Scott

Members
  • Content Count

    939
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Scott last won the day on April 26

Scott had the most liked content!

About Scott

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Scott

    Suicide and the Law of Chastity

    I am guessing that this is a troll post, but if it isn't why would you ask that question on an LDS forum? I think you could already predict what the answers would be on the forum.
  2. Scott

    The future

    Hillary didn't win and no one is wearing Hillary shirts. I already provided a source saying hundreds of attacks were instigated against Obama supporters after Obama won. You are ignoring everything presented. Here are more sources: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27738018/ns/us_news-life/t/obama-election-spurs-race-threats-crimes/ http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/05/11/obama_election_spurs_wave_of_hate_group_violence/ https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2009/racist-backlash-greets-president-barack-obama Also, there were several conservative groups (including arned militias) threatening a violent revolution and civil war if Hillary was elected. Which groups were calling for a violent revolution/civil war if Trump were elected? Even the Governor of Kentucky called for bloodshed and revolution if Hillary was elected, so no one can claim that it was just a bunch of nobodies calling for the bloodshed. https://www.yahoo.com/news/kentucky-gov-matt-bevin-says-bloodshed-might-be-165058821.html Other groups/sources: https://nypost.com/2016/11/02/meet-the-militia-monitoring-voting-sites-for-fraud/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/28/donald-trump-supporters-warn-of-another-revolutionary-war-if-hil/ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-supporter-assassinate-hillary-clinton-video-watch-us-election-2016-a7366301.html I didn't see any Hillary supporters calling for a civil war (which if one really did happen would likely kill hundreds of thousands if not millions), but I did see a bunch of whiney Hillary protesters so you don't have to point those out.
  3. Scott

    The future

    A somewhat similar thing happened to me and a friend on facebook five days ago. I seldom engage political discussions on FB, but this time I made the "mistake" of commenting on something concerning the Iraq and Syrian wars. Apparently the word Hitler is now a label for anyone you disagree with. Luckily, I ingnore most of it since if FB is a good measure of humanity then we are all doomed.
  4. Scott

    The future

    That is truely sad. I would bet that anyone who wore a Hillary hat in the town I lived in would get the same reaction. The same is probably true of any coal mining town. Lets just agree that such behavoir is unacceptable. As far as political violence goes, I don't know which side has more, though both sides certainly have a lot (too much). Any political violence is anacceptable. Based what I see I would say the left has the bigger problem with violent protest and the right has a bigger problem with hate groups. What we do need to realize though is that most people in America from both sides love America. When it comes down to it, most of the left isn't involved in violent protest and most of the right doesn't support hate groups. One of the biggest problems with hate is from social media as well. While there are good things about social media, it sure does make it easy to spread hate or to make hateful remarks as well as to spread contention. It can spread violence as well.
  5. Scott

    The future

    PS, I thought we were comparing violence, not just media coverage.
  6. Scott

    The future

    I agree with you Gator. Does anyone have a better source or can verify the figures?
  7. Scott

    The future

    At least we can see which side it is coming from on this forum.
  8. Scott

    The future

    When was Kathy Griffin defended most vocal noteable people on their side of the political spectrum? I remember many on the right defending Ted Nugent when he was making all kinds of hateful and threatening comments towards Democrats and Obama (and Hillary as well). Here was Trump's reaction:
  9. Scott

    The future

    Since when to celebrities have higher morals than the rest of the population? Anyway, here are some comments by Ted Nugent, who is a celebrity: If Barack Obama becomes the president in November, again, I will be either be dead or in jail by this time next year. Obama, he's a piece of s---. I told him to suck on my machine gun. Hey Hillary,". "You might want to ride one of these (machine gun) into the sunset, you worthless b--- Just know that evil, dishonesty and scam artists have always been around and that right now they're liberal, they're Democrat, they're RINOs, they're Hollywood, they're fake news, they're media, they're academia, and they're half of our government, at least." "So come to that realization," he continued. "There are rabid coyotes running around, you don't wait till you see one to go get your gun, keep your gun handy. And every time you see one, shoot one."
  10. Scott

    Canadian election

    No, I do not. I'm just pointing out that there are US laws that do favor "disadvantaged individuals". Hopefully you found that info interesting.
  11. Scott

