Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $5,519
Woo hoo!! And the first 6% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by BuddhaBrown

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • As Hillary! Craters, Democrats Search for Panic Button

    07/25/2015 4:45:49 PM PDT · 21 of 90
    BuddhaBrown to Kaslin

    Hillary, the human RESET button.

  • Would you vote for Donald Trump if he wins the Republican nomination? ( Poll )

    07/23/2015 9:27:33 PM PDT · 137 of 218
    BuddhaBrown to sushiman

    I assume the self-righteous half here have not voted the general in 32 years.

    In that regard, I hope for change.

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/10/2015 1:14:40 PM PDT · 41 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    I was born and raised Catholic. Catholic school, alter-boy, the works. I jumped that ship when old enough to realize the silliest parts of their club are not scriptural.

    Anyway, I know nothing of Mormon beliefs really.

    I won't try to convince you of anything and doubt you'd have any luck changing my opinion regarding pre-flesh doctrines.

    I'm just glad you don't believe unbaptized babies (or people in general) are doomed or anything goofy like that - I assume based on what you said about the miscarried girl.

    Good luck and God bless.

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/10/2015 9:23:02 AM PDT · 39 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    "This implies pre-mortal existence or reincarnation."

    Pre-human spiritual existence - yes.

    Reincarnation - no.

    Each soul is required to go thru the flesh but once. The fallen angels broke that rule and are already condemned to death of the soul at judgment day.

    What do you make of God knowing Jeremiah before He placed him in the womb?

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/09/2015 11:08:59 PM PDT · 33 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    "...his miscarried sister..."

    I'm not a movie critic or child psychologist or human lie detector or anything like that. And I'm certainly not the judge of this little kid.

    All I will say about it is that I pray you build the foundation of your faith upon The Rock. And heed His warnings to His contemporaries who had, as Christians do today, built religions upon fables and traditions of men: "...have you not read the scripture?"

    (I don't mean to accuse you of not reading.)

    Many, many folks have had near-death experiences that involve visions of relatives and such. It goes without saying that God is capable of anything and I personally believe His mercy is expressed to individuals in a quite diverse manner - especially in times of great trial and fear.

    Many of the near-death stories involve visions of older dead relatives comforting the near-dying. Do you suppose those dead folks are actually spending eternity old and getting older?

    To the extent that the marketing of these experiences is honest and brings folks to faith and to a study of His word, then I'd expect their works will be judged as good.

    To the extent their experience leads people to trust, or worse, revere themselves over His word, then they are not doing the Lord's work.

    Even Christ's own miraculously and repeatedly validated testimony never conflicted with prior scripture.

    Also, while determining for yourself whether such news stories are pleasantly uplifting glimpses of faith or the basis of some new Christian doctrine keep this in mind...

    ...from the patriarchs to the apostles, many had visions. Some of which were doctrinal / instructional, some prophetic, etc. And I could be forgetting somebody, but generally I don't recall them being part of near-death experiences. Or being revealed to pre-school aged kids.

    If it helps to mull the difference between physical and spiritual consider this: In a very real sense, John the Baptist had a near-birth experience. Leaping for joy in the un-born presence of the just-conceived Lord.

    Do you believe what John perceived and celebrated was a small lump of human cells or a mature and divine Spirit?

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/09/2015 9:20:06 PM PDT · 30 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    "...and it is perplexing"

    It's seems like maybe you are thinking dead babies have physical bodies in the spiritual dimension.

    Those chunks of meat are feeding the worms.

    None of our souls are infant.

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/09/2015 8:17:01 PM PDT · 18 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to Faith65
    Where in scripture does it say “babies who die before Baptism do not go to Heaven”?

    It is not in scripture.

    It is purely doctrinal to some misguided flavors of Christianity.

  • Manifest Destiny in the Bible? America Is Modern Babylon, Said David Wilkerson

    05/26/2015 10:02:47 PM PDT · 15 of 16
    BuddhaBrown to juliosevero
    Attempt to predict what specific vengeance you will from God...

    ...but today's America is certainly NOT to the level of corruption as was Sodom.

    Unless ALL (as in ALL) of you here have come out tonight to force yourselves upon a pair of visiting angels.

    And NOT simply to satisfy legal mandates thrust upon you by Obama and Co., but driven by YOUR own individual sinful lusts.

