Ten policies to save America

Big Boss · February 16, 2016, 08:38:16 PM

I think they should ban terrorism. That'll definitely work.

Assassin 11D7 · February 16, 2016, 08:56:15 PM

Quote from: Tengen Toppa Big Boss on February 16, 2016, 08:38:16 PM

I think they should ban terrorism. That'll definitely work.

6. Ban killing
7. Make America Great Again
8. Get rid of political party system
9. Retake Constantinople
10. Turn Mecca into one big black stone

Cindy · February 16, 2016, 09:16:31 PM

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 16, 2016, 02:00:33 PM

Quote from: Cindy on February 16, 2016, 04:31:53 AM
Why should marriage be incentivized?

If anything, I think LESS importance should be put on it
I know tearing down any institution that even smells of tradition gets progressives soaking wet, but marriage has survived this long for a reason.

"Hurpa durpa dur prugresibs dum"

Nice meme!

Only reason I haven't responded is because the dude made a good point. I was thinking in terms of the middle class and, when applied to poverty, he was actually pretty right.

Luciana · February 16, 2016, 09:39:48 PM

Quote from: Assassin 11D7 on February 16, 2016, 08:56:15 PM

9. Retake Constantinople

god i love you

big sponge · February 16, 2016, 09:49:22 PM

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 16, 2016, 02:56:35 PM

Taking religion out of marriage isn't something you can really do, fam.

Marriage predates our monotheistic religions and was originally a property transaction. So yeah, you can take the religion out of marriage.

More Than Mortal · February 16, 2016, 10:17:15 PM

Quote from: LC on February 16, 2016, 09:49:22 PM

So yeah, you can take the religion out of marriage.

So are we just going to pretend that the modern incarnation of marriage isn't totally different in a consequential way to what has come previously, and that religion absolutely is a massive part of the institution in its current form?

big sponge · February 16, 2016, 10:36:10 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 16, 2016, 10:17:15 PM

Quote from: LC on February 16, 2016, 09:49:22 PM
So yeah, you can take the religion out of marriage.
So are we just going to pretend that the modern incarnation of marriage isn't totally different in a consequential way to what has come previously, and that religion absolutely is a massive part of the institution in its current form?

So are we just going to pretend that increasingly in the modern world religion hasn't become less and less important to people and deny that religion and marriage are not intrinsically linked therefore making the statement that you can't remove the religion from marriage unequivocally false?

BaconShelf · February 17, 2016, 04:46:40 AM

I want to say something along the lines of more space funding because NASA is severely underfunded but I can't think of a way to word it beyond space ia fucking awesome.

The only incentive I can think for people who otherwise wouldn't give a shit is that space is a goldmine of pretty much any resource you need, but that's an investment on the scale of centuries with no immediate payoff.

Well, I'm not an economist in the slightest but I'm pretty sure that investing in R&D for a space tether/ elavator would pay off massively in the long run. Reducng costs of space travel by several factors of ten sounds pretty good fam.

Mattie G Indahouse · February 17, 2016, 07:27:12 AM

I wouldn't say this is a top ten thing, but it's still something we should do. When it comes to the jail system we should only be using it house people who deserve to be in it. Petty things like shoplifting, DUI's, drug selling and getting caught with drugs(Which shouldn't even be a fine.) should be punished with probation. Simple jails should be housing people who got arrested for things like assault, rape, sexual crimes, gang related things and whatever type of minor crime which makes them a threat for the time being.

For prisons they should be used in the same way as well like I said above. The only people who should be sent there are dangerous being like rapists, kidnappers, serial killers, murders, human traffickers, serious gang offenders and people who are involved or control a crime organization.

