• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Pat Robertson just said something that WASN'T retarded!?

arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Nope, it was still retarded.

If I read his evil mind properly, he DOES want to keep drug addicts out of prison. He wants to put them in "faith based rehab" instead, and either get the government to pay for it or mandate that the dope fiends pay for it one way or another.
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Nope, it was still retarded.

If I read his evil mind properly...

Come on now, that's crap, and I suspect you know it. He stated a succinct opinion about the unjust nature of mandatory sentencing and criminalizing fairly innocuous activities. These were non-retarded statements. If he actually said any of what you Vulcan mind-melded out of him then we would be in agreement.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
Come on now, that's crap, and I suspect you know it. He stated a succinct opinion about the unjust nature of mandatory sentencing and criminalizing fairly innocuous activities. These were non-retarded statements. If he actually said any of what you Vulcan mind-melded out of him then we would be in agreement.

You can agree with him about drugs without trusting him for a second. If you think that he doesn't have an ulterior motive, you haven't been paying attention. He's been a close ally to Liberian warlord Charles Taylor, and dictator Mobutu Sese Seko of Congo(formerly Zaire). He's claimed that feminism leads to human sacrifice, and blamed the Haiti earthquake on Hatian slaves who overthrew their French masters and therefore must have been Satan worshipers. He's run countless financial scams on his followers.

He's an evil, sick person... and his support for decriminalizing drugs is most likely just a smokescreen(no pun intended) for some other scam.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/shock-christian-leader-pat-robertson-favors-marijuana-legalization/
In this instance, even though he clearly expressed support for the reform of US marijuana laws, a spokesman for religious television station CBN walked back Robertson's comments, telling Raw Story on Thursday morning the Christian Coalition founder "did not call for the decriminalization of marijuana."

"He was advocating that our government revisit the severity of the existing laws because mandatory drug sentences do harm to many young people who go to prison and come out as hardened criminals," CBN spokesman Chris Roslan wrote. "He was also pointing out that these mandatory sentences needlessly cost our government millions of dollars when there are better approaches available. Dr. Robertson's comments followed a CBN News story about a group of conservatives who have proven that faith-based rehabilitation for criminals has resulted in lower repeat offenders and saved the government millions of dollars. Dr. Robertson unequivocally stated that he is against the use of illegal drugs."

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what its really about.
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what its really about.

So am I. And probably other levels of duplicity neither of us has thought of yet. Which is all besides the point. The man made a cogent, concise case for the decriminalization of marijuana while leaving sky daddy out of the equation. We can speculate as to his ulterior motives, and his not-so-ulterior motives, all day long; none of that makes this statement any more or less valid.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what its really about.

So am I. And probably other levels of duplicity neither of us has thought of yet. Which is all besides the point. The man made a cogent, concise case for the decriminalization of marijuana while leaving sky daddy out of the equation. We can speculate as to his ulterior motives, and his not-so-ulterior motives, all day long; none of that makes this statement any more or less valid.
Sure, whatever. So why are you making such a big deal out of my agreement with you and your agreement with me?
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Not so sure that I am. Merely commenting on a relatively minuscule point of disagreement. Which is all the controversy likely to be stirred up in this forum about a snake like Robertson.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
Not so sure that I am. Merely commenting on a relatively minuscule point of disagreement. Which is all the controversy likely to be stirred up in this forum about a snake like Robertson.
I guess we have to find our excitement somewhere, and we scare off the Christians and crackpots little more quickly than we used to.
 
arg-fallbackName="BrainBlow"/>
Why would Marijuana have to be decriminalized for those rehab centers of his to be built?
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
BrainBlow said:
Why would Marijuana have to be decriminalized for those rehab centers of his to be built?
Because right now dopers go to jail for long stretches if they get caught more than a couple of times. "Decriminalization" isn't "legalization"... it just means that you get mostly tickets and fines instead of jail. So I could see Pat Robertson and his cronies setting up faith based rehabs to match the sort of traffic school that bad drivers have to go to. If he can make it in-patient he can charge rent too, sort of like live-in community service. And because it is "faith based" he can probably shield it from taxes as well.
 
arg-fallbackName="BrainBlow"/>
So we should keep it illegal so that he can't build those centers then? :lol:
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
Another way to look at what he said is that the crime doesn't fit the punishment. He's not for pot. ;)
 
arg-fallbackName="SpaceCDT"/>
ImprobableJoe said:
He's an evil, sick person... and his support for decriminalizing drugs is most likely just a smokescreen(no pun intended) for some other scam.

I lolled, even if the pun wasn't intended. But a good point too!
He's clearly not trustworthy
 
Back
Top