    Can I see a show of hands - is this us?

  • More than the police politicians need to wear body cameras

    05/04/2015 7:33:32 PM PDT · 22 of 25
    BuddhaBrown to GilGil
    Police cause harm or not on a very direct physical level.

    I would think the analogous requirement for the conceptual social police world of politics would not be cameras but rather lie detectors.

  • Can the Pope Decide a Sin is No Longer a Sin (Like Eating Meat on Fridays)? (Catholic Caucus)

    04/14/2015 3:23:33 PM PDT · 35 of 62
    BuddhaBrown to NYer
    Would and should Christians make personal sacrifices as they see fit and beneficial...

    " ...out of love for Him? "


    ...out of fear that the church's definition of valid love gestures controls the destination of my soul?


  • Six Early Christian Controversies That Protestantism Can't Explain

    04/05/2015 10:09:19 PM PDT · 58 of 196
    BuddhaBrown to Arthur McGowan
    Maybe it's just me.

    But sometimes it seems like the factions and fractions Christ warned about and Paul worked to resist somehow today ironically measure their relative validity based on what proportion of the veil which Christ rent now hangs in their doorway.

    Christians, you are free.

    Neither man nor traditions of men define your relationship with God.

    Pray about it, join the one to which you feel led and never stop studying and critically analyzing your faith and your choice in earthly shepherds. Most of them do good works. Just don't think any one can save more of your soul than the next faction or anything so veil-ish as that.

    We are men. Imperfect all. Till the second coming we will not all agree. Strive to not judge the factions you did not choose. Respectfully correct, lobby, teach, debate, even chastise. But always remember to shake the dust off, if led so, and move on rather than try to do something you can't do - judge.

    Christ rent the existing denominations, He did not create any. That is kinda the main point about Christian freedom. Not that you are free do behave badly or anything, but you are free from earthly religions defining the status of your salvation or putting a velvet rope around God and a simple human holding the clipboard.

    You are with Jesus, you are in.

    Religion is religion, for better or worse. Faith is faith. Don't insult your Savior by giving the former control over the latter.

    The price is paid and the veil is rent, any effort to spread that word is time well spent.

  • Praying of the Rosary Is NOT Bible-Based Teaching

    03/24/2015 8:53:43 AM PDT · 41 of 928
    BuddhaBrown to RnMomof7
    God is your Father.

    Talk to Him as you would have your children talk to you.

    If you'd like your sons and daughters to say the same thing to you everyday, then by all means lavish repetition on Him as well.

  • The Fair and Relevant Question: After 8 Years of Obama, Why Should GOP Nominate a One-Term Senator?

    03/24/2015 7:05:21 AM PDT · 92 of 110
    BuddhaBrown to hinckley buzzard
    "Please. If you are going to stick your neck out get it right. Carter was a state senator only; not a US Senator."

    Please. If you are going to resort to such unreasonable lengths just to be critical, then note that your point was made (by a much more reasonable participant) and also answered dozens of comments ago.

  • The Fair and Relevant Question: After 8 Years of Obama, Why Should GOP Nominate a One-Term Senator?

    03/23/2015 8:54:47 PM PDT · 55 of 110
    BuddhaBrown to Vermont Lt
    Good point.

    Still, both legislative and executive experience.

    ...and a farmer, a born again Christian, a veteran, etc...

    You can't choose a good American president just by ticking off some of these supposed qualifications.

    If there is one guy / gal out there who can keep an oath, I'll vote for them.

    Ted does seem like one of the most likely ones to do that.

    And I'm from Walkersconsin.

  • The Fair and Relevant Question: After 8 Years of Obama, Why Should GOP Nominate a One-Term Senator?

    03/23/2015 8:32:06 PM PDT · 47 of 110
    BuddhaBrown to LibFreeUSA
    "Thats why “Gov”sss ... CARTER, CLINTON, BUSH were all GREAT PRESIDENTS!!!!!!"

    Good point. Carter was both Senator and Gov! What did that get us?

    Who the hell on our side is looking for a lifetime of Gov't experience anyway?

    Also, to say Obama is not a successful president is an entirely myopic view. He has whooped ass on the majority party in the People's House for years. And now handily beats the majority in the Senate too.

    Just because he is not doing what we want does not make him unsuccessful. He has gotten just about everything he wants. Including new powers! How on earth is he not successful?

