Christians also have called for the death of gays [W:218]

[ThoughtEx.]

You're fantasizing here. America isn't some transcendental spell cast over the globe. She is a place of opportunity. Opportunity for those who come here legally and seek to assimilate to the American way. American Culture. That's the problem we're seeing now not only in America but in many places. People come here but don't want to assimilate. Yes, you have to. But I know, I know, that's bigoted or racist or xenophobic, right? WRONG America had been and should always be a Multi ETHNIC country, it however will fall further into the abyss of failure and madness so long as there is a camp promoting Multi CULTURALISM. That is the difference between the years gone by and today.

So what defeated the Soviet Union, a battle of Ideals and Cultures... What makes every third world kid look at a globe, and think "One day I will live in America, and have enough to eat, and have cars, and go to school." You think I am fantasizing here, you are right. A Dream is a fantasy, and you can't make it a reality if you don't take it seriously. You know who else fantasized. Thomas Jefferson, Lincoln, MLK, and even Reagan. They all used the American Dream as more than a fantasy. The fact you read and ridicule my words fantasy, tells me you are one of the ones stumbling on our eternal journey. And the fact you try to defend your Mono-Cultural views with defenses against bigotry and racism, when I have made no accusations of bigotry and racism. Tells me you just don't want these people here, and will say anything short of something bigoted and racist to accomplish that goal. And the fact you think your culture should be the mono-culture America is based on, instead of say Natives, Irish, African, or even another European style culture is why people assume you are bigoted and xenophobic. And if you try and say American Culture is a mix of all those, then I say, yes they are. Our culture is not just one but all cultures, and future cultures of the world. Oh wait I did say that, when I said America is a dream that belongs to the world.

But why should you give up your culture right? With all these foreign immigrants coming in and upsetting the balance. It wouldn't be fair for anyone to make you be a certain way. Right? Or even right for them to expect you to act against your best interests. Right?

Why should other people give up theirs to live in a place built on multiple cultures. Why should you be able to expect them to act against their own best interests. Because you were here first? Tell that to a Natives, and see how hard they laugh at you. And when he say's why aren't you speaking Iroquois, living and a tepee, shouldn't your people have assimilated into ours. What are you going to say? "Well, thats different both sides committed atrocities, its not like they were peaceful before we came." And then you will be just like a liberal throwing Christianity in your face, every time you comment on Islam being a threat to our way of life.
And please do tell, how do we assimilate these other cultures? Do we pass laws? Forcing people to behave and act a certain way, based on nothing more than they are different from you? That would take a mighty big government. With far reaching powers, and they would have to enforce it. So more police, and maybe even martial law.

Do we use camps, like for the Japanese? Re-education schools for Muslim children? What do we teach them? "Your culture and history is wrong, ours is better, learn it or face a life of poverty and misery. We are the good guys, assimilate or leave." Can you hear yourself?

Oh wait, you didn't give your premise much thought beyond the talking points. That could never happen, because... As everyone knows we are the most fair and even minded group, once you meet our demands of allowing us to violate other peoples civil liberties.

Remember you were the one who brought up being a Bigot, Racist and Xenophobe. Maybe next time don't put words in people's mouths.

The truth is, we will have interbred to the point of a single ethnicity before America becomes mono-cultured. Deal with it.

Tell that to the victims who've suffered from it.

Are you implying that I think the victims of Terrorism are unimportant? Or are you implying every person who is a victim, needs our pity to somehow ease their pain and grief.

Here is a question. Should we give up our freedoms (those ideas you call fantasy), when say, liberals want to pass gun legislation in a city after a stand-your-ground, or mass shooting? When they throw Trayvon's family up in your face? Or any of the other vicitim's and families of this tragedy? You discount the victims then, for your fantasy.

What if I am not discounting the victims? What if I am accepting there will always be victims somewhere. And what if I don't let that fact change my principles. The principles I was taught and believe America based on.

 

[ChezC3]

Imposing policies and mandates? Are you referring to laws enabling same sex couples to get a civil marriage (state , in a society with seperation of church and state) is a violation of your freedom of religion? I am sorry, did anyone from the Government knock on your door and force you to attend services spouting pro gay rights. Because, its not oppressing your freedom unless the Federal Government is forcing you. Much like the Government would be forcing Muslims to register, and face deportation for their beliefs. If we suddenly stopped "importing" them. As you put it. In fact when it prevents you from preventing someone else's free access to a civil institution, its protecting your rights from yourself.

