TRIGGER HAPPY?
Which story generated the lengthiest conversation this week at Propeller? That would be "Obama Wants Gun Registration," with 62 props, 27 drops, and 264 comments. GLee saw this registration campaign as the thin edge of the anti-Second Amendment wedge: "This all is just the beginning of stuff that will have to be 'undone' in a couple of years. Socialism approaching communism." So did rimbaud: "If only 'The Man' is allowed to own really powerful weapons, we will be powerless to fight his tyranny (we will never have a 'well-armed militia'). I propose no bans on weapons of any kind, unless the cops and the National Guard are also prohibited them."
Meanwhile, Beau7890 took the discussion back to basics: "So what exactly is the problem with registering guns?" GWHayduke had a tongue-in-cheek response: "Then they'll know we have 'em. Then they'll send their liberal, fascist military police state door-to-door collectin' the guns we been totin' around pointin' at bad guys.... Or, maybe they want to reduce crime. Either way, it's a socialistic, menshevik communist, fascist, liberal conspiracy to take our guns away in order to suppress us into drones to serve the masters in DC."
DaneL argued that the guns in his own household were kept under lock and key, and that outside of the urban fleshpots they were in fact less dangerous: "Out here we use guns as tools. Unlike the cesspool of a city I'm sure you live in, we don't have drive-bys. The last burglary we had in town, someone stole a bike. You might be surprised how different people act when they don't live like rats, packed in on top of each other." This earned a shout of assent from stalemate: "Bravo, Dane. Here too we live as you do.... We just don't have the problems they do in cities."
To which fsev41 replied: "Unfortunately the majority of our population lives in cities. Somehow we need to find a way to control gun violence in the cities while still allowing for hunters (of animals, not people) and personal protection." And GWHayduke, who had earlier ridiculed the pro-registration argument, came clean about the bolt-action bonbon in his own closet: "I keep the Steyer Mannlicher SSG69 PII that my grandfather gave to me before he died in [my safe]. He shot some strange beasts with that thing. Just because you live in nowhere WY with your cows doesn't mean that you are exempt from the stupidity of others."
ONWARD, CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS
Another hotly debated story was "U.S. Soldiers Pushing Christianity on Muslims in Afghanistan," with 45 props, 3 drops, and 260 comments. "It's proselytizing," said metavirus, "and it's against Afghan law and the military's rules." Replied capecoralM: "To view your words of ignorance is truly spectacular. Muslims, Jews, and Christians believe in the same God." To which crespi replied: "Go down to Alabama and tell a church full of Baptists they actually worship Allah. Better yet, go to Pakistan and tell them they really worship Yaweh. If you have any cool old vinyl records or old comic books or anything, please leave them to me in your will."
But ChefEOD saw nothing wrong in U.S. soldiers distributing Bibles to the Afghan population: "Christians are mandated by Scripture to share and spread the Gospel. To not do so is to disobey God." Replied dissent: "Guns and Bibles.... how persuasive." There was a similar response from doggammit, who saw the Bible as one more stealth weapon deployed by the West, and compared the soldiers distributing them to military engineers (or worse): "Under such conditions, distributing religious propaganda is a sapper's job--a special commission designed by saps and performed by saps. In military hands, the Bible resembles a 9/11 box-cutter." Meanwhile, MisterX wondered if the soldiers could truly be accused of proselytizing: "If handing out Bibles is converting, then the Gideons have been after me every time I check into a hotel room."
AND DON'T OVERLOOK....
There were several stories about gay marriage in our Top Twenty this week. "Two National Polls, for First Time, Show Plurality Support for Gay Marriage" racked up 64 props, 7 drops, and 157 comments. Will1313 greeted this as good news: "They should have the right to be as miserable as hetero couples. We will have to think up a new term, [since] GAY marriage is an oxymoron." Locky12 disagreed: "Why should the state have to recognize same sex unions when there is no incentive for the state to recognize fruitless love?" Replied david_nwpa: "Pure BS! First, if marriage were for parents only, then the sterile, the elderly, and those who don't want children should be banned. They are not!"
