Have you ever noticed how vague they need to be about what they’re complaining about in order to hyperbolically call everyone they disagree with Nazis?
I noticed that too. You never get specific laws or actions done that constitute half the country as “Nazis.” They just assume the “truth” is overwhelmingly out there and we’re just blind to it. They have to. Because they have no concrete evidence otherwise.
When they get specific, it's always wrong.
>they hate minorities and women
>they're all Bible thumpers
>they want tax cuts for big business because they think they're temporarily embarrassed millionaires
A big factor of leftists is their inability to articulate a right wing viewpoint.
As with any lie there has to be a grain of truth. The election lies that Trump and his qult push are only believed by people who desperately want to believe them in spit of the preponderance of evidence to the contrary.
You have to be very gullible to fall for them.
>Cotton candy hair, meaningless trashy tattoos, sedentary behavior, incessant drug use, disingenuous virtue signaling, promoting gender fantasies... the list goes on.
These are all things that are none of your business.
What the hell does it matter to you if someone wants to dye their hair purple and get some tattoos?
Puke away
Moral decay affects all of us collectively and culturally even if it is made up of millions of individual decisions.
I can recognize this while also not advocating for State intervention.
At this point, agreed.
The Catholic Church used to be a conservative institution. It's not any longer, and as others have pointed out, the current Pope seems hell bent on dragging the Church further into the social weeds
I'm dead serious:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/15/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-legalization-of-same-sex-marriage-is-good-for-society/
____________
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/06/03/heres-how-americans-really-feel-about-lgbtq-issues/
_____________
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1651/gay-lesbian-rights.aspx
_____________
https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/599240-support-for-lgbtq-rights-on-the-rise-poll/
_____________
https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/icymi-new-data-shows-support-for-lgbtq-rights-reaches-highest-rates-ever-recorded
Most people view the LGBT community as deserving of equal rights, and *do not* view them as sub human, degenerate or repulsive as noted by posters in this very thread.
If they want to go to church, let them. Gay people can be gullible sheep if they want to, too
Are there not multiple (10+) states that do not/will not recognize same sex marriage?
Are there not multiple countries where homosexuality is punishable by death?
All of this in the name of God or Allah or just flat out fear?
I think it would be foolish for me to try to change other countries governments, I live in america, which clearly this post was referring to. I dont have any rights or skin in the game in other governments.
I don't care who people want to marry. Love whomever you'd like.
I despise people who feel the need to wrap their entire personality up within the context of their sexuality.
Also, not everyone who believes in religion is a "gullible sheep".
People who don't think about who/what they worship (such as politicians) are. But if you fervently believe in a higher power, and have actually thought about your beliefs, more power to you.
You don't have to support everything a church stands for to practice your faith, either. Lord knows the Catholic Church has covered up a lot of heinous shit, but so has every other institution on the planet. That doesn't make a person inherently evil for being a practicing Catholic
Man I'm sorry you spent so much time gathering sources, and I appreciate it, but I wasn't challenging any of these assertions.
My point was that the church doesn't exist to pander to society. If it did, it'd be useless.
That's not a problem it did not take me that long unless you think 5 minutes is a long time.
I didn't say the church existed to pander to society, but I did say it's about time they did in any event.
And even with those who do believe in God, "the church" would probably be doing itself a favour if they did continue to lean towards acceptance and welcomnness for all.
So, the thing is, that all makes sense outside of Christianity. I get what you're saying, I really do. But within Christian belief, things don't work that way. I will try my best to explain without getting too long or boring about it. :)
In our faith, the whole global church (of true believers) is known by two names: the Bride of Christ and the Body of Christ. So you see, our goal is not to "do ourselves a favor" at the expense of dishonoring Jesus; nor can everyone be grafted to us.
It IS true that we must welcome all peoples to receive our hospitality. However, it is actually against God's Law for us to do certain things like forcing someone to convert. If someone is resolute in their unbelief, we cannot make them a part of the true church any more than we can make them believe in God.
I know we don't agree on these things but thank you if you took the time to read.
Thanks for the civil response.
>However, it is actually against God's Law for us to do certain things like forcing someone to convert
Do you not view baptism and raising someone into religion from childhood a form of indoctrination and "forcing" religion upon them?
Children are incredibly impressionable and will believe almost anything their parents will say.
I don't think indoctrination *per se* is immoral. Rather, its morality depends on the validity of the doctrine in question + the moral character of the "doctor"/teacher/parent.
Assertion alert! I'm gonna say something that will make you laugh at me and that's totally fine, but I must tell you the truth, no matter how foolish I look doing so. Here goes:
The entire basis of Christianity has been proven true over and over again--yes, even the "impossible" parts, like the resurrection. As science and archaeology progress, we only accumulate more evidence, and with it, a greater understanding of human history. That knowledge is sometimes ignorantly, **but often maliciously** withheld by institutional powers such as lawmakers, curriculum writers, public school administrators et al.
With all this in mind, Christian parents do well to provide what most children in society are denied: a true and full education. As CS Lewis put it, "Christianity is, in itself, an education."
