And Einstein was a thief who stole ideas and has recently turned out to be wrong. His ideas have no way of proving them, most of them theory meanwhile a superior scientist, Tesla, actually developed practical things which have done far more for society.
He wasn't Jewish. And as much as I hate the OWS, alot are pretty down right about Jewish influence and domination.
Actually Einstein was indeed raised Jewish, and for most of his life he followed Judaism. He still considered himself to be a Jew even after adopting a more practical way of looking at "God" known as Spinozism. So yeah.....Einstein was Jewish. Everything else you said is open for debate.
Funny.. When I type Steven Crowder in the search box the first option is '' Steven Crowder is a racist''. Most funny, I type this message a couple of time in the pas and Crowder erased my comments.
"I type Steven Crowder in the search box the first option is '' Steven Crowder is a racist''. Most funny, I type this message a couple of time in the pas and Crowder erased my comments."
He was busted for racist behavior on his precious youtube channel.
@MonfangHowlett ??????????????????????????????? I don't help him.. Of corse, it is impossible to help this guys. It like helping a shit on the ground. Best thing you can do is trow it in the garbage...
Typical conservative. I have been thinking beyond the scope of conservative and liberal, republican and democrat, and for the most part it seems that both fall into ideology and attitude that both sides present. This guy typical conservative, and if you look at bill maher he is a typical liberal. I find it interesting. Why is this so?.. any thoughts ideas.? whats really going on. i myself prefer liberal ideas there less constraining, I find.
---I would like to know what you out there think???
the lotion man is not OWS he is a local homeless crackhead that people like you film to downplay the OWS movement. You are what you speak against and you ask others to take part of your dishonesty.
Everyone talks about this RACE problem and says that this RACE problem will be over when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries. Everyone says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate,” that is, intermarry, with all those non-Whites. According to the UN, this is genocide. They claim they are anti-racist, but what they are is anti-White. Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White
The thing that always gets me is that the ocuppiemunist all blelive in the same things I do, but they have been taught the exact opposite of what they mean, bailouts are wrong, because it is socialism, tax deductions are wrong because it is socialist subsidies are wrong because they are socialist, but some how they have all been brainwashed into believing these things are capitalist, (and for no adequately explored reason, racist.) have they no dictionaries ?
I think people to really need to chill out. Not trying to sound like a hippie or anything, but we need to take care of our politics first. It really isn't "American" to be racist or anti-semetic. Thus all you racists are just anti-American, and I guess I'm gonna be racist on you. :)
While I agree that the media has sort of elevated the Occupy movement, I also think that it has also focused on the most radical part of the movement. A lot of homeless people stay with the Occupy protests in order to get a free meal. Often they are the ones that are caught in the media being racist or saying absurd things that the movement does not support. They simply want to end the power of money in government. Most of the people there don't hate America and don't want entitlements.
Liberals are so full of their own self righteousness, they love to play the "teacher" on race issues and dominate any discussion on it. Then when any Liberal gets caught bashing Jews or calling a Black conservative an "uncle tom" they are suppose to get a Liberals free pass. Fuck Liberals who think they get to determine who is racist or not, I call their "free pass" inequality and utter hypocrisy. Not to mention the no justice done on New Black Panther intimidation. New Dialog on race my ass!!
The difference here is that NOM while being clearly backed by religious groups, they aren't clearly bigots, like the KKK. You think that anyone who is for the sanctity of marriage is a bigot, but that isn't true. Some of those people are just devout in their faith. And you know how liberal democrats love defending peoples faith................never mind they only do that if you're a terrorist.
"The difference here is that NOM while being clearly backed by religious groups, they aren't clearly bigots, like the KKK"
The KKK is violent, so that's a different level.
Bigotry doesn't have to involve violence, and I would disagree- NOM is clearly bigots. Some might even have what they think are good intentions...but clearly bigots.
"You think that anyone who is for the sanctity of marriage is a bigot"
Nothing non sanctity about gay marriage...so yes, bigot
I never said that bigotry had to involve violence in anyway so why bring that up? That is what you would refer to as a "non-point." And no you are clearly mistaken. Just because some people are for the sanctity of marriage that doesn't make them a bigot. Hell I'm all for the sanctity of marriage myself, and I don't think that allowing gay people to marry to hurt the sanctity of marriage in anyway. But some people do, and this is where you get all bent out of shape about things.
Bigots are people who go around calling people names out of pure hatred. Most of the people that you claim to be bigots aren't hateful people at all. They may hate the act, but they don't hate the person. Bigots are people who hate not only the act but the person as well. You have to take a step back and look at this from a different perceptive other than your own. You are clearly biased on this issue. Which is kind of funny because it is making you into a bigot of sorts.
"Bigots are people who go around calling people names out of pure hatred"
You seem to be just making up rules as you go along.
So let me ask you this- a man who says "i can't accept my daughter marrying a black man. I have no problem with black people, and some of my friends are black, but they should marry only each other. and think of the kids"
OR..."I have no problem with Jewish people. I just dont want them teaching my kids"
No I'm not making up rules as I go along. Remember last time you said I was making things up as I go along, and you happened to be wrong? Well it's the same way this time. My definition is the general understanding of a bigot. As far as the scenarios you presented I would say that in BOTH cases whether they admitted it or not they would be showing some signs of bigotism.
"No I'm not making up rules as I go along. Remember last time you said I was making things up as I go along, and you happened to be wrong? "
No, because that's not how it happened, and you were called out for making up bullshit "rules" as you went along.
YOU have been factually wrong on mutiple occasions and even had to admit such. Remember "no pagan statues"? Or you claiming Robert Byrd was "still in the Senate."
No I wasn't making up bullshit rules at all. The last time you said I was making up shit as I went along was about "internet speak." You were proven WRONG, and couldn't admit it then or now which is really really sad. Also I wasn't wrong about Robert Byrd, I brought him up when I was talking about the racist democrats who existed past the 30 year mark you had arbitrarily put up. I was wrong about the statues, and have admitted this SEVERAL TIMES NOW.
"The last time you said I was making up shit as I went along was about "internet speak." You were proven WRONG"
Not how it happened..thats your OPINION on the matter. Now when you had to admit to being wrong to me- yeah that was you having to eat shit in embarrassment. You remember that, right?
No, that is indeed how it happened. That isn't just my opinion. Anyone who can read can go back and reread through the comments and see exactly when that particular argument occurs. I accused you of using "internet speak" like a child because you used the term "Fail" which is used in "internet speak" by CHILDREN all the time. You in turn said I made that up as I went a long.
I told you to look up the term "internet speak" and you apparently did. You came back with this "rebuttal" "using the word fail one time hardly constitutes internet speak." I then asked you to clarify. Because you said that I made up the term "internet speak" as I went a long. As I obviously DID NOT, that would mean that you were WRONG in saying that I did. BUT, you will not admit that you are wrong. As far as me being wrong about the statues how many times must I say I was?
I have already admitted to being wrong. Because that's what adults do when they are CLEARLY wrong. They admit when they made a mistake, and move on. YOU on the other hand won't admit you were wrong about SEVERAL topics, and instead bring up the ONE time I was wrong, just to make yourself feel better. You are a very prideful and childish person. Your actions show this to be true. You are a hypocritical, typical, liberal douchebag.
You said Byrd was "still a Senator". Being DEAD he's not a Senator. There's no possible way for you to spin it- you were wrong. Probably not up on current events if the you are that conservative stupid to not know the man featured in national news coverage was dead.
For the LAST TIME, I referenced Robert Byrd not as a LIVING INDIVIDUAL, but as a racist democrat who just so happened to STILL be a racist past the 30 year mark that you had arbitrarily put up. He was a racist senator all the way up until 2010 which was when he DIED. This PROVES you wrong about racism being out of the democrat party for 30 or more years. I also brought up several other individuals who were in office and made racist comments.
ALL of the people I posted in that series of comments after you said that racism stopped in the democrat party 30 or more years ago, were racist well into the 2000's. Thus, CLEARLY showing that racism does indeed still exist in the democrat party. YOU can't admit this because YOU can't ever admit when you are wrong. I'm a grown man who takes responsibility for his actions. I admit when I am wrong, and have done so in this debate. You on the other hand have not grow the hell up Hippie.
YOU on the other hand have been wrong about "internet speak", racist democrats, faith, bigotry, the bible, separation of church and state being in the constitution, "God" not being mentioned in the constitution, and haven't admitted to being wrong about ANY of it. You are a very prideful person. You are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians and you can't admit when you are CLEARLY wrong. You need to grow up Hippie seriously.
"YOU on the other hand have been wrong about "internet speak","
No I wasnt.
"racist democrats"
Never said there wasnt any. It just had nothing to do with the bigotry from the right and how even the non christian conservatives support said bigotry, which is a huge civil rights batt.e
And everything else you are crying like a little bitch about I was not wrong.
Yes you were wrong about "internet speak" you said I made that up as I went along, and I didn't therefore you were WRONG. "Racist democrats" SAME THING, you said that racism ended in the democrat party 30 years ago or more, and I pointed out racist democrats who are either STILL in office, or were in office as late as 2010, which is CLEARLY not 30 or more years ago.
As far as everything else I'm "crying like a little bitch about" let's look at that too shall we. YOU said that the phrase "separation of church and state" was in the constitution WRONG!! You said that "God" wasn't mentioned in the constitution WRONG!! "The bible" you CLEARLY said that it was wrong to use profanity, even though it's not in the bible. Then you said that almost all ministers preach on it to cover up the fact that you got it from HEAR SAY.
In other words you were WRONG again. Those are just a few examples of you being WRONG. You say I'm "crying like a little bitch" because you aren't man enough to admit when you are WRONG. You instead resort to childish tactics, which is to expected from liberal democrats every time they are clearly shown to be WRONG. For the last time you need to grow the hell up Hippie. And that's not an insult that's a nickname because of the fact that the letters H, I, P are in your screen name.
"You are a very prideful person. You are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians"
It's not like I denied or supported leaders that tried to "christ"ians marriage, employment, military service, visitation rights, and other things . You know... that good old GOP bigotry you guys gleefully get behind.
Ok firstly, your first sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. On that note I have to say that I am only guessing as to what you meant. Instead of admitting your own bigotry you again tried to dismiss my findings and again bring it back around to the "GOP." You are indeed a BIGOT. You show clear HATRED toward conservative christians based on false assumptions about them. You go on hear say about their faith, and then LIE about doing years of research.
You show contempt for them based on one of the tenants of their FAITH. You dismiss all the good they do, and anything that proves them not to be bigots, and instead focus solely on ONE issue that YOU think is bigoted. This type of hatred and condemnation is known as BIGOTRY. Christians, TRUE CHRISTIANS, are good people who love others because that is also a tenant of their faith. They are not BIGOTS. This is the last time I will answer this for you as you clearly get it by now.