Endoscopy wasn't buying: "You and the other people that espouse homosexual marriage never want to look at the fact that marriage is the founding block of any government, as was taught in the civics classes I took." To which Tangent001 replied: "Nope. Historically, marriage is first and foremost a contract between families regarding the disposition of property and political power and only secondarily the legitimizing of children." Other related stories included "Maine prepares to take up gay marriage bill," with 51 props, 4 drops, and 103 comments, and "Majority of Americans oppose legalizing same sex marriages," with 38 props, 11 drops, and 77 comments. Said Wolfie2007: "Marriage should be between one man and one woman. In Canada there is a movement to legalize plural marriage. What next?" Replied gamahuche: "What next? They'll be banging on your windows and breaking down your doors to force you to commit savage, vile and obscene acts against your will."
Finally, there was "Which is Worst Addiction: Smoking or Drinking or Gambling?," with 109 props and 32 comments. "They are all bad," conceded sithmaster, "but I gotta go with smoking." For mark-stevens, all three addictions were sadly familiar: "My dad was a gambler, the whole family suffered in poverty for many years. My street-tough brother-in-law lost a lung and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair, due to smoking. My sister has a Jerry Springer family--all three generations--due to a serious drinking problem for twenty-some years. Pick one." Spadecaller also spoke from experience: "Truly addictive personalities change ships, from the Titanic to the Lusitania. From alcohol to gambling. Being a recovering alcoholic myself since September of 1978--over thirty years since my last drink--I quit cigarettes and before I was married (thank God) I gave up my addiction to sex. That does not mean that I gave up sex, btw."
There were also some more lighthearted responses. Said ctiedje: "Weed. Best addiction out there." Replied obiwan2112: "I'm absolutely sure that the worst addiction is smoking, and I'll bet you a fifth of Jack Daniel's and lay 10 to 1 odds that I'm right." But quicksilver0602 cut right to the chase: "Yes, they ARE all bad... but I've got to go with Propeller." That's right, folks: once you start, you can't stop. Can you?
Which story generated the lengthiest conversation this week at Propeller? That would be "Obama Wants Gun Registration," with 62 props, 27 drops, and 264 comments. GLee saw this registration campaign as the thin edge of the anti-Second Amendment wedge: "This all is just the beginning of stuff that will have to be 'undone' in a couple of years. Socialism approaching communism." So did rimbaud: "If only 'The Man' is allowed to own really powerful weapons, we will be powerless to fight his tyranny (we will never have a 'well-armed militia'). I propose no bans on weapons of any kind, unless the cops and the National Guard are also prohibited them." Meanwhile, Beau7890 took the discussion back to basics: "So what exactly is the problem with registering guns?" GWHayduke had a tongue-in-cheek response: "Then they'll know we have 'em. Then they'll send their liberal, fascist military police state door-to-door collectin' the guns we been totin' around pointin' at bad guys.... Or, maybe they want to reduce crime. Either way, it's a socialistic, menshevik communist, fascist, liberal conspiracy to take our guns away in order to suppress us into drones to serve the masters in DC."
DaneL argued that the guns in his own household were kept under lock and key, and that outside of the urban fleshpots they were in fact less dangerous: "Out here we use guns as tools. Unlike the cesspool of a city I'm sure you live in, we don't have drive-bys. The last burglary we had in town, someone stole a bike. You might be surprised how different people act when they don't live like rats, packed in on top of each other." This earned a shout of assent from stalemate: "Bravo, Dane. Here too we live as you do.... We just don't have the problems they do in cities."
To which fsev41 replied: "Unfortunately the majority of our population lives in cities. Somehow we need to find a way to control gun violence in the cities while still allowing for hunters (of animals, not people) and personal protection." And GWHayduke, who had earlier ridiculed the pro-registration argument, came clean about the bolt-action bonbon in his own closet: "I keep the Steyer Mannlicher SSG69 PII that my grandfather gave to me before he died in [my safe]. He shot some strange beasts with that thing. Just because you live in nowhere WY with your cows doesn't mean that you are exempt from the stupidity of others."
