|
Post by Cody™ on Apr 25, 2019 14:29:51 GMT
Yes, to you it's a big joke...LOL. But would you have been comfortable if they had called the mosque attackers as extremists for Christianity? If this if that if if if if. You secular leftists really are shameless.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,668
Likes: 1,290
|
Post by The Lost One on Apr 25, 2019 14:39:33 GMT
Ben Shapiro is a moron and hypocrite. Those are literally two things he is not. That would be the left’s heroes Hillary and Obama. I'm a leftist who would happily stick Obama, Hillary and Ben Shapiro into the same rocket and blast them into the sun.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Apr 25, 2019 15:50:14 GMT
Ben Shapiro is a moron and hypocrite. I don't think he's a moron. He's a con artist, pun intended. He tells people with money what they want to hear, and they give him money. Sounds like a win-win situation for those involved. Whether he really believes what he says, or whether anyone who cares about the truth should believe what he says, is another matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 16:01:05 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 16:02:13 GMT
Shapiro is an absolute fascist racist prick.
He calls European Muslims 'a disease'.
Straight out of Mein Kampf that.
Nazi bastard.
|
|
|
Post by RomyLovesMick on Apr 25, 2019 16:47:24 GMT
Shapiro is downright dangerous. He thinks Pres. Roosevelt was right to put Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II. "We won the war, didn't we?" he observes. He thinks gun banning is immoral, and he wants to bring back sedition laws, which would forbid criticism of the US government, its institutions, and its wars.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Apr 25, 2019 18:08:08 GMT
When people respond to me by just copying a link it usually means that they have no valid argument to make for themselves. The article in the link is just more distorted right-wing nonsense like that that Shapiro spouted, so what is your point? I knew you would just arrogantly dismiss that article. You’re a leftist you cannot help yourself. Uhh no. Christians do not worship Easter. Christians go to church to worship God and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hence why we are called Christians. It is actually Obama and Clinton who are guilty of adding redundant wording. You are just like most of the other radical leftists willing to scoff at facts and twist things if it threatens to contradict your precious worldview. No, I read the article and it was just stating the same things Shapiro and his mouthpiece in the video you linked were making. You made no point but just pasted a link in response to my earlier reply. It is you that failed to make any argument, in effect dismissing what I wrote. I don't think you had the ability to make an intelligent reply, so you decided to not make a reply at all. That was probably wise, in that you did not expose your deficiencies further. You are coming across as a very ignorant person attempting to defend a position that really cannot be defended.
I already preemptively took your argument about Christians worshiping Easter apart before you made it. Why? Because others on the radical right were making this absurd claim. Remember the part I wrote about "Easter" being an adjective? Your reading makes the word "worshipers" modify Easter, and not the way it is written.
I am not even close to being a radical leftist. I am actually center-right. I think there are those that have seen my posts for years and know the truth.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Apr 25, 2019 18:11:18 GMT
THAT part of it, at least seems a silly quibble.
The degree to which, and how. the world at large calls out specific religions as the basis for terrorism isn't a quibble. But I think it needs to be done diplomatically. Given that ~1/4 the worlds population is Muslim, that means there are 1.75 billion Muslims. Clearly they ALL aren't out committing terrorism. In fact, that means there are probably well over 1.7 billion who are living peacefully. Clearly Islam has its radical elements just like Christians have their radical elements. The background of [one of] the perpetrators in the mosque attacks in New Zealand makes it clear he was doing it on behalf of Christians/Christianity. Yet I wouldn't hold Christians or Christianity in general as responsible for that attack. AFAIK, no public official specifically names Christianity or Christians in condemning those who attacked the mosques.
The problem I see with the Shapiros of the world...wishing to call out Islam and Muslims specifically is that I don't see how it helps anything. For me, anyways, I think it all comes down to how can the rest of the world support and encourage the moderate and peaceful Muslims? Maybe it's by clearly identifying when some terrorists are doing it in the name of Islam. I don't know for sure. But I'm guessing that those who respond like Hillary and Obama aren't doing it JUST to irritate Christians and protect radical Muslims, but rather it's because they are trying to minimize the importance of the Islam religion in these terrorists attacks vs the fact that there are radical elements of all worldviews...Christian, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. As I have said elsewhere, naming Islam in these extremists attacks only lends strength to THEIR cause...the cause of the radical Islamic terrorists...they WANT to be seen as radical...radical in their fight for their version of God. The other Muslims would probably rather NOT be associated with these terrorists attacks so are chagrined when it is pointed out that these extremists are doing it "in the name of God." So I don't see it as hypocrisy but at trying to be diplomatic. At worst it might be a mistake, but best it might be a better approach than the approach Shapiro and the dude hosting the video.
LOL How long did it take for you to come up with this insightful reply? You really are unable to carry out an informed, mature and intelligent conversation.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Apr 25, 2019 18:15:04 GMT
No, he did not. I pointed this out to Cody hours ago, and how it made those making his case hypocrites...since they all leave Trump's message out of their discussion while attacking Obama and Hillary. He ignored me of course, making him an accessory hypocrite.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 18:19:47 GMT
No, he did not. I pointed this out to Cody hours ago, and how it made those making his case hypocrites...since they all leave Trump's message out of their discussion while attacking Obama and Hillary. He ignored me of course, making him an accessory hypocrite. That's his modus operandi... swing in fresh out of bible study with some ill-inspired 'champion fer jezuz' OP, defend some on the first page, realize he's getting his ass handed to him... then exit the thread entirely a few pages in with a few "LOL" responses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 18:33:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Apr 25, 2019 19:13:29 GMT
Better to jerk off about the left instead of feeling sad for the people killed.