    He is very successful.

    He's just evil, that's all.

    Not the Anti-Christ or anything though. He is neither good looking enough nor intelligent enough for that job.

    He is the Anti-American.

  • What in the world do you make of THIS?

    12/07/2014 1:17:08 PM PST · 69 of 126
    BuddhaBrown to ravenwolf
    " does not make Sunday the Sabbath..."

    By all means, attend your denomination's services on the day which convicts you.

    Just don't imagine that day is what saves you.

  • What in the world do you make of THIS?

    12/07/2014 1:14:19 PM PST · 68 of 126
    BuddhaBrown to wheat_grinder
    "Yes they did. They were called the 7th day and the 1st day..... Greedy money changers and selling in the temple is what caused Christ to drive them out."

    Research good.

    Legalism bad.

    Legalism and corruption are what Christ cleansed from the temple. Not greed - which is mentioned in none of the gospel accounts. (Don't fall prey to the mis-teachings of the Left. Christ is a free market Man.)

    You obviously enjoy specifics: what specifically is listed as the marketed products Christ drove out by whip?

    Household items maybe, pots, pans, Paula Dean knives? No, that wasn't it.

    Ham sandwiches, beer, popcorn, a pack of smokes? Nope.

    Hymnals, loin-girding belts, Herod bobble-heads? Again, no.

    It was sacrificially 'clean' animals - sheep, oxen, doves. A dark convenience for the hip worshiper on-the-go. The vendors were in cahoots with temple bigs - or they would not have been there.

    They were essentially selling salvation. Which is kinduva no-no already. But hawking salvation in the presence of the Savior?... they were fortunate He used a whip.

    To both the temple authorities and the temple-goers, the act of sin-cleansing had devolved into a legally-correct but faithless schedule.

    That has to be understood. Or you won't understand why Christ acted as He did.

    Consider why He called them 'thieves'.

    Again, not because of 'greedy' high prices or any such thing. Because they were selling snake oil - whatever the monetary value, it does not work as advertised.

    Don't let any denomination nor day can keep you from Christ. He did not rent the veil to clear room for more of Legalism's tables.

    Keep up the good research.

    And pray you don't let dates become your doves.

  • What in the world do you make of THIS?

    12/07/2014 9:13:36 AM PST · 56 of 126
    BuddhaBrown to wheat_grinder
    "...honest study on the history of the Sabbath and how it went from Saturday to Sunday and who REALLY changed it...evidence to justify omitting one of the ten commandments."

    Don't beat yourself so. Neither of those days existed when the finger of God wrote you that list.

    I'm speaking of faith - the only thing that saves.

    You are detailing religion - the only thing that drove Christ to violence.

  • What in the world do you make of THIS?

    12/07/2014 8:35:38 AM PST · 51 of 126
    BuddhaBrown to antidisestablishment
    "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath"

    Finally... Wisdom speaks.

    Researching days and history is fun. It is NOT faith.

    Christ, the Passover Lamb, is your Sabbath (rest).

    If you place not your rest in Him, then next thing you know your mission becomes a fight with the brethren at the profit of the enemy.

    The Cup is already clean thou Pharisees, drop the lawsuits and have a sip.

  • Gruber Apologizes for “Indelicate Phrasing” [satire]

    11/15/2014 10:22:38 AM PST · 9 of 11
    BuddhaBrown to gov_bean_ counter

    “...waaay too much material...”

    The domain is available for you on-tray pre-newers out there.

    It would be a fine name for an information site which catalogs the growing list of political Grubergasms.

    Or for a running government/news parody site.... perhaps including interview guest officials who switch... from promoting the moral goodness of central planning.... to spewing the ugly truth... instantly... when the Tosh-like green screen changes to appear they are among their own left-minded, more-equal pigs.

    If the Republicans had any imagination or marketing or issue-leverage skills - at all - they would be on TV talking about giving Gruber a Snowden-style asylum where he can speak the secret truths of the evil matrix he once helped Dark Helmut inflict upon this stupid, stupid world.

    Alice Cooper’s very old “Dead Babies” would be good into music to Gruber’s prior endorsement of the Maggie Sanger doctrine and the Planned No-Parenting-in-da-Hood goal. While DH’s giant vacuum sucks all the black kids off the planet.