No, I'm not.

Ok, as he was being nailed, did he fight? Did he call out to the crowd to stop the small group of soldiers, and then run out into the desert to start a guerrilla type war?
Or
Did he call out "Forgive them Father"?

No amount of torture, or humiliation, could keep him from blessing those who showed compassion even in his final moments.

He put Himself up there.

Alright then, when you reference the "atrocities committed in the name of Islam", and pointedly accede to Christian atrocities before asking why "import" more. You are directly linking the immigration of regular old Muslims to the ones that committed the atrocities. Playing on peoples fear of more atrocities, hoping they fall inline with your sentiment of keep them out. You didn't use a specific wording to narrow the field of Muslims down. You just threw a blanket over the whole lot of em, and you made it seem like we are discussing a terrorist exchange program. That is text book fear mongering. So you try to "kick people on their heels" with fear, I appeal to their sense of duty. Let's let the readers decide which appeal they prefer.

No, I am directly linking having an open door policy which would allow an untold numbers of individuals who would seek to do us harm, e.g. Islamic radicals with stupidity. You don't allow in from foreign countries that are known to produce radical Islamists thousands to millions of people. That is dumb. Fear and Stupidity might not be mutually exclusive but they certainly aren't synonymous.

I didn't use any of those labels, and you only think that way because you think the only way to defend America is by opposing an entire religion and race of people like they have leprosy because some crazy people believe the same thing they do to an extreme degree. All the while trying to distance yourself from the crazy people in your own religion. It's like Israel banning all Christians in the world, because some KKK guys burned one to many synagogues over the years.

You may not have but those on your side of the argument certainly have. "I only think..." I do? So, was my opposition to an entire religion what prompted me to amass hundreds of books and spend hundreds of hours in lecture studying this entire religion? To live in a neighborhood that has more Masjids than Churches? To build and maintain friendships with "regular old Muslims"? To share in solidarity the pangs of hunger when joining them in their fast during Ramadan? I distance myself from crazy people in general, I'm not a partisan in that regard.

*note to bible thumpers, this is not an accusation of wrongdoing. This is an abstract example meant drive home a point. If you don't understand the point, It's this. Christianity = large religion with many branches. Islam= large religion with many branches. Terrorist are to Islam, as KKK is to Christianity. And you should't blame Christianity for KKK, just like you shouldn't blame Islam for Terrorists.

False equivalence. The KKK was born out of the injustices suffered at the hands of Reconstructionists who punitively imposed harsh policies and promoted political corruption to favor those that up until a few years prior were considered property, not the Bible.

 

[ChezC3]

And be clear, you don't mean protecting Americans. You mean protecting non-Muslim Americans, and screw any Muslims wishing to be Americans, who you are saying shouldn't have the same standards of immigration as any other nationality. Based on their race. You wanna restrict immigration from a war-torn country for political reason, go ahead. But you still gotta accept the refugees applying for asylum. And you can't reject them based on religion. That's one of our laws and rules.

And to be clear, because you haven't used the word "bigot" or "racist" doesn't mean you haven't called me one, as we can all see you just did here.

Rather humorously I might add as Muslims aren't a race they're a religion and they are by and large Southeast Asian not Middle Eastern.

And to be crystal clear all this that you set forth is what is known as an "Aunt Sally" i.e. a Straw man argument. I've played along, gave plenty of leeway, but your arguments aren't my arguments, and you've yet to counter any of those.

Oh, and keep this statement of yours in mind when some "liberal" is after one of your freedoms. And they are arguing the public good outweighs your freedom, because we have laws and rules. One of those being , you can't keep people out based on religion. But hey the details are no concern of yours.

Again, false equivalence. As sone "liberal's" idea of the public good usually will involve stripping us of our freedoms. but I'm not promoting excluding people from anything based on religion. I'm promoting excluding people based on country of origin. If that happens to be a Muslim country and they themselves happen to be Muslim, than that's just how it played out.