ONWARD, CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS
Another hotly debated story was "U.S. Soldiers Pushing Christianity on Muslims in Afghanistan," with 45 props, 3 drops, and 260 comments. "It's proselytizing," said metavirus, "and it's against Afghan law and the military's rules." Replied capecoralM: "To view your words of ignorance is truly spectacular. Muslims, Jews, and Christians believe in the same God." To which crespi replied: "Go down to Alabama and tell a church full of Baptists they actually worship Allah. Better yet, go to Pakistan and tell them they really worship Yaweh. If you have any cool old vinyl records or old comic books or anything, please leave them to me in your will." But ChefEOD saw nothing wrong in U.S. soldiers distributing Bibles to the Afghan population: "Christians are mandated by Scripture to share and spread the Gospel. To not do so is to disobey God." Replied dissent: "Guns and Bibles.... how persuasive." There was a similar response from doggammit, who saw the Bible as one more stealth weapon deployed by the West, and compared the soldiers distributing them to military engineers (or worse): "Under such conditions, distributing religious propaganda is a sapper's job--a special commission designed by saps and performed by saps. In military hands, the Bible resembles a 9/11 box-cutter." Meanwhile, MisterX wondered if the soldiers could truly be accused of proselytizing: "If handing out Bibles is converting, then the Gideons have been after me every time I check into a hotel room."
AND DON'T OVERLOOK....
There were several stories about gay marriage in our Top Twenty this week. "Two National Polls, for First Time, Show Plurality Support for Gay Marriage" racked up 64 props, 7 drops, and 157 comments. Will1313 greeted this as good news: "They should have the right to be as miserable as hetero couples. We will have to think up a new term, [since] GAY marriage is an oxymoron." Locky12 disagreed: "Why should the state have to recognize same sex unions when there is no incentive for the state to recognize fruitless love?" Replied david_nwpa: "Pure BS! First, if marriage were for parents only, then the sterile, the elderly, and those who don't want children should be banned. They are not!" Endoscopy wasn't buying: "You and the other people that espouse homosexual marriage never want to look at the fact that marriage is the founding block of any government, as was taught in the civics classes I took." To which Tangent001 replied: "Nope. Historically, marriage is first and foremost a contract between families regarding the disposition of property and political power and only secondarily the legitimizing of children." Other related stories included "Maine prepares to take up gay marriage bill," with 51 props, 4 drops, and 103 comments, and "Majority of Americans oppose legalizing same sex marriages," with 38 props, 11 drops, and 77 comments. Said Wolfie2007: "Marriage should be between one man and one woman. In Canada there is a movement to legalize plural marriage. What next?" Replied gamahuche: "What next? They'll be banging on your windows and breaking down your doors to force you to commit savage, vile and obscene acts against your will."
Finally, there was "Which is Worst Addiction: Smoking or Drinking or Gambling?," with 109 props and 32 comments. "They are all bad," conceded sithmaster, "but I gotta go with smoking." For mark-stevens, all three addictions were sadly familiar: "My dad was a gambler, the whole family suffered in poverty for many years. My street-tough brother-in-law lost a lung and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair, due to smoking. My sister has a Jerry Springer family--all three generations--due to a serious drinking problem for twenty-some years. Pick one." Spadecaller also spoke from experience: "Truly addictive personalities change ships, from the Titanic to the Lusitania. From alcohol to gambling. Being a recovering alcoholic myself since September of 1978--over thirty years since my last drink--I quit cigarettes and before I was married (thank God) I gave up my addiction to sex. That does not mean that I gave up sex, btw."
There were also some more lighthearted responses. Said ctiedje: "Weed. Best addiction out there." Replied obiwan2112: "I'm absolutely sure that the worst addiction is smoking, and I'll bet you a fifth of Jack Daniel's and lay 10 to 1 odds that I'm right." But quicksilver0602 cut right to the chase: "Yes, they ARE all bad... but I've got to go with Propeller." That's right, folks: once you start, you can't stop. Can you?
