Trump May Not be a White Supremacist but He is In Fact a Bigot

[The Derp]

So, you failed to address that fact that being punished validates being a "victim" so that point stands.

In this instance, the only thing they're victims of is their own warped sense of belief. They make the choice to be bigots. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

You also failed to deny that you are open about wanting to deprive them their rights, so that "victim" point also stands.

What right are you talking about? Baking a cake is not an exercise of religion any more than surfing.

 

[The Derp]

I've never said anything about any of that.

So you wouldn't agree, then, that the central pillar to the faith of Christianity is God's forgiveness? Then what did Jesus die for?

I've said that your opinion on Christianity is irrelevant to the religious freedom of Christians.

I agree my opinion is irrelevant, nor is it even the issue here.

What's not irrelevant is Christians saying they are Christians because God forgives and Jesus died for their sins, yet in the same breath say that they will be harmed by baking a gay cake because God won't forgive.

 

[Correll]

You state that your acceptance of their opinion is not the issue, and then immediately explain why you disagree with their opinion, as though that is relevant..

You and they are the ones who evangelize Christianity as "God forgives your sins".

So if God forgives your sins, then how are you harmed by baking a gay cake?

This isn't an opinion issue because I don't have an opinion on the self-contradiction within your faith. And it's not an opinion that you contradict your own faith argument, you actively do that when you claim bakers are "harmed" by baking a cake.

So all the shit you spread about Christianity is bullshit because the central tenet of your faith, that God forgives, isn't true if you're saying bakers are harmed at baking gay cakes.

Interestingly enough, this shows that YOUR belief system is contradictory.

You're so confused you don't even know what the **** you're saying. This is bullshit.

Your disagreement with Christian dogma, as you understand it, is completely irrelevant.

The rest of your post is you being a bigot.

 

[Correll]

[So, you failed to address that fact that being punished validates being a "victim" so that point stands.

Oh, they're victims...not of the state or gay people, but of their own bigotry. They chose to not bake the cake, claiming it harms them despite them saying all the time that God forgives.

So how could it harm them if their God forgives? Does God forgive or not? If not, why are you marketing your faith under the slogan that God does? Is that deliberate? Are you deliberately deceiving people?

Your obvious hatred and bigotry against Christians makes a mockery of your pretended concern about the cake.

 

[Correll]

I've never said anything about any of that.

So then God doesn't forgive. OK, now that we've established that you don't think God forgives, the next obvious question is why then is faith being marketed as if God does? And the next obvious question from that is; if God doesn't forgive, and saying he does is false advertising, why are you even worshiping that God at all??

So you become a Christian because you believe God forgives, but then cry harm at baking a gay cake because...God doesn't forgive? So why are you all saying God does forgive if that's not true, and should you refund all those people who subscribed to your religion (and tithed) on the basis that you deceived them with false advertising?

Cause I get pretty pissed at companies when they market their products or service do something that they don't (like AT&T's cell "coverage").

My not commenting on a particular issue is not me agreeing with you.


That you pretended it was, was you being a liar and an asshole.

 

[Correll]

I've never said anything about any of that.

So you wouldn't agree, then, that the central pillar to the faith of Christianity is God's forgiveness? Then what did Jesus die for?

I've said that your opinion on Christianity is irrelevant to the religious freedom of Christians.

I agree my opinion is irrelevant, nor is it even the issue here.

What's not irrelevant is Christians saying they are Christians because God forgives and Jesus died for their sins, yet in the same breath say that they will be harmed by baking a gay cake because God won't forgive.

You agree that your opinion on dogma is irrelevant, then argue your opinion on dogma as a reason that bakers were wrong.


They say that liberalism is a form of mental illness.


I have rarely seen it so clearly as you show it to us.

 

[Correll]

The "sophistry" here is your defining the issue as though your opinion is fact.

It's not my opinion that you say God forgives. That's what you're saying. So if you are a Christian because God forgives and Jesus died for your sins, then how exactly is someone harmed by baking a gay cake?

Actually it is your opinion that I say God Forgives.

And you are wrong.


I never say that.

 

[Correll]

I get the idea that you hate Christianity and Christians by your constant need to belittle and insult them, not to mention your desire to jail them, and to deprive them of their right to religious freedom.

Again, I am singling out Christians in this thread because it's Christians who say one thing about their faith as it relates to gay cakes, then say the complete opposite in the same breath.

God forgives and that's why you're a Christian...yet God doesn't forgive baking a cake. So then God doesn't forgive, which would mean the reason you are a Christian is a lie.