 

[ChezC3]

So what defeated the Soviet Union, a battle of Ideals and Cultures... What makes every third world kid look at a globe, and think "One day I will live in America, and have enough to eat, and have cars, and go to school." You think I am fantasizing here, you are right. A Dream is a fantasy, and you can't make it a reality if you don't take it seriously. You know who else fantasized. Thomas Jefferson, Lincoln, MLK, and even Reagan. They all used the American Dream as more than a fantasy. The fact you read and ridicule my words fantasy, tells me you are one of the ones stumbling on our eternal journey. And the fact you try to defend your Mono-Cultural views with defenses against bigotry and racism, when I have made no accusations of bigotry and racism. Tells me you just don't want these people here, and will say anything short of something bigoted and racist to accomplish that goal. And the fact you think your culture should be the mono-culture America is based on, instead of say Natives, Irish, African, or even another European style culture is why people assume you are bigoted and xenophobic. And if you try and say American Culture is a mix of all those, then I say, yes they are. Our culture is not just one but all cultures, and future cultures of the world. Oh wait I did say that, when I said America is a dream that belongs to the world.

No. Economics beat the Soviet Union. What makes you think that's what every third world kid is saying? I'm not stumbling, I'm moving like a freight train. You're introducing so many preconceived notions and opinions now, you're holding a conversation with yourself.

But why should you give up your culture right? With all these foreign immigrants coming in and upsetting the balance. It wouldn't be fair for anyone to make you be a certain way. Right? Or even right for them to expect you to act against your best interests. Right?

Right. But judging by your post you haven't the foggiest idea of the distinction made. Fair? I'm not going anywhere, but if I did than as the old saying goes "When in Rome..."

Is learning the language not in someone's best interest?

Why should other people give up theirs to live in a place built on multiple cultures. Why should you be able to expect them to act against their own best interests. Because you were here first? Tell that to a Natives, and see how hard they laugh at you. And when he say's why aren't you speaking Iroquois, living and a tepee, shouldn't your people have assimilated into ours. What are you going to say? "Well, thats different both sides committed atrocities, its not like they were peaceful before we came." And then you will be just like a liberal throwing Christianity in your face, every time you comment on Islam being a threat to our way of life.
And please do tell, how do we assimilate these other cultures? Do we pass laws? Forcing people to behave and act a certain way, based on nothing more than they are different from you? That would take a mighty big government. With far reaching powers, and they would have to enforce it. So more police, and maybe even martial law.

Because it isn't built on multiple cultures, it is built upon a single culture that the world has contributed to. There is a difference and it is apparent that your unaware of this distinction.

Do we use camps, like for the Japanese? Re-education schools for Muslim children? What do we teach them? "Your culture and history is wrong, ours is better, learn it or face a life of poverty and misery. We are the good guys, assimilate or leave." Can you hear yourself?

.....

Remember you were the one who brought up being a Bigot, Racist and Xenophobe. Maybe next time don't put words in people's mouths. LMFAO oh this is rich!!! :lamo

The truth is, we will have interbred to the point of a single ethnicity before America becomes mono-cultured. Deal with it.



Are you implying...

Here is a question. Should we give up our freedoms (those ideas you call fantasy), when say, liberals want to pass gun legislation in a city after a stand-your-ground, or mass shooting? When they throw Trayvon's family up in your face? Or any of the other vicitim's and families of this tragedy? You discount the victims then, for your fantasy.

What if I am not discounting the victims? What if I am accepting there will always be victims somewhere. And what if I don't let that fact change my principles. The principles I was taught and believe America based on.

I've given you enough of my time, patience, and leeway. I've played along with you in your straw but all the above here is just becoming a bit of a bore. Do forgive me if I don't continue to indulge you.

:yawn:

 

[ThoughtEx.]

And to be clear, because you haven't used the word "bigot" or "racist" doesn't mean you haven't called me one, as we can all see you just did here.

Rather humorously I might add as Muslims aren't a race they're a religion and they are by and large Southeast Asian not Middle Eastern.

And to be crystal clear all this that you set forth is what is known as an "Aunt Sally" i.e. a Straw man argument. I've played along, gave plenty of leeway, but your arguments aren't my arguments, and you've yet to counter any of those.