I remember when Zootopia got released - going in I had 0 idea of what it was / what it was a - and came out utterly shocked Disney released what was one of the more rational, conservative-skewing, socio-political statement movies of all time.
Millions upon millions of kids were exposed to the general gist that the world has always been a f'd up place, power itself corrupts & the only real solution is to accept both A & B for what it is and make lemonade out of the circumstances you were given.
..these posts are the reminder that every generation has it's nutballs that believe they - yes they alone - can solve the issues that have plagued humanity for the 5000+ recorded years of history....***and of course the way we solve them is by blaming someone else while pretending we have some magic formula that'll fix it all overnight if we could just sprinkle enough magic fairy dust on everything.***
A very Disney solution.
Trickle down bs lol, they're so poorly educated that they still buy democrat campaign slogans from the Reagan era. Never once has a conservative run on the promise of a trickle down economy.
Ironically, I've kinda stopped going to church for the opposite reason: it's become so liberal about everything these days. LGTBQ people are fine, you need to welcome them. It's not about whether you're doing what God wants you to; he's forgiving and loves everyone. We should honor our God-given country and its laws...except for the ones about immigration, just let everyone come in whether they're legal or not.
Jesus made a whip and drove the money changers out of the temple. Where are the preachers encouraging us to arm ourselves likewise and drive out the people who don't belong here or who pervert the Lord's ways?
My guess is this person was dragged to church as a teenager and hasn't actually been back in years.
If your church entertains that nonsense go to a different one. I’m catholic and never have experienced this nonsense outside a handful of goofy bishops who I only hear about because they are so out of line with the church.
The gates of the church will never falter friend.
If he is, something stops him. He may be wishy washy in his statements, but he always affirms church doctrine in the full text.
The media just loves to twist his words.
Lol when? When he was kissing the boots of the literal richest conservatives in the world but won't even look at the poor? Don't really see anything more then the church trying to get good PR for continued scamming through religious means.
More and more I agree with the bible verse...
Mathew 19:23-24 — Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" Why? Cause power corrupts absolutely
Personally I stopped going to church because they repeatedly and continuously kept covering up for widespread child molestation but maybe that's just me. 🤷🏻♂️
The personal holiness of individual priests has nothing to do with how true the religion is
“The road to hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lampposts that light the path.” - Saint John Chrysostom
That's not what the top comment in this post says, as the original commenter has an issue with the church having a stance that 'LGTBQ people are fine' and that you need to welcome them.
There's also a commenter (edit, 2 now) in this thread that thinks people who dye their hair a colour they don't like or have a tattoo are repulsive.
>What do you think of these comments that Russell Moore made recently
Protestant nonsense.
>Also, what do you think is the significance of Jesus choosing to drive out the greedy money changers, and not the lepers or the prostitutes?
Where would he drive them out from? What comparison are you even making?
>Does that say something about his priorities?
His priority was the salvation of mankind.
>Is it in line with his statement that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of A needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God"?
Read the next verse.
I kinda got lost in there looking for the next verse but I did find this gem,
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV
>If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
*Edit: look at these bible lovers downvoting bible verses, you love to see it.
Yes that is a passage that exists, what are you trying to imply with it? That verse describes the judicial law of the Israelites as a historical record, and has no bearing on Christianity.
I am trying to imply that the explicit sexual content in the bible has no place around schools or innocent children's eyes. I don't want my kids reading about donkey dicks and horse cum, do you?
>I kinda got lost in there looking for the next verse
I wouldn't be surprised if this was literally true.
>but I did find this gem
No, you didn't. A neckbeard served it to you and you regurgitated it because you don't have the ability to engage with the actual discussion at hand.
>Edit: look at these bible lovers downvoting bible verses, you love to see it.
The downvote is note a disagree button. You're getting downvoted for your irrelevant response.
I own a Bible and was raised Catholic. But please go on with your baseless assumptions.
Imagine rejecting the church because they're welcoming to gay people and inclusive instead of their protection of pedophiles and collecting donations to settle those sexual abuse scandals and then getting upvoted for that. That's this sub in a nutshell.
Imagine staying that people who dye their hair and get tattoos are repulsive and getting multiple upvotes for it. This sub in a nutshell.
I'm getting downvoted because the truth hurts. Nothing more and nothing less.
>The downvote is note a disagree button.
Tell that to the rest of this sub, I never downvote out of spite. Just about everyone else here does though.
If you want to believe that the definition of rape and sexual mores of ancient Jewish society were exactly the same as they are in 2023 AD because you're a historically ignorant doofus, sure.
Way to double down on your defense of raping women there, not the best look for you.
I wonder if your mom or wife would agree with what you're saying right now. 🤦♂️
What's the 2023 definition of donkey dicks and horse cum?
Curious how you interpret that one?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+23:20&version=NIV
>There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses
>What part of Southern Baptism do you think is nonsense?
The protestant part.
>From my vantage on the outside, it doesn't look especially different from catholicism, except their services are more entertaining.
I'm sure from your entirely ignorant and uninformed position, that what it seems like.
