t?Official Religion Hatred Thread

[Michchamp]

at least you're finally acknowledging a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun. That's progress.

..to TRY to stop him...

not acknowledging shit

people still got shot here and one died

 

[Spartanmack]

the burden of proof is on the one asserting it.

it's well documented and obvious - in fact, it's so blatant only a bigot or moron could evade or ignore it. What's not obvious is why leftists bend over backward to make excuses for it and proclaim the most oppressive, bigoted and murderous, really the only oppressive, bigoted and murderous religion of the major belief systems is somehow being victimized by the most egalitarian civilization (western) in world history.

For example, SI features a model wearing a hijab and a "burkini" in this year's swim suit issue because in her culture she could be severely punished for revealing too much of her body and the leftist media declares she is "breaking barriers" - that's literally the opposite of what she is doing. She's literally complying with barriers placed on her by a repressive, regressive patriarchal society and your team is making her a heroine for being submissive. The level of hypocrisy and stupidity boggles the mind.

 

[Spartanmack]

..to TRY to stop him...

not acknowledging shit

people still got shot here and one died

LOL so the good guy with a gun fails if even one person gets shot. Is that your position? they would have been better off waiting for the cops?

by the way, a lot of the anti-semitic rhetoric is coming from Democrats in national office and the uber leftist New York Times.

 

[Gulo Blue]

MC asks for it regularly. In fact, the post you quoted was me replying to a post where he asked me for just that.

What people shouldn't expect is consistency from you. Ever.

Obviously he asks, but he doesn't expect it. He asks to make the point, not because he expects it.

 

[Spartanmack]

Obviously he asks, but he doesn't expect it. He asks to make the point, not because he expects it.

if you say so. and i have to say you are at least consistent in one thing. coming to defend him - its almost as if hes your little brother.

 

[Gulo Blue]

if you say so. and i have to say you are at least consistent in one thing. coming to defend him - its almost as if hes your little brother.

I've called him a commie enough.

 

[Michchamp]

if you say so. and i have to say you are at least consistent in one thing. coming to defend him - its almost as if hes your little brother.

speaking of consistency, I've noticed "internet douchebags," i.e. YOU, consistently flip out whenever more than one person calls them out on their douchieness.

 

[Spartanmack]

speaking of consistency, I've noticed "internet douchebags," i.e. YOU, consistently flip out whenever more than one person calls them out on their douchieness.

don't flatter yourself, you couldn't possibly offend me let alone get me to flip out.

 

[Spartanmack]

I've called him a commie enough.

so you admit you indulge him. champ's not the only one making progress today.

 

[Gulo Blue]

so you admit you indulge him. champ's not the only one making progress today.

I think we've got a bad connection. You can't make out what I'm saying.

 

[Spartanmack]

I think we've got a bad connection. You can't make out what I'm saying.

clearly one of us is having trouble getting the other. Here's a clue: it's not me.

 

[Gulo Blue]

clearly one of us is having trouble getting the other. Here's a clue: it's not me.

I can live with that. If you do understand what I'm saying, then you're correct, I'm not understanding why you post things like "you say..." or "so you admit..." followed by something I'm not saying or admitting.

 

[Spartanmack]

I can live with that. If you do understand what I'm saying, then you're correct, I'm not understanding why you post things like "you say..." or "so you admit..." followed by something I'm not saying or admitting.

you: I've called him a commie enough.

me: so you admit you indulge him (#sarcasm). does that help? smartest poster on the board...indeed.

 

[Spartanmack]

Every white supremacist is a racist, but not every garden variety racist is a white supremacist.

this is true even if all garden variety white racists (like champ) were white supremacists because garden variety black, Hispanic, East and Central Asian racists most likely wouldn't be white supremacists.

 

[Gulo Blue]

you: I've called him a commie enough.

me: so you admit you indulge him (#sarcasm). does that help? smartest poster on the board...indeed.

That one's actually really funny. Shame that I missed it.

 

[Michchamp]

Obviously he asks, but he doesn't expect it. He asks to make the point, not because he expects it.

It wasn't obvious...? I mean, I called him "Mullah spartamack" for fuck's sake.


For the humorless: I've been doing this long enough to know that you can cherry pick whole passages from any holy book, and find things that will horrify our modern, sane, 21st century morals.

edit: last part wasn't directed at gulo...

 

[Spartanmack]

It wasn't obvious...? I mean, I called him "Mullah spartamack" for fuck's sake.


For the humorless: I've been doing this long enough to know that you can cherry pick whole passages from any holy book, and find things that will horrify our modern, sane, 21st century morals.

this is half the point. You think that all cultures are basically morally equal - that we all share the same "modern, sane, 21st century morals" or worse, that western civilization is to blame for most of the world's problems. So taking it a step further, you believe that discriminating against bad ideologies is a form of racism because in your ill informed mind they're not bad, they're just different. It's painfully clear that this is not true which brings us to the other half of the point which is what's really obvious - no matter what I post or who I quote, you'll be unconvinced. You ignore the Pew data and any and all facts that don't fit your world view. You'll chalk up any dissention to bigotry. You won't dispute data or facts - you will instead impugn the source. You're a hack who follows the Saul Alinsky playbook to a T - it's you're MO and it's all you got.

I've been doing this long enough to know facts don't phase you - you probably still believe Uncle Ho turned from a constitutional democracy favoring the West to a communist dictatorship favoring the USSR because Truman hurt his feelings. You're an ideologue, like many people who post here and some who aren't are enablers of your moronic nonsense.

 

[byco42]

For the humorless: I've been doing this long enough to know that you can cherry pick whole passages from any holy book, and find things that will horrify our modern, sane, 21st century morals.

I am horrified by selected determintations of these. Isaiah 5:20.

 

[Michchamp]

I am horrified by selected determintations of these. Isaiah 5:20.

Compared to the bad acid trip that is the Book Of Revelations, even Trump's White House seems sane to me.

 

[tigermud]

Compared to the bad acid trip that is the Book Of Revelations, even Trump's White House seems sane to me.

Try reading it from cover to cover sometime it’s revelation not revelations it’ll take a year or more on ave. I agree though their a lots of things in the Old Testament that horrify me