You continuously tell me to look things up but won't do so yourself. In our debate you wouldn't even go through previous comments to make your point and instead wanted me to do it for you. You call conservative christians bigots because of their FAITH and completely dismiss anything I have to say about the bigoted democrat party or you being a bigot toward conservative christians. You are what is known as a hypocrite. You are the typical liberal democrat. Once again grow up Hippie.
I shouldn't have to quote in a conversation between two people, and yet I still do it from time to time to appease you. I answered a week later because I was busy running a business which I made perfectly clear to you. You said that you get busy from time to time as well remember? And NO I don't LIE, you wanted me to go back and clear up comments that I had made because YOU were to lazy to go back and look it up for yourself on more than one occasion.
Also NO you didn't answer my points. You dismissed what I had to say. You said that racism stopped 30 or more years ago in the democrat party. When I brought up racism that happened less than 10 years ago you completely dismissed what I had to say about it. I proved to you that racism didn't end 30 or more years ago in the democrat party, and you STILL couldn't admit you were wrong in saying that it did. You are wrong in calling all christians bigots as I have already explained
THEIR FAITH says that it is wrong for the same sex to marry. They don't organize against gay marriage out of hatred toward gay people, and those that do shouldn't even call themselves Christians. True Christians that do organize against it don't do it out of hatred, IF they did then they would be bigots. Honestly I think you understand this point already, but because of your bigoted opinion about conservative christians you have to argue about it anyway. Grow the hell up hippie.
No tears running down my face at all Hippie, but nice try on the insult. HAHAHAHA You are a hypocrite because you are a bigot. You claim other people to be bigots so you can make yourself feel better for hating them so much. The problem is your wrong in calling them bigots.
The reason I say this is because of their actions. If you don't want a Jewish person teaching your kids WHY? Are they just as qualified as anyone else? Is there any reason for them not to? Is your daughter too good to marry a black man? And how would their future possible kids have anything to do with it? See what I mean their actions say otherwise.
"because of their actions. If you don't want a Jewish person teaching your kids WHY?"
I agree on actions. Therefore anyone who said gays should marry because of a religion, or what it will do to kids, or other bullsht excuses are the same as the people with a "problem" with Jewish people.
"See what I mean their actions say otherwise"
Actions- including taking legal measures or spending millions or donate money to an atni gay PR campaign?
I didn't quite understand what you wrote this time. I think I got it but it was a bit jumbled for me. So if I have this wrong please tell me.............ah hell I don't have to tell you to tell me I'm wrong we both know that haha.Anyway, what you fail to realize yet again is that actions speak louder than words. As I said before Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways yet liberal democrats focus on this ONE area and say they are. Christians don't HATE gay people.
"As I said before Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways"
You "said" it with an argument that was so flimsy most high school debate kids would have laughed you off the stage. Religion doesn't excuse bigotry.
ANd it's like this- if your "faith" says gay is a sin...or being Jewish is a sin, or not observing the Sabbath...that's your business. I nor anyone else has to follow that. Ergo I can covert to Judiasm, go out on Sunday, etc.
Religion doesn't excuse bigotry, you are correct. As far as being "laughed off stage" the first time you asked me to go back and look through my comments for you instead of doing it yourself, you would've been laughed off stage. In fact you would've been defeated a long time ago in this debate when you LIED, as that goes against the debate rules. But oh well. Now, Christians do show they aren't bigots in so many ways. I have previously listed those.
You couldn't come up with a rebuttal for it so like you have done so many times you chose to make fun, and dismiss what I had to say. In any case, You were right in saying that religion doesn't excuse bigotry. However bigotry is: "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."
Christianity as a faith is not about hatred. They don't HATE gay people. They don't protest out of hatred or intolerance. They protest because of their faith. They believe it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry. People who go out there and protest against a group of people out of hatred those are the bigots. And the definition shows this, as I have stated before.
What you do toward conservative christians is considered bigotry by definition. You are obstinately, and intolerantly devoted to your opinion of them, and have shown your prejudice toward them time and time again. You are a bigot, and a hypocrite. In fact most liberal democrats are bigots and hypocrites. You can never admit when you are wrong, and have a childish take on almost everything. I will say this once again, you, and every liberal democrat like you, need to grow up.
At least they shouldn't if they call themselves a Christian. IF they hated gay people just for being gay then they would be a bigot. The reason why they spend money on keeping gay marriage illegal isn't because they are a bunch of bigots. Gay marriage goes against their FAITH, and faith for the most part isn't a bad thing. The application of faith can be bad in certain circumstances but this isn't one of them.
The reason I say this is for two reasons.One: Liberal democrats always want separation of church and state, and while this is good for government it doesn't apply to the voting public. PEOPLE will allow their faith to guide their voting, and no one can stop this. People will also allow their faith to guide their finances in certain instances such as political contributions.
Two: The application of faith is a basic tenant in Christianity, and in this country we have freedom of religion. If certain individuals have a problem with gay people getting married because of their faith it is better for them to contribute financially to certain organizations than it would be for them to do anything else such as violence. So this type of application of faith is better than many numerous other actions that could be taken.
"If certain individuals have a problem with gay people getting married because of their faith it is better for them to contribute financially to certain organizations than it would be for them to do anything else such as violence"
So...if a "religion" has it's members give money to prevent blacks from marrying whites legally and with no violence... not bigotry to your conservative logic?
Religion is no longer an excuse for bigotry. that shit hasnt flown for decades.
How the hell could you get that out of what I said? The bible doesn't say anything against interracial marriage. In fact in Song of Solomon chapter 1 verse 5 it clearly says that Solomon is married to an Egyptian woman who happens to be black. Several times throughout scripture men of one race marry women of another. So interracial marriage was never something wrong according to Christianity. You had racist people who had a problem with it, but not the faith.
You are clearly going off of what racist people had a problem with. You do this a lot. You go by hear say as well. Now, stop trying to bring up controversy to make yourself appear to be right. I'm not the one who tolerated bigotry and racism toward black people, and dismissed racism from my party. That was YOU. You are just trying to find a way to make yourself feel better for being a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. One more time Hippie, GROW THE HELL UP.
What you seem to be confusing is faith with bigotry. The Jewish teacher wouldn't be teaching judaism to the students, she would be teaching them the same thing any other teacher would. A black man marrying the guys daughter is just a man marrying the guys daughter, and his skin color should have nothing to do with it. Faith has nothing to do with their decisions, as you clearly said the person had no problems with "Jewish people."
And NO I am not giving the same "bullshit excuse" as faith isn't an EXCUSE. YOU claim it to be because you have no respect for anyone who has it. You have shown your disdain several times now for christians. You should be embarrassed to be that biased against a group. Especially when you call that group out for being "bigots." Seems to me that you are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. You have no respect for them and constantly talk bad about them.
"What you seem to be confusing is faith with bigotry"
ANd you keep dodging my points...again.
believing something is one thing, acting on beliefs is another.
the "my religion says..." does not excuse those who opposed interracial marriage. Or worse- those that opposed it in the past, and STILL claim "their faith" in the modern times.
Also why continue bringing up the interracial marriage thing? You have on more than one occasion taken up for the racist democrat party by simply "dodging" anything I have brought up about them. You simply said that you disagreed with the "dixiecrats," and then talked about a political shift that never even really happened. But oh well I'm sure you'll find a way to avoid it once again and somehow talk about conservative christians and republicans. Liberal dumbocrats always manage that
Also that isn't a dodge of any kind it is a direct response. I was pointing out your confusion, how you claim that to be a dodge is beyond me. If you knew anything about christianity you would know this "Faith without works is DEAD." Why believe in something if you're not willing to show other people you believe in it? Once again it's not an excuse, but you are having a very hard time seeing this because of your hatred toward conservative christians.
However the christian faith does say that it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry. Hell muslims go a step further and say stone gay people. And while that is their faith, the action itself is illegal. It isn't illegal to think that two people of the same sex getting married is wrong. In YOUR opinion that makes them a bigot, but that is only your opinion. What do you think of the muslim stance of gay people in general?
"Some of those people are just devout in their faith"
In the 60s, some opposed interracial marriage & cited "faith". Malcolm X and Muhamed Ali said the SAME from an Islamic POV. "faith" doesn't excuse bigotry.
Even if you believe it's "sin" others are free to do what they want. If you eat ham on Friday, that's a "sin" to your Jewish and Muslim friends for pork & Catholics for meat. Its a sin for Pentecostals to drink, but they cant legally stop me.
Once again you confuse faith with bigotry. Just because someone believes something to be wrong based on their faith doesn't make them a bigot. Once again a bigot is a person who does things out of hatred. They call people names, or do violent acts against a group simply because of how they view a certain other group of people. Those are the bigots you should go after. People who just happen to be devout in their faith shouldn't be targeted as bigots by you or anyone.
"Once again a bigot is a person who does things out of hatred. They call people names, or do violent acts against a group simply because of how they view a certain other group of people"
Bigotry is not limited to names and violence. Conservatives in my county tried to pass a referendum giving property owners the legal right to deny housing based on sexual preference. After it was defeated, they brought it back 4 years later in i think 04.
What country do you live in? This whole time I was thinking you lived in America, guess that's what I get for assuming. Anyway how else can you tell a person is a bigot unless they show themselves to be one through their actions? By actions I mean calling someone names based on their race or sexual preference or doing violent acts against someone based on their race or sexual preference. I'm personally not a mind reader, so I go by peoples words and actions.
If they do it out of pure hatred then they are a bigot. But calling a devout person of faith a bigot, would be like calling someone rude when they walked away from me to go pray three times a day. They are just being devout in their faith. If their faith says that it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry then you shouldn't fault them for it. Just like they shouldn't fault you for not believing in god.
"If they do it out of pure hatred then they are a bigot. But calling a devout person of faith a bigot, would be like calling someone rude when they walked away from me to go pray three times a day"
No it wouldn't be anything like that since your example is nothing like the first. Typical Conservative tactic- take "thing A" and pretend it's the same as "thing B"
You just seem bent on finding loopholes because the people in question are often conservative.
And yes, Christians know they can't legally ban divorced marriage. But...a church can refuse to perform the ceremony. Various Catholics have refused pro life politicians, Rabbis have refused Muslim/Jewish unions. in Canada churchs turn away gay couples. I've yet to see a "christ"ian turn away a divorced cheat on spouse scumbag like Newt Gingritch or John McCain.
I did not see "christ"ians protest Rush Limbaugh 4th wedding like they protest gays.
How many times must I point out that I don't have a problem with gay marriage before you stop directing comments about it toward me? As far as them not protesting a man and a woman getting married I wonder why? HMMMMMMMM let's think about that for a second. Obviously they see nothing wrong with a man and a woman getting married, and divorce existed in the bible for certain reasons, so they see nothing wrong with divorce either to a certain extent.