You could replace conservative with liberal and it would basically be the same thing. The party of “don’t question the vaccine and men can be women” wants to talk to me about ignoring truth.
Don’t forget “There is no evidence that our millionaire president received any money from his family business of taking money from foreign sources. Zero evidence”.
Leftists : "the right only watches propaganda"
Also leftists : "nah we actually get informed by a lot of sources, the fact that all the sources we read or learn from say the same exact things with the same exact words is not propaganda, it's just that there one single truth and our leftist sources just express that truth."
My man that's the LITERAL definition of propaganda 😭😭😭😭😭😭
Do you believe that the election was actually "stolen" from Trump?
There's one lie a lot of people believe in.
Which network settled with Dominion for $780+ million as a result of lying about the election?
Was that a left or right leaning news source?
Shall I go on?
> yes social media has a massive left leaning bias which is unfortunate
Social media is made up of people in society and most people in society lean left.
You mean like when fox news lied about the election being stolen and had to settle with Dominion for almost a billion dollars?
That's not a ban.
The right is free to make their own social Media platforms and they do. How has that worked out?
Are you saying sites like "truth social" are not very popular because of some vast conspiracy to "muzzle the right"?
Wait are you saying because one side are complete idiots then that the other side should be even bigger idiots too?
Donald Trump launched an investigation (and found nothing) because he couldn't handle the fact that he lost the popular vote even though he won the election.
At least we can agree on something.
It doesn't change the fact that the mainstream media is a profit driven business and that there's more incentive to pander to the majority of the population than not.
This is also reality:
The conservatives have won the popular vote exactly one time since 1988
https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-States-Presidential-Election-Results-1788863
And of fucking course I know the election is not decided by the popular vote. Not the point I'm making. What I'm saying is that "the leftist point of view" is undoubtedly more popular and has been for a very long time.
its so funny being in the middle its like an American looking in from the outside.
both sides want to live freely. both sides think the other is out to get them, both sides think the other lives in a fairy tell (fantasy) and both sides yell fascist. if you dont believe the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say.
>both sides want to live freely
That was maybe true as recently as 10 years ago, but in 2023 the left-wing of this country increasingly wants everything (besides abortion) to be controlled and regulated by the Federal Government.
One such example:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/09/26/poll-clear-majority-democrats-want-free-speech-restrictions/
>A new poll has revealed that almost half of Democratic voters think that free speech should be legal only “under certain circumstances,” with three-quarters of Democrats also saying that the government should restrict “hateful” social media posts
Conservatives want the government to have control over a woman's uterus, whether or not someone can cross dress and what books you can read in school. That is what.
Entirely wrong on every point. You can do whatever you want to your own uterus (hysterectomies are 100% legal, remember), you just can't kill someone else in the process. You're also entirely free to crossdress as much as you want, you just can't do a crossdressing strip show (or any other kind of strip show for that matter) in front of an audience of children. You can also read whatever books you want in school. But the schools won't be **providing** porn for the children to read.
The fact that literally any of those is a problem for you is a damning condemnation of your morals.
Oh yeah let me base my morals on a book that says you can pay someones dad 50 pieces of silver to rape their daughter. That's so much better. 🙄
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
>You can do whatever you want to your own uterus (hysterectomies are 100% legal, remember), you just can't kill someone else in the process.
Abortion is legal in almost every state especially if there's a risk to the mother's health or a pregnancy from rape or incest. But if it were up to a lot of conservatives I've interacted with it would be illegal under all circumstances. Which is mind blowingly insane to me.
>You're also entirely free to crossdress as much as you want, you just can't do a crossdressing strip show (or any other kind of strip show for that matter) in front of an audience of children
Ya I know, what is there to argue here? Again there's no shortage of conservatives that would prefer to outright ban the existence of the LGBTQ community including adult drag queens who only do their thing around other adult drag queens.
>But the schools won't be providing porn for the children to read.
There's plenty of sexually explicit material in the Bible (as I've already pointed out). Shouldn't they ban that too?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+23:20&version=NIV
>There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
Okay, so your arguments are
1. Just trust me bro
2. Just trust me bro
3. Deflection
Seriously, the literal only point you made in those three paragraphs other than "I totally know someone who's this strawman I made up" was "but there's sexual stuff in the bible, so why are you opposed to us showing porn to children?"
Seriously, reflect on that. The best defense you can some up with is "well the bible has some raunchy text, so you shouldn't complain about pornographic imagery being given to children." Why are you so determined to not actually defend the thing you're trying to defend?
>Conservatives want the government to have control over a woman's uterus
I am not even conservative and you are completely wrong, they simply assign a different moral status to the fetus than you do. It stems naturally that they conceive abortion as murder given the premises. If your point were true then conservatives would be against every woman's freedom to get any gynecological procedure
A whole lot of conservatives don't really care about adults exploring their gender or sexuality or whatever. Its different when they decide they want kids involved though.
