Any serious Christians left?

You have been so wrong, so consistently, you have become boring.

My reasoning is just as I have stated. I vote for the things that I think are right and I vote against the things I think are wrong.
No, that's not what you were saying. You said it adversely affected your life.

Why don't you tell the truth?

Another Crime Issue Associated with Gambling is Street Crime. U.S. News and World Report did a comparison of crime rates in cities with gambling versus those that do not. The crime rates were significantly higher in the places that allowed gambling.18 Industry researchers dispute the view that cities with gambling have higher crime rates and assert that the rates aren't higher when the tourist population is considered.19 The article failed to consider that these cities are vacation destinations and their population is swollen by the influx of tourists.
http://www.library.ca.gov/CRB/97/03/Chapt11.html

echi wrote:

Arella,

In order for our system of government to best serve all the people, discussions of this sort are very necessary. We all gain from hearing each other out and learning about the reasons for each other's concerns and convictions. The more unsympathetic we are to the needs of our fellow citizens, the more our country will suffer for it.

I can't believe you feel as though your rights are threatened just because someone who holds a different view wants to better understand your own. That doesn't even make any sense! Why should you think your rights are threatened just by opening up and letting us have a look. Can they not withstand the light of day?

I am more than happy to share my thoughts on matters such as this with you, or anyone else on these forums. That's why I come here; to learn and maybe even teach some.

Of course, you have LEGAL RIGHTS. That is not the subject. How could it be? No one disputes your LEGAL RIGHTS, so why do you keep bringing it up? I am wondering about your reasoning, as I have made perfectly clear right from the start. Honestly, had I known that you were so bent on keeping your reasoning a secret, I never would have engaged you in this dialogue.

Echi, I completely understand what you are saying. I just felt like you kept telling me I was wrong for the way I exercise my rights. Now, if that is not what you were implying, then I apologize. But telling me I don't have the right to do it sure felt like that's what you were doing.

My reasoning is just as I have stated. I vote for the things that I think are right and I vote against the things I think are wrong. If I think they are wrong then I am wrong in voting for them. It's very simple for me but seemingly complicated to convey.

95% of my income is capital gains, when I go into the voting booth I feel compelled to vote for what I think is best for my country rather than what I feel is best for me. I often vote for platforms that would raise my taxes.

dyslexia wrote:

95% of my income is capital gains, when I go into the voting booth I feel compelled to vote for what I think is best for my country rather than what I feel is best for me. I often vote for platforms that would raise my taxes.

If I believe something is wrong then I believe it is not good. So why would I vote for something I think is wrong?

I admit, this one I thought was pretty good. Did you read it?

Quote:

Another Crime Issue Associated with Gambling is Street Crime. U.S. News and World Report did a comparison of crime rates in cities with gambling versus those that do not. The crime rates were significantly higher in the places that allowed gambling.18 Industry researchers dispute the view that cities with gambling have higher crime rates and assert that the rates aren't higher when the tourist population is considered.19 The article failed to consider that these cities are vacation destinations and their population is swollen by the influx of tourists.
http://www.library.ca.gov/CRB/97/03/Chapt11.html

The "buzz" article reports on a former LA Governor convicted of ripping-off people in the casino business. That is evidence only of government corruption. Nothing else.

The "focus on the family" statistics I did not read because they were produced by "focus on the family".

Because you can't think beyond your own self interest?

Arella Mae wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

95% of my income is capital gains, when I go into the voting booth I feel compelled to vote for what I think is best for my country rather than what I feel is best for me. I often vote for platforms that would raise my taxes.

If I believe something is wrong then I believe it is not good. So why would I vote for something I think is wrong?

Because you can't think beyond your own self interest?

Echi, I completely understand what you are saying. I just felt like you kept telling me I was wrong for the way I exercise my rights. Now, if that is not what you were implying, then I apologize. But telling me I don't have the right to do it sure felt like that's what you were doing.

My reasoning is just as I have stated. I vote for the things that I think are right and I vote against the things I think are wrong. If I think they are wrong then I am wrong in voting for them. It's very simple for me but seemingly complicated to convey.

I guess I have a hard time understanding why you think voting to remove/restrict others rights is right. I understand it's legal, but how is it right?

Let's say that someday Christians become a minority in this country and the majority starts to peck away at your rights. What if your right to speak about god to your home was taken away (maybe the law as against indoctrinating children or something)? It will still be legal in churches and during church meetings, etc, but you could no longer do it in your home because it violated the childs right to not be indoctrinated.

Let's say that this bill passed through congress, was voted on by elected officials, etc. Would you think that this law is a good, just law simply because it was voted on legally? Or would you be pissed that the majority infringed on your rights as a parent/person/etc.

Do you think that the majority has the right to remove/restrict the minority's rights just because they are voting on what they believe to be right?

Here's something to chew on: it's been shown by studies that over 80 percent of Americans are christians. Guess where the highest serious crime developed country is? You get only one guess.

There are plenty of other statistics Echi. Would you like me to get you some more or would you like to research it for yourself?

United States General Accounting Office: Impact of Gambling - Economic Effects More Measurable Than Social Effects (Note: 72 page .pdf download)

Multi-year study with data drawn from FBI national crime statistics, various official state and local crime statistics, the Internal Revenue Service, the Small Business Administration, the National Institute of Health, the Department of the Census, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, and an assortment of peer-reviewed, published academic studies and articles, among other sources. The upshot of the report is that while nationwide there was no discernable statiscally significant correlation between crime rate and the presence of casinos in communities, communities with casinos to a statistically significant extent had lower unemployment, higher average earnings and standard of living (including healthcare), lower suicide and bankruptcy rates, and overal more robust economic, infrastructure (including both public education and public safety assetts and personnel), and population growth than had otherwise essentially similar communities distant from and/or without casinos.

maporsche wrote:

Let's say that someday Christians become a minority in this country and the majority starts to peck away at your rights. What if your right to speak about god to your home was taken away (maybe the law as against indoctrinating children or something)? It will still be legal in churches and during church meetings, etc, but you could no longer do it in your home because it violated the childs right to not be indoctrinated.

Let's say that this bill passed through congress, was voted on by elected officials, etc. Would you think that this law is a good, just law simply because it was voted on legally? Or would you be pissed that the majority infringed on your rights as a parent/person/etc.

I would think that it would be a law that needs to be changed and if there were legal recourse to change that law I would follow that course. I wouldn't like the fact that it was made law but getting mad and throwing hissy fits doesn't help anyone. What helps is doing what you can to make a situation you find intolerable more tolerable. Why should I add to the negativity of the situation by getting angry? I'd rather take that energy and try to get the law changed.

Quote:

Do you think that the majority has the right to remove/restrict the minority's rights just because they are voting on what they believe to be right?

I think that if everyone voted in all elections, etc., then this kind of thing would be less of a problem. I think too many people today don't vote but then will turn around and complain about the way things are.

75% of the American population is white and only 12% is black. However, black people account for 44% of those in prison.

Are the black people committing the majority of the crime, or is the white majority seeing to it that the black people are charged and convicted unfairly?