However they protest gay marriage because the bible does speak about gay marriage being "wrong." It is part of their faith. Yet for some reason you see them as bigots for believing this. They aren't bigots because of their faith. Like I said before bigots are people who go around speaking bad about people and doing violent acts against people just because of their race, gender, or sexual orientation.
"However they protest gay marriage because the bible does speak about gay marriage being "wrong." It is part of their faith. "
This was the SAME excuse Christians used to protest interracial marriage.google "Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation" by Peggy Pascoe
And...same magic religion says Islam, Hindi, Wiccan, etc. are "sin" but for some reasons "christ"ians dont spend MILLIONS trying to deny their rights.
You keep bringing this up as if it means ANYTHING. Their faith actually does matter this time, and isn't based off of a bunch of racist pricks. Interracial marriage was protested because of a bunch of racist pricks who tried using the bible to their advantage, but like I said the bible doesn't say anything against interracial marriage, and in fact show several cases of interracial marriage occurring.
The bible DOES say that being gay is a "sin." Therefore their faith actually does matter this time. You can't admit this because it completely refutes everything you have to say about it. As far as spending millions to try and deny the rights of other "religious" people why would they? Like I said before the bible does say to obey the laws of the land. In this country we have freedom of religion. Therefore by denying their "rights" they would be breaking the law which is a "sin."
"The bible DOES say that being gay is a "sin." Therefore their faith actually does matter this time"
Plenty of other "sins" they dont spend MILLION on to legally ban from marriage. Martial affairs McCain was allowed to remarry. Glutton/drug user Rush Limbaugh can remarry over and over.
Again- one "sin" gets special attention. Ergo- bigotry. hatred.
"Plenty of other "sins" they dont spend MILLION on to legally ban from marriage. Martial affairs McCain was allowed to remarry. Glutton/drug user Rush Limbaugh can remarry over and over."
This point is moot as I have already shown you that divorce was not and is NOT a sin in the bible. Therefore why continue to try and use this as an argument? If your criteria for being a bigot is showing special attention to something, then you are indeed a bigot toward "conservative christians"
Once again not dodging, while those are sins, they have nothing to do with getting married or remarried for that matter. So why try and bring those up in this discussion? That makes no sense at all. The bible never says that anyone who abuses drugs can't get married. It also never says a glutton can't get married. So what exactly was your point in bringing those up? The bible does say that being gay is a sin, and that people of the same sex shouldn't be together.
You never did answer my point about Zo...if he says the Democrats are bad for being "accusers"...why go on to accuse them of being demons?
and as far as accusations go...you have to admit that's a bit out there since YOU dont believe in demons. But the accusation isn't even "they are dumb, wrong, etc..." it's they are evil personified.
Going off on people for "accusing" and then accusing them of this is like being against violence and then punching someone.
I answered this once before but I typed too fast and messed up a lot. When Zo was stating his case about liberal democrats being accusers. He was saying who they accuse, and how they accuse. He wasn't accusing them of anything, he was explaining what made them accusers. During his time at the podium he made his point perfectly clear. Are you sure you watched the whole thing? Because if not then that would show a bias on your part, and you would be taking what he said out of context.
"When Zo was stating his case about liberal democrats being accusers. He was saying who they accuse, and how they accuse. He wasn't accusing them of anything, he was explaining what made them accusers"
Zo: 3:56 "pages of this book is saturated with the morbidity of mobs driven by DEMONS"
I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. I already explained to you what happened, and why we got divorced. I know you get all amped up when it comes to gossip and all, but for the last time I'm not going to gossip with you.
"I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. "
You mean like I answered that I wasn't gay, yet you repeated that accusation over and over again resulting in you lying?
If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that.
For one once again I didn't lie. I made an observation based on current evidence that had been provided. I didn't make any assertions about your character, I made an assertion based on evidence provided that you were indeed a closeted homosexual. Since there is nothing wrong with being a homosexual, you should not have been offended by this in anyway. The fact that you took this as an offense from the very first time I brought it up says a lot about you though.
"If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that." With this statement YOU on the other hand did make an assertion about my character that had nothing to do with any evidence provided during our conversation. You did this to try and make me angry, and hurt my feelings, because you felt offended that I had called you out on being a closeted homosexual.
The fact of the matter is you were so offended at the very notion that you had to attack my character in a manner that was unwarranted. In other words it was a low blow. You see me calling you a closeted homosexual isn't wrong, because there is nothing wrong with being gay, or not wanting to admit it to a complete stranger. Someone molesting children, and beating their wife on the other hand is downright sickening. The fact that you took it to this level also shows a lot about you.
"I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. "
You mean like I answered that I wasn't gay, yet you repeated that accusation over and over again resulting in you lying?
If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that.
Therefore, marriage would be included in this, and actually does have something to do with the discussion. You can't go naming random "sins" and then placing them in with not being able to marry. You don't seem to get this. Either that or you do and are just arguing for the sake of argument.
That wasn't a canned conservative comeback it was the truth. You are indeed a bigot. You hate "conservatives" especially "conservative christians." I'm not accusing you of being a bigot, I'm telling you directly that you are indeed a bigot. An accusation could be true or false. That is why this is not an accusation because it is a fact that you are a bigot toward "conservatives" especially "conservative christians." You have shown this to be true through your comments about them.
I think you mean MARITAL not MARTIAL but oh well. As I already explained the Christian faith says that it is wrong for two people of the same sex to be together. It is considered a sin. I didn't found the religion, nor did I make up the rules. While cheating on your wife is a sin, you can still get married to another woman after doing so. As far as asking me why certain sins are ok when it comes to marriage and others aren't I couldn't tell you. As I didn't come up with the religion.
"As I already explained the Christian faith says that it is wrong for two people of the same sex to be together. It is considered a sin. "
Your Jewish friends will tell you eating pork is a sin, but they dont get to set a law preventing you from having bacon, eve in 99% of the people in your town want that.
It was a "sin" for Newt to have all those conservative affairs, but Christians didnt pass laws from him getting remarried.
Okay for the last time, gay marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states. I personally don't think it should be but hey. Now as far as Jews not eating pork, that is up to them. Which is exactly how I personally feel about people getting married. It should be left up to them. The fact of the matter is it isn't just conservative christians who are against gay marriage. IF it was then gay marriage would be legal by now.
"Okay for the last time, gay marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states."
Despite your drama queen cry, that doesn't address any point I made. If we had a debate in th 1940s, you saying "interracial marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states" that doesn't end a debate on that subject.
"Despite your drama queen cry, that doesn't address any point I made. If we had a debate in th 1940s, you saying "interracial marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states" that doesn't end a debate on that subject."
There was nothing dramatic about what I said, however your attempt at humor is noted. For one we aren't in the 1940's, therefore my point is indeed valid. If we were in the 1940's and I used that argument against interracial marriage it would've been too.
Secondly, like I said gay marriage is illegal in almost all 50 states. I personally don't agree with this but that's the way it is. However, you continue to blame "conservative Christians" for making this happen. Their political pull is simply not powerful enough to cause this, not anymore anyway. Their political pull hasn't been powerful enough for almost 40 years. This isn't just the fault of "conservative Christians" and your bias on this subject is absurd, and unwarranted.
For the past 39 years Christians have been trying to get abortion made illegal, and have failed. This shows exactly how much power they wield over the government. You have such contempt for them, and are so bigoted toward them that you want to blame the whole thing on them, and THEIR bigotry. You do this to make yourself feel better about your own bigotry. Get over it man it's not worth it. Remember California one of the most liberal states in the nation didn't want gay marriage.
"Remember California one of the most liberal states in the nation didn't want gay marriage."
So you think because the political pendulum swung one way, that "proves" liberal. That's like claiming Texas was liberal for electing Ann Richards.
You need to study this stuff before making an ass out of yourself. Many Mexicans and black people for example vote Democrat...but studies showed it was the church influence on the gay vote. Ergo- christian bigotry
"So you think because the political pendulum swung one way, that "proves" liberal. That's like claiming Texas was liberal for electing Ann Richards." Actually NO it's not because the pendulum swung one way that I believe anything. California has shown itself to be a predominantly liberal state many times over in both policy and elections. In fact the current governor of California Jerry Brown is a liberal democrat. Not to mention Hollywood is known as "the land of the liberals."
A liberal state like California should've voted YES to allowing gay marriage. Especially since it is your assertion that only conservatives are against gay marriage. The fact that the majority of the people in California voted against it and that California is a known liberal state, would prove you wrong. It's not only conservatives or conservative Christians who are against gay marriage. That is simply your assertion and it shows your bias towards conservatives and Christians.
"You need to study this stuff before making an ass out of yourself. Many Mexicans and black people for example vote Democrat...but studies showed it was the church influence on the gay vote. Ergo- christian bigotry" For YOU to tell anyone to "study" anything is just downright hilarious. You have been shown to use second hand knowledge, and hear say on multiple occasions to form an opinion. An opinion you also passed off as FACT. This has nothing to do with Christian bigotry.
A person believing something to be wrong, and protesting against it because of their FAITH, or putting money toward a certain cause they believe in because of their FAITH is not necessarily a bad thing. Look at all the good things churches do. Like building medical facilities in third world nations, or clothing the poor, or taking up donations to help build houses for places like habitat for humanity, or all the work they did after hurricane Katrina.
Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways. YOU and other liberal democrats look at ONE area of their FAITH and call them bigots because of it. For the last time there is a difference between having faith and being a bigot. You can't see this however because YOU are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. That's sad, and embarrassing. You shouldn't call someone out falsely for being a bigot, it just shows yourself to be the real bigot.
"Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways"
Lets see...passing laws making bullying on religious grounds ok, opposing marriage of certain citizens, history of opposing interracial marriage, wanting laws o make employment and housing harder on gays, spreading lies, trying to pass laws to KILL gays, floowing book with commands to kill...
You have that backwards you know? They didn't pass a law making it ok to bully on religious grounds. They wanted to pass a law teaching tolerance to stop bullying using religious methodology. What article did you read? Interracial marriage was opposed by a lot of people not just christians at one time in this country. And gay marriage isn't just opposed by christians either. So why blame all of this on them? I'll tell you why because of your BIGOTRY toward them.
As far as passing laws to try and kill gays are you referring to the Anti-Homosexuality bill from UGANDA? How the hell did conservative christians in America have anything to do with that bill? As far as "floowing book with commands to kill" what book? Who wrote it? It seems to me like you are trying to pin things on conservative christians in America for things that are happening around the world. Our conversation has been about America.
Conservative Christians in America show time and time again that they are not bigots. For one conservative Christians are made up of all different races of people. For two, they go around helping everyone in need regardless of their color, sexual orientation, or religion. Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas. Remember AIDS started out as GRID, or GAY RELATED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY.