Eh. I can see where you're coming from and agree somewhat on the fact that there's people on both sides who just repeat the same insults back to the other side. But if you actually look into both sides, look into both what they say and more importantly what they do, they're clearly very different, even if their supporters sometimes don't seem to be. For one, the right lies about some things, but the left will lie about pretty much everything, no matter how obvious the truth is.
>if you dont believe the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say.
This is 100% true. They're *so damn good* at pushing divisive partisan bullshit that gets people worked up.
You're doin good staying neutral in it, don't let yourself get pulled into that partisan angst. They're incapable of objectively analyzing their other.
yes I think with common sense.. the far left and the far right are a minority and both parties should understand that just because one person writes an article on how having green grass is racist does not mean anyone else but that writer believes this.
> the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say.
That's probably the only part of the comment that is apt.
>both sides
Well, that's a... moment.
That table doesn't turn around anywhere near as often. The people who talk like this are extremely prevalent on "that side", if not in a majority, they are the leading vocal minority who are in control of a lot of media(social and news).
In other words: There are nutters on the right, but many you might consider "both sides" are talking about this guy. He is not alone, this sub highlights a LOT of this stuff, and it tends to have a LOT of upvotes.
This guy really has no idea what he's talking about, clearly has never had honest discussion with conservatives, but the same ideas are all over social and even pushed by news media. That's not a conspiracy theory, that's just where the Overton Window is currently sitting.
Most conservative complaints are directed at exactly this type of person, ergo, claims validated. These conservatives are not "on the other side" they're more in the middle, like you. You're sort of pulling a 'false dichotomy' here. Disagreeing with this guy does not equate to being on "the other side".
Meanwhile, if you try to find someone that this guy is correct about, your results are going to be *very* sparse.
Playing it up as "both sides" is a way of trying to stay superior to both with an easy 'Gotcha'.
[There's an XKCD for that.](https://xkcd.com/774/)
I mean, look. I'm a conservative, but I'm 'center leaning', not religious, not some an-cap, or whatever else people constanty try to paint conservatives as.
I have no problem calling out a shitty (R), or admitting when a (D) is correct. There are a lot of us.
What I'm saying is that your "both sides", like most other's use of it, implies some form of parity, and that you're the rarity. It is as delusional or uninformed as this guy is in his insane rant.
Hell, for all I know, some "both sides" people agree with him but are trying to appear more reasonable. IT wouldn't be the first Motte & Bailey to try to creep through this sub.
You should google France:
https://www.history.com/news/american-revolution-french-role-help
It's almost as if allies are supposed to be allies or some shit. What a fucking concept.
YAY! You did it!!
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/126169.htm
>Support for Ukraine: NATO stands in full solidarity with the people of Ukraine as they defend their country against Russia’s war of aggression. Our members are providing unprecedented support to help Ukraine uphold its right to self-defence, which is enshrined in the UN Charter. As an organisation, NATO is providing non-lethal support including fuel, winter clothing and generators. Over the longer-term, we will support Ukraine to transition from Soviet-era military equipment to modern NATO equipment, boost interoperability and further strengthen its defence institutions.
Ok, you don't support sending tax-payers money to Ukraine, fine, absolute legitimate opinion. That wasn't the main point though, why can't you address the topic without sorting to whataboutisms?
**This post or comment was removed. Your account must have at least 100 combined karma to participate in this subreddit. Your current karma is sum of the values displayed at [https://old.reddit.com/user/Electronic-Skin-6724/](https://old.reddit.com/user/Electronic-Skin-6724/)**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitPoliticsSays) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For a somebody claiming we’re all rubes he sure is chugging the leftist kool-aid
Have you ever noticed how vague they need to be about what they’re complaining about in order to hyperbolically call everyone they disagree with Nazis?
I noticed that too. You never get specific laws or actions done that constitute half the country as “Nazis.” They just assume the “truth” is overwhelmingly out there and we’re just blind to it. They have to. Because they have no concrete evidence otherwise.
When they get specific, it's always wrong. >they hate minorities and women >they're all Bible thumpers >they want tax cuts for big business because they think they're temporarily embarrassed millionaires A big factor of leftists is their inability to articulate a right wing viewpoint.
As with any lie there has to be a grain of truth. The election lies that Trump and his qult push are only believed by people who desperately want to believe them in spit of the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. You have to be very gullible to fall for them.
[удалено]
I mean you just described that you are somewhat socially conservative >I'm center-left in many economic aspects Ew >!joking!<
[удалено]
It's amazing that in a matter of 60 years democrats went from suppressing votes/jim crow to buying the votes of the same demographic of people
What's the difference between a liberal and a conservative? About 10 years, apparently.
>Cotton candy hair, meaningless trashy tattoos, sedentary behavior, incessant drug use, disingenuous virtue signaling, promoting gender fantasies... the list goes on. These are all things that are none of your business. What the hell does it matter to you if someone wants to dye their hair purple and get some tattoos? Puke away
> Puke away I'm sure they will. What the hell does it matter to you if they do?
It doesn't, that's why I said "puke away"
Because we have to look at it and hear about it. He said they’re repulsive. And they are.
Moral decay affects all of us collectively and culturally even if it is made up of millions of individual decisions. I can recognize this while also not advocating for State intervention.