    Essentially, according to Gruber... the population in general is too stupid to choose the right ways to live healthy. And the black population is simply too stupid to live.

  • Defense says FBI posed as repairmen to get into Las Vegas hotel villa

    10/29/2014 12:26:10 PM PDT · 11 of 14
    BuddhaBrown to Theoria

    What happens in Vegas stays in.... your FBI file for life.

  • Five Myths About the “Rapture” and the “Left Behind” Industry

    09/30/2014 2:16:03 PM PDT · 88 of 232
    BuddhaBrown to huldah1776

    ” I did and I don’t believe in the rapture as defined by the salesmen.”


    I don’t dismiss anybody’s opinion and don’t wish to fight over it, but...

    I find strange that people think we have to be physically swept away somewhere to be safe. It kinda seems faithless to me.

    Easter is candy.

    Christ IS the Passover Lamb. If you have Him, you can be in the midst of death and destruction (as with the first Passover) and be quite unharmed.

  • "The Parable of the Weeds and the Wheat" (Sermon on Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43

    07/21/2014 3:01:27 AM PDT · 5 of 11
    BuddhaBrown to Charles Henrickson

    Fine subject and all.

    But I am curious regarding references to “the Weeds and the Wheat”.

    Is there some logic or research that went to this phrasing -vs- the traditional and more accurate “the Wheat and the Tares” ?

    First of all, the latter expresses the proper order of this teaching. Wheat sown first.

    Also, tares (Strong’s: darnel) are not just any generic weed. And, in my opinion, the generic “weeds” references could tend to emphasize the burden of them. Whereas “tares” emphasizes the falseness (Strong’s: false grain).

    There are many burdens in this world, not all of them evil. However, the tares of Matt 13 are planted with evil intent and represent falseness sown amongst truth. It is toxic if partaken and in the end produces no nurishing fruit/grain.

    I’m not wise enough to determine if ESV has been dumbed-down for English readers and perhaps I’m just being too danged picky. But personally, it was to some extant the word ‘tares’ in the KJV that made me more curious about the meaning of the parable and enticed me to study it further. As a gardener, had I seen the word ‘weeds’ instead, I would have immediately associated it with a recognizable burden, but it likely would not have prompted me to open the Strong’s to reveal the more accurate definition.

    Again, I’m not saying I’m qualified to make this determination. But, it feels like an example of translators or denominations changing text to somehow make it more lazily digestible for whatever audience by making it less true.

    If that happens to be the case, especially if intentional, then the fruit of it would be both toxic and ironic.

  • Hey, Anti-Hunters: Don't Read The Bible Because It's Pro-Hunting

    05/19/2014 6:32:25 PM PDT · 23 of 23
    BuddhaBrown to trebb

    “You told me to beware of getting things out of context (after putting context into my post that I hadn’t put there myself) and I would like for you to explain, in context, how Peter decided that pork was off the menu after his dream.”

    I apologize for adding context to your post.

    Nonetheless, Peter’s vision had nothing to do with making garbage food into clean food. The whole context of the chapter is about God using symbolism (as He commonly does) to knock Peter off his high horse and remind him that the message of Christ is food for all, not just for Jews.

    Jesus Himself was extremely clear that He did NOT come to change one jot nor tittle of the law. Only to pay the price for us breaking it - assuming we believe and repent.

    It would be quite insulting to Christ to imagine that “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common” is a reference to His shed blood cleansing pigs. Pigs can’t sin. Christ died to cleanse sin. From people. Even non-Jewish people.

    If the chapter was about cleansing unhealthy critters, it would have ended with Peter and the gang having a luau instead of it ending with him preaching to gentiles. Never once either before or after Christ’s death and resurrection is it recorded that even a single one of His followers ate unclean meats.

  • Hey, Anti-Hunters: Don't Read The Bible Because It's Pro-Hunting

    05/18/2014 7:56:47 AM PDT · 14 of 23
    BuddhaBrown to trebb

    “And from the New testament (Acts 10:13): “

    Hunting is no sin.

    But Acts 10 has absolutely nothing to do with hunting.

    Nor does it justify eating pigs and such. As Peter himself explains about 15 verses later.

    Out of context pull quotes are sometimes deceiving. This one in particular has led millions of Christians astray because they don’t read whole chapters/books anymore.

    I’m not saying you do that, but it is something to be alert for in general.

