Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

World news and politics.

tsf said:
Oh, yeah I know they are not all the same, but essentially the evenagelicals are Christians.

It's not a dig at Christianity, just these grifters that use it to make bank.
Click to expand...
Fair enough it just shits me to tears that they hide behind a false narrative to be pathetic human beings.

Sure the evangelicals purport to be Christians but they are also (in the majority) white, science deniers, oddly militaristic, idolaters of the cult of Mango Mussolini, right wing, greedy little piggies..... Any of those traits would better define them than "Christians"

Not really any different to equating all of Islam with people flying planes into buildings
 
Monoethnic Social Club said:
Fair enough it just shits me to tears that they hide behind a false narrative to be pathetic human beings.

Sure the evangelicals purport to be Christians but they are also (in the majority) white, science deniers, oddly militaristic, idolaters of the cult of Mango Mussolini, right wing, greedy little piggies..... Any of those traits would better define them than "Christians"

Not really any different to equating all of Islam with people flying planes into buildings
Click to expand...
Exactly; if they wanna live in a theocracy so bad then they can fuck off to the Islamic Republic of 🇮🇷(while it’s still one) and leave secular 🇺🇸 society alone.

That it’s a Shia Muslim theocracy and not a redneck televangelist ‘Christian’ one is utterly beside the point, because the cruel totalitarianism of it IS the point💡
 
BA81 said:
Exactly; if they wanna live in a theocracy so bad then they can fuck off to the Islamic Republic of 🇮🇷(while it’s still one) and leave secular 🇺🇸 society alone.

That it’s a Shia Muslim theocracy and not a redneck televangelist ‘Christian’ one is utterly beside the point, because the cruel totalitarianism of it IS the point💡
Click to expand...

I would argue the US is practically a theocracy.
 
zimbos05 said:
I'd agree with you on his intent if his actions were not the complete opposite of it. He might have had good intent to start with, but I feel like once he got funding from certain groups, he could no longer be impartial when needed to.

If you read my posts, you will see that I have admitted the left can be at fault sometimes. This is contrast to posters on the right blaming the left for everything. Beretta said the left is 99.99% at fault. I'm not getting into the cheering of Kirk. The right cheered George Floyd's death, so I'm not getting further into this debate.

I've always given the other side the opportunity to express their views, however, it always results in hateful and divisive rhetoric, so paint me as "entertaining left wing dogma". Even the use of dogma is counter to your point of engaging in respectful conversation. You are already tainting it with negative connotations, so if you come with that off the bat, you'll never get what you claim to want.

Refusing to see race means you refuse to see others. Means you are only choosing to see everyone as one race, ignoring that other races exist. In doing so, you are refusing to acknowledge the challenges faced by people because of their race. I have researched the matter, those organisations were not exactly powerful at elevating minority ethnic groups. It was more about elevating minorities that agreed with them.

Well, you spout these views, I'm not making assumptions, I'm making deductions. If you agree with Kirk, then you agree with what he stands for. An assumption I am making is that you vote right, which again, means you agree with right views and ideology? You are out here defending Kirk, a man who spread false and inciteful rhetoric about my faith. You want me to be ok with that and mourn him? Please.
Click to expand...
A well rounded response Zimbos, funding always removes impartiality on that we most definitely agree.

I'm not aligned to the views of Beretta (not claiming you're attempting any link), I don't recall right wingers cheering for George Floyds death, as he was essentially a nobody. Criticism come due to the overreaction meltdown from the left and general destruction of property that ensued. But I've still seen far more criticism from the left after the capital riots, then from the right for the complete social breakdown following the BLM event. Again, that could be algorithm capture.

Individual's face challenges, entire races do not. We have many successful people in this country and around the worlds from various racial demographics as testament. Any claim in Australia that all of any particular race face additional challenges has always been an attempt to pilfer from the taxpayer.

In terms of my voting preference, I general swing but admittingly gone Greens more than the rest. Not something I'm particularly proud of anymore after Sen Thorpes generally disgraceful behavior. Does that make me right, far right or far right extremist?
 