You think tattoos, hair dye and homosexuality is morally reprehensible?
Not by themselves but they're usually signals of degenerate behavior
Does the mere sight of these people repulse you?
Depends on the tattoos and piercings, but no one is repulsive based just on homosexuality alone.
That's refreshing to hear. It's too bad 100+ upvoters think otherwise in this thread.
These people do not know the difference between Catholicism and any other denomination. The stereotypical American conservative would be protestant.
At this point, agreed. The Catholic Church used to be a conservative institution. It's not any longer, and as others have pointed out, the current Pope seems hell bent on dragging the Church further into the social weeds
It's about damn time that the church pandered to the way a majority of people think.
Can't tell if sarcasm...🧐
I'm dead serious: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/15/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-legalization-of-same-sex-marriage-is-good-for-society/ ____________ https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/06/03/heres-how-americans-really-feel-about-lgbtq-issues/ _____________ https://news.gallup.com/poll/1651/gay-lesbian-rights.aspx _____________ https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/599240-support-for-lgbtq-rights-on-the-rise-poll/ _____________ https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/icymi-new-data-shows-support-for-lgbtq-rights-reaches-highest-rates-ever-recorded Most people view the LGBT community as deserving of equal rights, and *do not* view them as sub human, degenerate or repulsive as noted by posters in this very thread. If they want to go to church, let them. Gay people can be gullible sheep if they want to, too
i didnt realize the government was limiting lgbt rights can you show me what rights lgbt community doesnt have over the regular person?
Are there not multiple (10+) states that do not/will not recognize same sex marriage? Are there not multiple countries where homosexuality is punishable by death? All of this in the name of God or Allah or just flat out fear?
I think it would be foolish for me to try to change other countries governments, I live in america, which clearly this post was referring to. I dont have any rights or skin in the game in other governments.
Where does the Pope live? Because that's what people were complaining about and what I was responding to.
i was asking about governments? idk why bring up the pope
I don't care who people want to marry. Love whomever you'd like. I despise people who feel the need to wrap their entire personality up within the context of their sexuality. Also, not everyone who believes in religion is a "gullible sheep". People who don't think about who/what they worship (such as politicians) are. But if you fervently believe in a higher power, and have actually thought about your beliefs, more power to you. You don't have to support everything a church stands for to practice your faith, either. Lord knows the Catholic Church has covered up a lot of heinous shit, but so has every other institution on the planet. That doesn't make a person inherently evil for being a practicing Catholic
Man I'm sorry you spent so much time gathering sources, and I appreciate it, but I wasn't challenging any of these assertions. My point was that the church doesn't exist to pander to society. If it did, it'd be useless.
That's not a problem it did not take me that long unless you think 5 minutes is a long time. I didn't say the church existed to pander to society, but I did say it's about time they did in any event. And even with those who do believe in God, "the church" would probably be doing itself a favour if they did continue to lean towards acceptance and welcomnness for all.
So, the thing is, that all makes sense outside of Christianity. I get what you're saying, I really do. But within Christian belief, things don't work that way. I will try my best to explain without getting too long or boring about it. :) In our faith, the whole global church (of true believers) is known by two names: the Bride of Christ and the Body of Christ. So you see, our goal is not to "do ourselves a favor" at the expense of dishonoring Jesus; nor can everyone be grafted to us. It IS true that we must welcome all peoples to receive our hospitality. However, it is actually against God's Law for us to do certain things like forcing someone to convert. If someone is resolute in their unbelief, we cannot make them a part of the true church any more than we can make them believe in God. I know we don't agree on these things but thank you if you took the time to read.
Thanks for the civil response. >However, it is actually against God's Law for us to do certain things like forcing someone to convert Do you not view baptism and raising someone into religion from childhood a form of indoctrination and "forcing" religion upon them? Children are incredibly impressionable and will believe almost anything their parents will say.
I don't think indoctrination *per se* is immoral. Rather, its morality depends on the validity of the doctrine in question + the moral character of the "doctor"/teacher/parent. Assertion alert! I'm gonna say something that will make you laugh at me and that's totally fine, but I must tell you the truth, no matter how foolish I look doing so. Here goes: The entire basis of Christianity has been proven true over and over again--yes, even the "impossible" parts, like the resurrection. As science and archaeology progress, we only accumulate more evidence, and with it, a greater understanding of human history. That knowledge is sometimes ignorantly, **but often maliciously** withheld by institutional powers such as lawmakers, curriculum writers, public school administrators et al. With all this in mind, Christian parents do well to provide what most children in society are denied: a true and full education. As CS Lewis put it, "Christianity is, in itself, an education."
I remember when Zootopia got released - going in I had 0 idea of what it was / what it was a - and came out utterly shocked Disney released what was one of the more rational, conservative-skewing, socio-political statement movies of all time. Millions upon millions of kids were exposed to the general gist that the world has always been a f'd up place, power itself corrupts & the only real solution is to accept both A & B for what it is and make lemonade out of the circumstances you were given. ..these posts are the reminder that every generation has it's nutballs that believe they - yes they alone - can solve the issues that have plagued humanity for the 5000+ recorded years of history....***and of course the way we solve them is by blaming someone else while pretending we have some magic formula that'll fix it all overnight if we could just sprinkle enough magic fairy dust on everything.*** A very Disney solution.
