Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed (Replaced by Amy Coney Barrett)(Now Abortion Discussion) (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Is the caliphate backed by the Islamic state? It is, so you perception is just wrong, but it sounded like a good zinger to you no doubt.

    Having society police morality vs the state actually policing morality is the same to you obviously. Hey, you do you my friend.
    No zingers, man, it's true. You try to come off as a libertarian but you are really a culture warrior who wants his religious beliefs codified into law. I have no beef with your opinion, just the semantically shallow way you try to dance around the basis for it.
     
    No zingers, man, it's true. You try to come off as a libertarian but you are really a culture warrior who wants his religious beliefs codified into law. I have no beef with your opinion, just the semantically shallow way you try to dance around the basis for it.
    I don't think I ever said I want my beliefs codified into law. I have said I want my beliefs mainstream in the culture, but not by the state.
    I am culture warrior though. True story. As far as dancing, I think I generally tell you or whoever exactly what I think despite the shallow attempts to 'have a discussion'.
     
    I don't think I ever said I want my beliefs codified into law. I have said I want my beliefs mainstream in the culture, but not by the state.
    I am culture warrior though. True story. As far as dancing, I think I generally tell you or whoever exactly what I think despite the shallow attempts to 'have a discussion'.

    You said it.

    Oh, there is a misunderstanding. I am 100% behind making Christian beliefs into law. I am fan of western civilization.

     
    honestly, Farb, is that cognitive dissonance? I cannot imagine you thinking you haven’t said that you’re in favor of making your religious beliefs into law. I mean, i am flabbergasted that you think that.
     
    a crime? No. Should society establish that is against the societal norm. Yes, but we both know that won't happen as our society has fractured and devolved into the vanity and narcissism.

    The only societies to ever do this have been theocratic, autocratic and often both. Western civilizations, and the vast majority of civilizations across the world, have been sexually liberal since before we even called it civilization. Right up until the widespread practice of Christianity in the west. It isn't even fair to compare it to Islam because even Muslims recognized the validity of things like transgenderism for centuries, right up until the Christian west systematically removed the liberal leaders in the middle east.

    Oh, there is a misunderstanding. I am 100% behind making Christian beliefs into law. I am fan of western civilization.

    Which perfectly tracks with this statement. You're arguing for theocracy. You're arguing for something that is antithetical to the nation you claim to love. I doubt we'd have to probe very far to find out that what you really want is a Christian ethnostate.
     
    The only societies to ever do this have been theocratic, autocratic and often both. Western civilizations, and the vast majority of civilizations across the world, have been sexually liberal since before we even called it civilization. Right up until the widespread practice of Christianity in the west. It isn't even fair to compare it to Islam because even Muslims recognized the validity of things like transgenderism for centuries, right up until the Christian west systematically removed the liberal leaders in the middle east.



    Which perfectly tracks with this statement. You're arguing for theocracy. You're arguing for something that is antithetical to the nation you claim to love. I doubt we'd have to probe very far to find out that what you really want is a Christian ethnostate.
    Civilization, all civilization, has been based on male and female couplings to produce offspring. Every single one and forever. This has nothing to do Christianity or we can just call it western civilization. In fact, even the puritans were pretty 'modern' in allowing divorces for women who were married to men who did not provide 'happiness in the bedroom'. So your immediate jump to 'Christianity bad, islam enlightened' is tired, incorrect and revisionist history almost as tired as the myth of the peaceful, enlightened and noble natives on this continent.

    I have also stated that we live in a constitutional republic so codifying 'my' religious beliefs into law is not applicable. But we can ignore that as usual and stick to what you think helps your argument.
     
    Was this the discussion about me being emperor or the authoritarian theocratic?

    It's the discussion where you can't remember or don't care about your own deeply held opinion from two months ago. It's almost as though you are a grown man that thinks trolling is funny, but there's no way you would do that...
     
    It's the discussion where you can't remember or don't care about your own deeply held opinion from two months ago. It's almost as though you are a grown man that thinks trolling is funny, but there's no way you would do that...
    So, which was it? What the was the context of the quote you pulled?
    Speaking of trolling and all that.
     
    So, which was it? What the was the context of the quote you pulled?
    Speaking of trolling and all that.

    The context is still there for all to see. If I took out of context, explain what I missed.
     
    The context is still there for all to see. If I took out of context, explain what I missed.
    Typical. But no, you can believe what you want. I don't care as much as you do to actually go through and find quotes. If you find anything else, please share with the class.
     
    Typical. But no, you can believe what you want. I don't care as much as you do to actually go through and find quotes. If you find anything else, please share with the class.
    In what world does he have to find anything else?

    You said you didn’t say something. He clearly quoted you where you did say the thing (and it wasn’t terribly long ago, so most of us remembered it anyway).

    The onus is on you to show where he’s misinterpreted you in some fashion, because as of right now, it just looks like you say whatever’s convenient to win an argument at the time, consistency be damned.
     
    In what world does he have to find anything else?

    You said you didn’t say something. He clearly quoted you where you did say the thing (and it wasn’t terribly long ago, so most of us remembered it anyway).

    The onus is on you to show where he’s misinterpreted you in some fashion, because as of right now, it just looks like you say whatever’s convenient to win an argument at the time, consistency be damned.

    GOP 2024 Slogan:

    THE HYPOCRISY IS THE POINT
     
    Typical. But no, you can believe what you want. I don't care as much as you do to actually go through and find quotes. If you find anything else, please share with the class.

    It's out of context, but you can't provide the right context. The speed at which you change your views in order to own the libs or whatever the fork it is you're trying to do here is enough to give a person whiplash. What a forking joke.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom