE the Constitution is to protect the rights of the individual - that's what the Constitution does - among other things.

Maybe I shouldn’t have assumed that you could figure some things out on your own, but I was mistaken. The NRA is a lobbyist for our 2nd Amendment rights. If you can go back to 3 years ago, ISIS was a very big problem – not law abiding Americans.

The president accurately called the media the enemy of the people because they are. They have been exposed as liars over and over. As a whole, they have it in for this duly elected president and at the same time have ignored asking Democrats like Hillary and Obama any tough questions. Time and space prohibits my listing the crimes of the media but go to the Media Research Center or Project Veritas and get educated. Trump has been spot on which the media deception of the American people.

I can be easily convinced – just present evidence. I am also afraid that you might need to go study American history instead of leftism. The fact that this is a Christian nation does NOT make it a theocracy. It means that many of the tenants of Christianity is the foundation. A theocracy would mean that God Himself is leading the country. Individual rights and property rights – a representative form of government are right out of the Holy Bible. That is not a theocracy either.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that A- this is MY way- it is the American way. B- that I would have us locked in land wars?? You have some imagination!!

Again, Hillary's stance against the NRA was not an attack on the Second Amendment, nor did it diminish the dangers of ISIS. The NRA is not an exclusive proponent of the Second Amendment but a lobbyist organization that does what all lobbyist organizations do best. They support gun manufacturers and suppliers and that's about it. It use to be focused on regulation and safety, and in some ways it still is, but it has diminished in that capacity and in recent years has been more about supporting companies than individual's rights. Or buyer's rights. More buyers equals profits.

I wouldn't have gone so far as called the media the enemy of the people, so much as it has slipped in the last twenty years in it's duty to keep the public informed. There is a lot of information out there, a lot of new platforms to exploit, and the media is shifting more towards internet than relying on television and that has certainly caused many devastating hiccups like forming biases in order to keep viewership up. <- this paragraph completely unnecessary because it has nothing to do with our argument and debate. I'm actually agreeing with you here but we do disagree on it's severity.

Theocracy doesn't mean we're lead by an actual deity but that people in authority are solely influenced by their religious tenants. True, we're not a Theocracy yet, but if we were a Christian nation founded solely on Christianity, we would be. We aren't. And that's where your whole argument falls apart. While it is true that many of our founding fathers were Christians they were not all Protestants and Catholics. Some were Atheists, Agnostic, and Freemasons. There was no attempt to devote a single religion or denomination at the founding of our country because this would've been counterproductive to the purpose of religious freedoms. By declaring our country a Christian nation, you alienate Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, and anyone else who is not a Christian. I'm not saying that was your intent, nor am I denying historical evidence. I'm merely stating you're overplaying the significance of Christianity in the formation of our Democratic Republic. And ignoring the dangers of Theocracy by denying it as a certain possibility with your inaccurate definition of it.

Your ignorance of the damage a theocracy has over a country could lead us into a conflict similar to that fought in the Middle East.

Also, how does YOU registering as a Republican make ME a Democrat? That's some flawed logic there. Republicans disagree with each other all the time. LOOK AT CONGRESS!

Actually, there is a Republican in line next if the top 3 Democrats are axed.

I'm going to respond to part of your last comment regarding theocratis rule. You are overstating the meaning of "Christian nation". Please note that what that means is that it is the foundation of the form of governmen (Representative) and the morals which most of the laws were based upon were from Christianity. What the founders were is irrelevant to this point. It is clear that there is no state religion as no one has made that claim. Contrary to alienating other faiths - Christianity allows for freedom and individual rights. Muslim countries actually do have theocratic rule, not America. America has welcomed people here and allowed them to live out their faithe but Christians cannot have Bibles in Saudi Arabia and in many countries Christians cannot witness to Muslims. What allows that freedom here? Christian values. We have a Bill of Rights which allows things like freedom of speech and religion. I think you are taking these things for granted. Where did they come from? Christianity. You don't have to become a Christian though. That's your choice - a choice not given to Christians in Muslim countries. You might want to study the founding documents as there is many writings on this but it is no longer taught in schools.

Why is this so hard for you?

By stating that our country is a "Christian nation" you are literally advocating theocracy.

Yes, we don't persecute other religions here as other countries do. (Yet.) But if you start using that rhetoric in any kind of debate, you insert a false narrative that Christianity is somehow a dominate religion. That, in this country, anyone who operates outside of your religious morality can be denied their basic human rights.

Which is exactly what you're advocating.

Limitation of rights for women, homosexuals, and the transgendered based on your religious preference. That makes you an adversary to Civil Rights and an advocate for Christian theocracy.

You are trying to force YOUR own definition of what is meant by accurately calling America a Christian Nation. For the 2nd or 3rd time - THAT IS NOT A THEOCRACY. You are creating that as a straw man. Neither I or any other person I know have asserted the Christian RELIGON as the dominant religion which everyone must follow. That's your false interpretation and I have not asserted no such idea. It is actually affirmation of basic human rights. How am I denying others their basic human rights?? I am an advocate of our Constitution.

I believe that everyone has basic human rights - women(I live with 3 - my wife and 2 daughters), sexual orientation and race. You are making a giant leap for the fact that this nation is built on Judeo-Christian VALUES to the nonsensical - no offense. No one is advocating that you must follow the Christian RELIGION. That's up to you. But we all must respect each other's rights - rights granted by our CREATOR - and by "Creator" the founders meant the Judeo-Christian God - not Zeus or Jupitor. That is whom our rights are grounded in. That's the anchor. Does that mean that you have to believe in God of the Bible? No. That's the anchor or the grounding point. It's not the government or man.

The only straw man here is that we're a "Christian nation" because SOME of our founding fathers were of religious faith (not all).

You do not shy away from the persecution of women, homosexuals, and transgendered. You justify their limitation of rights based mostly on your religious beliefs.

That makes you for Theocracy and an enemy to Civil Rights.

Again you are straw manning. You are ignoring the fact that our form of government is from the Bible. Its irrelevant as the the religion or practices of teh founding fathers. It doesn't change that fact. So, you are simply changing the subject. And where are you coming up with the notion that I am justifying the "PERSECUTION" of anyone?? Where are you coming up with the notion that these people's rights are limited based on the view that America is a Christian nation??? I have not stated no such notion, nor is it implied. Therefore you are punching a straw man as it is not my view. Where are you coming up with this stuff? Certainly not from anything I said.

IF you are disagreeing with my stance on mentally ill people being able to serve in the military then THAT has nothing to do with a religious or a political viewpoint. It's common sense. You don't give guns to people with mental illnesses and according to a study from John Hopkins University, Transgenderism is a mental disorder. Why would you want to give such a person a gun? The suicide rate for TG peole is something like 20x higher then the rest of society. These are facts.

Any form of government that is created from a religion is a Theocracy.

We're not a theocracy.

We are not a Christian nation.

These are facts.