"they go around helping everyone in need regardless of their color, sexual orientation, or religion"
The ACLU defends all beliefs. Google "ACLU defends Christians" Time and again I ask conservatives to name a conservative org who has rendered such legal aid to liberals...i never get a reply.
"Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas"
I said "Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas"
You said "That doesnt "excuse" bigotry or what came later."
You admitted that they did indeed fund aids research and then later question whether they did it or not. In the words of.......well you......YOU LIED. And as far as a christian organization that gives legal aid to liberals well the CLS(Christian Legal Society.)
So I live in Michigan. When I first got here in the early 2000s, there was a referendum fighting for the "right" of property renters to deny hosing in a college town to gay residents. Sponsored by...conservative christians! deny housing...Bigotry or not?
The kicker is this smae bill was defeated like 4 years prior. Outside of bigotry, conservatives seemed ok with shitting on the will of the people.
The people YOU claim to be bigoted toward gay people raised MILLIONS of dollars to fund research into the disease when it was still known as GRID. You claiming them to be bigots is nonsense, and is based on your bias and hatred for conservative Christians. Hippie, you have to face facts here, you, and any liberal democrat who thinks like you, are BIGOTS, and therefore hypocrites as well.
a. I wasn't vague and you overuse that word. When I said that millions were raised to fund research on AIDS when it was still known as GRIDS I was referring to the millions that were raised by churches all across the nation.
"the christians who protested interracial marriage...if they gave money to help the black community, the means not bigot?"
b. What is your obsession with this? IF people gave money to help the black community then obviously they aren't bigots toward black people.
"in MN, the "christ"ian group PALS still wants to teach about GRIDs despite that term being out of date, and that gay is "curable"...ergo bigots."
c. PALS is a way for churches all around the world to communicate with each other more easily. It's basically like facebook for churches. Honestly how the hell do you get that they believe a certain way, or that they still teach GRIDS as an accepted term for AIDS?
Never mind the fact that even if this were true it wouldn't prove they were bigots at all. You have to remember that christians believe being gay is a choice, and therefore "curable" how does this belief in anyway show them to be bigots? You really have to get off this whole christians are bigots thing, because it is making you look bad. Also if they were trying to find a "cure" that would mean they cared, and therefore not bigots.
For one drinking isn't a "sin" as Jesus' first miracle was turning water in wine, and wine was used as to symbolize Jesus' blood at the "last supper." That being said, those "sins" you mentioned did indeed get a lot of heat for a lot of years because of conservative christians. Remember prohibition? Hell gambling is illegal in almost all 50 states to some degree or another. So to say they "never" face the discrimination is a complete lie.
"For one drinking isn't a "sin" as Jesus' first miracle was turning water in wine"
MANY churches teach "sin" citing Prov 23:29-35, Gal 5, I Cor 6:9-10
some cite a few (lame) loopholes around it:
1. Jesus didnt get drunk or
2. the wine was non alcoholic
You have an OPINION on the Bible, but you dont seem aware what is being taught in churches. Did you ever even go? Have you read much on religions outside the one you might have been forced to go to as a kid?
Actually yes I have read about many religions. Before going into the body shop business I actually went to college for BIBLE/Religious History. I have a bachelors in both, and even taught for awhile. I got tired of church so I quit. After years of studying different religions, and religious history I came to the conclusion that I didn't know whether or not "God" actually existed. So I stopped going to church and became an agnostic.
"That being said, those "sins" you mentioned did indeed get a lot of heat for a lot of years because of conservative christians. Remember prohibition?"
Yes, the 1920s. I was very clearly talking about the MODERN era. Your best "example" stems back from around 90 years.
"So to say they "never" face the discrimination is a complete lie."
Your idiotic examples of prohibition and gambling do not equate "Christians face discrimination"
You said they NEVER faced "discrimination" I showed you a time when they did face "discrimination." You shouldn't have used the word NEVER. Also my examples weren't meant to show the discrimination of Christians. It was meant to show that Christians do indeed discriminate against more than the one thing you accuse them of, which is gay marriage.
IF you are going to make comments like this, you need to demonstrate you know about Christianity. I have sat in churches that have taught this, and yes there are those less strict about it. But for you to pretend no Christians teach drinking is a sin is not really being honest.
Have you been to many churches outside weddings and funerals or your childhood?
Yes actually I have. This is why I said that drinking wasn't a sin. If you look at the Aramaic and Hebrew text it says they served the BEST wine at weddings first. The BEST wine was the most alcoholic. They did this that way people would get drunk enough to not care how bad the rest of the wine was. The scriptures that show Jesus' first miracle can be found in John 2:1-11. Remember that the best wine was served first ALWAYS.
However when Jesus turned water into wine at the wedding, the master of the banquet exclaimed "Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now." This particular part of it can be found in verse 10. Therefore all the Christian people who have a problem with drinking and call it a sin, are wrong for doing so. Also Jesus himself drank wine at the last supper.
The wine he drank was in fact alcoholic as this was the Jewish custom, and Jesus was a Jewish man. Drinking wine, not grape juice, was the custom at the celebration of Passover. The last supper being a celebration of the Passover would show that Jesus did indeed drink wine. In any case I never said that NO churches teach this, I was simply telling you that drinking is NOT a sin, as Jesus himself did it.
They did indeed face "discrimination" if you will for a long time. And these are still looked down upon by many conservative christians to this day. This once again goes to show that you are merely focusing on one aspect of the religion to make your hatred for it seem ok. This is unreasonable, and unfounded. It is clearly showing you to be a bigot. If anyone else showed half as much hatred toward a group as you do toward conservative christians, you would call them a bigot.
Yet for some reason...........cough PRIDE cough.....you think that what you are doing is somehow different and almost admirable. This pride is also what makes you unable to admit when you are wrong on any other topic as well. IF bigotry is wrong, and we both agree that it is, then YOU would also be wrong. Just admit it already. Stop being so childish. No I take that back, stop being such a liberal.
Yes I have been in love, but this doesn't prove your point in anyway what so ever. You saying "The assumption gay is some disease to be "cured" is bigotry" is flat out wrong. The whole premise is wrong. Once again to try and find a "cure" for something shows they aren't bigots as finding a cure takes caring and compassion. Two traits not associated with bigotry. There is no need to spin it.
Seriously that would be like calling a white doctor from DWB a bigot even though he is trying to find a cure to help a group of African people. The fact that he is trying to find a cure means he is trying to help them because he CARES, therefore he couldn't be a bigot. Just like the christians who take the time to try and "cure" gayness. You can find it absurd for sure, but to call them bigots because of it is ridiculous.
The whole notion you can "cure" gay is bigotry. it implies that despite everything gay people know and feel...their love is not real because of a magical jesus book.
This is also what happens when you practice "counselling" without any sort of accreditation. That's like going to a guy with some medical tools as a "surgeon"
IVE SEEN THAT GUY WHO MADE FUN OF THE JEW IN YOUR OTHER VIDEO ABOUT OWS YOU THOUGHT HE WAS DRUNK LOL
iinventedthequestion 1 week ago
Albert Einstein was Jewish Nuff said.
dimensionalnumber 1 week ago
@dimensionalnumber
And Einstein was a thief who stole ideas and has recently turned out to be wrong. His ideas have no way of proving them, most of them theory meanwhile a superior scientist, Tesla, actually developed practical things which have done far more for society.
He wasn't Jewish. And as much as I hate the OWS, alot are pretty down right about Jewish influence and domination.
TikofTok 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Actually Einstein was indeed raised Jewish, and for most of his life he followed Judaism. He still considered himself to be a Jew even after adopting a more practical way of looking at "God" known as Spinozism. So yeah.....Einstein was Jewish. Everything else you said is open for debate.
xSamWaynex 1 week ago
I knew it. Herman Cain ain't a black man at all.....He was Val Kilmer. So Random.
mindinsolitude 1 week ago
fuckkk all wall street fuckers
TrueBlueCanuck 2 weeks ago
i hate occupy wallstreet, a bunch of hypocrites
TheClone3000 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
TheClone3000 2 weeks ago
Funny.. When I type Steven Crowder in the search box the first option is '' Steven Crowder is a racist''. Most funny, I type this message a couple of time in the pas and Crowder erased my comments.
SodaPopensky 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SodaPopensky
"I type Steven Crowder in the search box the first option is '' Steven Crowder is a racist''. Most funny, I type this message a couple of time in the pas and Crowder erased my comments."
He was busted for racist behavior on his precious youtube channel.
watch?v=4qgbSB_O0Ng
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
@SodaPopensky Because you aren't helping him at all. How about you just stop telling lies.
MonfangHowlett 2 weeks ago
@MonfangHowlett ??????????????????????????????? I don't help him.. Of corse, it is impossible to help this guys. It like helping a shit on the ground. Best thing you can do is trow it in the garbage...
SodaPopensky 2 weeks ago
It happens to have been a Jewish author, Milton Friedman who was one of the greatest opponents of the Federal Reserve System.
grungefreak10 3 weeks ago
don't worry resolution does not matter :P
sonofdrjekyll 3 weeks ago
comes off like a douche
nathancproduction 1 month ago
Typical conservative. I have been thinking beyond the scope of conservative and liberal, republican and democrat, and for the most part it seems that both fall into ideology and attitude that both sides present. This guy typical conservative, and if you look at bill maher he is a typical liberal. I find it interesting. Why is this so?.. any thoughts ideas.? whats really going on. i myself prefer liberal ideas there less constraining, I find.
---I would like to know what you out there think???
SwiftGQ 1 month ago
the lotion man is not OWS he is a local homeless crackhead that people like you film to downplay the OWS movement. You are what you speak against and you ask others to take part of your dishonesty.
datdereduck 1 month ago
Poor old man
haloboyFNFAL 1 month ago
@haloboyFNFAL which old man?
ninjascroll6789 3 weeks ago
The kid himself was jewish retarded fuck. Find out yourself.
Xzibillionaire 1 month ago
A full on black dude! LOL That was funny!
blok229 1 month ago
I don't like OWS, but the tea party is no better. There are loads of Racists in the tea party movement.
Just google ''tea party racism''.
See, no better...
ec123456789able 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone talks about this RACE problem and says that this RACE problem will be over when the third world pours into EVERY White country and ONLY into White countries. Everyone says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY White country and ONLY White countries to “assimilate,” that is, intermarry, with all those non-Whites. According to the UN, this is genocide. They claim they are anti-racist, but what they are is anti-White. Anti-racist is a code word for anti-White
justincaruso81 1 month ago
I'v notice that any group in the USA has a few white power followers just saying?
curranmarshall 1 month ago
Crowder, I think you bring stupidity to a whole new level. May I feel sorry for you?
