The Regressive Left and Islam -- What is happening here?

[LoneLaugher]

I just looked up the Rawls guy. I had never heard the name before. The dude published his great work in 1971. How the **** can anyone say he is the most influential liberal political philosopher?

Talk about hoity-youth elitest bullshit.

You and your lib friends talk Rawls and play trivia? My ass.

Ask him to discuss Kazanistan, Rawl's imagined Islamic society.

Nah. I don't care about Rawls.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

 

[Tehon]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

 

[Tehon]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

Yes, but what about his philosophy in particular do you find relevant?

 

[Coyote]

Electrocuted any dogs lately?

.

You are utterly beneath contempt.

Like I said...if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. You are certainly very thin skinned despite all the vitriole you spew.

You are no liberal. To repeat: Your version of "liberal" includes a whole lot of hate for innocent people based only on their religion.

That is regressive.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

It's beginning to look like you are simply name dropping. Rawls is not liberalism.

This thread is about the supposed behavior of "regressive lefties" when it comes to tolerating Islam but not Christianity. This thread is not about a the work of liberal thinkers. Thus far...you haven't convinced me that you know much about the subject of this thread.

And....unless you start telling us why Rawls is so vital to this discussion, I might start to think you don't know much about him either.

 

[Coyote]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

 

[Norman]

Agreed, but I do think there is still a very healthy amount of traditional liberals, at least I hope so.

These people are illiberal, a distortion.
.

I hang out with liberals.

But, of course, those I hang out with are well educated. Any mention of J.S. Mill or John Rawls, and there is understanding instead of a bunch of belligerent and childish sticking of the fingers in the ear with a "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah"

I hang out with liberals...but...they DO things.

Electrocuted any dogs lately?

.

You are utterly beneath contempt.

Like I said...if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. You are certainly very thin skinned despite all the vitriole you spew.

You are no liberal. To repeat: Your version of "liberal" includes a whole lot of hate for innocent people based only on their religion.

That is regressive.

If their religion is that of intolerance there is nothing "regressive" about it.

You make it seem as if there is no connection. That is not the case... Somehow this standard seems to disappear when talking about Christians, then their generally harmless beliefs are the worse than Hitler himself.

 

[Coyote]

Agreed, but I do think there is still a very healthy amount of traditional liberals, at least I hope so.

These people are illiberal, a distortion.
.

I hang out with liberals.

But, of course, those I hang out with are well educated. Any mention of J.S. Mill or John Rawls, and there is understanding instead of a bunch of belligerent and childish sticking of the fingers in the ear with a "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah"

I hang out with liberals...but...they DO things.

Electrocuted any dogs lately?

.

You are utterly beneath contempt.

Like I said...if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. You are certainly very thin skinned despite all the vitriole you spew.

You are no liberal. To repeat: Your version of "liberal" includes a whole lot of hate for innocent people based only on their religion.

That is regressive.

If their religion is that of intolerance there is nothing "regressive" about it.

You make it seem as if there is no connection. That is not the case...

Because the tolerance and practices of the religion vary around the world.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

and don't forget Marwan Barghouti!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

It's beginning to look like you are simply name dropping. Rawls is not liberalism.

This thread is about the supposed behavior of "regressive lefties" when it comes to tolerating Islam but not Christianity. This thread is not about a the work of liberal thinkers. Thus far...you haven't convinced me that you know much about the subject of this thread.

And....unless you start telling us why Rawls is so vital to this discussion, I might start to think you don't know much about him either.

You told me you are completely ignorant and are quite happy to remain that way.

Why should I prove anything to you when you are so belligerently resistant to the mere notion of learning what liberalism IS?

 

[Coyote]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

and don't forget Marwan Barghouti!

Sorry dude, unlike your anti-semitic animal torturing hero - I never said I admired Barghouti.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

and don't forget Marwan Barghouti!

Sorry dude, unlike your anti-semitic animal torturing hero - I never said I admired Barghouti.

You are an utter lair, though, with an underhanded agenda.

 

[Coyote]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

and don't forget Marwan Barghouti!

Sorry dude, unlike your anti-semitic animal torturing hero - I never said I admired Barghouti.

