Something I Don't Understand About Liberals...

[editec]

are you deliberately being idiotic? ive said at least twice that there are anarchists on both sides of the spectrum

Seems to me the problem is that there are people who call themselves all sorts of things they are NOT.

You cannot be an anarchist IF your ultimate goal is the establishment of ANY FORM of government.

But in fact there are people who call themselves anarchists of left and fight persuasions whose ultimate goal is to impose some form of government AFTER they destroy the one in existence now.

They're not anarchists, despite whatever they call themselves.

 

[Care4all]

"They" don't. There have been something like 2-3 abortionist killings/bombings in the US. Each case has, I believe, been the case of a crazed individual.

The conservative Christian stance is that all the innocent and defenseless should be protected, and that one of the most heinous crimes of all, a crime against the Holy Spirit and one which it says in the Bible is particularly unforgiveable, is the taking of the life of an innocent. It is considered the worst sin by God.

But taking life is wrong, period, and those who do it in the name of the innocents are also in the wrong.

WOW that's a real STRETCH Allie.....you say that abortions is THE ONE SIN THAT IS UNFORGIVEABLE?

Never, ever was I taught such a thing about the one "unforgiveable sin" against the holy spirit....

WHERE do you get this from? Verse please....

Care

 

[Dr Grump]

... so why is it that liberal "anti-war" people are always the most numerous and "VIOLENT" protesters on the planet? Why do they protest for an end to wars and for peace by using violence and destruction while protesting? Can anyone explain that?

The biggest problem you have Pale is that you don't understand much about anything except how to tune a Harley. Not that that's a bad thing, but mayhap you best stick to what you're best at, and leave the politiking to the adults...

 

[rayboyusmc]

It's because they're hypocrites, with a desire to control those who they see as less important and valuable than themselves.

Looking in the mirror as you write this?

There are liberal assholes and there are conservative assholes. Anyone who tries to condemn an entire group is either very stupid or very bigotted.

Get a life, Ali. We don't hate you. We just happen to see the world differently than you do. And for the last 8 years it hasn't been liberals who screwed up our economy and our country. It was a group of Neo Conservative who had dreams of glory but not the brains to back them up.

 

[Silence]

obviously you never attacked a woman !

as a lib and a woman I saw the humor so thanks for the laugh

 

[Odd1_Out]

How about the race protests---worse than them too ?

Race protests? Well, I've never actually heard this term before, but I suppose you mean the people who were fighting to keep schools segregated. That was an evil cause to begin with, and it certainly wasn't liberals who were doing the protesting. Thank you for bringing up another heinous cause that the right got behind in this country.

Also, I can't find the post made by this Ravi person anywhere, but in response to liberals pretending to be Christians and bombing the abortion clinics. Its adorable that you think religiousity and morality are the same thing. So, in the world according to you, the Crusades never happened, no one was burnt at the stake during the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials never occurred, the KKK doesn't exist, the Protestants and Catholics were never at war in Ireland, and ...need I say more. Christianity, historically, has been just as violent as radical Islam is today. It may not be something you want to hear, and I doubt it is something you will ever admit to, but if you would take the time to actually study religious wars and the horrible injustices committed by religious people, you'll find out that it is true. I'm not saying all religious people are like that, certainly not, but you can't discount history just because it doesn't fit with your beliefs.

 

[dilloduck]

Race protests? Well, I've never actually heard this term before, but I suppose you mean the people who were fighting to keep schools segregated. That was an evil cause to begin with, and it certainly wasn't liberals who were doing the protesting. Thank you for bringing up another heinous cause that the right got behind in this country.

Google Watts or Rodney King--- or are you claiming that race riots are not a form of protest ?

 

[Odd1_Out]

Google Watts or Rodney King--- or are you claiming that race riots are not a form of protest ?

Violence breeds violence, and both of those incidents were the fault of the police. Yes, rioting is a form of protest.

 

[dilloduck]

Violence breeds violence, and both of those incidents were the fault of the police. Yes, rioting is a form of protest.

I guess abortion is pretty violent then if it led to abortion clinic bombings, huh?
Violence breeds violence.

 

[Odd1_Out]

I guess abortion is pretty violent then if it led to abortion clinic bombings, huh?
Violence breeds violence.