FrozenAtrox 1 month ago
Ron Paul 2012 ... thankfully the Occupiers won't win this year.
KittenKoder 1 month ago
The thing that always gets me is that the ocuppiemunist all blelive in the same things I do, but they have been taught the exact opposite of what they mean, bailouts are wrong, because it is socialism, tax deductions are wrong because it is socialist subsidies are wrong because they are socialist, but some how they have all been brainwashed into believing these things are capitalist, (and for no adequately explored reason, racist.) have they no dictionaries ?
halloranedward 1 month ago
I think people to really need to chill out. Not trying to sound like a hippie or anything, but we need to take care of our politics first. It really isn't "American" to be racist or anti-semetic. Thus all you racists are just anti-American, and I guess I'm gonna be racist on you. :)
spacemarine00 1 month ago
While I agree that the media has sort of elevated the Occupy movement, I also think that it has also focused on the most radical part of the movement. A lot of homeless people stay with the Occupy protests in order to get a free meal. Often they are the ones that are caught in the media being racist or saying absurd things that the movement does not support. They simply want to end the power of money in government. Most of the people there don't hate America and don't want entitlements.
macronaria 1 month ago
Liberals are so full of their own self righteousness, they love to play the "teacher" on race issues and dominate any discussion on it. Then when any Liberal gets caught bashing Jews or calling a Black conservative an "uncle tom" they are suppose to get a Liberals free pass. Fuck Liberals who think they get to determine who is racist or not, I call their "free pass" inequality and utter hypocrisy. Not to mention the no justice done on New Black Panther intimidation. New Dialog on race my ass!!
CyberSpaceman81 1 month ago
The difference here is that NOM while being clearly backed by religious groups, they aren't clearly bigots, like the KKK. You think that anyone who is for the sanctity of marriage is a bigot, but that isn't true. Some of those people are just devout in their faith. And you know how liberal democrats love defending peoples faith................never mind they only do that if you're a terrorist.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"The difference here is that NOM while being clearly backed by religious groups, they aren't clearly bigots, like the KKK"
The KKK is violent, so that's a different level.
Bigotry doesn't have to involve violence, and I would disagree- NOM is clearly bigots. Some might even have what they think are good intentions...but clearly bigots.
"You think that anyone who is for the sanctity of marriage is a bigot"
Nothing non sanctity about gay marriage...so yes, bigot
hipstermi 1 month ago
I never said that bigotry had to involve violence in anyway so why bring that up? That is what you would refer to as a "non-point." And no you are clearly mistaken. Just because some people are for the sanctity of marriage that doesn't make them a bigot. Hell I'm all for the sanctity of marriage myself, and I don't think that allowing gay people to marry to hurt the sanctity of marriage in anyway. But some people do, and this is where you get all bent out of shape about things.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Bigots are people who go around calling people names out of pure hatred. Most of the people that you claim to be bigots aren't hateful people at all. They may hate the act, but they don't hate the person. Bigots are people who hate not only the act but the person as well. You have to take a step back and look at this from a different perceptive other than your own. You are clearly biased on this issue. Which is kind of funny because it is making you into a bigot of sorts.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Bigots are people who go around calling people names out of pure hatred"
You seem to be just making up rules as you go along.
So let me ask you this- a man who says "i can't accept my daughter marrying a black man. I have no problem with black people, and some of my friends are black, but they should marry only each other. and think of the kids"
OR..."I have no problem with Jewish people. I just dont want them teaching my kids"
No names. so bigot or not?
hipstermi 1 month ago
No I'm not making up rules as I go along. Remember last time you said I was making things up as I go along, and you happened to be wrong? Well it's the same way this time. My definition is the general understanding of a bigot. As far as the scenarios you presented I would say that in BOTH cases whether they admitted it or not they would be showing some signs of bigotism.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"No I'm not making up rules as I go along. Remember last time you said I was making things up as I go along, and you happened to be wrong? "
No, because that's not how it happened, and you were called out for making up bullshit "rules" as you went along.
YOU have been factually wrong on mutiple occasions and even had to admit such. Remember "no pagan statues"? Or you claiming Robert Byrd was "still in the Senate."
You could have, I dunno...LOOKED IT UP.
hipstermi 1 month ago
No I wasn't making up bullshit rules at all. The last time you said I was making up shit as I went along was about "internet speak." You were proven WRONG, and couldn't admit it then or now which is really really sad. Also I wasn't wrong about Robert Byrd, I brought him up when I was talking about the racist democrats who existed past the 30 year mark you had arbitrarily put up. I was wrong about the statues, and have admitted this SEVERAL TIMES NOW.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"The last time you said I was making up shit as I went along was about "internet speak." You were proven WRONG"
Not how it happened..thats your OPINION on the matter. Now when you had to admit to being wrong to me- yeah that was you having to eat shit in embarrassment. You remember that, right?
hipstermi 1 month ago
No, that is indeed how it happened. That isn't just my opinion. Anyone who can read can go back and reread through the comments and see exactly when that particular argument occurs. I accused you of using "internet speak" like a child because you used the term "Fail" which is used in "internet speak" by CHILDREN all the time. You in turn said I made that up as I went a long.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
I told you to look up the term "internet speak" and you apparently did. You came back with this "rebuttal" "using the word fail one time hardly constitutes internet speak." I then asked you to clarify. Because you said that I made up the term "internet speak" as I went a long. As I obviously DID NOT, that would mean that you were WRONG in saying that I did. BUT, you will not admit that you are wrong. As far as me being wrong about the statues how many times must I say I was?
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
I have already admitted to being wrong. Because that's what adults do when they are CLEARLY wrong. They admit when they made a mistake, and move on. YOU on the other hand won't admit you were wrong about SEVERAL topics, and instead bring up the ONE time I was wrong, just to make yourself feel better. You are a very prideful and childish person. Your actions show this to be true. You are a hypocritical, typical, liberal douchebag.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Also I wasn't wrong about Robert Byrd"
You said Byrd was "still a Senator". Being DEAD he's not a Senator. There's no possible way for you to spin it- you were wrong. Probably not up on current events if the you are that conservative stupid to not know the man featured in national news coverage was dead.
duuuHHHhhh!
hipstermi 1 month ago
For the LAST TIME, I referenced Robert Byrd not as a LIVING INDIVIDUAL, but as a racist democrat who just so happened to STILL be a racist past the 30 year mark that you had arbitrarily put up. He was a racist senator all the way up until 2010 which was when he DIED. This PROVES you wrong about racism being out of the democrat party for 30 or more years. I also brought up several other individuals who were in office and made racist comments.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
ALL of the people I posted in that series of comments after you said that racism stopped in the democrat party 30 or more years ago, were racist well into the 2000's. Thus, CLEARLY showing that racism does indeed still exist in the democrat party. YOU can't admit this because YOU can't ever admit when you are wrong. I'm a grown man who takes responsibility for his actions. I admit when I am wrong, and have done so in this debate. You on the other hand have not grow the hell up Hippie.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
YOU on the other hand have been wrong about "internet speak", racist democrats, faith, bigotry, the bible, separation of church and state being in the constitution, "God" not being mentioned in the constitution, and haven't admitted to being wrong about ANY of it. You are a very prideful person. You are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians and you can't admit when you are CLEARLY wrong. You need to grow up Hippie seriously.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"YOU on the other hand have been wrong about "internet speak","
No I wasnt.
"racist democrats"
Never said there wasnt any. It just had nothing to do with the bigotry from the right and how even the non christian conservatives support said bigotry, which is a huge civil rights batt.e
And everything else you are crying like a little bitch about I was not wrong.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Yes you were wrong about "internet speak" you said I made that up as I went along, and I didn't therefore you were WRONG. "Racist democrats" SAME THING, you said that racism ended in the democrat party 30 years ago or more, and I pointed out racist democrats who are either STILL in office, or were in office as late as 2010, which is CLEARLY not 30 or more years ago.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
As far as everything else I'm "crying like a little bitch about" let's look at that too shall we. YOU said that the phrase "separation of church and state" was in the constitution WRONG!! You said that "God" wasn't mentioned in the constitution WRONG!! "The bible" you CLEARLY said that it was wrong to use profanity, even though it's not in the bible. Then you said that almost all ministers preach on it to cover up the fact that you got it from HEAR SAY.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
In other words you were WRONG again. Those are just a few examples of you being WRONG. You say I'm "crying like a little bitch" because you aren't man enough to admit when you are WRONG. You instead resort to childish tactics, which is to expected from liberal democrats every time they are clearly shown to be WRONG. For the last time you need to grow the hell up Hippie. And that's not an insult that's a nickname because of the fact that the letters H, I, P are in your screen name.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"You are a very prideful person. You are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians"
It's not like I denied or supported leaders that tried to "christ"ians marriage, employment, military service, visitation rights, and other things . You know... that good old GOP bigotry you guys gleefully get behind.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Ok firstly, your first sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. On that note I have to say that I am only guessing as to what you meant. Instead of admitting your own bigotry you again tried to dismiss my findings and again bring it back around to the "GOP." You are indeed a BIGOT. You show clear HATRED toward conservative christians based on false assumptions about them. You go on hear say about their faith, and then LIE about doing years of research.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
You show contempt for them based on one of the tenants of their FAITH. You dismiss all the good they do, and anything that proves them not to be bigots, and instead focus solely on ONE issue that YOU think is bigoted. This type of hatred and condemnation is known as BIGOTRY. Christians, TRUE CHRISTIANS, are good people who love others because that is also a tenant of their faith. They are not BIGOTS. This is the last time I will answer this for you as you clearly get it by now.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
You continuously tell me to look things up but won't do so yourself. In our debate you wouldn't even go through previous comments to make your point and instead wanted me to do it for you. You call conservative christians bigots because of their FAITH and completely dismiss anything I have to say about the bigoted democrat party or you being a bigot toward conservative christians. You are what is known as a hypocrite. You are the typical liberal democrat. Once again grow up Hippie.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"You continuously tell me to look things up but won't do so yourself"
Not quoting and answering like a week later I have no idea what you refer to. And you lie- I do look up or know my info.