You are an utter lair, though, with an underhanded agenda.

I've clearly stated who I admire and why and most are liberals - not academics, but people who have done things to actively improve the world. You take Barghouti completely out of the context of the conversation in which he was being discussed. Why don't you crawl back to your "lair".

 

[Tehon]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

It's beginning to look like you are simply name dropping. Rawls is not liberalism.

This thread is about the supposed behavior of "regressive lefties" when it comes to tolerating Islam but not Christianity. This thread is not about a the work of liberal thinkers. Thus far...you haven't convinced me that you know much about the subject of this thread.

And....unless you start telling us why Rawls is so vital to this discussion, I might start to think you don't know much about him either.

You told me you are completely ignorant and are quite happy to remain that way.

Why should I prove anything to you when you are so belligerently resistant to the mere notion of learning what liberalism IS?

I told you no such thing. In fact I asked you to educate me. Tell us about Kazanistan.

You brought Rawls up multiple times during this discussion. Surely you had a reason. Enlighten me.

 

[Norman]

Agreed, but I do think there is still a very healthy amount of traditional liberals, at least I hope so.

These people are illiberal, a distortion.
.

I hang out with liberals.

But, of course, those I hang out with are well educated. Any mention of J.S. Mill or John Rawls, and there is understanding instead of a bunch of belligerent and childish sticking of the fingers in the ear with a "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah"

I hang out with liberals...but...they DO things.

Electrocuted any dogs lately?

.

You are utterly beneath contempt.

Like I said...if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. You are certainly very thin skinned despite all the vitriole you spew.

You are no liberal. To repeat: Your version of "liberal" includes a whole lot of hate for innocent people based only on their religion.

That is regressive.

If their religion is that of intolerance there is nothing "regressive" about it.

You make it seem as if there is no connection. That is not the case...

Because the tolerance and practices of the religion vary around the world.

So then you at least admit that Islam is a problem somewhere?

What about your view of Christianity? Does that not include a whole lot of hate?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Of course. Anyone who doesn't care who John Rawls is or what he wrote is ignorant regarding who John Rawls was and what he wrote. I don't find that to be such a horrible thing.

The liberals I admire are the ones like Andrew Goodman, James Chaney and Michael Shwermer. They actually went out and made a difference in the world.

Another thing the extreme left and extreme right have in common -- they take pride in their ignorance.

Why do you think Rawls is relevant to this discussion? Educate me.

Why is liberalism important in a thread about the differences between liberal and regressive?

Gee, I don't know?

It's beginning to look like you are simply name dropping. Rawls is not liberalism.

This thread is about the supposed behavior of "regressive lefties" when it comes to tolerating Islam but not Christianity. This thread is not about a the work of liberal thinkers. Thus far...you haven't convinced me that you know much about the subject of this thread.

And....unless you start telling us why Rawls is so vital to this discussion, I might start to think you don't know much about him either.

You told me you are completely ignorant and are quite happy to remain that way.

Why should I prove anything to you when you are so belligerently resistant to the mere notion of learning what liberalism IS?

Completely ignorant? No sir. I'm ignorant regarding Rawls. You think Rawls is liberalism. I think that notion is funny.

 

[Coyote]

Agreed, but I do think there is still a very healthy amount of traditional liberals, at least I hope so.

These people are illiberal, a distortion.
.

I hang out with liberals.

But, of course, those I hang out with are well educated. Any mention of J.S. Mill or John Rawls, and there is understanding instead of a bunch of belligerent and childish sticking of the fingers in the ear with a "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah"

I hang out with liberals...but...they DO things.

Electrocuted any dogs lately?

.

You are utterly beneath contempt.

Like I said...if you can't take it, then don't dish it out. You are certainly very thin skinned despite all the vitriole you spew.

You are no liberal. To repeat: Your version of "liberal" includes a whole lot of hate for innocent people based only on their religion.

That is regressive.

If their religion is that of intolerance there is nothing "regressive" about it.

You make it seem as if there is no connection. That is not the case...

Because the tolerance and practices of the religion vary around the world.

So then you at least admit that Islam is a problem somewhere?

What about your view of Christianity? Does that not include a whole lot of hate?

Nope. I don't hate Christians either.