I am a patriotic american but, lets get realistic. Ok boys and girls lets sit and make fun of our good ole USA. If I'm wrong which I can, post rebuttles. American bashing for the fun of it. We all know we have our problems so why don't we post a rant about it.

First:we were the first to base our nation on dimocracy *EHHH* wrong, the greeks and romans were probley way closer then we could of been as they had a senate. Even britan a century before we had the revoluationary war had parliment however after the war they stript thier rulers of thier power more.

Next, Now boys and girls we are and always be #1 contry in the world *EHH*, wrong here too. I think personally japan has us beat in more ways then one. They got us slain with thier anime, our brains dumb from thier video games. They made thier cars and pwned us so badly at that. Lets face it Japan pwns us. The only thing we did moraly right was own up to our two badboy bombs and repair all the dammage. Not to mention give japan way better dimocracy then we ourself have.

We are for justice. Are we "really" for justice. Bush bashers know what I mean here. Wile I am in full support of afganistan (they admitted to 9/11). I do not support Iraq. Even Alquada had told in thier terrist videos that Iraq had in no way helped them in this. Also wile yes Iraq fired a fue illegal weapons. (The weapon's range of a fue of thier missiles had violated the laws and landed in syria.) None of them were nukes but, originally the idea for the war was based on them having these banned weapon. (That was bush's first reason he later flip floped so much I confued bush for kerry).

Our laws are a contridiction of themselfs. We have laws expressing one thing yet we make new laws violating our fundimental laws. Gays/lesbians. I am looken at you. They have every right to wed becouse there is a law in congrace which says that no law can discrimate based on race/creed/or sexual orintation. Yet judges allowed these laws to be passed to be with the christians.

Anouther example of this is Shivo. Our laws says the husband(or person intrusted with medical lyability) gets to say weather to pull the plug on or not, NOT THE PARENTS. Congress did pass a legislation for them to try it agian yet the courts had followed the law legally and denyed that. It was more torture I think for Shivo then for anyone else and she had unfairly been kept alive. I personally would of pulled the plug if I was him, and I would of had him pull the plug if I was her.

Anyhow It is fun to poke at ourselfs for all our stupidity yet we must rember we are a democrocy so. You voice doesn't matter unless everyone else agrees with you. Aint that fun.

what's there to argue?

well you don't have to argue , this is basically a post all your rants in here and if someone disagrees then they can argue lol.

lol, i'm pro USA as well, whatever we do.
i just try to ignore the bad.

aint that what we always do ? Ignore the bad, I mean when the people in third world are starvin we givum food. Yet when we got a homeless smoe on the street , some citys actually give them the boot. We probley do it to prove how selfless we are yet personally I think having to prove your selfless means your even more selfish.

my city, irvine, does that, i think.
we never see any, and once i did, and saw a police come, and the dude run.

How true that statement is.

i'm so lucky i have a outsie veiw. and Ken Ki is right an a right hand.

Yeah, but think about it. Every country does something bad, so its not like U.S.A. is the only bad place in the nation. There have been alot worse things in the Middle East and stuff like that, like human rights violations, etc.

As far as military might goes we are the #1 Nation in the world. Japan Does not come close to us that way....In fact we still have a bunch of troops over there(50,000+ i believe). Other than that, i have to agree with you.

justice:

Noun
1. The quality of being just; fairness. 2. a. The principle of moral rightness; equity. b. Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness. 3. a. The upholding of what is just, especially fair treatment and due reward in accordance with honor, standards, or law. b. Law The administration and procedure of law. 4. Conformity to truth, fact, or sound reason: The overcharged customer was angry, and with justice.

Eh, what is morally right? I don't think you would find that the way that saddam was ruling Iraq was "Just"...yet according to their laws it was. I believe that it was a good thing(morally right) that we are trying to Make a democracy out of Iraq. Yet does that mean that the USA was legaly right...No. frankly according to the constitution we should not be doing many of the things we are doing...(Laws that restrict religious activity in any way. laws that restrict Guns in any way....)..yet we continue to ignore the constitution.(also, DO NOT blame only Bush for Iraq...Almost every senator voted for the war.(which i support))

Judges have NOTHING to do with if a law is passed.(http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Lesson_13_Notes.htm)

No, your oppinion only matters if you are in the majority. although some senators think that as the minority they can run things......

Well if you want to base it on military china is #1 in the world actually. Not by tech but by the fact that they could throw more men at us then we could imagine. Litterlly could overwhelm our forces before we had a chance. Keep and eye on China and Tiwan, see USA has said they would protect them but, we also have to deal with China. So when and if China attacks will we support them or not.