For certain murderers though they should be sent to prison or a help center depending on what they did. If you randomly walked up to someone and killed them you should be sent to prison, but if you caught your wife with someone else then you shouldn't. Yes you killed your wife and maybe the person she was with, but you didn't randomly do it though. You ended up catching them in the act which drove you over the edge to do something you wouldn't have done otherwise.

eggsalad · February 17, 2016, 09:15:58 AM

Quote from: BerzerkCommando on February 17, 2016, 07:27:12 AM

For certain murderers though they should be sent to prison or a help center depending on what they did. If you randomly walked up to someone and killed them you should be sent to prison, but if you caught your wife with someone else then you shouldn't. Yes you killed your wife and maybe the person she was with, but you didn't randomly do it though. You ended up catching them in the act which drove you over the edge to do something you wouldn't have done otherwise.

You'll find that this is the case for most murderers. (Not gang related)

More Than Mortal · February 17, 2016, 10:15:08 AM

Quote from: LC on February 16, 2016, 10:36:10 PM

are not intrinsically linked

I never claimed they were intrinsically linked. My point is that you are never going to remove religion from marriage at the aggregate level totally. Even if the world is 100pc atheist, I'm fairly confident we'll still be having marriages in Anglican churches and shit.

Mad Max · February 17, 2016, 10:19:11 AM

Quote

Policy Five: Incentivise marriage.

Are there not already incentives for marrying?

More Than Mortal · February 17, 2016, 10:33:31 AM

Quote from: Mad Max on February 17, 2016, 10:19:11 AM

Quote
Policy Five: Incentivise marriage.
Are there not already incentives for marrying?

I know the tax code is pretty friendly towards marriage at least in Britain, and I'm pretty sure some kind of incentives exist in the U.S. one as well, but I have to question their efficacy given how family structure has been changing over the past three decades or so.

Mad Max · February 17, 2016, 10:36:16 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 10:33:31 AM

Quote from: Mad Max on February 17, 2016, 10:19:11 AM
Quote
Policy Five: Incentivise marriage.
Are there not already incentives for marrying?
I know the tax code is pretty friendly towards marriage at least in Britain, and I'm pretty sure some kind of incentives exist in the U.S. one as well, but I have to question their efficacy given how family structure has been changing over the past three decades or so.

Are there really any fewer people marrying, though? Genuine question; I don't know. I know the age at which people get married is going up, but I'd say that is because of other factors.

challengerX · February 17, 2016, 11:25:10 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ · February 17, 2016, 11:27:11 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

big sponge · February 17, 2016, 11:30:10 AM

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 17, 2016, 11:27:11 AM

When I said you can't separate marriage from religion, I meant literally YOU (the actor) can't take (via action) it out.

All I have to do is not have a religious ceremony and not do it in a house of worship and I've already done it.

big sponge · February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 10:15:08 AM

Quote from: LC on February 16, 2016, 10:36:10 PM
are not intrinsically linked
I never claimed they were intrinsically linked. My point is that you are never going to remove religion from marriage at the aggregate level totally. Even if the world is 100pc atheist, I'm fairly confident we'll still be having marriages in Anglican churches and shit.

And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere? I was stating that you can remove marriage from religion because you can. Not everybody who gets married has some sort of religious ceremony to go along with it or even does it in a church. So to claim that you can't take the religion out of marriage is extremely asinine.

More Than Mortal · February 17, 2016, 11:34:35 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM

And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere?

That was literally the impetus behind this line of conversation. The first thing that was said on the matter was Verbatim calling for the removal of religion from marriage entirely.

Verbatim · February 17, 2016, 11:35:15 AM

Here's a good one:

Implement a preferential voting system (IRV) for presidential elections (if not all elections).

This is how you obliterate our demonstrably insidious two-party system.

challengerX · February 17, 2016, 11:35:34 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Verbatim · February 17, 2016, 11:36:16 AM

Quote from: challengerX on February 17, 2016, 11:35:34 AM

Religion should be removed from everything.

*tips*

big sponge · February 17, 2016, 11:37:07 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:34:35 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM
And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere?
That was literally the impetus behind this line of conversation. The first thing that was said on the matter was Verbatim calling for the removal of religion from marriage entirely.

And I'm contesting Doors claim that all marriage is religious, verbatims claims have nothing to do with this line of conversation.