    “Where in the hell has my country gone?”
    I’m afraid is it now only available in book form, check the History section.

  • Hey, Anti-Hunters: Don't Read The Bible Because It's Pro-Hunting

    05/18/2014 7:44:36 AM PDT · 11 of 23
    BuddhaBrown to Kaslin

    Certainly God’s word is heavily, very heavily, more slanted toward the slaughter of domesticated animals.

    But you are correct that hunting in general is no sin.

    Of course, I assume that if you are basing your justification for hunting on His word, then you also don’t hunt/eat pigs or other forbidden critters including coons, bears, catfish, lobster, etc. The health laws are not arbitrary, basically you are instructed not to eat the garbage and meat eating critters. Bambi is clean to eat. You are not commanded to be vegetarian. But you are told to eat vegetarian creatures. And, no, that itself does not make Pamela Anderson clean to eat.

    And no, those rules did not change post-Jesus. Things God said were bad before Jesus did not magically become good after Jesus. What changed is how we pay for sin. No longer via animal killing, but by faith brought about by understanding who Jesus is and why He came.

    Regarding your questions:

    It is not stated specifically who killed the first animal. But clearly God liked Abel’s dead animal-based offering - though it was not hunted meat.

    Hunting is nowhere declared sin.

    Jesus is hip, but not a vegetarian hippie.

    God had Noah help the critters because He likes them for all the reasons He created them. And while they were not the target of His wrath, they were otherwise susceptible to His forewarned method of cleansing. Extra copies of the clean animals were taken along specifically to be killed/sacrificed.

    Absolutely NO to the David question. Yes he killed predators as a shepherd. Yes, he killed thousands of Democrats (Philistines) with the jawbone of a Democrat. Yes, later he even was guilty of putting a hit (murder) on a man because he has the hots for the guys wife. But, no, no, no a thousand times no - it was NOT confidence in his own killing skills that put him before Goliath. It was faith in God.

    Hunting is great and all (I hunt bow and gun), but there is no need to confuse people with speculation. And it would be the grave sin of false doctrine to contend that it was not purely faith that won that battle. Just read what David said about it to Goliath’s face. That should clear it up for you. Please consider carefully what it means to muddle God’s word for your own desires. Also, it has nothing specific to do with hunting, but it might help to read and consider the reason God gave David the plans for the temple but would not let him build it.

    The mentioned commandment is specifically against murder, not killing in general - which I’m sure you already know. Even for those who don’t research the meaning of the words vs the English translation, it is not possible to read the bible as a whole and come to the conclusion that all killing is bad. God demanded killing many times.

  • (Abortion Barbie) Wendy Davis Slams Pro-Life Paraplegic Opponent: He’s “Never Walked In My Shoes”

    01/21/2014 4:36:58 PM PST · 33 of 54
    BuddhaBrown to Zakeet

    Abbott -vs- Costello

  • Boy Scout leaders vandalize ancient rock formation [At Least they celebrate sodomy]

    10/21/2013 7:38:06 PM PDT · 61 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to KeyLargo

    He is just fortifying his defense:
    “Look, it really was unsafe. Even a disabled guy could knock it over.”

  • Boy Scout leaders vandalize ancient rock formation [At Least they celebrate sodomy]

    10/19/2013 6:55:37 AM PDT · 42 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to HotHunt

    “I am a 65 year old Eagle Scout....”

    Congrats! I’m genuinely jealous.

    Seems to me, the one guy fits the profile, literally, of the how-the-heck-is-it-standing round rock more so than what I recall as the pledged properly self maintained scout.

    Let’s both hope and pray their recent wrong turn on the trail does not lead the Boy Scouts of America to devolve into Scouting for American Boys.

    But I’m afraid the guy with the Pie Eating badge in the video could be another strong wind against the once-great teetering rock of an institution:

    “A gay leader would not have been so obtuse... nor so obese.”

  • Boy Scout leaders vandalize ancient rock formation [At Least they celebrate sodomy]

    10/19/2013 6:31:13 AM PDT · 38 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to Blackirish

    “Yeah well I’m pushing back on these fat ass thugs pretending to be scouts.”

    Sounds good to me.

    Push with your legs. Watch which way Fat Bastard rolls.

    And get the vids.

  • Boy Scout leaders vandalize ancient rock formation [At Least they celebrate sodomy]

    10/19/2013 6:26:17 AM PDT · 35 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to Anton.Rutter


    Film at 11.