Japan had in thier goverment in its beginning signed a ordinace that they would have "NO military". Thats right folks they have no military. That is highly commendable and I think thats why they are better then us. ^_^ probley becouse of all the good anime we would never harm them becouse if we hert them we would have no animes. Also becouse they didn't probley have to worry about military thats why they pwn us on technology constantly.

Also judges do play a part in how laws are passed via the supreme court. If a case of a law that has been sort of thought of as unconstituional yet was still passed was made the supreme court makes a ruling to either 1. keep the law, or 2. remove the law. So yes the courts do have an effect. However, I was meaning after the standard way of a law passing through the 3 branches.

^_^, christians run our goverment thats why we can't have male/male , female/female, marrages. Personally I find it funny that a first cousin can legally marry yet they cant. See I would bring the hole "seperation of chirch and state into it." However everybody probley knows the arguments here so I won't.

Yes minoritys do sometimes seem to get a better advantage then the rest of us. No that does not mean I am racest I am just stating from personal experiance. See if I rember right in some states isn't there laws stating there cannot be any club that would discriminate based on race/sex/ all that jazz. So what I am wondering is why is there are after shcool clubs based on just once race. IE (german club, spanish club, yada yada). It seems if you are poor and hispanic you have higher chances to go to coledge yet if your white and poor tuff luck becouse there isn't that many shcolorships. I also won't step into the illegal alian thing becouse, I would be a hipacrit considering we ourselfs were illegal alians taking land from the indians who actually had first claim to america's.

i'm just surprized that the election is much more secular here, witch is a christian country offically, comapred to your religious-laden election in your secular nation.

They may have mass...but we could take care of that fairly easily.....

Marriage......hmmmmmm.....methinks i will stay out of that one ^_^ .
Separations of church and state..
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

:P thats why I was saying its unconstiution to say they can't get married.

y'know terrorists say in their manuals to take advatage of your leberal gun laws

Explain to me how Homosexual marriages are a religious activity.

shadow is right, it is purley a civil ceremony. they can't have religeous marrages, yet.

Actually if 40% of the population carried Guns, many people would be more hesitant to commit a violent crime. as the odds of getting shot would be through the roof. Imagine what would happen to a terrorist who Tried to terrorize certain places in Texas with gun's.......

Criminals will always get guns somehow. its the law abiding citizens who will or will not have guns due to laws.

when i turn 21 im going to get a license to carry concealed in Ohio.

ohh..shadow will get a gun! why? whats your reason for wanting to carry one?

Because i can.

no personal reason? no 'its my right' in it?

Well it is my right....thats sorta why I can.

oh. just wonering.

Have any of you noticed niether Mr. Bucket or Grondring has stepped into this thread to put there view into it? Must mean something...

As for me, I don't feel like discuss thing because we are not really in the 'know' about these kind of things, unless youw atch the news ever day, look over the internet, and take AP citizenship classes and even then we don't know what it's like for those in the government and know all they know. I think they keep some information for themselves about the happenings in Iraq.

thats blatantly obvious

yep, short and simple like my attention span for big post.

lol trce has ADHD

Mixtil Please Stay On topic here.

KK has one great point. In terms of technology, the USA has been PWNED by Japan. Just you watch, in a few years... Japan'll take over the world with their awesome Gundams, seriously. Has anyone noticed that they have androids in Japan? Androids, humanoid robots, they have way more advanced AI than we do, and they simply pwn us... i mean, who came up with DDR? The Japanese. Who came up with the whole notion of Gundams? the japanese. Who has ANDROIDS? the Japanese.

Not to say KK has no other good points, that one just stands out

:smartsign: I agree.

exspecially on DDR! DDR rules! If your a game nerd you can not deny that DDR is one of the ebst games ever!

I haven't stepped in because I wasn't on, sincea friend was over here until around 8:00 (I missed swimming:( ), then I had dinner and stuff. Anyway, more talking, yay!

First off, we're a democratic republic, Ken Ki, though I agree with you. Since the start, there have been safeguards in our government to stop the "mob voice" from taking over (electoral college), and there are usually deprivations of rights for certain people. For instance, even in Greece there were laws controlling voting-I believe only landowning men 30 or over could vote, correct me if I'm wrong. Of course, this has been limited/eliminated now, though some disputes go on about behind-the-scenes prevention, like the arguments on Republicans trying to limit voters from voting. This is natural, though-the incumbent tries to prevent voter turnout, the challenger tries to increase voter turnout (if you want an explanatin I'll give one).