"You call conservative christians bigots because of their FAITH and completely dismiss anything I have to say about the bigoted democrat party"
I answered those points. Your point seems to be a bout bigotry that happened Decades ago mine is about christian bigotry now.
hipstermi 1 month ago
I shouldn't have to quote in a conversation between two people, and yet I still do it from time to time to appease you. I answered a week later because I was busy running a business which I made perfectly clear to you. You said that you get busy from time to time as well remember? And NO I don't LIE, you wanted me to go back and clear up comments that I had made because YOU were to lazy to go back and look it up for yourself on more than one occasion.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Also NO you didn't answer my points. You dismissed what I had to say. You said that racism stopped 30 or more years ago in the democrat party. When I brought up racism that happened less than 10 years ago you completely dismissed what I had to say about it. I proved to you that racism didn't end 30 or more years ago in the democrat party, and you STILL couldn't admit you were wrong in saying that it did. You are wrong in calling all christians bigots as I have already explained
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
THEIR FAITH says that it is wrong for the same sex to marry. They don't organize against gay marriage out of hatred toward gay people, and those that do shouldn't even call themselves Christians. True Christians that do organize against it don't do it out of hatred, IF they did then they would be bigots. Honestly I think you understand this point already, but because of your bigoted opinion about conservative christians you have to argue about it anyway. Grow the hell up hippie.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"You are what is known as a hypocrite"
You know what you are is a crying little bitch.
hipstermi 1 month ago
No tears running down my face at all Hippie, but nice try on the insult. HAHAHAHA You are a hypocrite because you are a bigot. You claim other people to be bigots so you can make yourself feel better for hating them so much. The problem is your wrong in calling them bigots.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
The reason I say this is because of their actions. If you don't want a Jewish person teaching your kids WHY? Are they just as qualified as anyone else? Is there any reason for them not to? Is your daughter too good to marry a black man? And how would their future possible kids have anything to do with it? See what I mean their actions say otherwise.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"because of their actions. If you don't want a Jewish person teaching your kids WHY?"
I agree on actions. Therefore anyone who said gays should marry because of a religion, or what it will do to kids, or other bullsht excuses are the same as the people with a "problem" with Jewish people.
"See what I mean their actions say otherwise"
Actions- including taking legal measures or spending millions or donate money to an atni gay PR campaign?
hipstermi 1 month ago
I didn't quite understand what you wrote this time. I think I got it but it was a bit jumbled for me. So if I have this wrong please tell me.............ah hell I don't have to tell you to tell me I'm wrong we both know that haha.Anyway, what you fail to realize yet again is that actions speak louder than words. As I said before Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways yet liberal democrats focus on this ONE area and say they are. Christians don't HATE gay people.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"As I said before Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways"
You "said" it with an argument that was so flimsy most high school debate kids would have laughed you off the stage. Religion doesn't excuse bigotry.
ANd it's like this- if your "faith" says gay is a sin...or being Jewish is a sin, or not observing the Sabbath...that's your business. I nor anyone else has to follow that. Ergo I can covert to Judiasm, go out on Sunday, etc.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Religion doesn't excuse bigotry, you are correct. As far as being "laughed off stage" the first time you asked me to go back and look through my comments for you instead of doing it yourself, you would've been laughed off stage. In fact you would've been defeated a long time ago in this debate when you LIED, as that goes against the debate rules. But oh well. Now, Christians do show they aren't bigots in so many ways. I have previously listed those.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
You couldn't come up with a rebuttal for it so like you have done so many times you chose to make fun, and dismiss what I had to say. In any case, You were right in saying that religion doesn't excuse bigotry. However bigotry is: "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Christianity as a faith is not about hatred. They don't HATE gay people. They don't protest out of hatred or intolerance. They protest because of their faith. They believe it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry. People who go out there and protest against a group of people out of hatred those are the bigots. And the definition shows this, as I have stated before.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
What you do toward conservative christians is considered bigotry by definition. You are obstinately, and intolerantly devoted to your opinion of them, and have shown your prejudice toward them time and time again. You are a bigot, and a hypocrite. In fact most liberal democrats are bigots and hypocrites. You can never admit when you are wrong, and have a childish take on almost everything. I will say this once again, you, and every liberal democrat like you, need to grow up.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
At least they shouldn't if they call themselves a Christian. IF they hated gay people just for being gay then they would be a bigot. The reason why they spend money on keeping gay marriage illegal isn't because they are a bunch of bigots. Gay marriage goes against their FAITH, and faith for the most part isn't a bad thing. The application of faith can be bad in certain circumstances but this isn't one of them.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
The reason I say this is for two reasons.One: Liberal democrats always want separation of church and state, and while this is good for government it doesn't apply to the voting public. PEOPLE will allow their faith to guide their voting, and no one can stop this. People will also allow their faith to guide their finances in certain instances such as political contributions.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Two: The application of faith is a basic tenant in Christianity, and in this country we have freedom of religion. If certain individuals have a problem with gay people getting married because of their faith it is better for them to contribute financially to certain organizations than it would be for them to do anything else such as violence. So this type of application of faith is better than many numerous other actions that could be taken.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"If certain individuals have a problem with gay people getting married because of their faith it is better for them to contribute financially to certain organizations than it would be for them to do anything else such as violence"
So...if a "religion" has it's members give money to prevent blacks from marrying whites legally and with no violence... not bigotry to your conservative logic?
Religion is no longer an excuse for bigotry. that shit hasnt flown for decades.
hipstermi 1 month ago
How the hell could you get that out of what I said? The bible doesn't say anything against interracial marriage. In fact in Song of Solomon chapter 1 verse 5 it clearly says that Solomon is married to an Egyptian woman who happens to be black. Several times throughout scripture men of one race marry women of another. So interracial marriage was never something wrong according to Christianity. You had racist people who had a problem with it, but not the faith.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
You are clearly going off of what racist people had a problem with. You do this a lot. You go by hear say as well. Now, stop trying to bring up controversy to make yourself appear to be right. I'm not the one who tolerated bigotry and racism toward black people, and dismissed racism from my party. That was YOU. You are just trying to find a way to make yourself feel better for being a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. One more time Hippie, GROW THE HELL UP.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
What you seem to be confusing is faith with bigotry. The Jewish teacher wouldn't be teaching judaism to the students, she would be teaching them the same thing any other teacher would. A black man marrying the guys daughter is just a man marrying the guys daughter, and his skin color should have nothing to do with it. Faith has nothing to do with their decisions, as you clearly said the person had no problems with "Jewish people."
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"What you seem to be confusing is faith with bigotry"
You are giving the same bullshit excuse many "christ"ians in the 60s said in opposing interracial marriage.
hipstermi 1 month ago
And NO I am not giving the same "bullshit excuse" as faith isn't an EXCUSE. YOU claim it to be because you have no respect for anyone who has it. You have shown your disdain several times now for christians. You should be embarrassed to be that biased against a group. Especially when you call that group out for being "bigots." Seems to me that you are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. You have no respect for them and constantly talk bad about them.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"What you seem to be confusing is faith with bigotry"
ANd you keep dodging my points...again.
believing something is one thing, acting on beliefs is another.
the "my religion says..." does not excuse those who opposed interracial marriage. Or worse- those that opposed it in the past, and STILL claim "their faith" in the modern times.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Also why continue bringing up the interracial marriage thing? You have on more than one occasion taken up for the racist democrat party by simply "dodging" anything I have brought up about them. You simply said that you disagreed with the "dixiecrats," and then talked about a political shift that never even really happened. But oh well I'm sure you'll find a way to avoid it once again and somehow talk about conservative christians and republicans. Liberal dumbocrats always manage that
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Also that isn't a dodge of any kind it is a direct response. I was pointing out your confusion, how you claim that to be a dodge is beyond me. If you knew anything about christianity you would know this "Faith without works is DEAD." Why believe in something if you're not willing to show other people you believe in it? Once again it's not an excuse, but you are having a very hard time seeing this because of your hatred toward conservative christians.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
However the christian faith does say that it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry. Hell muslims go a step further and say stone gay people. And while that is their faith, the action itself is illegal. It isn't illegal to think that two people of the same sex getting married is wrong. In YOUR opinion that makes them a bigot, but that is only your opinion. What do you think of the muslim stance of gay people in general?
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Comment removed
hipstermi 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Some of those people are just devout in their faith"
In the 60s, some opposed interracial marriage & cited "faith". Malcolm X and Muhamed Ali said the SAME from an Islamic POV. "faith" doesn't excuse bigotry.
Even if you believe it's "sin" others are free to do what they want. If you eat ham on Friday, that's a "sin" to your Jewish and Muslim friends for pork & Catholics for meat. Its a sin for Pentecostals to drink, but they cant legally stop me.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Once again you confuse faith with bigotry. Just because someone believes something to be wrong based on their faith doesn't make them a bigot. Once again a bigot is a person who does things out of hatred. They call people names, or do violent acts against a group simply because of how they view a certain other group of people. Those are the bigots you should go after. People who just happen to be devout in their faith shouldn't be targeted as bigots by you or anyone.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Once again a bigot is a person who does things out of hatred. They call people names, or do violent acts against a group simply because of how they view a certain other group of people"
Bigotry is not limited to names and violence. Conservatives in my county tried to pass a referendum giving property owners the legal right to deny housing based on sexual preference. After it was defeated, they brought it back 4 years later in i think 04.
hipstermi 1 month ago
What country do you live in? This whole time I was thinking you lived in America, guess that's what I get for assuming. Anyway how else can you tell a person is a bigot unless they show themselves to be one through their actions? By actions I mean calling someone names based on their race or sexual preference or doing violent acts against someone based on their race or sexual preference. I'm personally not a mind reader, so I go by peoples words and actions.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
If they do it out of pure hatred then they are a bigot. But calling a devout person of faith a bigot, would be like calling someone rude when they walked away from me to go pray three times a day. They are just being devout in their faith. If their faith says that it is wrong for people of the same sex to marry then you shouldn't fault them for it. Just like they shouldn't fault you for not believing in god.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"If they do it out of pure hatred then they are a bigot. But calling a devout person of faith a bigot, would be like calling someone rude when they walked away from me to go pray three times a day"
No it wouldn't be anything like that since your example is nothing like the first. Typical Conservative tactic- take "thing A" and pretend it's the same as "thing B"
You just seem bent on finding loopholes because the people in question are often conservative.
hipstermi 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
And yes, Christians know they can't legally ban divorced marriage. But...a church can refuse to perform the ceremony. Various Catholics have refused pro life politicians, Rabbis have refused Muslim/Jewish unions. in Canada churchs turn away gay couples. I've yet to see a "christ"ian turn away a divorced cheat on spouse scumbag like Newt Gingritch or John McCain.