Again, false equivalence. As sone "liberal's" idea of the public good usually will involve stripping us of our freedoms. but I'm not promoting excluding people from anything based on religion. I'm promoting excluding people based on country of origin. If that happens to be a Muslim country and they themselves happen to be Muslim, than that's just how it played out.

If any of this were true you wouldnt have responded to my first post in the matter in which you did. Post #223. You basically put alot of words in my mouth, shouted nu uh, jesus wasn't a pacifist, and there is no such thing as an American dream. Then yelled don't call me a racist see everyone he thinks im a racist. And when I broke down your own argument, and criticized you for general references. You flip flop, only countries we are war with... Not all muslims. Seeing as how that was my goal all along, we are done here. Congratulations on learning the difference between all muslims and terrorists.

 

[Tigerace117]

No, I'm not.




He put Himself up there.





No, I am directly linking having an open door policy which would allow an untold numbers of individuals who would seek to do us harm, e.g. Islamic radicals with stupidity. You don't allow in from foreign countries that are known to produce radical Islamists thousands to millions of people. That is dumb. Fear and Stupidity might not be mutually exclusive but they certainly aren't synonymous.



You may not have but those on your side of the argument certainly have. "I only think..." I do? So, was my opposition to an entire religion what prompted me to amass hundreds of books and spend hundreds of hours in lecture studying this entire religion? To live in a neighborhood that has more Masjids than Churches? To build and maintain friendships with "regular old Muslims"? To share in solidarity the pangs of hunger when joining them in their fast during Ramadan? I distance myself from crazy people in general, I'm not a partisan in that regard.



False equivalence. The KKK was born out of the injustices suffered at the hands of Reconstructionists who punitively imposed harsh policies and promoted political corruption to favor those that up until a few years prior were considered property, not the Bible.

The poor southerners. They had to tolerate African Americans existing. They had to tolerate African Americans not being their slaves. They could potentially be arrested by a lawman who was African American. The shock! The horror!

Reconstruction was designed to utterly crush the power of the class which had thrown North America into the furnace of war for their own profit.

 

[chromium]

No, it's very, very fringe. And I'm pretty sure that Cruz's association with some fringe guy does not involve validation of that guy's fringe beliefs. More likely there are some issues they agree on and others not, just like with most supporters. It's idiotic to assume that acceptance of support from someone implies acceptance of everything and anything that person advocates.

Did I mention that guilt by association is stupid? That people who promulgate guilt by association are stupid? That in the past liberals agreed that guilt by association is stupid? Liberals had a name for guilt by association. They called it "McCarthyism". But I don't expect you to know about that, education in this country being in the sorry state that it is.

it's not stupid when someone is that extremist and you're literally on stage with them. If trump has to disavow the endorsement of the KKK leader then you're damn right we will expect ted cruz to be less of a whore for extremists

 

[Bucky]

It is not "discriminatory mentality" when I point out in response to the denial of one commenter that there are Christians who also advocate for the death of gays. It is the irrational response of some which illustrates their lack of knowledge about the Islamic faith that causes me to point out that advocates of other religions can be just as biased and hate-filled as the Islamic fundamentalists.

As there are "gay-friendly" churches, there are now gay-friendly mosques in Western nations.

Gay-friendly 'mosque' opens in Paris - BBC News - BBC.com

British Muslim Who Founded a Controversial Gay-Friendly Mosque in Cape Town South Africa

Toronto mosque is gay friendly, mixed gender prayers led by a woman

A major difference exists:

Christians are not killing gays, Muslims are. Look at the preponderance of evidence in the world. The liberal hypocrisy is amazing. Support a group of people that do not represent your values. Reme.

Conservatives are at least consistent. Christians and least represent conservative values.

 

[ChezC3]

If any of this were true you wouldnt have responded to my first post in the matter in which you did. Post #223. You basically put alot of words in my mouth, shouted nu uh, jesus wasn't a pacifist, and there is no such thing as an American dream. Then yelled don't call me a racist see everyone he thinks im a racist. And when I broke down your own argument, and criticized you for general references. You flip flop, only countries we are war with... Not all muslims. Seeing as how that was my goal all along, we are done here. Congratulations on learning the difference between all muslims and terrorists.