As for the discussion on Japan...I don't think they're a frighteningly strong nation, as they've had an economic slump. I know some stuff about this because I sat in on a class on Asian economy my brother went to. Basically, Japan's economy after WWII jumpstarted by sheer force of will on their part-despite raw material and resources, they bought the things they needed to produce manufactured goods, despite the general economic goal of monopolizing every part of an industry to reduce payment during production. They then began a technological revolution, beating out our car companies and such with much better companies than our own. Japan had started as our capitalist foothold in Asia (while China was the Communist foothold) but grew to be an economic competitor. Now, however, there are a few problems. First off, cheaper production and copying by Taiwan, Korea, and other Asian countries is leaving Japan with less-if you've ever bought imported anime like I have, you probably got it from disc pirates. For instance, I got all 90 or so Ruroni Kenshin Episodes, with the two OVAs and the movie, for about $70, perfectly working, in Japanese but with subtitles. As I found out later, these discs were burned by disc pirates and sold to the US, and assumably auctioned by someone else on Ebay later. Thus, with things like this happening, tech. based companies are losing money, not to mention that Taiwanese, Koreans, and Chinese are begginning to compete with their own technology. Also, some Japanese bussinnesses still value seniority over skill, thus developing less and not using their best potential-though some have reformed greatly. Thank you, my brother's college proffessor, I learned much that day.

So, anyway, Japan isn't in great economic condition either, and the liberal democratic party of Japan ain't that great. I'm way too lazy to talk about that, though, sorry. However, I do like anime, and I love Japanese video games, so it's a good place. Thumbs up Japan, even if China is probably the up-and-coming world power (though it's possible we'll see an end to the era of world powers soon). Also, the no military thing dates back to WWII, which is why they signed that thing.

As for homosexual mairrage, Shadow, I know you argued it isn't a religious activity, and this is true. However, the problem is that the only basis for banning it is a religious reason-keeping the "sanctity of mairrage" by only allowing M/F mairrages is an idea shared by more than one religion, but a religious idea nonetheless. So what non-religious grounds does any branch of the government have to ban homosexual mairrage?

As for guns...I'm very uneasy. It's believed by a number of people that the "Right to Bear Arms" is so that civilians will overthrow the government if it becomes an oppressive one that restricts too many rights-the idea of government is to exchange rights for safety, but that the ultimate power lies in the hands of the people. However, the problem is that instead of muskets-where a mass murderer would take so long to reload they wouldn't be able to do much of anything-we now have assault weapons that can be used by one person to mow down a whole crowd. However, I believe this right must be preserved-yup, that's right, I've got a little bit of Libertarian philosophy running in my brain, though not much. However, people can be hasty, and I'd prefer not to worry about guns...but I understand.

As for the comment Trace made...I agree. My parents are immigration judges, and whenever I hear people who aren't directly involved in immigration talk about it, I can only shake my head and try to correct them. The laws are so screwed up, both liberals and conservatives with influence on them have no idea what they're doing. Sometimes, I wonder what generals must think of politicians, and vice versa.

I just want to say that i have not made a arguement for or against Homosexual marriage. I just challenged Ken Ki's statement that it was a "Religious".....But here is the arguement....Just because a belief is shared by a religion(s) does not mean that it cannot be inputed into our law. Look at the ten commandment for example; "Though shalt not kill." this statement is shared by many religions, yet we still have laws banning killing. In the case of Homosexual marriage, I do not believe that it should be sanctioned by government. Why? Because of my belief that marriage is about children. Yes it can be argued: what if a hetrosexual couple cannot have children, does that mean that they should not be married? My answer is no. Because we are sticking to the same principles. I think there should be something that reconizes Homosexual partners some way......but not marriage.

<edit>On what grounds do they have to sanction it?</edit>

Many people could reload a muzzle loader in 15 seconds...

And if there was a crowd of say....50 people and 5 of them where carrying guns. If someone started shooting indiscriminately at them, the odds are that one of those 5 people would shoot him/her.

Ok the problem with marriage is that the goverment does actually force you to do a wedding. Either in a courtroom or in a chaple you are requried by law to get a marrage licence, since the religious sects have had government pass sancticty of marrage acts. This means that they cannot be married. Marriage is considered of many as a religious act. Therefore that was what I had ment.

Next on gun control. My stance is best explained on Trigun episode "Love and Peace". There was no sherif needed becouse the hole town was packing. Personally if a town had no police I would mind my P's and Q's just for that reason.

I had posted more on how shcools seem to be more "secluded" with the race clubs. I had also stated I would be a hippacrit to say that illegal alians should be shot or that they deserve bad treatment. Our ansestors were illegal alians. From the earlyest spaniors who originally attacked and took indian land. To england and thier colonys. We did the same thing that the chinese and mexican's do now. Also all through our history we sometimes forget, what about lady liberty ?