I did not see "christ"ians protest Rush Limbaugh 4th wedding like they protest gays.
hipstermi 1 month ago
How many times must I point out that I don't have a problem with gay marriage before you stop directing comments about it toward me? As far as them not protesting a man and a woman getting married I wonder why? HMMMMMMMM let's think about that for a second. Obviously they see nothing wrong with a man and a woman getting married, and divorce existed in the bible for certain reasons, so they see nothing wrong with divorce either to a certain extent.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
However they protest gay marriage because the bible does speak about gay marriage being "wrong." It is part of their faith. Yet for some reason you see them as bigots for believing this. They aren't bigots because of their faith. Like I said before bigots are people who go around speaking bad about people and doing violent acts against people just because of their race, gender, or sexual orientation.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"However they protest gay marriage because the bible does speak about gay marriage being "wrong." It is part of their faith. "
This was the SAME excuse Christians used to protest interracial marriage.google "Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation" by Peggy Pascoe
And...same magic religion says Islam, Hindi, Wiccan, etc. are "sin" but for some reasons "christ"ians dont spend MILLIONS trying to deny their rights.
hipstermi 1 month ago
You keep bringing this up as if it means ANYTHING. Their faith actually does matter this time, and isn't based off of a bunch of racist pricks. Interracial marriage was protested because of a bunch of racist pricks who tried using the bible to their advantage, but like I said the bible doesn't say anything against interracial marriage, and in fact show several cases of interracial marriage occurring.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Comment removed
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
The bible DOES say that being gay is a "sin." Therefore their faith actually does matter this time. You can't admit this because it completely refutes everything you have to say about it. As far as spending millions to try and deny the rights of other "religious" people why would they? Like I said before the bible does say to obey the laws of the land. In this country we have freedom of religion. Therefore by denying their "rights" they would be breaking the law which is a "sin."
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"The bible DOES say that being gay is a "sin." Therefore their faith actually does matter this time"
Plenty of other "sins" they dont spend MILLION on to legally ban from marriage. Martial affairs McCain was allowed to remarry. Glutton/drug user Rush Limbaugh can remarry over and over.
Again- one "sin" gets special attention. Ergo- bigotry. hatred.
hipstermi 1 month ago
"Plenty of other "sins" they dont spend MILLION on to legally ban from marriage. Martial affairs McCain was allowed to remarry. Glutton/drug user Rush Limbaugh can remarry over and over."
This point is moot as I have already shown you that divorce was not and is NOT a sin in the bible. Therefore why continue to try and use this as an argument? If your criteria for being a bigot is showing special attention to something, then you are indeed a bigot toward "conservative christians"
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"This point is moot as I have already shown you that divorce was not and is NOT a sin in the bible"
that's not what many churches teach...but you can't deny ADULTERY is a sin, so that's still McCain, Barr, Newt. Stop dodging.
and...gluttony and drug use is a sin as well, yet Rush can remarry.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Once again not dodging, while those are sins, they have nothing to do with getting married or remarried for that matter. So why try and bring those up in this discussion? That makes no sense at all. The bible never says that anyone who abuses drugs can't get married. It also never says a glutton can't get married. So what exactly was your point in bringing those up? The bible does say that being gay is a sin, and that people of the same sex shouldn't be together.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
You never did answer my point about Zo...if he says the Democrats are bad for being "accusers"...why go on to accuse them of being demons?
and as far as accusations go...you have to admit that's a bit out there since YOU dont believe in demons. But the accusation isn't even "they are dumb, wrong, etc..." it's they are evil personified.
Going off on people for "accusing" and then accusing them of this is like being against violence and then punching someone.
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
I answered this once before but I typed too fast and messed up a lot. When Zo was stating his case about liberal democrats being accusers. He was saying who they accuse, and how they accuse. He wasn't accusing them of anything, he was explaining what made them accusers. During his time at the podium he made his point perfectly clear. Are you sure you watched the whole thing? Because if not then that would show a bias on your part, and you would be taking what he said out of context.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
"When Zo was stating his case about liberal democrats being accusers. He was saying who they accuse, and how they accuse. He wasn't accusing them of anything, he was explaining what made them accusers"
Zo: 3:56 "pages of this book is saturated with the morbidity of mobs driven by DEMONS"
and demon again at 2:40
"watched the whole thing"
Yes. did you?
watch?v=rm0M0uMhAQQ&lc=2ugwkmJQ2lxnTg8vX90dzlooE8bCAltZZKdlevIw_J4&feature=inbox
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
Hey you didnt answer my "question" or "observation" (these are using your terms and logic)
did you wife leave you because you beat her?
Or did she leave you because you molest children?
See how "questions" like your work?
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. I already explained to you what happened, and why we got divorced. I know you get all amped up when it comes to gossip and all, but for the last time I'm not going to gossip with you.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
"I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. "
You mean like I answered that I wasn't gay, yet you repeated that accusation over and over again resulting in you lying?
If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that.
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
For one once again I didn't lie. I made an observation based on current evidence that had been provided. I didn't make any assertions about your character, I made an assertion based on evidence provided that you were indeed a closeted homosexual. Since there is nothing wrong with being a homosexual, you should not have been offended by this in anyway. The fact that you took this as an offense from the very first time I brought it up says a lot about you though.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
"If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that." With this statement YOU on the other hand did make an assertion about my character that had nothing to do with any evidence provided during our conversation. You did this to try and make me angry, and hurt my feelings, because you felt offended that I had called you out on being a closeted homosexual.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
The fact of the matter is you were so offended at the very notion that you had to attack my character in a manner that was unwarranted. In other words it was a low blow. You see me calling you a closeted homosexual isn't wrong, because there is nothing wrong with being gay, or not wanting to admit it to a complete stranger. Someone molesting children, and beating their wife on the other hand is downright sickening. The fact that you took it to this level also shows a lot about you.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"I answered this one already as well. I never beat my wife, nor do I molest children. "
You mean like I answered that I wasn't gay, yet you repeated that accusation over and over again resulting in you lying?
If I tried YOUR logic and said "I didnt say that, that's just an observation I. you seem like you beat your wife and molest children" that implication is just that.
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"amped up when it comes to gossip and all"
That's another conservative lie. It's hardly "gossip" when ask the source.
"I already explained to you what happened, and why we got divorced."
Which was vague.
You mentioned money and her saying something she couldnt take back. Points to greed and you not forgiving.
Not to mention you breaking a vow.
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
Therefore, marriage would be included in this, and actually does have something to do with the discussion. You can't go naming random "sins" and then placing them in with not being able to marry. You don't seem to get this. Either that or you do and are just arguing for the sake of argument.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"then you are indeed a bigot toward "conservative christians""
Ah yes...another canned conservative comeback.
Whenever someone points out bigotry on the right, accuse the otherside of being...bigots. "Im not a bigot, you're the bigot you bigot"
the poor me...middle aged white guy...comeback.
hipstermi 1 month ago
That wasn't a canned conservative comeback it was the truth. You are indeed a bigot. You hate "conservatives" especially "conservative christians." I'm not accusing you of being a bigot, I'm telling you directly that you are indeed a bigot. An accusation could be true or false. That is why this is not an accusation because it is a fact that you are a bigot toward "conservatives" especially "conservative christians." You have shown this to be true through your comments about them.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"This point is moot as I have already shown you that divorce was not and is NOT a sin in the bible"
It's amazing you quoted me and STILL missed the point. I said:
-- Martial affairs McCain was allowed to remarry.
So your "divorce" tangent doesnt even apply.
So how about address the point- McCain and Newt having affair is a sin...yes or no? Why can that "sin" remarry"?
hipstermi 1 month ago
I think you mean MARITAL not MARTIAL but oh well. As I already explained the Christian faith says that it is wrong for two people of the same sex to be together. It is considered a sin. I didn't found the religion, nor did I make up the rules. While cheating on your wife is a sin, you can still get married to another woman after doing so. As far as asking me why certain sins are ok when it comes to marriage and others aren't I couldn't tell you. As I didn't come up with the religion.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"As I already explained the Christian faith says that it is wrong for two people of the same sex to be together. It is considered a sin. "
Your Jewish friends will tell you eating pork is a sin, but they dont get to set a law preventing you from having bacon, eve in 99% of the people in your town want that.
It was a "sin" for Newt to have all those conservative affairs, but Christians didnt pass laws from him getting remarried.
gay sin gets special attention ...
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
Okay for the last time, gay marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states. I personally don't think it should be but hey. Now as far as Jews not eating pork, that is up to them. Which is exactly how I personally feel about people getting married. It should be left up to them. The fact of the matter is it isn't just conservative christians who are against gay marriage. IF it was then gay marriage would be legal by now.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
"Okay for the last time, gay marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states."
Despite your drama queen cry, that doesn't address any point I made. If we had a debate in th 1940s, you saying "interracial marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states" that doesn't end a debate on that subject.
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Despite your drama queen cry, that doesn't address any point I made. If we had a debate in th 1940s, you saying "interracial marriage is illegal in this country in almost all 50 states" that doesn't end a debate on that subject."
There was nothing dramatic about what I said, however your attempt at humor is noted. For one we aren't in the 1940's, therefore my point is indeed valid. If we were in the 1940's and I used that argument against interracial marriage it would've been too.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
Secondly, like I said gay marriage is illegal in almost all 50 states. I personally don't agree with this but that's the way it is. However, you continue to blame "conservative Christians" for making this happen. Their political pull is simply not powerful enough to cause this, not anymore anyway. Their political pull hasn't been powerful enough for almost 40 years. This isn't just the fault of "conservative Christians" and your bias on this subject is absurd, and unwarranted.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
For the past 39 years Christians have been trying to get abortion made illegal, and have failed. This shows exactly how much power they wield over the government. You have such contempt for them, and are so bigoted toward them that you want to blame the whole thing on them, and THEIR bigotry. You do this to make yourself feel better about your own bigotry. Get over it man it's not worth it. Remember California one of the most liberal states in the nation didn't want gay marriage.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
"Remember California one of the most liberal states in the nation didn't want gay marriage."
So you think because the political pendulum swung one way, that "proves" liberal. That's like claiming Texas was liberal for electing Ann Richards.
You need to study this stuff before making an ass out of yourself. Many Mexicans and black people for example vote Democrat...but studies showed it was the church influence on the gay vote. Ergo- christian bigotry
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"So you think because the political pendulum swung one way, that "proves" liberal. That's like claiming Texas was liberal for electing Ann Richards." Actually NO it's not because the pendulum swung one way that I believe anything. California has shown itself to be a predominantly liberal state many times over in both policy and elections. In fact the current governor of California Jerry Brown is a liberal democrat. Not to mention Hollywood is known as "the land of the liberals."