    Crust by about 12 or so.

  • Boy Scout leaders vandalize ancient rock formation [At Least they celebrate sodomy]

    10/19/2013 6:23:50 AM PDT · 34 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to SoFloFreeper

    Mother Nature knocks down our stuff all the dang time.

    I’ve even planted trees for her sake. And she blew some down.

    The ones she knocked down with lightning took far fewer than 14 seconds. And her thunderous roar of approval topped even BSA leader StaPuft’s victory shout.

    Mother Nature is SUCH a scout leader.

    I’m pushing back. Bitch.

  • Navy SEAL's father: Obama sent my son to his death Tells Michael Savage 'they knew something was up'

    07/26/2013 9:25:37 AM PDT · 28 of 43
    BuddhaBrown to Pearls Before Swine

    “Reminds me of the biblical story about David and Uriah the Hittite.”

    That fits well with the story I read in the NYT about Obama killing Bin Laden with a rock and a strap of leather.

  • Should Hamtramck Erect A 12-Foot Wall To Keep Out Detroiters?

    07/19/2013 6:11:54 PM PDT · 39 of 47
    BuddhaBrown to Hot Tabasco

    “Still has the best Polish restaurants...”

    I still have a T-shirt from the Polish Festival or whatever it’s called that they have there once a year. Like a big block party with live music, awesome Polish, Middle Eastern and other food booths and a great bar run by some Greek guys I think.

    It is (was? - I was there about six years ago) a fantastic event. My brother lived there. It did not seem violent or anything. But Detroit is half ghost-town.

    Oh yeah, I think Hamtramck is also known for being the first town in America to have daily public Muslim calls to prayer.

  • The End of Reason: Does the phrase "faith Begins Where Reason Ends" make sense?

    07/15/2013 10:06:26 AM PDT · 13 of 17
    BuddhaBrown to SeekAndFind
    "If, in the future, I do return to faith, then I can truly and honestly say that I have reached the end of reason..."

    It certainly would NOT be reasonable to suggest that God, Christ, Moses or the patriarchs think of faith and reason as mutually exclusive or at all incompatible. And definitely not separate segments on the journey to Truth. At least not based on internal evidence within the books of the bible.

    You seem well intentioned and you have no verifiable reason to hear my words. But it seems to me that you might be struggling with the concept of revealed wisdom.

    Faith is not some crutch Christians whip out whenever we can't reason our way through life.

    Faith is a trust placed in God that what He has revealed and promised is truth. And trust in the multi-millennial series of witnesses He has provided for us.

    Everyone reasons. But results vary.

    Reason can find Truth if that is the end honestly sought.

    Reason can also find the pride in rebellion which convicted Satan and which will gain you a flamboyant parade in San Francisco.

  • Elections Are Not Democracy - A lesson from Egypt. (Andrew C. McCarthy)

    07/06/2013 5:09:41 PM PDT · 13 of 29
    BuddhaBrown to neverdem

    America’s value is Freedom.

    Democracy is merely the illegal immigrant that made it past the Founders’ fence - The Constitution.

  • A Libertarian Turn on Marijuana Legalization, Same-Sex Marriage and Gun Rights

    06/18/2013 6:13:31 AM PDT · 46 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to little jeremiah
    "Proof that you have zero zilch nada no nein nyet understanding of the Constitution nor the intent of the men who worte it."

    There is no reason to get all silly and multi-lingual. I was describing the original intent of the BOR, you are describing what it evolved into later. Much later. After the incorporation doctrine took over. Starting after the war between the states. Which, of course, is what killed the states' rights Ken H is correct to admire.

    Hell, the Second Amendment was not even incorporated, ironically, until the reign of King Obama, also known as the world's greatest gun salesman.

    And quite naturally I understand the USC is not involved in protecting me from you specifically in a policing type function which, of course, is a state and lower issue. I think I was clear that it is a fence built to protect individual freedom from democracy, the whim of the majority, in general.