Just reaching for anything now, aren't you? Violence breeds violence is typically used in relation to warfare and cases of self-defense. You can use it to refer to a medical procedure that you don't agree with, but you would also be stating that you condone the bombings and the killing of doctors who perform abortions, and if that is the case and you still consider yourself pro-life, then you are a complete and utter hypocrite.

Remember: The largest protest rally in the history of the United States was in defense of Roe v Wade, and attended by over 1 million people in Washington DC. Abortions are legal and that's never going to change. As Abraham Lincoln said, "Revolutions go not backwards." So, get over it.

 

[SFC_TMC915]

Just reaching for anything now, aren't you? Violence breeds violence is typically used in relation to warfare and cases of self-defense. You can use it to refer to a medical procedure that you don't agree with, but you would also be stating that you condone the bombings and the killing of doctors who perform abortions, and if that is the case and you still consider yourself pro-life, then you are a complete and utter hypocrite.

Remember: The largest protest rally in the history of the United States was in defense of Roe v Wade, and attended by over 1 million people in Washington DC. Abortions are legal and that's never going to change. As Abraham Lincoln said, "Revolutions go not backwards." So, get over it.

I never quite understood the term "pro-life." I'm all for life, but more importantly, I'm PRO CHOICE!!!!!!! The term pro-life insinuates that those of us who believe that abortion is a personal, moral and health issue rather than a political issue don't value life. Are you kidding me? Maybe the term "pro-life" should be changed to "no choice"?

 

[Ravi]

I never quite understood the term "pro-life." I'm all for life, but more importantly, I'm PRO CHOICE!!!!!!! The term pro-life insinuates that those of us who believe that abortion is a personal, moral and health issue rather than a political issue don't value life. Are you kidding me? Maybe the term "pro-life" should be changed to "no choice"?

I always prefer calling them the Forced-birthers.

 

[dilloduck]

Just reaching for anything now, aren't you? Violence breeds violence is typically used in relation to warfare and cases of self-defense. You can use it to refer to a medical procedure that you don't agree with, but you would also be stating that you condone the bombings and the killing of doctors who perform abortions, and if that is the case and you still consider yourself pro-life, then you are a complete and utter hypocrite.

Remember: The largest protest rally in the history of the United States was in defense of Roe v Wade, and attended by over 1 million people in Washington DC. Abortions are legal and that's never going to change. As Abraham Lincoln said, "Revolutions go not backwards." So, get over it.

Listen---you claimed that bombing abortion clinics were the most violent form of protest. I think thousands of people rioting, killing and buring are moreso.

 

[Odd1_Out]

Listen---you claimed that bombing abortion clinics were the most violent form of protest. I think thousands of people rioting, killing and buring are moreso.

Yes, but I only made that comment in defense of anti-war protesters, of whom I have been one. Those bombings were just the most violent that I could think of off the top of my head at that moment. If I recall, it took you more than one try before you decided on the race riots.

Sorry, for the tone I took last time. But if someone uses my own words against me, in what seems to be a defense of an action that I find appalling, I will strike back. Call it human nature.

 

[editec]

So, in the world according to you, the Crusades never happened,

One of the things I think some of you do NOT understand about the Crusades is that CHRITENDOM was attempting to TAKE BACK the lands that they'd lost to...

to?

Anyone?

Anyone?

The ISLAMIC Jihadists.

So, while I can get on baord with those of you who point out the excesses of Christendom, (there are many and that history can be extrmely bleak) I am at a loss to understand why you think the Crusades were evil.

Right up unil the XXTH century, the dominate religion in Syria and lebanon was what religion?

CHRISTIAN, folks, Christian.

Learn your history for christ's sakes, folks. At least get a basic framework of what happened and when.

Otherwise you will forever be the tools of today's propagandists.

 

[Odd1_Out]

One of the things I think some of you do NOT understand about the Crusades is that CHRITENDOM was attempting to TAKE BACK the lands that they'd lost to...

to.........

The ISLAMIC Jihadists.

So, while I can get on baord with those of you who point out the excesses of Christendom, (there are many and that history can be extrmely bleak) I am at a loss to understand why you think the Crusades were evil.

Right up unil the XXTH century, the dominate religion in Syria and lebanon was what religion?

CHRISTIAN, folks, Christian.

Learn your history for christ's sakes, folks. At least get a basic framework of what happened and when.