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
A liberal state like California should've voted YES to allowing gay marriage. Especially since it is your assertion that only conservatives are against gay marriage. The fact that the majority of the people in California voted against it and that California is a known liberal state, would prove you wrong. It's not only conservatives or conservative Christians who are against gay marriage. That is simply your assertion and it shows your bias towards conservatives and Christians.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
"You need to study this stuff before making an ass out of yourself. Many Mexicans and black people for example vote Democrat...but studies showed it was the church influence on the gay vote. Ergo- christian bigotry" For YOU to tell anyone to "study" anything is just downright hilarious. You have been shown to use second hand knowledge, and hear say on multiple occasions to form an opinion. An opinion you also passed off as FACT. This has nothing to do with Christian bigotry.
xSamWaynex 2 weeks ago
A person believing something to be wrong, and protesting against it because of their FAITH, or putting money toward a certain cause they believe in because of their FAITH is not necessarily a bad thing. Look at all the good things churches do. Like building medical facilities in third world nations, or clothing the poor, or taking up donations to help build houses for places like habitat for humanity, or all the work they did after hurricane Katrina.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways. YOU and other liberal democrats look at ONE area of their FAITH and call them bigots because of it. For the last time there is a difference between having faith and being a bigot. You can't see this however because YOU are a bigot when it comes to conservative christians. That's sad, and embarrassing. You shouldn't call someone out falsely for being a bigot, it just shows yourself to be the real bigot.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Christians show they are not bigots in so many ways"
Lets see...passing laws making bullying on religious grounds ok, opposing marriage of certain citizens, history of opposing interracial marriage, wanting laws o make employment and housing harder on gays, spreading lies, trying to pass laws to KILL gays, floowing book with commands to kill...
your opinion doesnt hold up to reality.
hipstermi 1 month ago
You have that backwards you know? They didn't pass a law making it ok to bully on religious grounds. They wanted to pass a law teaching tolerance to stop bullying using religious methodology. What article did you read? Interracial marriage was opposed by a lot of people not just christians at one time in this country. And gay marriage isn't just opposed by christians either. So why blame all of this on them? I'll tell you why because of your BIGOTRY toward them.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
As far as passing laws to try and kill gays are you referring to the Anti-Homosexuality bill from UGANDA? How the hell did conservative christians in America have anything to do with that bill? As far as "floowing book with commands to kill" what book? Who wrote it? It seems to me like you are trying to pin things on conservative christians in America for things that are happening around the world. Our conversation has been about America.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Conservative Christians in America show time and time again that they are not bigots. For one conservative Christians are made up of all different races of people. For two, they go around helping everyone in need regardless of their color, sexual orientation, or religion. Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas. Remember AIDS started out as GRID, or GAY RELATED IMMUNE DEFICIENCY.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"Conservative Christians in America show time and time again that they are not bigots"
Opposing gay marriage is bigotry. Outside marriage, you guys are OKing bullying for religion. limit gays housing , employment, etc.
John Birch Society calling Civil Rights movment a "communist plot".
Conservatives referring to MLK as a "socialist" (google The Independent American, MLK billboards)
Conservatives fought interracial marriage.
hipstermi 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"they go around helping everyone in need regardless of their color, sexual orientation, or religion"
The ACLU defends all beliefs. Google "ACLU defends Christians" Time and again I ask conservatives to name a conservative org who has rendered such legal aid to liberals...i never get a reply.
"Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas"
That doesnt "excuse" bigotry or what came later.
hipstermi 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I said "Christian organizations were some of the first to fund AIDS research facilities in low income areas"
You said "That doesnt "excuse" bigotry or what came later."
You admitted that they did indeed fund aids research and then later question whether they did it or not. In the words of.......well you......YOU LIED. And as far as a christian organization that gives legal aid to liberals well the CLS(Christian Legal Society.)
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
So I live in Michigan. When I first got here in the early 2000s, there was a referendum fighting for the "right" of property renters to deny hosing in a college town to gay residents. Sponsored by...conservative christians! deny housing...Bigotry or not?
The kicker is this smae bill was defeated like 4 years prior. Outside of bigotry, conservatives seemed ok with shitting on the will of the people.
hipstermi 1 month ago
The people YOU claim to be bigoted toward gay people raised MILLIONS of dollars to fund research into the disease when it was still known as GRID. You claiming them to be bigots is nonsense, and is based on your bias and hatred for conservative Christians. Hippie, you have to face facts here, you, and any liberal democrat who thinks like you, are BIGOTS, and therefore hypocrites as well.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"The people YOU claim to be bigoted toward gay people raised MILLIONS of dollars to fund research into the disease when it was still known as GRID"
a. dont be vague. cite the group/ instance
b. the christians who protested interracial marriage...if they gave money to help the black community, the means not bigot?
c. in MN, the "christ"ian group PALS still wants to teach about GRIDs despite that term being out of date, and that gay is "curable"...ergo bigots
hipstermi 1 month ago
a. I wasn't vague and you overuse that word. When I said that millions were raised to fund research on AIDS when it was still known as GRIDS I was referring to the millions that were raised by churches all across the nation.
"the christians who protested interracial marriage...if they gave money to help the black community, the means not bigot?"
b. What is your obsession with this? IF people gave money to help the black community then obviously they aren't bigots toward black people.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"b. What is your obsession with this? IF people gave money to help the black community then obviously they aren't bigots toward black people."
So to YOU giving money can erase any bigotry? That's like buying Catholic indulgences!
Guy gives money to help say a local soup kitchen in the african american community- well and fine.
If the same guy says "blacks cant marry whites" or forbids his daughter from it...I daresay that is a bigot.
hipstermi 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"in MN, the "christ"ian group PALS still wants to teach about GRIDs despite that term being out of date, and that gay is "curable"...ergo bigots."
c. PALS is a way for churches all around the world to communicate with each other more easily. It's basically like facebook for churches. Honestly how the hell do you get that they believe a certain way, or that they still teach GRIDS as an accepted term for AIDS?
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Never mind the fact that even if this were true it wouldn't prove they were bigots at all. You have to remember that christians believe being gay is a choice, and therefore "curable" how does this belief in anyway show them to be bigots? You really have to get off this whole christians are bigots thing, because it is making you look bad. Also if they were trying to find a "cure" that would mean they cared, and therefore not bigots.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"You have to remember that christians believe being gay is a choice, and therefore "curable" how does this belief in anyway show them to be bigots?"
Plenty of "sins" dont get 1/10th the attention homosexuality get.
people who drink, gamble, have affairs, and other sins...they never face the conservative discrimination gays do.
hipstermi 1 month ago
For one drinking isn't a "sin" as Jesus' first miracle was turning water in wine, and wine was used as to symbolize Jesus' blood at the "last supper." That being said, those "sins" you mentioned did indeed get a lot of heat for a lot of years because of conservative christians. Remember prohibition? Hell gambling is illegal in almost all 50 states to some degree or another. So to say they "never" face the discrimination is a complete lie.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
"For one drinking isn't a "sin" as Jesus' first miracle was turning water in wine"
MANY churches teach "sin" citing Prov 23:29-35, Gal 5, I Cor 6:9-10
some cite a few (lame) loopholes around it:
1. Jesus didnt get drunk or
2. the wine was non alcoholic
You have an OPINION on the Bible, but you dont seem aware what is being taught in churches. Did you ever even go? Have you read much on religions outside the one you might have been forced to go to as a kid?
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
Actually yes I have read about many religions. Before going into the body shop business I actually went to college for BIBLE/Religious History. I have a bachelors in both, and even taught for awhile. I got tired of church so I quit. After years of studying different religions, and religious history I came to the conclusion that I didn't know whether or not "God" actually existed. So I stopped going to church and became an agnostic.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
@xSamWaynex
"That being said, those "sins" you mentioned did indeed get a lot of heat for a lot of years because of conservative christians. Remember prohibition?"
Yes, the 1920s. I was very clearly talking about the MODERN era. Your best "example" stems back from around 90 years.
"So to say they "never" face the discrimination is a complete lie."
Your idiotic examples of prohibition and gambling do not equate "Christians face discrimination"
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
You said they NEVER faced "discrimination" I showed you a time when they did face "discrimination." You shouldn't have used the word NEVER. Also my examples weren't meant to show the discrimination of Christians. It was meant to show that Christians do indeed discriminate against more than the one thing you accuse them of, which is gay marriage.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex
"For one drinking isn't a "sin""
???
IF you are going to make comments like this, you need to demonstrate you know about Christianity. I have sat in churches that have taught this, and yes there are those less strict about it. But for you to pretend no Christians teach drinking is a sin is not really being honest.
Have you been to many churches outside weddings and funerals or your childhood?
hipstermi 3 weeks ago
Yes actually I have. This is why I said that drinking wasn't a sin. If you look at the Aramaic and Hebrew text it says they served the BEST wine at weddings first. The BEST wine was the most alcoholic. They did this that way people would get drunk enough to not care how bad the rest of the wine was. The scriptures that show Jesus' first miracle can be found in John 2:1-11. Remember that the best wine was served first ALWAYS.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
However when Jesus turned water into wine at the wedding, the master of the banquet exclaimed "Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now." This particular part of it can be found in verse 10. Therefore all the Christian people who have a problem with drinking and call it a sin, are wrong for doing so. Also Jesus himself drank wine at the last supper.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
The wine he drank was in fact alcoholic as this was the Jewish custom, and Jesus was a Jewish man. Drinking wine, not grape juice, was the custom at the celebration of Passover. The last supper being a celebration of the Passover would show that Jesus did indeed drink wine. In any case I never said that NO churches teach this, I was simply telling you that drinking is NOT a sin, as Jesus himself did it.
xSamWaynex 3 weeks ago
They did indeed face "discrimination" if you will for a long time. And these are still looked down upon by many conservative christians to this day. This once again goes to show that you are merely focusing on one aspect of the religion to make your hatred for it seem ok. This is unreasonable, and unfounded. It is clearly showing you to be a bigot. If anyone else showed half as much hatred toward a group as you do toward conservative christians, you would call them a bigot.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Yet for some reason...........cough PRIDE cough.....you think that what you are doing is somehow different and almost admirable. This pride is also what makes you unable to admit when you are wrong on any other topic as well. IF bigotry is wrong, and we both agree that it is, then YOU would also be wrong. Just admit it already. Stop being so childish. No I take that back, stop being such a liberal.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex "Also if they were trying to find a "cure" that would mean they cared, and therefore not bigots."
You ever been in love?
What woudl you have done if someone was trying to "cure" you of that? "it's wrong you love that woman because my religion says..."
try to spin it how you want... but The assumption gay is some disease to be "cured" is bigotry.
hipstermi 1 month ago
Yes I have been in love, but this doesn't prove your point in anyway what so ever. You saying "The assumption gay is some disease to be "cured" is bigotry" is flat out wrong. The whole premise is wrong. Once again to try and find a "cure" for something shows they aren't bigots as finding a cure takes caring and compassion. Two traits not associated with bigotry. There is no need to spin it.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
Seriously that would be like calling a white doctor from DWB a bigot even though he is trying to find a cure to help a group of African people. The fact that he is trying to find a cure means he is trying to help them because he CARES, therefore he couldn't be a bigot. Just like the christians who take the time to try and "cure" gayness. You can find it absurd for sure, but to call them bigots because of it is ridiculous.
xSamWaynex 1 month ago
@xSamWaynex
The whole notion you can "cure" gay is bigotry. it implies that despite everything gay people know and feel...their love is not real because of a magical jesus book.
This is also what happens when you practice "counselling" without any sort of accreditation. That's like going to a guy with some medical tools as a "surgeon"