    Canadian election

    This isn't true at all. I work for a consulting engineering firm for highway (and previously airport work). In the US people are referred to as "disadvantaged individuals" and there are plenty of laws that favor or support minorities (and women). In order for states to receive federal highway funds, according to Federal Law, States must hire construction companies that commit to hiring minorities and women as well as using a designated percentage of subcontractors that are a "Disadvantaged Business Enterprise". Such businesses must be owned by a minority or woman or no contract item. Perhaps it could be argued that the Feds really aren't forcing the states to obey the law, if states want Federal Highway money (which is about half of all road funds), they must by law meet the requirements. States are allowed to set their own laws and goals, but they must fit within Federal Law. The Federal Law is long and complex, so I'll just use the Colorado DBE requirement as an example since the requirements are summed up in one paragraph. Here is the qualification for being considered a DBE: A firm must be at least 51% owned and controlled by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. Women, Black Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic, Asian-Pacific Americans, Subcontinent Asian Americans, and other minorities found to be disadvantaged by the SBA are presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged. Firms owned by individuals who are not members of one of the above presumptive groups may also apply for certification. Those individuals must make an individual showing of disadvantage pursuant to Appendix E of 49 CFR Part 26. Each individual whose ownership and control is relied upon for DBE certification must have a personal net worth that does not exceed $1.32 million. The individual’s ownership interest in the applicant firm and equity in their primary residence are not included in the net worth calculation. https://www.codot.gov/business/civilrights/smallbusiness/dbe/eligible All contractors must use a certain percentage (which changes depending on the project) of subcontractors who meet the above criteria. In addition to using a designated percentage of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, prime contractors themselves are required to make efforts to hire minorities and women and interviews of employees are required for every contractor. One of my jobs as a consultant is to conduct the interviews of those employees and to make sure contractors doing highway work are compliant with the law. If anyone is interested in the interview questions (it's a pretty simple interview) I have to ask, a link is below: https://www.codot.gov/library/forms/cdot0280.pdf/view It's a pretty short and easy interview, but the contractor can get in trouble if too many employees say that the contractor hasn't asked them (meaning all employees including white males) to refer minorities and women to job openings.
  12. Scott

    The future

    I meant I haven't seen them in person. I know that they have happened Every single one of those has a counterpart from someone on the right. Here's almost an hour of videos of Obama effigies being burned or hung: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxjPHAg0T64 How is that different from someone holding a severed head of Trump? How about the below different from the above? Coast Guard Officer Plotted to Kill Democrats and Journalists: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/20/us/christopher-hasson-coast-guard.html Bombs mailed to Democrats: https://www.npr.org/2019/08/05/748420957/cesar-sayoc-florida-man-who-mailed-bombs-to-democrats-and-media-gets-20-years Car deliberately driven into a crowd of people who had been peacefully protesting against the United the Right Rally killing one and injuring 28: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack Hundreds of attacks on Obama supporters, both violent and some non-violent but disgusting (including leaving pizza boxes full of feces at people's houses who had Obama signs: https://www.mercurynews.com/2008/11/15/obamas-election-spurs-race-threats-crimes/ Are these all just fantasies and transparent lies as was claimed in previous posts? Some (not all obviously) of the right wing certainly did try to make it as a right vs. left Issue. They made Bundy into some kind of folk hero. It is them (not me) who assigned me the label of democrat and liberal because I support environmentalist causes. Both of them when on and on about the evils of democrats. I should also mentioned that the first nasty letter wasn't even spurred by a slideshow I gave; it was spurred because my 10 year old son made a comment to another 10 year old that my son supported the national parks. We got a super nasty letter from a ward member that overheard the conversations of the two ten year olds. It was her that assumed that we were democrats because we supported national parks and she went on and on in her letter saying that we must repent because we were democrats, democrats were evil, etc. I think your missing my point. My point isn't that there isn't any violence from the left, but that it is happening on the right too. Saying that it is all coming from one side isn't productive and is ignoring the problem. We are supposed to be Americans who disagree, but are still on the same side. Robert Byrd denounced the KKK decades ago (even in the 1980's he was discussed in our high school history as an example of someone who changed viewpoints on civil rights). What does that have to do my comment about the KKK siding with Republicans now days? What I said is true. I said now days the KKK sides with Republicans even though most Republicans disagree with them. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/01/the-kkks-official-newspaper-has-endorsed-donald-trump-for-president/?noredirect=on I'm pretty sure that most Republicans are repulsed by the KKK. Hopefully they will (some are) be more vocal about it. White Nationalist have threatened, killed, or injured others (including whites) even if they support equality for those they are against. Anyway, as mentioned in other threads I'm an independent, but I'm pretty sure that most on the left or right (at least in the US) are pretty repulsed by violence against anyone just disagrees with them politically. Admitting that it happens on whatever side you happen to be on (and it is happening on both sides as has been demonstrated) and renouncing the violence is a lot more productive than saying it is all coming from one side and that any violence from the other is only fantasy isn't really productive. All as it does is cause more contention.
  13. Scott

