RE: World War III

RE: World War III (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

World War III

That war is coming.

20% (6)

That war will never come.

20% (6)

Please let that war come.

6% (2)

The war was never over.

13% (4)

The war has already started.

40% (12)

Total Votes : 30

(last vote on : 3/30/2014 10:57:19 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

njlauren -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 8:32:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Yup,The Family,aka The Fellowship,aka C-Street (a Wash.DC town house they use to bribe the republicans who live there.....for free. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellowship_(Christian_organization) They were able to trick the Ugandans into passing the most horrific anti human laws(in this case anti-gay laws) written since the nazis wrote theirs.... Job well done christo-fascist-republicans....[X(] Anyone (with a conscience) who wants to know how much damage an off-the -radar, well funded conservative group can make,google the words "c-street,Uganda and homosexuality and see what these "Christian" monsters (that our conservatives are pretending doen`t exist) have created..... I would say they tricked the Ugandans, that is a cop out, people in places like Uganda are mean spirited, ignorant people who can be swept up in the worse that religion offers. By the way, don't just blame the evangelicals, the RC Bishops of the country put their weight behind these laws, and the Vatican did nothing to stop them. The original version of the laws had the death penalty for homosexual activity, and in one version it called for stoning them to death, and not only did the Bishops do nothing to stop the law they way they were proposed, they also fully supported it..and the Vatican stayed silent, even though the Vatican issued statements over the last few years saying such laws were against church teaching.

njlauren -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 8:37:09 PM)
I don't know about Christians deliberately starting WWIII, but there was an interesting comment about Bush II being an evangelical, and the common notion about evangelicals that a nuclear war might be the trigger for the end of days as described in revelation, which if you hold to the evangelical notion that they will be swept up in the rapture, is not exactly a bad thing..and imagine having a president with the keys to the nuclear arsenal who could potentially believe that a nuclear war is not a bad thing....... BTW, I am not saying Bush II himself believed that, I don't think he was that far off the deep end, he did a lot of stupid things but I don't think he is like that..but still, you get some born again that thinks like that, and it is a scary thought.

TheHeretic -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 8:42:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I can't imagine how you came by that perception. Certainly not by anything I've claimed. The Family does backroom deals, behind the scenes. Hardly "authoritarian theocratic regimes." They're wannabes. But influential wannbes in Washington. I'm always stunned how quickly folks run with the tangents and leave the original posts. The point was countering that Islam is bent on conquering the world and Christians are immune. Neither are true. There's a minority in each with that vision. I completely agree that there are minority kooks of such crazy aspirations coming from both sides in the Christianity/Islam comparison. What I'm saying though, Muse, is that the minority on the Christian side you are talking about are "making backroom deals" and contributing to campaigns as one of many groups, of many ideologies, who are doing exactly the same thing in pursuit of their own ends, while the minority in a place like Iran is formally, openly, and by their rule of law, picking the candidates who get their names in on the full length of the ballot. That's a significant difference, don't you think?

Owner59 -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 8:49:22 PM)
We normal folks believe there`s a huge difference between say getting gays thrown in prison for life and water projects for poor communities..... [8\|]

Owner59 -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 9:14:43 PM)
He voted like a republican and was influenced by "the family" all the same..... We`ll let Rachel help...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwr_TzCggzM One guy said he`d been getting subsidized housing for 14 years! That`s hundreds of thousands of dollars in in-kind payments.....

Owner59 -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 9:19:04 PM)
Republicans......shame on you.

Musicmystery -> RE: World War III (3/23/2014 11:53:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery I can't imagine how you came by that perception. Certainly not by anything I've claimed. The Family does backroom deals, behind the scenes. Hardly "authoritarian theocratic regimes." They're wannabes. But influential wannbes in Washington. I'm always stunned how quickly folks run with the tangents and leave the original posts. The point was countering that Islam is bent on conquering the world and Christians are immune. Neither are true. There's a minority in each with that vision. I completely agree that there are minority kooks of such crazy aspirations coming from both sides in the Christianity/Islam comparison. What I'm saying though, Muse, is that the minority on the Christian side you are talking about are "making backroom deals" and contributing to campaigns as one of many groups, of many ideologies, who are doing exactly the same thing in pursuit of their own ends, while the minority in a place like Iran is formally, openly, and by their rule of law, picking the candidates who get their names in on the full length of the ballot. That's a significant difference, don't you think? Again, you're reading in things I haven't said. Of course it's different. But again, that wasn't the question. What's not in question is the influence The Family exercises. I shared where even evangelicals and a Bush official confirm. And a theocracy doesn't have to model Iran to be a theocracy. Nor does a wannabe theocracy.

DesideriScuri -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 6:18:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Lol, well you're right about the sarcasm. But it wasn't sarcasm in the sense that I think he should be silenced, it was sarcasm in the sense that I disagree with him and that I think he buys into xenophobic conspiracies and that he's backwards and crazy. Should stop looking for something that isn't there, otherwise you'll start thinking like truck there and start thinking that anyone who isn't white is a threat to world peace [;)] So, banish him to sites where he'll find more agreement. But, that's not free speech, really. That's just hoping to make this site more agreeable to your own views. You have no idea what I think, and you've proven that over and over. You have, again, proven that you don't know and, likely, won't ever understand.

truckinslave -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 6:33:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 you'll start thinking like truck there and start thinking that anyone who isn't white is a threat to world peace [;)] you've proven that over and over. You have, again, proven that you don't know and, likely, won't ever understand. Ditto. He also doesn't know my race(s). Unsupported charges of racism are just cheap, easy, and require no thought at all....

