• Theocrat's Avatar
    Today, 08:47 AM
    It's the same reasoning used to justify voting for the lesser of two evils. We hear it over and over during every Presidential election cycle. Donald Trump is evil, just as Hillary Clinton is evil. Nothing is going to change with either of them in the Oval Office, and even Dr. Ron Paul recognizes that.
    51 replies | 659 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:23 AM
    Like phill4paul, I'm anti-Trump, too, but if Trump loses and we end up with Hillary as our next gun-grabbing President, then it will be the fault of the Republican Party and Republican voters who continue to tolerate, endorse, support, and vote for unprincipled, big-government candidates just so we don't end up with a stinking Democrat in the Oval Office. The GOP should have promoted Sen. Rand Paul when it had the chance because he would do far better against Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump can. And, of course, Sen. Paul has a much better record on gun rights than Donald Trump has.
    66 replies | 1191 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-21-2016, 06:28 AM
    Danke, I heard you got fired from a calendar factory for taking a day off.
    217 replies | 4554 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-21-2016, 06:14 AM
    I was writing down a joke with my pencil, when, suddenly, the tip broke. Then I realized there was no point to it.
    217 replies | 4554 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-19-2016, 07:46 AM
    Well, if Trump loses, then blame the Republican Party for it. For years in these Presidential races, the leaders of the party (with the help of the mainstream media) have shunned, isolated, humiliated, lied, ignored, and ridiculed principled, moral candidates like Dr. Ron Paul and Sen. Rand Paul. Then when those candidates finally drop out of the race (to the GOP's delight), then conservatives are left with establishment-friendly, unprincipled, flip-flopping, egotistical, power-hungry candidates that are used to vote against the excrement that comes out of the donkey's ass on the Democratic side, always with the reasoning that if we don't vote for the Republican candidate, then a Democratic victory will spell the doom for us all. Thus, we always get enticed to vote for the lesser of two evils. So, you know what? If Trump loses, then we all deserve the consequences of it, especially the Republican Party. Don't expect me to vote for the Republican when the Republican Party does all it can to rid itself of statesmen who rightly deserve the title as "President of the United States," like Drs. Ron and Rand Paul, and then uses scare tactics to try to force the public that a Republican douchebag is now better than the Democratic douchebag. Enjoy your chains. You wear them well.
    35 replies | 689 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    0 replies | 168 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-17-2016, 04:26 AM
    By the same logic, I would ask Alicia Dearn why she supports the "emotional harm" inflicted upon Christian bakers from homosexuals, demanding them to provide a good (a gay wedding cake) towards an event which those Christians cannot support in good conscience because of their Biblical convictions.
    16 replies | 405 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-17-2016, 04:12 AM
    Yeah, that's all well and good, except for the fact that Trump also believes we should "bomb the shit" out of certain countries and take their oil.
    35 replies | 600 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-16-2016, 12:44 AM
    Your statement above proves again what I mean by your being blinded of Trump's tyrannical nature because of your pragmatism. There is no "overall usefulness" to Trump's candidacy to the "liberty movement" because Trump does not stand for liberty. Just because the establishment types in both parties don't like Trump does not make him pro-liberty. In fact, the leader of the "liberty movement," Dr. Ron Paul, has even mentioned several times that Trump is just as much of an authoritarian as the establishment folks who are against him. But the fact that you can overlook Trump's obvious carelessness towards principles like the right to private property for the sake of his "overall usefulness to the movement" really demonstrates that you're not seeking to advance "the movement" at all. That's what we critics of Trump and his supporters (including Dr. Ron Paul) keep trying to tell you; your pragmatism does not protect the very things (like respect for private property) that you believe it does. In fact, it undermines those principles, and stifles what the "liberty movement" is all about.
    104 replies | 1513 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-15-2016, 08:53 PM
    Any man who has a history of using the government to take away private property for his own commercial interests, as well as supporting foreign invasions just so we can take a country's national resources is a tyrant. If you can't see that, then you're simply blinded by your pragmatism.
    104 replies | 1513 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-14-2016, 04:53 AM
    Take the quiz at ISideWith.com, and post your results. Here are mine:
    16 replies | 284 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-14-2016, 04:20 AM
    Yes, it's almost like they're afraid to admit that someone can be both physically and emotionally attracted to little boys and little girls, which, if they did concede, it would open the door to the acceptance of pedophilia, too.
    27 replies | 602 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-13-2016, 07:32 PM