First off, the word "jihad" didn't even originate until after the crusades, so those Muslims were NOT "jihadists", but that's beside the point.
The crusades were evil because...
A) The Christians had no "special" rights to that land. That claim, if you believe in what the Bible says, belongs to the Jews.
B) Any war fought in the "name of God" is horribly misguided, and who ever starts it is incredibly conceited to think god is on their side in the cause of slaughtering people (Thou shalt not kill, sound familiar to anyone).
C) They weren't just going after the Holy Land, it extended beyond that, so the whole "noble cause" thing is a moot point.
D) Just as much raping, pillaging, and plundering took place during the crusades as any other war.
E) The Children's Crusade.

Those are the reasons I can think of off the top of my head.

Also, you appear to consider Muslims evil, which is unfortunate. However, Muslims weren't the only ones slaughtered during the Crusades; jews, pagans, and even other Christians were the victims of the Crusaders attacks.

I won't be so condescending as to tell you to "learn your history," I just want to clarify that I know mine. The fact that the Christians once owned the land is of no consequence. The United States would certainly not be okay with any of the European powers coming over here to reclaim the parts of the United States they once owned. Its the same principle.

 

[AllieBaba]

I haven't read the new stuff on this thread, but this is interesting because I was just thinking about this last week.

Constantinople (AKA Jerusalem) was a ROMAN city, ruled over by a CHRISTIAN caesar....and the MUSLIMS sacked and took over the city.

So I don't quite understand this crap about the Christian crusaders "wrongfully" taking the city back. It was a Roman/Christian stronghold, won by the Muslims, then taken back.

The whole song and dance about Crusaders wiping them out without justification is a bunch of crap, and a complete fallacy. This is why it was called the "Crusades". It was simply a response to an act of war by Muslims.

And I've listened to Jihadists, and Muslims, state openly that they will hunt down Jews and Christians and slaughter them, wherever they hide. They say the rocks and bushes will point them out, and it DOESN'T MATTER WHERE THEY GO.

Also would like to point out (and as I said haven't read the whole thread yet, but it seems apropos) that the Muslim religion is the only global religion that preaches global domination.

 

[del]

I haven't read the new stuff on this thread, but this is interesting because I was just thinking about this last week.

Constantinople (AKA Jerusalem) was a ROMAN city, ruled over by a CHRISTIAN caesar....and the MUSLIMS sacked and took over the city.

So I don't quite understand this crap about the Christian crusaders "wrongfully" taking the city back. It was a Roman/Christian stronghold, won by the Muslims, then taken back.

The whole song and dance about Crusaders wiping them out without justification is a bunch of crap, and a complete fallacy. This is why it was called the "Crusades". It was simply a response to an act of war by Muslims.

And I've listened to Jihadists, and Muslims, state openly that they will hunt down Jews and Christians and slaughter them, wherever they hide. They say the rocks and bushes will point them out, and it DOESN'T MATTER WHERE THEY GO.

Also would like to point out (and as I said haven't read the whole thread yet, but it seems apropos) that the Muslim religion is the only global religion that preaches global domination.

um, Constantinople and Jerusalem are 2 separate cities about 700 miles apart.

Constantinople fell in 1453, about 200 years after the Crusades ended.

other than these slight factual errors, you certainly seem to be an expert in the field.

carry on.

 

[Odd1_Out]

Constantinople (AKA Jerusalem) was a ROMAN city, ruled over by a CHRISTIAN caesar....and the MUSLIMS sacked and took over the city.

I already addressed why I thought the Crusades were wrongful. Mainly, I just find all religious wars to be distainful and a contradiction in terms. I'm sure the Christians had their justifications, but none of those that I have ever heard changed my opinion on the matter. Again, they didn't just go after the holy land or Muslims.

I would however like to point out from this last post that Constantinople and Jerusalem are not and have never been the same city, in fact they are well over 500 miles away from each other.

A little historical geography lesson for you, courtesy of all the Ancient History books I read in high school: Constantinople, currently Istanbul in Turkey, prior to being renamed Constantinople was called Nova Roma, and prior to that it was Byzantium the capital of the Byzantine Empire.

 

[busara]

um, Constantinople and Jerusalem are 2 separate cities about 700 miles apart.

Constantinople fell in 1453, about 200 years after the Crusades ended.

other than these slight factual errors, you certainly seem to be an expert in the field.

carry on.

the 4th crusade sacked constantinople when it was still a christian city and set up what is known as the latin empire.