    The future

    I guess I can see the point that they weren't attacking Democrat or Left Wing specifically, but they were out to attack. Feds and anyone who agrees with them. To clarify the above though, it really isn't a property rights issue since the Bundy's didn't own any of the land in question. Although the media only focused on the Bundy's grazing on public lands, they were also (illegally) grazing on thier neighbor's lands and other's private property. They made plenty of threats though and people feared standing up to them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FEAR_(terrorist_group) The FEAR militia (Forever Enduring, Always Ready) was an American terrorist group of between four and eleven individuals that the State of Georgia alleged in 2012 to have planned to destroy a dam and poison apple orchards in Washington State, set off explosives in Forsyth Park in Savannah, Georgia, and assassinate President Barack Obama. The KKK used to be Democrats, but now they side with the Republicans, which isn't to say that Republicans support the KKK. Most Republicans (and Democrats) hate the KKK. The Ambush of the police officers was definitely right wing motivated, at least from an anti-government. Yes, though I haven't seen it. The first part may have well and might still be happening. I don't think the left is doing syncronized monster painting any more than the right is against the left. Just look at this forum. Yes, definitely. I am not really a Democrat, but I am an environmentalist. Even though I wasn't vocal about it in Craig Colorado (we moved last November), I did give slide shows for the Conservation Colorado and other wilderness advocasy groups. Just for that (I was surprised by it), I got plenty of hate mail, including from some ward members. Although they did apologize after I showed them to the Bishop, they continued their rhetroric on social media. Several wilderness advocasy groups have been threatened in places like San Juan County Utah. "Wanted Dead or Alive" posters were hung around their property. The ranch where they were holding their gathering was padlocked. In the same county, some of the SUWA members were run off the highway while riding their bikes and had things thrown at them. https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=55092164&itype=CMSID In Escalante Utah, there used to be parades where people would make effigies of Democrats and Envinronmentallist and put them on the front of cars like they had been run down and killed by running them over. This was in the town parades. The former bishop there was also released (presumably, I don't think the reason was announced publically) after making threats against anyone who agreed with wilderness preservation. When their land and house was vandalized he announced in public that they got what they deserved. When that hit national news, he was released shortly after. So yes, it does happen to democrats or others. It has happened to us, though only by cruel words rather than physical voilence. (Also yes I already known that there has been environmental terrorism as well-which is also not acceptable).
  14. One that doesn't take in account mental stability or lack thereof.
  15. Scott

    The future

    According to the Washington Post who has the latest figures I can find has the following statistics: https://beta.washingtonpost.com/national/in-the-united-states-right-wing-violence-is-on-the-rise/2018/11/25/61f7f24a-deb4-11e8-85df-7a6b4d25cfbb_story.html In 2017, here are the domestic terrorism statistics for the United States: There were 65 incidences classified as domestic terrorism in the US during 2017. Right wing terrorism = 36 incidences and 11 fatalities Left wing terrorism = 10 incidences with 6 fatalities Islamist terrorism = 7 incidences with 16 fatalities Unknown/other (including the mass shooting in Las Vegas) = 62 fatilities (58 which were from the Las Vegas shooting) Does anyone have better figures or care to dispute this? Please use figures and not general statements such as "it's all a fantasy" or whatever. Is there a better source out there?