Comments by "Remy Lebeau" (@remyllebeau77) on "PragerU" channel.

  1. Ironically, it isn't social and it isn't justice. It is extremely anti social in that it prohibits freedom of speech in favor of nobody being offended. It forces a wedge into our society splitting it apart because SJ has been used to trick people into believing lies.
    19
  2. True, but most of them are economic migrants, they are not all refugees from war torn countries.
    11
  3. Nic What is the point that your questions are trying to get to?
    4
  4. "I'm being exposed to different opinions on campus! What a nightmare!"
    3
  5. Democrats haven't been this upset since we took their slaves away. :D
    3
  6. +DeShiia Coleman Leave it to liberals to completely miss such a basic concept.
    2
  7. Democrats were never good. Their origin was fighting the republicans to keep slavery and the kkk. They did so right through the civil rights act of 1964, in which democrat Robert Byrd (a former member of the kkk) set the record for the longest filibuster against the act. He was the longest serving senator, and the democrats never kicked him out of the party. If all that wasn't enough, Mrs Clinton called him a "friend and mentor".
    2
  8. Alex Delarge 14th Amendment? I presume you speak of the "equal protection" part. Want to talk about how women get lighter sentences than men for the same crime? Also, why do you have a birthright? Do you realize that this means you are claiming that you have the right to force people to work for you, at least enough to provide whatever you call a minimum standard of living? Just like those who claim a right to free healthcare are claiming a right to force doctors to treat them for free, although it is likely you will try to get out of that by saying society will pay the doctor, but somewhere down the line, someone is FORCED to do something so you can have free goods and services. Socialism only "works" until you run out of other people's money to spend.
    2
  9. +Avidcomp You are in complete ignorance of the founding fathers beliefs, actions, and intentions for the government.
    2
  10. +Avidcomp Christian values are not at fault for the welfare state. The supposedly socialist society in the Bible was not only a theocracy, but giving was voluntary. Furthermore, can you tell me where separation of church and state came from?
    2
  11. +Atler the Dark It is not a tax and forcing people to buy anything is not under the purview of ANY branch of government.
    1
  12. +Atler the Dark It is fact. Sneaking it through by calling it a tax is reprehensible. It bypasses the safeguards put in place by the constitution, thereby making the proponents a traitor.
    1
  13. +Atler the Dark You can't declare the whole thing a tax based on conditional requirements that rarely come into play. By that absurd logic, the government only needs to add on some sort of penalty or tax to be able to control ANYTHING. This is as bad as justifying mafia extortion or a protection racket, just because the negative result of not complying is similar to something that is legal and approved. "And this is far from the first time Congress has used taxation to influence the behavior of the people." That doesn't justify anything either.
    1
  14. +Atler the Dark But not for justifying BOcare. You effectively are arguing that it is okay to tax to enforce it, and its okay to create the public policy, because it has an element of tax in it. Don't you see the circular reasoning there?
    1
  15. +Atler the Dark That is irrelevant.
    1
  16. +Atler the Dark You will have to be more specific than that.
    1
  17. +yiyo ascen Your idiocy and blind faith in government are much more amusing/terribly sad.
    1
  18. +Avidcomp "Until Americans can understand the nature of the constitution" Am I wrong in saying that you blame Christian values for undermining what you think America should be? This flies in the face of the overwhelmingly religious background and support from the founding fathers who wrote the constitution.
    1
  19. +Avidcomp So you are blaming Germany and the misinterpretation of the Bible? Question: "Am I my brother’s keeper?" Answer: The phrase “my brother’s keeper” occurs in the context of the story of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4:1-9. After the Lord God had expelled Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden for their disobedience, Cain killed his brother Abel out of jealousy that God had found Abel’s sacrifice acceptable, but He had rejected Cain’s. After the murder, the Lord, knowing full well what had happened, asked Cain where Abel was. Cain’s response was "I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?" Christians are commanded to care for fellow Christians, the poor, widows, and the fatherless, but nowhere does it say to accomplish the charity through government edict. This would entirely circumvent showing the love of God through personal charity. Where did the term or saying "separation of church and state" come from? I am well aware of SCOTUS using the term to twist the meaning of the 1st Amendment.
    1
  20. +Avidcomp What people use the phrase as is irrelevant, only the creator of it can give the ultimate truth of its original intention. All other changes are just that, deviations or misinterpretations that were not intended. This includes both the constitution and the term "church and state". "Jefferson wrote explicitly about "building a wall of separation between Church & State" Of course he did, in his letter to the Danbury baptists, where he assured them protection FROM the government. http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/jefferson-s-letter-to-the-danbury-baptists It is unfortunate that Jefferson couldn't foresee how his words could be twisted and used against every good intention . Furthermore, it is easily proved that liberals have twisted the 1st Amendment, because if the meaning was to keep all religious influence out of government, they would never have held Christian church services INSIDE THE CAPITOL. "care for others was government edict. It actually is." I didn't say there wasn't government that thinks it can justify the edict, I said there was no Biblical edict to conduct charity through government. "What do you think taxation is justified under?" "Who will build the roads" nonsense I am sure. Using it for welfare is a relatively new idea is it not? " If these values hadn't influenced politics there'd be no role for government other than to protect individual rights." I disagree. "America is not Germany, so why are they heading the same way?" I believe we are following Europe, not the other way around. Why is Europe embracing the welfare state when they are by far, way more secular? If religion is indeed the main source of justification for the welfare state. "And why do you write:"Christians are commanded to care .." Doesn't that seem odd to you?" Not at all. Why do you ask? It doesn't prove your point in the slightest, as I have already explained. "Wouldn't a more respectable approach be, people are asked if they would care" For a secular society, yes, but for a religious group that claims to have the love of God, no. "Morality is a choice, but not a duty." See above answer.
