I Don't Understand Why Democrats Keep Calling For Free Speech

[BackAgain]

Does this description fit JoeB131?

God complex​

A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct. Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges. Wikipedia

Yes. It does.

And they also tend to believe that any of their attempted personal “rebukes” mean anything to those they are addressing.

This is why I have frequently just referred to it as “JoeyBitch.”

 

[forkintheroad7]

Now, toddle off you perpetual loser.

You mean:

Now, toddle off you can't-spell, perpetual loser.

(He wrote Hear instead of HERE)

 

[BackAgain]

You mean:

Now, toddle off you can't-spell, perpetual loser.

(He wrote Hear instead of HERE)

Nobody has ever accused him of literacy.

 

[forkintheroad7]

Does this description fit JoeB131?

God complex​

A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct. Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges. Wikipedia

I speak as though my views are unquestionably correct because I have done my homework and based such a view on massive life experiences as well as said homework (research).

So yeh, it's not "opinion" with yours truly

I say this because I've been accused of thinking or acting like my OPINIONs are facts. No, my facts are facts... and my experiences back up those facts in spades

 

[forkintheroad7]

Nobody has ever accused him of literacy.

I've found that virtually all dims suffer from the same can't-do-the-English language malady.

They really are dims, ya know...

 

[Robert W]

I speak as though my views are unquestionably correct because I have done my homework and based such a view on massive life experiences as well as said homework (research).

So yeh, it's not "opinion" with yours truly

I say this because I've been accused of thinking or acting like my OPINIONs are facts. No, my facts are facts... and my experiences back up those facts in spades

Why do you assume you are being discussed?

 

[forkintheroad7]

Why do you assume you are being discussed?

I wasn't being discussed HERE but plenty of times b4, especially (wait... maybe ONLY) in Religion

I've been accused of such things as: not accepting others' beliefs (why would I if I find those beliefs are off?)

and acting like I am the only one who knows (whatever)

Well, I AM the only one here who knows what happened to the Catholic Church. Everyone else here either 1) has the intelligence to realize that maybe I do know something they don't - and doesn't comment.. or (and this appears to be most at this time) 2) they think I am in the wrong simply because... well, they just need me to be in the wrong..

sheez... So much for truth-seeking

 

[beagle9]

Free speech isn't free from the vitriol of someone who doesn't like what you're saying, ie. Tyler Robinson. It's freedom from being persecuted by the government, which Trump obviously doesn't agree with, otherwise he wouldn't be using the FCC to get Kimmel fired because he criticized him on his show.

Why did Maga attempt to kill Pelosi, why did Maga kill Melissa Horton and John Hoffman, why did Maga want to kidnap Gretchen Witmer? It's the only way they think they can win, by silencing the threat. See? Two can play at this game.

You have no proof that these people were actually MAGA's, Christian's, Conservatives, Republicans or other, but just because they might claim to be anything other than the sick human beings that they are, it doesn't make it so.

Until this nation truly starts investigating this stuff in the most transparent way possible, the conspiracy theories are going to constantly rule the day.

It starts with getting the truth and hard core facts from the FBI investigation that will tell everyone exactly what is going on.

Until the truth is told without waver, then and only then will we know to the extent of what the problem truly is, and how big it really is.

 

[krichton]

You have no proof that these people were actually MAGA's, Christian's, Conservatives, Republicans or other, but just because they might claim to be anything other than the sick human beings that they are, it doesn't make it so.

Until this nation truly starts investigating this stuff in the most transparent way possible, the conspiracy theories are going to constantly rule the day.

It starts with getting the truth and hard core facts from the FBI investigation that will tell everyone exactly what is going on.

Until the truth is told without waver, then and only then will we know to the extent of what the problem truly is, and how big it really is.

And what proof is there that Robinson, Mangione, or Crooks, etc. were leftists, democrats or antifa? Absolutely none, but does that stop everyone on the right from wildly claiming they're democrats, trans or blm? Helllll no. Heck, even POS Trump gets in on it and instigates much of it. So now you'll have take some of your own medicine.

How do you get to the bottom of anything when our own president is the one who often either conjures up or legitimizes the conspiracies he randomly hears?

 

[JoeB131]

Lol

Good to know.

Now, toddle off you perpetual loser.

Again, you commit the worst offense of USMB.

You're boring.

Does this description fit @JoeB131?

God complex​

A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. The person is also highly dogmatic in their views, meaning the person speaks of their personal opinions as though they were unquestionably correct. Someone with a god complex may exhibit no regard for the conventions and demands of society, and may request special consideration or privileges. Wikipedia

While it's amusing I've gotten under your skin to this degree, it probably has to do more with the fact that I share facts with you about your silly little cult that you aren't willing to hear.

Admittedly, it's probably cruel, like telling a dumb 10-year-old that Santa isn't real. But it's really something you should figure out for yourself.

 

[BackAgain]

Again, you commit the worst offense of USMB.

You're boring.

In your opinion which (as everyone knows) is something of no value.

 

[Robert W]

While it's amusing I've gotten under your skin to this degree, it probably has to do more with the fact that I share facts with you about your silly little cult that you aren't willing to hear.

Admittedly, it's probably cruel, like telling a dumb 10-year-old that Santa isn't real. But it's really something you should figure out for yourself.

When I treat you like you treat me, you claim you report me.

So you think you got under my skin? Joe your false claims get refuted by me and your skin was pierced from things you say back to me on this forum.