Anyhow I appogize in many reguards. If I was wrong about japan as of currant but, going by what I knew. However I do rember the japan not having a military thing. No idea on the gundam thing, some said that the us military has those sort of tech in "devolupment" and in planning phases and stages. However who really knows.

There hope I clarifyed what I ment.

As I said, i don't believe that they should be "married". And just because something is considered a Religious act by many. Does not mean government should stay out of it.

Umm the seperation of chirch and state...., it effects your taxes and everything if you are legally wed.

ummm...Many people pay more taxes directly after marriage. Its children that give tax credit.

So if something is considered religious by some group Governments hands should be tied? NO. The Clause in the bill of rights was to keep Government from Restricting religion in any way. Not from keeping religion from changing government, unless it in turn restricted other religions.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

:P , yeah which was my point to begin with. lol

Wow, this is great, If you guys could keep arguing for a while, I'll have a great paper for English class. I will use names and give credit where it is needed, and if you don't want me to use you'r name tell me...You guys have some great views..some things I never would have the guts to say, even on the internet.

The thing is, since our government is not supposed to be controlled by religion, why are we prohibiting something on religious grounds? The problem, once again, isn't that they're interfering in religion-it's that the practices of religion are being ascribed to people who don't follow that religion. Simply because killing is wrong according to religion doesn't mean we took that idea from religion...we do not kill because we have a moral inhibition that prevents us from randomly massacring innocent people and because there is a threat of a government to stop it. Also, Shadow, you say there should be nonreligious ceremonies for homosexual mairrages, that we should simply make it a civil ceremony instead of a religious one. What if someone who isn't Christian, Jewish, etc, wants to get mairried, and according to their religion, they can? You use the Christian definition of mairrage to define everyone in America's way of life, as though you can only be mairried in a Christian way. Whatever, we weren't really talking about this before anyway, I shouldn't have brought it up. Sorry.

Second off, about race clubs. These clubs don't exalt the races above others, they don't try to establish racial supremacy, they just celebrate the culture of the people. And whether you're white, black, hispanic, or any other skin color, you are free to join. It isn't really a racial institution-there isn't seperation and stuff.

Second, the US government doesn't generally go around shooting immigrants on sight. Second, there are legal ways to get into the country. Why aren't the immigrants coming that way? Some are honestly seeking asylum from oppressive governments or societies, and really need to get out-that's fine, if there's even a little proof their claims are true, they've got a good chance if they don't screw up. Some are seeking better lives-though they aren't oppressed, they aren't making much money, and want to seek the American dream. Third, there are immigrants who aren't making enough money, come and work for a few years and make a comparitively large amount of money, then go back home-either they make enough, or they're kicked out of the country. Either way, though I sympathize with all three groups, our country cannot hold enough immigrants and cannot deal with having them all live here. Also, a number are deported because they commit crimes here-many get the money to come over here lended from drug lords, and bring drugs over. They aren't eager to be involved in crime, but they're desperate-and even though they don't have bad intentions, they lead to substance abuse over here. Generally, if you commit crimes here and you aren't a citizen, you'll get deported.

Edit-And if you want to use ideas on here, fine, but I strongly encourage you to use these to think and come up with some of your own, if you can.

Prophet you can feel free to use anything I say *feels flattered* however you have to post what grade you get and I did say you are very much welcome to refute any thing posted here. As long as we behave ourselfs.

My oppogizes on the shcool club thing, i realize some of the clubs do what mr.bucket said. Just theres times I think ok why aint there more being celbrated instead of just serton ones. That was really more what I was getting at there is a spanish , a german , and a french club back at my high shcool in colorado, theres even a christian club there, however other then that there is no other cultures that have clubs.

Also to anser that question about illegals. The reason that they cannot come in legally is they cannot offord to by thier goverment.See the cost to actually get the visa and wait is considered too pricy, also I had included chinese becouse they also are smuggled through shipping. In some states they are forming a "minate men" group to round up the people. Also if you watch the news there is so many illegals getting in by the time they get 1 our theres probley 1000 in thier place.

Next I watched a 60mins report on how easy it is to be a legal citizen yet come in illegally. All he needed was a social security number and contact info and that is it. Companys get off the hook becouse once they check for the status of said number or anything to check of they are legal or something that means they made "an attempt" to find out if they did or not. However in that report they got a social security number in the us , then went and found an american who moved to cuba had that exact number. Terrisome has more preceedence before immagration and I think if you controled the illegal alians a bit better you would twart terrorists a lot better.

I will not go after the terrorist mumbojumbo becouse uhhh we know all the ins and outs on that so bad it aint even worth joken about. Anyhow hopes it anseres things.