Conservationist said

pam said

Conservationist said

pam said	[orig][quote]

I'm for less delusional government.

Yes, I don't like creationism either, nor would I ever ban abortion (it's dysgenic), but I'm not clueless enough to run to the opposite party because of those SMALL issues relative to the BIGGER issue of direction.

My feeling has always been that the Confederacy was right: states should decide these issues, not the federal gov't, because states are going to vary in political outlook... in general, the places I want to live are the conservative places, because there are FEWER PARASITES.

Of course, you'd rather call me an idiot than read what I've written on this topic. Awesome. Internet++

The fact that you ascribe any value at all to ethnonationalism blows my mind. The only single factor in ethnic progression is food production, which has more to do with latitudes than it does the color of one's skin or the race someone is identified with.

Calling a particular group of people or person a PARASITE(S) is subjective and means nothing.

The Confederacy was not right, especially as American legislation has progressed. No matter what you say it is impossible to maintain a healthy, economically sound, and domestically-fluid nation allowing States to supercede Federal law. Allowing citizens to disperse in different states based on some legislative grab-bag is divisive and would eventually invalidate the Constitution (which I do not deny should be more flexible). Trying to maintain equitable trade between states whose laws are different would prove difficult and in some cases impossible.

Trying to base a state on political tenets is unbelievable. Even though political analysts who couldn't have a single constructive nor original thought in a lifetime babble on about blue states and red state, to actually denominate a state as having to adhere to a political faction at this point would really create about 3-4 different types of states, ie. three or four different small countries which will most likely not border each other and require separate, non-unified policing based on individual policy.

Your bullshit amounts to one principle: you want division because you pigeonhole people and their ideologies, which is rigid and non-realistic. People exist, and the only way to synthesize is to have as many minds working toward goals as possible, and I don't see how anything you've brought forth is at all constructive.