    The misusage of Jeremiah 31 is a common error of Dispensationalism, used to show some sort of disparity between the nature of the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. However, the writer of Hebrews uses Jeremiah 31 to prove his case in Hebrews 8 that what makes the two covenants different is that there is a new priesthood, which is founded in Christ, after the order of Melchizedek. Thus, what makes the New Covenant different from the Old Covenant has nothing to do with the former being internalized versus the latter being externalized. In fact, in the Old Covenant, there were saints who already had the law "written in their hearts," like King David. Psalm 40:8 says, "I delight to do Thy will, O my God; yea, Thy law is within my heart." We even see God calling upon Old Covenant Christians who had God's law in their hearts, stating, "Hearken unto Me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is My law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings." So, you're totally wrong that the Old Covenant people are different from the New Covenant people because of some internalization of spiritual life in the people of the former. Both covenants had people with the law written in their hearts and minds. The difference is that under the Old Covenant, there was a separate priesthood (Levites) who had the laws of God and whose job was to explain the law to the people of God. In the New Covenant, there is no longer that kind of priesthood because Christ, being the Word, now imparts His word to all covenant people, without the need of a tribal priesthood, and especially, without daily and yearly sacrifices to atone for sins. So, once again, there is no difference between Old Covenant Christians and New Covenant Christians. They are both in the Father, through Christ, and in the power of the Holy Spirit. The same laws in the Old Testament can be applied to New Testament Christians, through Christ, because Christ is the One Who not only nailed the Law to cross when He died, but resurrected the Law in His resurrection and ascension. But it takes wisdom.
    322 replies | 4651 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-13-2016, 03:14 AM
    It bears repeating that just because a person appears to be "antiestablishment," it doesn't mean that that person is also "pro-liberty." In my opinion, Trump is not antiestablishment; he just wants to create another kind of establishment. He's also at war...with himself: And, the most antiestablishment statesman to ever sit in a seat of Congress has exposed Trump for who is really is--an authoritarian:
    38 replies | 602 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-13-2016, 02:48 AM
    Explain to me, again, how drugs are extremely damaging to society.
    246 replies | 3465 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-12-2016, 10:26 PM
    I can't look at that without wondering how the transgender priests differentiate between "masculinity" and "femininity." If they want to create a dichotomy between "sex" and "gender," then what makes a male "male," and a female "female," apart from biology?
    27 replies | 602 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-12-2016, 10:03 PM
    That's true, but for many parents, it has been difficult for them to see the "golden calves" which the public schools have made their kids worship at...until now.
    27 replies | 602 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-12-2016, 09:24 PM
    By: Matt Walsh Click here to read his post on The Blaze.
    27 replies | 602 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    20 replies | 584 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-11-2016, 08:00 PM
    Your comment against drugs is yet another argument based on the fallacy of reification (ascribing animate qualities to inanimate objects). Drugs don't damage society; it's the people who use drugs that have the potential to cause problems in a society, just as it's not guns that kill people, but the people who use guns immorally. Drugs can't do anything to a society until a person uses them, for recreation/medicine or for financial profit. But even if you want to argue that drug usage harms society in total, why should federal and state governments be the first lines of defense to stop its detriment? There are plenty of churches and private organizations devoted to help with drug abuse and addiction. That's where the solution needs to take place, from a "bottom-up approach." The system of a free market is much better and, dare I say, more holy than the political whims from federal and state governments to take care of drug habits that could be disastrous to a community or society.
    246 replies | 3465 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-10-2016, 06:29 AM
    That's doubleplusungood. Soonwise, you shall be reported by upsub to the Miniluv for your lack of bellyfeel towards goodthink.
    14 replies | 283 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-10-2016, 05:37 AM
    3894 replies | 170481 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-09-2016, 10:01 AM
    Of course, the polls are skewed.
    38 replies | 691 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-09-2016, 09:37 AM
    So, basically, Gary Johnson is for discrimination against Christian business owners whose theological beliefs do not allow them to acquiesce to what they believe are sinful lifestyles. Got it.
    12 replies | 294 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-08-2016, 05:55 AM
    24 replies | 477 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-07-2016, 02:28 AM
    As we all know, gun control is not about public safety; it is about increasing government power, as Chuck Baldwin accounts to: The hypocrisy continues here.
    6 replies | 234 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-07-2016, 01:40 AM
    Whether we've realized this or not, every poll is skewed towards people willing to participate in polling. In addition to that, polling is continually used to manipulate public views rather than measure public views. How, then, can polls be reliable instruments of public opinion, objectively speaking? (Yes, I understand the same question can be asked towards voting, too.)
    4 replies | 222 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-05-2016, 08:24 PM
    As usual, Sen. Paul was helping people see liberty in a different way, on so many levels. ;)
    4 replies | 431 view(s)
  • Theocrat's Avatar
    08-05-2016, 08:12 PM
    Yes, but you see how this damages Trump's image of being "anti-establishment," compared to those who criticized Sen. Paul for appearing "establishment" by endorsing people like McConnell and Romney (as well as at the beginning of his Presidential campaign), right? That's the point of the OP, I think.
    39 replies | 648 view(s)
More Activity
About garyallen59

Basic Information

Age
30
About garyallen59
Occupation:
Truck Driver

Signature


the rEVOLution begins!

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,318
Posts Per Day
0.41
General Information
Last Activity
08-11-2016 11:36 PM
Join Date
11-12-2007
Referrals
0

2 Friends

  1. MrDrawingguy MrDrawingguy is offline

    Member

    MrDrawingguy
  2. Theocrat Theocrat is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via Skype™ to Theocrat
    Theocrat
Showing Friends 1 to 2 of 2
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...