  • A Libertarian Turn on Marijuana Legalization, Same-Sex Marriage and Gun Rights

    06/17/2013 9:32:10 PM PDT · 37 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to little jeremiah
    "...I've noticed often libertarians, when ranting about "nanny state" this and "nanny state" that, when directly asked "Well, do you think it's okay for STATES to make laws against abortion/ drugs/ faggotry/ porn/ vice of choices?" often drop out of the conversation at that point. They don't want to admit (many of them, not painting with a broad brush) that they don't want states to be allowed to pass such laws"

    I don't think we disagree, but since I'm the only one who used the 'nanny' terms, I'll bite.

    There is only one true measure of American-style patriotism. It is in the extent to which a person believes in God-given (or 'natural') rights to individual freedom. As opposed to any sort of entitlement, class or other man-constituted rights.

    Freedom / Liberty is our first principle.

    Parties come and go, principles should not. Like the wise Ken H, I tend to favor sticking closely to our original Constitution. As he reminds, it can be amended when needed.

    It also could be, quite morally, abolished today as well. I think it is reasonable to suggest that old Jefferson himself might entertain the question of whether it is time to do so since it is not working as planned and since the Declaration makes it plain that such is our duty when Freedom is losing to the 'general'(central) government. Which is inarguably the case today.

    Without the Declaration, the Constitution would be nothing beyond evidence of treason.

    So, the U.S Constitution is great and all, comparatively speaking. But it does NOT define the American principle - Freedom! The Declaration of Independence does.

    The Constitution is simply a barrier Madison and the boys built to protect the Freedom Jefferson so eloquently declared. Protect it FROM the evils of democracy which we have so wrongly glorified for so many years now.

    Back to your question... naturally I understand the U.S Constitution is there to protect me from you at the national level only. And, yes, it is definitely not desirable but clearly constitutional for individual states to restrict and regulate things the feds specifically are not supposed to touch as you said. That includes guns, by the way, despite what many on the right wrongly believe about the Second Amendment.

  • A Libertarian Turn on Marijuana Legalization, Same-Sex Marriage and Gun Rights

    06/17/2013 9:58:02 AM PDT · 18 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to xzins

    ... “general welfare”.

    I’m not exactly sure what you mean, but it is common to misread those words. Done purposely by some, I assume not by you.

    Those two words don’t mean anything like what ‘welfare’ means today. Madison did not want the central government to play favorites - AT ALL. Literally to not recognize rich or poor, young or old, black or white. Those two words meant the opposite of today’s general usage - it meant no ‘targeted’ programs. Which, of course, is what almost all ‘welfare’ is today.

    Don’t believe me, ask the Constitution’s dad:

    “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.” -Madison

    Neither Christ nor Madison told you to use central force in spreading what you, rightly I assume, define as morality.

    People who do that are compassion thieves. Such as liberals falsely claiming morality points by taking my money and ‘donating’ it to others. Robbing me of a potential to do so willingly - the definition of a biblical love offering. Tithes are different, but still do not go to Caesar.

    Force voids my blessing and theirs. Not to mention totally obscuring gratitude.

    I’m not accusing you of this behavior, the mention of ‘general welfare’ is just a pet peeve of mine. The epidemic example is unusual, still not exactly sure what you mean. If it is that Ohio and the other states should be forced to pay, then I disagree. Same logic as above. Americans never need force to spew charity. And it would not be charity with force involved.

  • A Libertarian Turn on Marijuana Legalization, Same-Sex Marriage and Gun Rights

    06/17/2013 8:04:30 AM PDT · 15 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to xzins

    I don’t get your point.

    Are you saying that Madison is wrong that non-central governments should be the ones, if any level should, to perform such actions?

    Should the feds ban alcohol for the same reasons you stated earlier?

    The nanny Right seems to forget, they don’t always win. And when out of power, they are hypocrites to blame the Left for legislating their morals at the central level too.

    America can survive just fine as designed. With little central power, states can be Left, Right or whatever.

    It is nonsense when people suggest Americans are more divided than ever. We are just making too many decisions centrally nowadays, that’s all. That is a recipe for disagreement. When the feds did little more than fight wars and deliver mail, then there was not so much to disagree about nationally. As originally intended.

  • A Libertarian Turn on Marijuana Legalization, Same-Sex Marriage and Gun Rights

    06/17/2013 6:34:27 AM PDT · 12 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to Ken H

    “So the US was violating natural law from colonial times until FDR because marijuana was legal?”

    Good to see some respect for original intent. It is often lacking even here.

    You can tell a Jeffersonian style freedom-lover from a conservative when the latter’s nanny-like tendencies start to show.