    1
  21. +Avidcomp "What's irrelevent is you telling me that's not what your god means. " You are seriously stuck on that idea and you misunderstood my point. I was talking about the creators of the constitution and Jefferson, not God. "Any intervention by your god is in your mind, and when my income is taxed it's by people with names that breathe the same air as me." I have no idea what you are talking about. "Why ask me "Where did the term or saying "separation of church and state" come from?" It was a test to see if you knew or could see plain reality. Thus far you have failed to see or admit that Jefferson coined the term to assure protection of the Danbury Baptists FROM the government, in no reasonable way should it be construed to mean protecting government from religion. It is liberal ignorance or deliberate sabotage to use this term to twist the meaning and intention of the 1st Amendment. (Which you should well know since you admit that church services were held in the capitol.)
    1
  22. +Avidcomp "As for your comment on what the liberals" Jefferson, not liberals. "these "liberals" of today's type weren't in the picture back when the real damage was being done." Yes you have already made this point quite clear. I don't agree that religion damaged anything. "The founding documents were being undermined almost from the outset.Even before they had been written, Christian values were a driving force behind early American life." No need to make the same point over again. "I meant why is America heading the way of Europe...so no need to flip flop my meaning now I've clarified it here." Fair enough. "As for religion being the cause of the welfare state - I didn't say that, however there is a connection:" Well that is the implication that I gathered from your statement. "Religion/faith = spiritual mysticism with God at the head. Statism/Collectivism = social mysticism with a dictator(State) at the head." One is valid, the other is not. The state forces the will of the majority, the other does not. (islam being the exception) "Both preach altruism" Personal charity is not comparable with charity taken by force, as it then ceases to be charity. "whereas faith based beliefs sacrifice the body for the mind." No not really, not yet in America. There has been persecution, but I don't know of anyone that has been killed yet.
    1
  23. +Avidcomp "Why should you be COMMANDED to do a charitable act. Are you saying if no such command existed that you wouldn't do it." I won't pretend to know what the state of mankind would be without Biblical influence, but I do believe that God wrote His law on our hearts, so that even those that don't have the Bible know right and wrong. "So secular individuals only need to be asked, But religious individuals need to be told." On the contrary, it is the secular that is forced by way of government. religious people are told, but not forced. A significant difference I believe. "This is akin to the odd argument against atheists that without God what stops you killing and raping?" The correct response to such a query, would be Romans 2:15 But as you don't believe the Bible, it could present you with a problem. It's still a good way to correct the one posing the question and it might catch them off guard. :D "Whereas the atheist that isn't killing and raping throughout his life, didn't do such atrocities because he was able to determine an objective morality by his own secular mind." Yes I'm sure that is the conclusion that most atheists convince themselves of. "how can I get through to a man that believes morality is a duty?" It is not necessary. I am a conservative Ancap, so I have no desire to force my morality on you, but as long I live under this government (however objectionable it may be), I will vote according to my beliefs. (if I choose to vote) Which means protecting religious freedom in accordance with the 1st Amendment, protecting churches and the definition of marriage, and protecting the life of the innocent unborn. These issues are not negotiable, nor do I believe any of these are in conflict with the NAP. "I can't, so is it worth convincing you that such a method of thinking is the root cause of the destruction of capitalism and what ought to be the most moral nation in history... undermined as I said from the outset, by Christian altruistic values." Once again, no need to repeat yourself.
    1
  24. +Avidcomp "No, perhaps it isn't, perhaps this would be futile." Perhaps. "Thinking about it at the end of this post, it pisses me off and saddens me to deal with people like you." You are too quick to dismiss a possible ally, even though I come from/with a very different point of view. For example I enjoy watching Stefan M. and AvsTM here on youtube. "But on the whole I don't think you mean anything other than wanting the best, peaceful and prosperous outcome. In that I suspect you are sincere." Indeed, a society without government. "I also reject that you principles lead to good outcomes and I happen to think that the axioms they are built on are truly evil." We will have to remain in disagreement there. "I doubt there's anything more I can say. I've presented my case and neither of us are likely to reverse gear and u-turn our thinking." Agreed. "I hold my values with just as much conviction as I believe you pretend to. I say pretend because your's ultimately is faith, and I don't do mysticism, neither spiritual or social." Yes you have made that very clear. "Best premises and try not to support issues that require initiating force over others, and of course do not permit anyone to initiate force over you." If at all possible, I agree. "I respect that you own your own life, I hope you can respect that I own mine. Don't tax me!" Agreed, have a great day.
    1
  25. +Henk Pizza Are you trying to argue that congress should have decided over Al Gore vs. George Bush? The popular vote has never been the deciding factor, get over it or change how the voting system works. You should also stop pretending that BO didn't continue and increase the unconstitutional wars.
    1
  26. heh heh :)
    1
  27. @GG Allin Provide evidence or you are full of it.
    1
  28. Whill Whitt, the conservative version of Whill Wheaton. :)
    1
  29. And the previous generations that allowed such demented communist and socialist brainwashing to creep into education are what, squeeky clean of responsibility?
    1
  30.  Leela Brannigan  I don't see that happening in our lifetimes. The republicans are cowards or rinos, so even if they controlled all 3 branches of gov't, they would not do what you suggest.
    1
  31.  Leela Brannigan  allowed it* not "aloud"
    1