Dan_The_Red said:
A well rounded response Zimbos, funding always removes impartiality on that we most definitely agree.

I'm not aligned to the views of Beretta (not claiming you're attempting any link), I don't recall right wingers cheering for George Floyds death, as he was essentially a nobody. Criticism come due to the overreaction meltdown from the left and general destruction of property that ensued. But I've still seen far more criticism from the left after the capital riots, then from the right for the complete social breakdown following the BLM event. Again, that could be algorithm capture.

Individual's face challenges, entire races do not. We have many successful people in this country and around the worlds from various racial demographics as testament. Any claim in Australia that all of any particular race face additional challenges has always been an attempt to pilfer from the taxpayer.

In terms of my voting preference, I general swing but admittingly gone Greens more than the rest. Not something I'm particularly proud of anymore after Sen Thorpes generally disgraceful behavior. Does that make me right, far right or far right extremist?
Click to expand...
I was not conflating your views with his, just giving an example of what is also on your side. I feel like on both sides you will have the sensible and the extreme. The thing is, we also have to be willing to deal with our own extreme if we want our sides to be more amicable. I posted an example in here of someone celebrating George Floyds death. At the time of his death, the right was very quick to say things like, "he was a druggie" and "had priors" in an attempt to paint his death as something was justified in a sense.

I disagree with that statement. History tells us that races and religions as a whole face challenges. We can go as far back as slavery. That was not just a select black people issue, but an entire race issue. From my own experience, I can tell you that I have been rejected for things simple because of my name and race. I was once wrongly held up in Brisbane airport on suspicion of terrorism because of my name, no other reason. The officer even went through my Whatsapp and was asking me about conversations I had with my family members. Asked me which mosques I frequent and why. Asked me what my purpose was in Australia. I had an Australian passport and was simply returning home, but he questioned me on all these things. Even questioned my family business.

I honestly did not expect Greens. However, I worry about the swing part.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Muz
zimbos05 said:
I noticed you didn't respond to Muz's question around these statements, so I'll ask them.

- provide evidence of it in schools or in the curriculum
- why does drag story time affect you so much?
- should we do away with all holidays? Christmas, Easter, to father's Day, mother's day...
- does same sex marriage affect you in any way?
Click to expand...

Notice how these blokes can never explain themselves?

Farken crickets.


I'm still waiting for Dan to respond to this.

Who's forcing a belief system on you when pretty much all they're saying is you should respect peoples choices? On the one hand you are happy to accept religious people's beliefs but not some bloke in a dress that wants to use pronouns.

As for 'why does a person's life need to materially or mentally alter to simply agree it's not for government to force a belief system on anyone'?

Why?

You know what else were 'woke' issues in the past?

Abolition of slavery
The right for women to vote.
The right for aboriginals to vote.
Mixed marriages
Public education
8 hour workdays
Women working
Women at university
Social security
Smoking bans
Disability rights.
Civil rights

So yeah IT IS THE PLACE of the government, and activists, to agitate for change. If not them then who?
 
Last edited:
zimbos05 said:
I noticed you didn't respond to Muz's question around these statements, so I'll ask them.

- provide evidence of it in schools or in the curriculum
- why does drag story time affect you so much?
- should we do away with all holidays? Christmas, Easter, to father's Day, mother's day...
- does same sex marriage affect you in any way?
Click to expand...

- just because it's not in the curriculum, doesn't mean radical leftie professors & teachers aren't projecting their sick radical views on kids and students. Just need to go walk through modern day Universities and see how twisted people are.
- why cant you just leave kids alone? let them be kids, why do they need to be around grown men who dress as women, and think that's normal? its not.
- have your little mardi gra celebration for a day. why does it need to be a whole month? where every company goes woke, changes colours, sporting teams with rainbow laces bla bla bla. its nonsense.
- No, but marriage is a religious sacrament between a man and a woman. End of Story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top