Liberalism is an epidemic of stupidity:

This debate was about liberalism the political ideology, which does consist of everything I mentioned before. Also, “equality” is never protected in the constitution, and the pursuit of equality is incredibly stupid because some people work harder than others and are entitled to more. You are not entitled to anything just because, except liberties but these are the ability to do something, not an actual thing. Liberalism isn’t abstract, it is a set of beliefs which are spreading like a disease and are idiotic and immoral. This is what I must prove to win; I also have to prove that liberalism, the ideology, consists of beliefs which would make any liberal’s good sense or judgment questionable. Under the separation of church and state, marriage, which is a religious rite, should be left to the church. It isn’t the government’s job to decide whether or not marriage can be between a man and a man. This is how liberalism comes in; they believe that equality is a right, and that gay marriage is equal to real marriage, so they decide that it is discrimination to say otherwise, and that men can marry men. But hold on, they don’t get to decide that gay marriage is equal to real marriage, that’s like passing a law saying that we all have to pretend that fiat money is real money, it is completely unconstitutional! And just like fiat currencies, if gay marriage ever could be any form of valid marriage institution, the government wouldn’t need to mandate that it is, and force us to play along. This is stupid because they are exercising a massive misuse of power, acting like tyrants, and then turning around and saying they are for liberty- it is heavily hypocritical. It is also heavily hypocritical to whine about the separation of church and state, and then warp the definition of a rite whose proper definitions belong to the church. It also just so happens to be that Rabbis and Pastors are being forced to marry gay perverts {1} {2} {3}. I do not need to prove that this harms anything, though it does, because we are judging liberalism according to its good sense and judgment like you said earlier, not what harm it causes, though it undoubtedly has resulted in disaster. It ids a prevailing belief in liberalism to ban guns or to heavily regulate them, just look at these quotes: “I do not believe that citizens should be able to own guns.” – Barrack Obama “I will get the NRA shut down for good if I become president. If we can ban handguns, we will do it,” – Hillary Clinton “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,’ I would have done it.” – Diane Feinstein Like I said, stupid, and immoral, it is stupid to think that disarming innocent people will somehow protect innocent people, it is already illegal for felons to own guns, so whatever felons do have guns are doing so illegally, and a gun ban won’t affect them very much. So felons are just as armed as before, except maybe more because when you ban something you create a whole new market for it, while law abiding citizens are disarmed. This is supposed to reduce crime how? Liberals would point to Brittan having fewer homicides than we do, about 4 times less proportional to their population. But correlation is not causation, just because I can find a place where guns are illegal that has a lower crime rate than one where they are legal doesn’t prove anything because hat nation where guns are illegal might otherwise have a lower crime rate. You are also picking up the nation with the highest crime rate of those nations where guns are legal and comparing it to the nation with the lowest crime rate of those nations where guns are illegal. You have to compare very nation where guns are legal to those where they are illegal, and compare times with higher gun ownership to those with less gun ownership in the same nation. Which gives you the following statistics, I was referring to socialized healthcare, which existed since the liberal Lyndon Johnson established Medicare, followed by the liberal Barrack Obama expanding it, while another liberal, Bernie Sanders wants to socialize it completely. George Bush devised the initial Obama care plan, who, by the way, is a relative of the Clintons, more liberals. Healthcare being so expensive that it costs you 100$ to get an aspirin and 10,000$ to get an MRI while you could get one in South Africa for only 50$ is definitely bad. And like Ron Paul said, whenever the government destroys something, it doubles down, hence the reason Bernie wants universal healthcare, a complete communist takeover of the healthcare system. {1}. http://www.snopes.com... {2}. http://newsexaminer.net... {3}. http://www.nowtheendbegins.com... {4}.