So now, not only would you try to give me my worldview, opinion, and argument, but also reactions...

Oh my...:giggle1:

 

[ChezC3]

The poor southerners. They had to tolerate African Americans existing. They had to tolerate African Americans not being their slaves. They could potentially be arrested by a lawman who was African American. The shock! The horror!

Reconstruction was designed to utterly crush the power of the class which had thrown North America into the furnace of war for their own profit.

There are so many misconceptions here, I don't know where to begin: Wrong inference, perspective, Aunt Sally showing a little leg, I mean...damn... :wow:

 

[Tigerace117]

There are so many misconceptions here, I don't know where to begin: Wrong inference, perspective, Aunt Sally showing a little leg, I mean...damn... :wow:

Even Nathan Bedford Forrest thought what the Klan did was wrong. And he was a hard as nails Confederate Calvary general.

 

[ChezC3]

Even Nathan Bedford Forrest thought what the Klan did was wrong. And he was a hard as nails Confederate Calvary general.

oh, for **** sake, NBF worked to disband the Klan because it went too far, not that the original purpose for why it was created -- what he helped create -- was wrong. Please note, I'm not nor have I said anything about right, wrong, good, bad, et al. I have explained in historic context what were the reasons for the Klan's formation. I did this to correct an individual who was flat out wrong about the subject.

 

[LowDown]

it's not stupid when someone is that extremist and you're literally on stage with them. If trump has to disavow the endorsement of the KKK leader then you're damn right we will expect ted cruz to be less of a whore for extremists

So it's OK for you to use McCarthyism, but not me. Got it.

If I see Trump standing on the stage with Al Sharpton or I see Hillary standing on the stage with Wayne LaPierre, President of the NRA, it's reasonable for me to ask what their association is and to what extent they share beliefs. But it would be grossly stupid of me to assume or assert that just because they are standing together that they do share all the same beliefs.

 

[chromium]

So it's OK for you to use McCarthyism, but not me. Got it.

If I see Trump standing on the stage with Al Sharpton or I see Hillary standing on the stage with Wayne LaPierre, President of the NRA, it's reasonable for me to ask what their association is and to what extent they share beliefs. But it would be grossly stupid of me to assume or assert that just because they are standing together that they do share all the same beliefs.

except that we already know ted cruz shares those sentiments that gays are inferior. He's said it many times and vowed to make it so

 

[LowDown]

except that we already know ted cruz shares those sentiments that gays are inferior. He's said it many times and vowed to make it so

I guess I missed those Trump quotes. Do you happen to have them handy?

Besides which, even if Trump does harbor certain objectionable opinions, just because we see him shaking hands with Rev. Wright does not mean he believes as Wright does. Or at least that's what Obama's supporters tell us.

 

[D_NATURED]

So it's a-ok to murder people en masse because........other people have killed people before? On what planet is that "rational"?

On what planet did I say that? What I said is, Stalin and Mao were dictators with a beef against religion. Their religious beefs were understandable, but the way they used it to rationalize harming humans is no better than using god to do so. Is that clear?

I struggle to understand why, exactly, you seem to think that what Stalin and Mao did was understandable. Do you realize what horrible things they, and their flunkies, did? For somebody who seems so upset about how "tyrannical" religion is you don't seem to care too much when the shoe is on the other foot.

Well, you're wrong. Understand, if you can, that the threat to their real authority by imaginary gods could not be opposed with propaganda. Religion, if nothing else, is immovable in the face of logic. That's why differing religious beliefs have led to so much violence throughout history, it's inevitable. Religion, as Sam Harris said, is a conversation stopper.

So, interpret that, if you must, as my support for murder rather than the sad comprehension of the futility of trying to reason with the faithful.

If a person doesn't believe in hell or heaven, how exactly are they supposed to be threatened by the idea of going to hell?

Well, they shouldn't have to be. However, the fear of hell is sufficient to make some do horrible things to you in THIS sphere of existence to protect themselves from magical god. That is the unfortunate truth, that god may very well be lacking in substance but is very real in consequence. Real or not, He gets a lot of blood spilled in His name.