You love attacking religion except against Muslims. Are you working to join their Jihad?

 

[JoeB131]

When I treat you like you treat me, you claim you report me.

Naw, I report you when you make insulting and racist comments about my wife.

So you think you got under my skin? Joe your false claims get refuted by me and your skin was pierced from things you say back to me on this forum.

Actually, what refutation? Some of your claims are really bizarre, like somehow, polygamy was legal in the 19th century (no, it wasn't), so that made Joseph Smith banging those 14-year-olds okay, somehow?

Now, in principle, I have no problem with polygamy. As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult and not a child brought up in a cult and doesn't know any better.

You love attacking religion except against Muslims. Are you working to join their Jihad?

I also don't attack Shintoism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism that much, because 1) frankly, I don't know enough about them to make solid criticism, and 2) they aren't trying to impose their superstitions on me.

 

[BackAgain]

Actually, what refutation? Some of your claims are really bizarre, like somehow, polygamy was legal in the 19th century (no, it wasn't),

Actually, yes it was. Utah was a U.S. territory and it was “legal” in Utah until it was formally outlawed n the late 1890’s.

 

[Blaster]

It wouldn't bother me if they ruled that protesting is illegal.

 

[Robert W]

Actually, what refutation? Some of your claims are really bizarre, like somehow, polygamy was legal in the 19th century (no, it wasn't), so that made Joseph Smith banging those 14-year-olds okay, somehow?

Now, in principle, I have no problem with polygamy. As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult and not a child brought up in a cult and doesn't know any better.

You lied JoeB131

Polygamy was outlawed in the 1882 Edmonds act. Smith was brutally murdered earlier than that. Your imagination keeps causing you problems and so does your hate for a very loving and wonderful religion known as the Latter day Saints. Now the today purveyors of polygamy the Muslims you tell us you are fine with. We see through you JoeB131.

 

[Robert W]

Naw, I report you when you make insulting and racist comments about my wife.



Actually, what refutation? Some of your claims are really bizarre, like somehow, polygamy was legal in the 19th century (no, it wasn't), so that made Joseph Smith banging those 14-year-olds okay, somehow?

Now, in principle, I have no problem with polygamy. As long as everyone involved is a consenting adult and not a child brought up in a cult and doesn't know any better.



I also don't attack Shintoism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism that much, because 1) frankly, I don't know enough about them to make solid criticism, and 2) they aren't trying to impose their superstitions on me.

YOU began talking bad to me when you learned about my church. Then holy hell rained down on me by you. So I have mentioned issues with China and you reported me. What kind of jerk are you?

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, yes it was. Utah was a U.S. territory and it was “legal” in Utah until it was formally outlawed n the late 1890’s.

Um, it was illegal in Illinois, where Joseph Smith lived (Until the good people of Carthage, IL un-alived him).

I see why you don't try to make substantive arguments; you kind of suck at it.

As for why Utah outlawed it, it was because the Federal Government told them they couldn't have statehood until they did. Then the Mormon Prophet said God told him to end Polygamy. Funny how that works.

 

[JoeB131]

You lied JoeB131

Polygamy was outlawed in the 1882 Edmonds act. Smith was brutally murdered earlier than that. Your imagination keeps causing you problems and so does your hate for a very loving and wonderful religion known as the Latter day Saints. Now the today purveyors of polygamy the Muslims you tell us you are fine with. We see through you @JoeB131.

You are a little confused. The Edmonds Act only applied in the TERRITORIES, and was specifically passed because of what the Mormon Cult was doing in Utah.

Marriage was considered (and largely still is) a State matter. In the State of Illinois, Polygamy was very much against the law in 1845.

Marriage Laws

Emily Dickinson once said, “The heart wants what the heart wants . . .So, what happens when what the heart wants is generally considered taboo? Many may raise an eyebrow at the idea of marrying their cousin, but the practice was long considered commonplace for those entrenched in communities...

www.lawrencelore.org

The State of Illinois passed its first marriage law in 1819. Note that actual enforcement was somewhat complicated. Some types of marriages might be considered valid until voided by a court order. An example might be if both parties were drunk when deciding to get married. Other types of marriage are considered void even without a court order. Common law marriages have not been valid since 1905.

• Bigamy or plural marriages: Although popular in some parts of the world, plural marriages have been prohibited from 1819 to date. Bigamy had been punishable under Indiana Territorial laws by death. In 1819, Illinois reduced the sentence to “no less than 100 nor more than 1,000 lashes”—which would have probably resulted in death. It is doubtful if this was often enforced. One could always use the defense that you didn’t know if the first spouse was still alive. In later years penalties were much reduced.

YOU began talking bad to me when you learned about my church. Then holy hell rained down on me by you. So I have mentioned issues with China and you reported me. What kind of jerk are you?

My own special kind.

No, you didn't mention issues about China, you made specific insults towards Mrs. B131.

And please don't think you are special, I've been riffing on the LDS Cult since I got here in 2011, when you guys tried to fob the Weird Mormon Robot into the Presidency.

 

[Robert W]

Actually, what refutation? Some of your claims are really bizarre, like somehow, polygamy was legal in the 19th century (no, it wasn't), so that made Joseph Smith banging those 14-year-olds okay, somehow?

Show us the state laws at the time you claim Joseph Smith married a number of wives? Use official sources and not your crappy tone on me. It wasn't too many years back in some states it was legal to marry 12 year old's. And bet your dollar they had sex.

Even today 12 year old's have sex.