Owner59 -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 6:40:36 AM)
What about all the <cough>, stuff you`ve written.......are you another one who`s words we`re suppose ignore?

MrBukani -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 9:19:10 AM)
I'm a Dutch German with portugese jewish roots. Or are you not tokkin to me?[:D]

Owner59 -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 11:55:36 AM)
[;)]

Tkman117 -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:25:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Lol, well you're right about the sarcasm. But it wasn't sarcasm in the sense that I think he should be silenced, it was sarcasm in the sense that I disagree with him and that I think he buys into xenophobic conspiracies and that he's backwards and crazy. Should stop looking for something that isn't there, otherwise you'll start thinking like truck there and start thinking that anyone who isn't white is a threat to world peace [;)] So, banish him to sites where he'll find more agreement. But, that's not free speech, really. That's just hoping to make this site more agreeable to your own views. You have no idea what I think, and you've proven that over and over. You have, again, proven that you don't know and, likely, won't ever understand. Lol, dude you don't get it. I HAVE NO POWER HERE. All i stated was my honest opinion and personal suggestions, which hold no less or more value than yours. I can't banish him, and I can't take away his free speech. That is literally an act which is out of my hands. I simply cannot do that. Natta, zip, zilch. I can wave my arms, scream and say whatever I want on these forums all I want, but his free speech on this site will remain as it always had. Yes, I suggested he go to a site that aligns with a more xenophobic mindset, and yes, it was because I find such a mindset offensive. Do I have the power to actually force that on him and make that happen? NO So as a result, I am not taking away his right to free speech, and I wouldn't even if I could. Because despite my disagreement with him, he has not violated any TOS. And after all, I may disagree with you on many other issues, but I wouldn't take away your free speech either because you have not violated any TOS or anything of the likes. You have don't nothing wrong, he has don't nothing wrong, and neither have I. We are working within the confines of the TOS and our rights to free speech. Nothing else. And I don't care what you think, I don't see how thats even relevant here. All I know is what you post.

truckinslave -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:31:05 PM)
Since you're so keen on sharing your (potentially totally unfounded) opinions, do you have one on whether or not it is against the ToS to call another poster a racist without any evidence whatsoever?

Tkman117 -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:35:02 PM)
Just for the record, there is a difference between Xenophibia, which is what I stated, and racist. Xenophobia: hatred or fear of foreigners or strangers or of their politics or culture Racism: the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by hereditary factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others So since they never specified calling someone a Xeonphobe as against the TOS...yep, I'm still in the green here. Not to mention you dropped that hint about isreal and iran in post 28, so it was pretty easy to spot that little bit of xenophobic attitude. Unless you have more to explain on that which would prove my point moot... P.S. On a final pint I didn't directly call you a xenophobe anyway, I said "why don't you go crawl back to those conspiracy xenophobe websites where you belong." so even if it was against the TOS, that statement wouldn't have broken any rules relating to a personal attack. [8\|]

mnottertail -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:43:43 PM)
The fuckin thing is here, they take personal attack way beyond the definition and include those retorts where it clearly has foundation, and bearing on the discourse. Not saying you did it, just saying they use a standard that is elsewise undefined.

truckinslave -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:46:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 Just for the record, there is a difference between Xenophibia, which is what I stated, and racist. Xenophobia: hatred or fear of foreigners or strangers or of their politics or culture Racism: the belief that races have distinctive cultural characteristics determined by hereditary factors and that this endows some races with an intrinsic superiority over others So since they never specified calling someone a Xeonphobe as against the TOS...yep, I'm still in the green here. Not to mention you dropped that hint about isreal and iran in post 28, so it was pretty easy to spot that little bit of xenophobic attitude. Unless you have more to explain on that which would prove my point moot... What a cowardly sniveling little PoS post that is, uh? Here's what you wrote: you'll start thinking like truck there and start thinking that anyone who isn't white is a threat to world peace Care to grovel around attempting to explain how that calls me a xenophobe, not a racist? (BTW, I am neither. I do, in fact, after study, abhor Islam. Which is an intellectual stance far outside your definition of zenophobia, above).

JeffBC -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:49:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave (BTW, I am neither. I do, in fact, after study, abhor Islam. Which is an intellectual stance far outside your definition of zenophobia, above). So given that I feel pretty much the same about all the abrahamic religions (after study) does that make me more or less xenophobic than you?

Tkman117 -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 12:53:38 PM)
Lol, well played, very well played [:D]. However, it still technically wasn't a personal attack as I didn't say it flat out to you. And I don't think I'll be going into the details of what I think about your statements and furthering this BS, I prefer to play within the lines of the TOS, nice try though [;)] And abhor: regard with disgust and hatred. So ya, that seems to fall in line pretty closely with xenophobia on the hate part, as a lot of middle eastern cultures are based around islam and sharia law, so if the shoe fits [;)]

truckinslave -> RE: World War III (3/24/2014 1:09:57 PM)
I don't think it makes either one of us a xenophobe. M-W defines it as " one unduly fearful of what is foreign and especially of people of foreign origin". Doesn't seem to fit, does it? I cannot speak for you, of course, but I am simply a person who has found a number of ways of thought with which I disagree, some past the point of despising them. Which, I suppose, is pretty much another way of saying I have thought about various things and decided that those things are not equal. Which means that I make value judgments. Which clearly makes me unfit to live according to many of the idiots that comprise today's American citizenry. Is there a word for that?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.046875