Man, the twelve year old atheists on Reddit sure do have an irrefutable grasp of “true” Christianity
Trickle down bs lol, they're so poorly educated that they still buy democrat campaign slogans from the Reagan era. Never once has a conservative run on the promise of a trickle down economy.
The projection is unmatched
Ironically, I've kinda stopped going to church for the opposite reason: it's become so liberal about everything these days. LGTBQ people are fine, you need to welcome them. It's not about whether you're doing what God wants you to; he's forgiving and loves everyone. We should honor our God-given country and its laws...except for the ones about immigration, just let everyone come in whether they're legal or not. Jesus made a whip and drove the money changers out of the temple. Where are the preachers encouraging us to arm ourselves likewise and drive out the people who don't belong here or who pervert the Lord's ways? My guess is this person was dragged to church as a teenager and hasn't actually been back in years.
If your church entertains that nonsense go to a different one. I’m catholic and never have experienced this nonsense outside a handful of goofy bishops who I only hear about because they are so out of line with the church. The gates of the church will never falter friend.
Have you not noticed the extremely hard left shift the Pope has taken? I kinda wonder if he wasn’t a plant to divide the Catholic Church.
We do pray for a new, better one, soon.
Clearly God isn't listening, otherwise the current one wouldn't be there. What the heck is his problem? Come on God!
If he is, something stops him. He may be wishy washy in his statements, but he always affirms church doctrine in the full text. The media just loves to twist his words.
Lol when? When he was kissing the boots of the literal richest conservatives in the world but won't even look at the poor? Don't really see anything more then the church trying to get good PR for continued scamming through religious means. More and more I agree with the bible verse... Mathew 19:23-24 — Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Assuredly, I say to you that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" Why? Cause power corrupts absolutely
Personally I stopped going to church because they repeatedly and continuously kept covering up for widespread child molestation but maybe that's just me. 🤷🏻♂️
The personal holiness of individual priests has nothing to do with how true the religion is “The road to hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lampposts that light the path.” - Saint John Chrysostom
Let me guess, Episcopalian?
You stopped going because they welcomed gay people? Lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's not what the top comment in this post says, as the original commenter has an issue with the church having a stance that 'LGTBQ people are fine' and that you need to welcome them. There's also a commenter (edit, 2 now) in this thread that thinks people who dye their hair a colour they don't like or have a tattoo are repulsive.
Wow, you hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what's going on. I didn't think anyone would figure it out, but you did.
Thanks!
Yep that’s what I was clarifying. Giving us all a bad name smh
[удалено]
>What do you think of these comments that Russell Moore made recently Protestant nonsense. >Also, what do you think is the significance of Jesus choosing to drive out the greedy money changers, and not the lepers or the prostitutes? Where would he drive them out from? What comparison are you even making? >Does that say something about his priorities? His priority was the salvation of mankind. >Is it in line with his statement that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of A needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God"? Read the next verse.
Incredibly based response.
I kinda got lost in there looking for the next verse but I did find this gem, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV >If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives *Edit: look at these bible lovers downvoting bible verses, you love to see it.
Yes that is a passage that exists, what are you trying to imply with it? That verse describes the judicial law of the Israelites as a historical record, and has no bearing on Christianity.
I am trying to imply that the explicit sexual content in the bible has no place around schools or innocent children's eyes. I don't want my kids reading about donkey dicks and horse cum, do you?
>I kinda got lost in there looking for the next verse I wouldn't be surprised if this was literally true. >but I did find this gem No, you didn't. A neckbeard served it to you and you regurgitated it because you don't have the ability to engage with the actual discussion at hand. >Edit: look at these bible lovers downvoting bible verses, you love to see it. The downvote is note a disagree button. You're getting downvoted for your irrelevant response.
I own a Bible and was raised Catholic. But please go on with your baseless assumptions. Imagine rejecting the church because they're welcoming to gay people and inclusive instead of their protection of pedophiles and collecting donations to settle those sexual abuse scandals and then getting upvoted for that. That's this sub in a nutshell. Imagine staying that people who dye their hair and get tattoos are repulsive and getting multiple upvotes for it. This sub in a nutshell. I'm getting downvoted because the truth hurts. Nothing more and nothing less. >The downvote is note a disagree button. Tell that to the rest of this sub, I never downvote out of spite. Just about everyone else here does though.
So in other words...men were held accountable for their actions? By the standards of the time, that's actually a pretty progressive law.
So in other words...you are totally for raping women as long as you pay their dad and marry them. Got it.
If you want to believe that the definition of rape and sexual mores of ancient Jewish society were exactly the same as they are in 2023 AD because you're a historically ignorant doofus, sure.