Verbatim · February 17, 2016, 11:38:45 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 10:15:08 AM

Even if the world is 100pc atheist, I'm fairly confident we'll still be having marriages in Anglican churches and shit.

Ehhh. Maybe.

More Than Mortal · February 17, 2016, 11:39:10 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:37:07 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:34:35 AM
Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM
And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere?
That was literally the impetus behind this line of conversation. The first thing that was said on the matter was Verbatim calling for the removal of religion from marriage entirely.

And I'm contesting Doors claim that all marriage is religious, verbatims claims have nothing to do with this line of conversation.

He didn't even say that though. . .

Quote

Religious folks will have religious marriages, secular folks will spend thousands of dollars on ceremonies they don't even really believe in. It's all marriage. Different groups just have different ceremonies.

Like, what fucking thread are you even reading?

challengerX · February 17, 2016, 11:40:14 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

big sponge · February 17, 2016, 11:41:34 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:39:10 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:34:35 AM
Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM
And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere?
That was literally the impetus behind this line of conversation. The first thing that was said on the matter was Verbatim calling for the removal of religion from marriage entirely.

And I'm contesting Doors claim that all marriage is religious, verbatims claims have nothing to do with this line of conversation.
He didn't even say that though. . .

Quote
Religious folks will have religious marriages, secular folks will spend thousands of dollars on ceremonies they don't even really believe in. It's all marriage. Different groups just have different ceremonies.

Like, what fucking thread are you even reading?

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 16, 2016, 02:56:35 PM

Taking religion out of marriage isn't something you can really do, fam.

The part I initially quoted and the part you conveniently cut out. What you quoted are supporting statements,

More Than Mortal · February 17, 2016, 11:44:43 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:41:34 AM

The part I initially quoted and the part you conveniently cut out. What you quoted are supporting statements,

What he said doesn't support your interpretation, though.

Not being able to take the religion out of marriage =/= all marriages being religious. His point is that you can't take the religion out of marriage because there are going to be at least some marriages which are explicitly religious for those getting married. He's saying that, short of mass indoctrination or cultural shifts, marriage will be at least in part religious for the foreseeable future.

That's why Verbatim's comment is relevant, because Door responded in the context of religion potentially being removed from marriage entirely. I have no idea why you think Door thinks all marriages are religious; if anything, given his political views, marriages are most likely going to be nothing more than a contractual agreement with subjective meaning painted over the top. After all, he wants government out of marriage.

ΚΑΤΑΝΑΛΩΤΗΣ · February 17, 2016, 11:51:33 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

big sponge · February 17, 2016, 11:53:05 AM

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 17, 2016, 11:51:33 AM

Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:41:34 AM
Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:39:10 AM
Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: Meta Cognition on February 17, 2016, 11:34:35 AM
Quote from: LC on February 17, 2016, 11:32:41 AM
And who claimed that it was going to be removed everywhere?
That was literally the impetus behind this line of conversation. The first thing that was said on the matter was Verbatim calling for the removal of religion from marriage entirely.

And I'm contesting Doors claim that all marriage is religious, verbatims claims have nothing to do with this line of conversation.
He didn't even say that though. . .

Quote
Religious folks will have religious marriages, secular folks will spend thousands of dollars on ceremonies they don't even really believe in. It's all marriage. Different groups just have different ceremonies.

Like, what fucking thread are you even reading?

Quote from: Chief Among Sinners on February 16, 2016, 02:56:35 PM
Taking religion out of marriage isn't something you can really do, fam.

The part I initially quoted and the part you conveniently cut out. What you quoted are supporting statements,
I think you're misunderstanding what I was saying.

You can have an irreligious marriage. That's been happening for years, nobody questions that.
YouTube

What I was saying was that religion cannot be totally separated from the institution of marriage through policy or direct action. I was responding to Verbatim's post, which in the context of this thread made it sound almost like he wanted a policy or something separating religion from marriage (I doubt that is what he literally meant), which to me seemed like an absurd notion. That kind of change can only come from socio-cultural shifts.

Alright, sorry for the misunderstanding. I actually agree with you on this.