Let me clarify something about the “gay rights” comment, before others who I have argued with chime in.

Rights belong to all people, not a sub group, so I am for all rights being giving to all Americans. I hate the terms “gay rights”, “woman’s rights”, and so on. There are no “gay rights”, only human rights.

So while I am for this country to progress in a manner where everyone has the rights to live, work, and prosper, I am not for classifying a group of people, and then giving them some sort of rights.

We need to just change the laws so the rights everyone should already have, are not taken from them. So for example, get rid of marriage as a legal term and only recognize civil unions for legal purposes, and then let any two people join in a civil union, or let any two adults marry. That’s should not be a gay right, it’s a right all people should have.

       Do you believe that if a person is poor and manages to find a gun, then they should be able to knock over their nearest corner market if they need money and that protection of the store and its goods should depend upon the store owner and that if a person is successful in knocking it over, then they have the right to whatever is inside or do you believe in the police?

     Because really the only way some people could boost their lot in life would be to do something that would be considered criminal and if you really believe people need to put out more effort, then knocking over a store for the money inside should fall into the category of expending effort to accomplish something.

When I was in University I took several sociology courses because (although their research was highly questionable and most of their conclusions were unfounded) there were lots of interesting observations that were pointed out in these courses. The underlying assumption of sociology is that the difference between people in different social groups is primarily a factor of upbringing and society and not based in biology.

Now, I mention this because one of the studies that was presented to us demonstrated that by the time children were 9 years old there was a noticeable difference between the ability for children of middle class and lower class backgrounds ability to communicate effectively and co-operate to solve a problem; and the worst group of middle class children were more effective that the best group of lower class children.

I don't know your school, and I can't say for sure, but I wouldn't be that surprised to find that the wealthier the background of a student the more likely they were to seek out help from teachers, students, family and (potentially) tutoring services at all levels of achievement. To a certain extent money would play a role in this, after all tutoring isn't free, but the extra help weathier students were getting was rarely related to anything that directly involved money.

     But it could be related to the fact that it was more desirable or easier to help the wealthier students from the best neighborhoods than the ones from the worst homes and neighborhoods.  Would you want to spend time with the people that were from the nicer homes and neighborhoods, and wore nicer clothes or would you want spend more time with the kids from homes where they are beaten and that have been driven a bit psychotic from the abuse and that come from dangerous neighborhoods where most teachers probably wouldn't want to go to home visits with the parents?

So child abuse is entirely a factor of poverty?

Now, there is no doubt that wealthy students may have advantages in picking friends who are better able to help them but are you expecting the government to step up and provide social equity? Are we now going to provide everyone with plastic surgery to make pretty people uglier and ugly people prettier in order to ensure that people who are better looking have no advantages in life?

^
It'll happen if the Healthcare Plan goes ahead.

You can have a nose-job on the NHS here in the UK. Just tell the doctor your nose makes you feel depressed and wait 5 years, all "free".

You missed the point, it can be said as its different when your parents and grandparents are lawyers, doctors, etc.. than when they are an average or lower than average guy, its different when you live in a house where the people dominate a lot of words and forms of expressions than when you live in a house where your parents didnt go to the university.

Differences like this come into play when giving people more tools to develop in life, a lot of people get in this cicle where it isnt easy to get out of poverty because you dont  have these tools.

To pretend poor people have the same oportunity to be succesfull than rich people is naive.

Money comes as a result of effort, but the effort to make that money come depends of the person. Also healthcare should be consider as something people should be equal, at least in the same country, other than that it could be said you are discriminating, since healthcare isnt something like buying electronics.

Also, you should consider the fact that many millionares arent like that because of their effort, and many poor people arent poor because they are lazy. Their are things that can be carried throught generations, I know a lot of very rich people that havent done anything and they are still rich, maybe because of their grandparents efforts or whatever they did to get that money(dirty deals come in mind to). Poverty can be carried because of the lack of tools that parents can give to their sons and this is not a problem most schools are willing to fix.

Millionaries do have free time too, to pretend they dont is because you dont know a lot of them. I know a lot of poor peope that actually work a lot more than millionaires and still make a shitty ammount of money, and it isnt exactly their fault, they cant get to study medicine or laws because they have had a worst education than the others, not because they didnt try hard enought, its stupid to think any guy at the age of 14 can get in his mind that he will study medicine in harvard and work hard to acheive it.

Your logic may work if you consider healthcare as any other thing like buying consoles and if people started the same when they are born, but this doesnt happen.

So you would like to make a coup? To a goverment people ellected? How democratic, I forgot that was the way USA used to fight for democracy, making coups in other countries, seems like you still have a lot of that in your mind.

Also, you dont know anything about politics when you consider Obama a socialist or moving to socialism, this is pure BS.

Another thing, I dont know why you call other people "socialists" just because they care what happens to human kind, there are things people should get the same treatment since they share the fact that they are people after all. And this people you call socialists arent actually supporting socialism, they just think people should get their basical needs protected by the goverment, like any inteligent person would want.

And the second part of your post makes you really look like someone who should go back to school. Not all poor people are lazy, druggies, alcoholics, etc... There isnt such thing as running your lives as you should be doing too.

And you quote of Margaret Thatcher, for any other reason than making fun of her, is laughable, belongs to another time in which people where even more idiots than now, and its coming from a person who is pro dictatorships. If you are this kind of person I will just make fun of your kind and hope an idiot like what I discribed before doest ever get to be president or something important.

And I doubt a civil war happens in the US, I still have hope since the idiots that are mentioned in the OP are still few and they lack inteligience to even do something.