Yeah because calling out the left’s clear hypocrisy means one doesn’t give a shit about the people killed. Idiot. You don't. It's just an excuse for the usual shit.
Fucktard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 21:34:30 GMT
They were people worshipping, at Easter. Therefore, they were Easter worshippers. Why is that a problem for you 🤷 Those tweets are good messages of condolence and support... You would have to be a total bell-end with a fucked up agenda to find fault with them 🙄 And if they were all Catholic Christians, would you feel the same way? Yes of course. I don't understand what you are getting at 🤷 Nobody gets a free pass from me because they are a Catholic.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Apr 25, 2019 21:47:44 GMT
THAT part of it, at least seems a silly quibble.
The degree to which, and how. the world at large calls out specific religions as the basis for terrorism isn't a quibble. But I think it needs to be done diplomatically. Given that ~1/4 the worlds population is Muslim, that means there are 1.75 billion Muslims. Clearly they ALL aren't out committing terrorism. In fact, that means there are probably well over 1.7 billion who are living peacefully. Clearly Islam has its radical elements just like Christians have their radical elements. The background of [one of] the perpetrators in the mosque attacks in New Zealand makes it clear he was doing it on behalf of Christians/Christianity. Yet I wouldn't hold Christians or Christianity in general as responsible for that attack. AFAIK, no public official specifically names Christianity or Christians in condemning those who attacked the mosques.
The problem I see with the Shapiros of the world...wishing to call out Islam and Muslims specifically is that I don't see how it helps anything. For me, anyways, I think it all comes down to how can the rest of the world support and encourage the moderate and peaceful Muslims? Maybe it's by clearly identifying when some terrorists are doing it in the name of Islam. I don't know for sure. But I'm guessing that those who respond like Hillary and Obama aren't doing it JUST to irritate Christians and protect radical Muslims, but rather it's because they are trying to minimize the importance of the Islam religion in these terrorists attacks vs the fact that there are radical elements of all worldviews...Christian, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. As I have said elsewhere, naming Islam in these extremists attacks only lends strength to THEIR cause...the cause of the radical Islamic terrorists...they WANT to be seen as radical...radical in their fight for their version of God. The other Muslims would probably rather NOT be associated with these terrorists attacks so are chagrined when it is pointed out that these extremists are doing it "in the name of God." So I don't see it as hypocrisy but at trying to be diplomatic. At worst it might be a mistake, but best it might be a better approach than the approach Shapiro and the dude hosting the video.
LOL I LOVE when Cody posts this. It is like a code and red beacon to the Board, for the fact that the above poster has saidi something that, whilst it conflicts with Cody's narrow bigoted worldview... he can't actually refute it.
|
|
basmaticathury
Junior Member
@basmaticathury
Posts: 3,130
Likes: 1,186
|
Post by basmaticathury on Apr 26, 2019 0:33:44 GMT
It is uncharacteristic of Clinton and Obama not to be consistent.
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Apr 26, 2019 16:49:46 GMT
Yes, to you it's a big joke...LOL. But would you have been comfortable if they had called the mosque attackers as extremists for Christianity? If this if that if if if if. You secular leftists really are shameless. Answer the question please. Would you be comfortable if those who commented on the mosque attacker(s) had mentioned that the attacker(s) were extremists for Christianity?
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Apr 27, 2019 12:16:31 GMT
Did anyone, Hillary, Obama, Trump, etc. mention that the perpetrator of the mosque attack in New Zealand was doing it in the name of Christianity? I don’t see how that is relevant. He was a white supremest and his appalling crime was racially motivated.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Apr 27, 2019 12:27:22 GMT
If this if that if if if if. You secular leftists really are shameless. Answer the question please. Would you be comfortable if those who commented on the mosque attacker(s) had mentioned that the attacker(s) were extremists for Christianity? Of course not, because the attacker wasn’t an “extremist for Christianity”. He was an ethno-nationalist. Here are the facts. Muslims get slaughtered in a mosque by a racist and Obama and Clinton are quick to mention the religion of the victims and the motivation of the attackers. Christians are slaughtered in even bigger numbers in a church by Islamists(something that’s happening on a daily basis across large parts of the world) and they couldn’t even bring themselves to type the words “Christians” or “islamists”. This is clear hypocrisy and a double standard and you’re here trying to defend those two cowards?! As the guy in the video put it nicely, these good for nothing leftist politicians need to either be consistent or be quiet.
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Apr 27, 2019 21:50:43 GMT
Did anyone, Hillary, Obama, Trump, etc. mention that the perpetrator of the mosque attack in New Zealand was doing it in the name of Christianity? I don’t see how that is relevant. He was a white supremest and his appalling crime was racially motivated. It's as relevant as raising the religion of any other people committing appalling crimes. The crime was more than racially motivated...he felt himself defending Christians against Muslims. This site explains the connection. So it wasn't just "racial" it was a holy war in his deranged opinion.
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Apr 27, 2019 21:53:12 GMT
Answer the question please. Would you be comfortable if those who commented on the mosque attacker(s) had mentioned that the attacker(s) were extremists for Christianity? Of course not, because the attacker wasn’t an “extremist for Christianity”. He was an ethno-nationalist. Here are the facts. Muslims get slaughtered in a mosque by a racist and Obama and Clinton are quick to mention the religion of the victims and the motivation of the attackers. Christians are slaughtered in even bigger numbers in a church by Islamists(something that’s happening on a daily basis across large parts of the world) and they couldn’t even bring themselves to type the words “Christians” or “islamists”. This is clear hypocrisy and a double standard and you’re here trying to defend those two cowards?! As the guy in the video put it nicely, these good for nothing leftist politicians need to either be consistent or be quiet. Of course he was an extremist for Christianity. That was his motivation. Read up on the attacker.
|
|