    By some of the logic in this thread, Bloomberg is a great conservative.

    Pretend it is still yesterday and defer to the constitution’s father, Madison:

    “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.”

    I can’t be more clear. The feds have no place banning stuff like pot. Those who want to be a nanny should do it at the state level. So a disagreeing minority can leave it if necessary.

  • MUST SEE THIS PHOTO (God & Jerusalem vote) - "Picture snapped and emailed to me"

    09/06/2012 8:37:51 AM PDT · 45 of 78
    BuddhaBrown to Slyfox; W.Lee
    "St. Peter repented, I don't think these people ever will."

    Pontius Villaraigosa appeared to be looking for a place to wash his hands as the crowd shouted "Barabbas, Hamas, Barak..."

  • Rape, Abortion, and the High Moral Ground

    08/21/2012 8:06:15 AM PDT · 8 of 26
    BuddhaBrown to dps.inspect; NKP_Vet

    I have heard all of the political and emotional arguments for the “except in the case of rape or incest” illogic and though they are seductive, they are not convincing.

    From the political perspective, one might suggest that there is a better chance of getting anti-abortion legislation passed when exceptions are allowed and I have no reason to doubt that assertion. From the emotional angle, we all have heart-felt sympathy for the victimized mother.

    There is a powerful reluctance to force a woman to continue her physically demanding and emotionally draining role in the most divine function of God’s nature when the initiation of that process was without the mother’s normally assumed consent. We would be assigning to her the responsibility to carry into this world a new soul who will be a seemingly unholy combination of her own self and of a man who is either frighteningly unknown or sinfully familiar.

    There is, of course, the almost inescapable temptation to assume this new person will somehow not be good because the genetic code of a rapist was used in his/her construction. Or that the new person will somehow not be complete because of the potential for physiological problems to arise when daddy is grandpa.

    Adoption is always an option when the post-birth burdens outweigh the natural desire of the mother to nurture a child which is, after all, still half her.

    On any scientific or logical rationale, assuming human life has value, I would ask two questions:

    -Does it continue to grow and change via natural biologic process? - If so, it is alive.

    -What will you call this life if the natural process is allowed to continue? - If the answer is ‘human’, then it has rights.

  • “Do things that have never been done before” - The guy who invented the computer...

    08/20/2012 4:41:24 AM PDT · 29 of 31
    BuddhaBrown to mylife

    “Gunning for the Buddha”

    Hey, I resemble that remark.

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 6:13:33 PM PDT · 528 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to wagglebee

    “Then why the hell are you here?”

    Good question.

    I suppose there is some value in a rear guard as well. But I’m off to the front lines. I leave my posting history to speak for me.

    Feet now voting.

    (Your pro-life bits will be one thing I miss.)

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 5:46:47 PM PDT · 512 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to Osage Orange

    “I bow to you...oh great one.”

    Now that’s more like it.

    Check the shine while you’re down there.

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 5:44:56 PM PDT · 507 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to SomeCallMeTim

    “I was NEVER a liberal.... just used to be ill-informed about Mittens.”

    Sorry about that.

    I did not mean to tarnish you with my sins.

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 5:35:45 PM PDT · 494 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to Rhane

    “I also support Romney....there are plenty of sites that allow complete open-ended debate/promotion, which is truly free...”

    I oppose Romney.

    But will vote for him over Obama if necessary as I expect you to do similarly if you are reasonable minded.

    I’ll look for you on the ‘truly free’ sites. We’ll rassle where reason runs free.

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 5:20:38 PM PDT · 480 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to SomeCallMeTim
    " 'Hey, you can always vote with your feet, pal.' ... I think it's silly. I'm NOT a Romney supporter... anymore.. largely because of things I learned HERE."

    You are quite correct, it is silly.

    I had expected better from FR and JR.

    I was also once a liberal (though much longer ago) who was convinced by reason and Light. NOT by the darkness of the closet.

  • Romney Supporters Banned From Free Republic

    11/01/2011 5:17:08 PM PDT · 477 of 898
    BuddhaBrown to Jim Robinson
    "RINO supporters will just have to keep it under their hats or in the closet."

    How do I 'fight' somebody you've got locked in the closet?

    Perhaps you can leave the closet key where I can reach it. And institute filtering for the currently well-represented squeamish Freepers.