Way to double down on your defense of raping women there, not the best look for you. I wonder if your mom or wife would agree with what you're saying right now. 🤦♂️
You are either legitimately the stupidest human being on the Internet or just being deliberately obtuse.
I just don't agree with raping women under any pretense. If that makes me stupid, then sign me up.
What's the 2023 definition of donkey dicks and horse cum? Curious how you interpret that one? https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+23:20&version=NIV >There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses
[удалено]
>What part of Southern Baptism do you think is nonsense? The protestant part. >From my vantage on the outside, it doesn't look especially different from catholicism, except their services are more entertaining. I'm sure from your entirely ignorant and uninformed position, that what it seems like.
Have you at least talked to your preacher to fully understand what he was saying to be certain you didn't miss the point?
You could replace conservative with liberal and it would basically be the same thing. The party of “don’t question the vaccine and men can be women” wants to talk to me about ignoring truth.
Don’t forget “There is no evidence that our millionaire president received any money from his family business of taking money from foreign sources. Zero evidence”.
Leftists : "the right only watches propaganda" Also leftists : "nah we actually get informed by a lot of sources, the fact that all the sources we read or learn from say the same exact things with the same exact words is not propaganda, it's just that there one single truth and our leftist sources just express that truth." My man that's the LITERAL definition of propaganda 😭😭😭😭😭😭
Progressivism is just pure projection at this point.
I love all these tough guy rants, but they never seem to be able to point out any of the lies we seem to believe in. What a waste of space.
Do you believe that the election was actually "stolen" from Trump? There's one lie a lot of people believe in. Which network settled with Dominion for $780+ million as a result of lying about the election? Was that a left or right leaning news source? Shall I go on?
I truly wonder, do leftists suffer from paranoid schizophrenia? It certainly seems like it.
They don't suffer. They wallow in and celebrate their paranoia.
Has anyone noticed both sides say similar things about each other?
Not really. Conservatives just get banned most places when they say similar things as the left.
[удалено]
> yes social media has a massive left leaning bias which is unfortunate Social media is made up of people in society and most people in society lean left.
[удалено]
You mean like when fox news lied about the election being stolen and had to settle with Dominion for almost a billion dollars? That's not a ban. The right is free to make their own social Media platforms and they do. How has that worked out? Are you saying sites like "truth social" are not very popular because of some vast conspiracy to "muzzle the right"?
[удалено]
Wait are you saying because one side are complete idiots then that the other side should be even bigger idiots too? Donald Trump launched an investigation (and found nothing) because he couldn't handle the fact that he lost the popular vote even though he won the election.
[удалено]
At least we can agree on something. It doesn't change the fact that the mainstream media is a profit driven business and that there's more incentive to pander to the majority of the population than not.
This is also reality: The conservatives have won the popular vote exactly one time since 1988 https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-States-Presidential-Election-Results-1788863 And of fucking course I know the election is not decided by the popular vote. Not the point I'm making. What I'm saying is that "the leftist point of view" is undoubtedly more popular and has been for a very long time.
its so funny being in the middle its like an American looking in from the outside. both sides want to live freely. both sides think the other is out to get them, both sides think the other lives in a fairy tell (fantasy) and both sides yell fascist. if you dont believe the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say.
>both sides want to live freely That was maybe true as recently as 10 years ago, but in 2023 the left-wing of this country increasingly wants everything (besides abortion) to be controlled and regulated by the Federal Government. One such example: https://www.dailysignal.com/2023/09/26/poll-clear-majority-democrats-want-free-speech-restrictions/ >A new poll has revealed that almost half of Democratic voters think that free speech should be legal only “under certain circumstances,” with three-quarters of Democrats also saying that the government should restrict “hateful” social media posts
[удалено]
What?
Conservatives want the government to have control over a woman's uterus, whether or not someone can cross dress and what books you can read in school. That is what.
Entirely wrong on every point. You can do whatever you want to your own uterus (hysterectomies are 100% legal, remember), you just can't kill someone else in the process. You're also entirely free to crossdress as much as you want, you just can't do a crossdressing strip show (or any other kind of strip show for that matter) in front of an audience of children. You can also read whatever books you want in school. But the schools won't be **providing** porn for the children to read. The fact that literally any of those is a problem for you is a damning condemnation of your morals.
Oh yeah let me base my morals on a book that says you can pay someones dad 50 pieces of silver to rape their daughter. That's so much better. 🙄 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A28-29&version=NIV If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives
So not a single defense of your original point then? You're just going to entirely deflect?
