Article by Bill Frist - Page 8

JoseGonzlez · #71 10-07-2006, 07:45 PM

Its the same problem the Libertarian party has. The religious right is very organized and they have a plan. Support the hell (sorry if that word is offensive) out of the Republican party. In return they will get your policies past. The pro fun movement, even if bigger, can never be as organized as people motivated by religion. After all politics and voting is not fun so pretty hard to create a movement.

The only real hope for the fun movement is the collapse of support for the Republicans among the religious. Its possible they will be less motivated. But in their mind the Republicans will always be worth supporting since it will always be much better than the pro abortion democrats.

Im not anti - religion or values. I just dont like its over involvement in politics.

permafrost · #72 10-07-2006, 07:52 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another immaculate conception... and I thought Jesus was the only one. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ] Except the Immaculate Conception refers to the birth of Mary, not the birth of Jesus.

[/ QUOTE ]

did I miss something or am I just suffering from lack of sleep?

candyman718 · #73 10-07-2006, 07:55 PM

There are also elements of shame and wanting to maintain your privacy that hurt the "pro-fun" movement. When Guiliani tried to wipe out strip clubs and sex shops in NYC, he had an army of angry mothers behind him. They didn't want there children to have to walk past a strip club. Not 1 of the thousands of patrons of these establishments came forward publicly.

It's probably less so for poker, but I imagine some players don't want to be known publicly as poker players.

MelchyBeau · #74 10-07-2006, 07:55 PM

immaculate conception refers to the idea of Mary being born without original sin

augie_ · #75 10-07-2006, 08:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
immaculate conception refers to the idea of Mary being born without original sin

[/ QUOTE ]

looooooooooooooooooool

Nincompoop · #76 10-07-2006, 08:09 PM

For me it's hard to really argue that gambling doesn't destroy families. It does. I know this. I don't think we can contend with him on that level.

We have to admit that while it has the potential to be dangerous, gambling is an activity we choose to pursue of our own free will. We put no drugs in our system. Nothing harmful is involved in the play itself. It is a game, and we have a right to enjoy it.

The hypocrisy thing is the foundation of an argument against this guy's rhetoric, to me. How can he explain not going after horseracing given his saint-like crusade against the evils of poker? This makes him look like a completely cynical opportunist, and these are his true colors.

CaseS87 · #77 10-07-2006, 08:09 PM

isn't it overwhelmingly depressing for some of you that no one in washington gives a crap about what you believe or think?

Nincompoop · #78 10-07-2006, 08:11 PM

Yeah, and we are all too lazy and spoonfed to do [censored] about it

Neurotoxin · #79 10-07-2006, 08:14 PM

Anything to be President. We are Frists new cats.

candyman718 · #80 10-07-2006, 08:20 PM

I would have to guess that the number 1 thing that hurts families is adultery. Should we go back to banning that?

As a compromise, just let poker players wear a scarlet P on our shirts and allow us to still play.