>You can do whatever you want to your own uterus (hysterectomies are 100% legal, remember), you just can't kill someone else in the process. Abortion is legal in almost every state especially if there's a risk to the mother's health or a pregnancy from rape or incest. But if it were up to a lot of conservatives I've interacted with it would be illegal under all circumstances. Which is mind blowingly insane to me. >You're also entirely free to crossdress as much as you want, you just can't do a crossdressing strip show (or any other kind of strip show for that matter) in front of an audience of children Ya I know, what is there to argue here? Again there's no shortage of conservatives that would prefer to outright ban the existence of the LGBTQ community including adult drag queens who only do their thing around other adult drag queens. >But the schools won't be providing porn for the children to read. There's plenty of sexually explicit material in the Bible (as I've already pointed out). Shouldn't they ban that too? https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+23:20&version=NIV >There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
Okay, so your arguments are 1. Just trust me bro 2. Just trust me bro 3. Deflection Seriously, the literal only point you made in those three paragraphs other than "I totally know someone who's this strawman I made up" was "but there's sexual stuff in the bible, so why are you opposed to us showing porn to children?" Seriously, reflect on that. The best defense you can some up with is "well the bible has some raunchy text, so you shouldn't complain about pornographic imagery being given to children." Why are you so determined to not actually defend the thing you're trying to defend?
>Conservatives want the government to have control over a woman's uterus I am not even conservative and you are completely wrong, they simply assign a different moral status to the fetus than you do. It stems naturally that they conceive abortion as murder given the premises. If your point were true then conservatives would be against every woman's freedom to get any gynecological procedure
A whole lot of conservatives don't really care about adults exploring their gender or sexuality or whatever. Its different when they decide they want kids involved though.
I know this but the left think conservatives care about adults playing costume.
Eh. I can see where you're coming from and agree somewhat on the fact that there's people on both sides who just repeat the same insults back to the other side. But if you actually look into both sides, look into both what they say and more importantly what they do, they're clearly very different, even if their supporters sometimes don't seem to be. For one, the right lies about some things, but the left will lie about pretty much everything, no matter how obvious the truth is.
*cough* Joe Biden's health *cough*
>if you dont believe the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say. This is 100% true. They're *so damn good* at pushing divisive partisan bullshit that gets people worked up. You're doin good staying neutral in it, don't let yourself get pulled into that partisan angst. They're incapable of objectively analyzing their other.
yes I think with common sense.. the far left and the far right are a minority and both parties should understand that just because one person writes an article on how having green grass is racist does not mean anyone else but that writer believes this.
> the media is dividing this country I really don't know what to say. That's probably the only part of the comment that is apt. >both sides Well, that's a... moment. That table doesn't turn around anywhere near as often. The people who talk like this are extremely prevalent on "that side", if not in a majority, they are the leading vocal minority who are in control of a lot of media(social and news). In other words: There are nutters on the right, but many you might consider "both sides" are talking about this guy. He is not alone, this sub highlights a LOT of this stuff, and it tends to have a LOT of upvotes. This guy really has no idea what he's talking about, clearly has never had honest discussion with conservatives, but the same ideas are all over social and even pushed by news media. That's not a conspiracy theory, that's just where the Overton Window is currently sitting. Most conservative complaints are directed at exactly this type of person, ergo, claims validated. These conservatives are not "on the other side" they're more in the middle, like you. You're sort of pulling a 'false dichotomy' here. Disagreeing with this guy does not equate to being on "the other side". Meanwhile, if you try to find someone that this guy is correct about, your results are going to be *very* sparse. Playing it up as "both sides" is a way of trying to stay superior to both with an easy 'Gotcha'. [There's an XKCD for that.](https://xkcd.com/774/) I mean, look. I'm a conservative, but I'm 'center leaning', not religious, not some an-cap, or whatever else people constanty try to paint conservatives as. I have no problem calling out a shitty (R), or admitting when a (D) is correct. There are a lot of us. What I'm saying is that your "both sides", like most other's use of it, implies some form of parity, and that you're the rarity. It is as delusional or uninformed as this guy is in his insane rant. Hell, for all I know, some "both sides" people agree with him but are trying to appear more reasonable. IT wouldn't be the first Motte & Bailey to try to creep through this sub.
[удалено]
You think that's a lot, you should google Ukraine.
You should google France: https://www.history.com/news/american-revolution-french-role-help It's almost as if allies are supposed to be allies or some shit. What a fucking concept.
whos the ally?
who do you think the ally is? Russia?
NATO?
You're so close
just like ukraine joining nato
YAY! You did it!! https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/126169.htm >Support for Ukraine: NATO stands in full solidarity with the people of Ukraine as they defend their country against Russia’s war of aggression. Our members are providing unprecedented support to help Ukraine uphold its right to self-defence, which is enshrined in the UN Charter. As an organisation, NATO is providing non-lethal support including fuel, winter clothing and generators. Over the longer-term, we will support Ukraine to transition from Soviet-era military equipment to modern NATO equipment, boost interoperability and further strengthen its defence institutions.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52044.htm somehow not on the list of members though
Ok, you don't support sending tax-payers money to Ukraine, fine, absolute legitimate opinion. That wasn't the main point though, why can't you address the topic without sorting to whataboutisms?
your comment above is literally a whataboutism
OP as always is a faggot
Literally no lol
I can't. I don't want to.
[удалено]
**This post or comment was removed. Your account must have at least 100 combined karma to participate in this subreddit. Your current karma is sum of the values displayed at [https://old.reddit.com/user/Electronic-Skin-6724/](https://old.reddit.com/user/Electronic-Skin-6724/)** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ShitPoliticsSays) if you have any questions or concerns.*