I have not asked you to "suspend disbelief".

Yes you have. You've asked me to suspend my disbelief to accommodate your belief in God, A), and B) you're also asking me to suspend disbelief that God forgives except when it comes to baking gay cakes.

You SHOULD be able to respect the rights of people you disagree with. If you are not a bad person.

This isn't a religious rights issue, this is about inherent contradictions in the faith you are using as the pillar of your anti-gay cake argument.

No, because you are so full of hate.

You won't even talk about that contradiction. It's like you're allergic to it. You evangelize people should be Christians because God will forgive them for their sins...but then you say God won't forgive the "sin" of baking a gay cake. So how is that bigotry not a complete contradiction of your faith?

Your opinion on christian dogma is irrelevant to the issue, which IS religious freedom.


The rest of your post is you lying about what I said, and you sharing your hatred.

 

[Correll]

You've stated that you don't want them to "worship" in public. IF that wish of yours was enforced, that would be denying them their Right to Religious Freedom.

How so? You need to be in public to pray and have faith? If God universally forgives, what does it matter? You're saying God doesn't forgive? Well that runs in the face of how Christianity is being marketed today. The only BS is from you clowns who say God forgives except when God doesn't. Yet you are a Christian specifically because God forgives. That's the whole ******* point. How come I have to explain your faith to you? Because you're a bigot. You just hate gay people and are seeking any way you can to justify your bigotry. But that's progress because at least you recongize the inherent hideousness of your position, which is why you have to make excuses and allowances for it. You're not as clever as you think.

Well, that was a lot of hate from you that had nothing to do with your question.

And being forced to hide a part of your life behind closed doors is not being Free.

It is not credible that you do not understand that. Stop your lying.

Your overly sensitive feelings do not trump their right to Religious Freedom.

How is not baking a cake "religious freedom"? [/QUOTE]

That has been repeatedly explained to you by people more versed and concerned about Christian Theology, and if you choose to ignore it, that is just you rationalizing your bigotry.

YOur cutting of my phrase out of context does not change the fact that you are the one that ignored the fact that Marty had already addressed your position and you failed to reply to that, and instead just re asserted your position.That's a logical fallacy and your post is invalid.

I quoted your post 100% accurately. So you don't get to try to skirt away on that. Secondly, no, Marty McFuckup didn't address my position because my position is that your faith is inherently flawed if you're saying baking a cake isn't something God will forgive, despite evangelizing your faith that God forgives you no matter what. That shit is the fallacy here. And I think you even recognize that, which is why you exercise sophistry.[/QUOTE]



Yes he did, over and over again, and so have I.


You are either delusional or a liar.

Mmm, no. If it were not True, then perhaps, "insecurity" might be a reason I said it.

No, you said it because you're full of shit. That's why you said it. [/QUOTE]


NOpe. Not insecure at all. Please try again.

But your claim that "insecurity" is the reason, is just you lying.

Well, since we know God forgives all, according to your dogma, then God will forgive the gays for being gay, and the baker for baking a gay cake. But you're saying these people are harmed by baking these gay cakes. How are they harmed? Because their God won't forgive them? So if their God won't forgive them for that, then why are they saying God forgives? And if that contradiction is ignored, the only thing left is the bigotry and that bigotry comes from repressed sexuality and insecurity.[/QUOTE]


That was nothing but irrelevant ranting hatred on your part, bigot.

THe obvious reason I said it, was because it was true, and I wanted to laugh at you and your debating skills, or lack there off.

Nothing you've said it true...just juvenile attempts to justify inherent contradictions in the argument, then running away from those contradictions when light is shone upon them.[/QUOTE]


NOpe. What I've said is true. Marty is crushing you like a bug, and you are either too dim to understand that, or too dishonest to admit it.

 

[sakinago]

‘ESPN on Tuesday issued a statement disavowing host Jemele Hill’s tweets calling President Donald Trump “a white supremacist,” “a bigot” and “unqualified and unfit to be president.”’

ESPN disavows Jemele Hill's tweets calling Donald Trump a 'white supremacist'

Trump is in fact a bigot – and although ‘qualified’ per the Constitution, Trump is indeed unfit to be president.

I'm done with Espn, I run a fantasy league through Espn for the past 6 or so years. I can't change it this season without all the other owners getting pissed with a good bit of money on the line, but next season...best believe we're making a change to yahoo. I've deleted my Espn apps, and sent them a message on why. I also said I'm done with Disney, universal studios is just as fun (I think more fun) once your kids are around 8 or older. No more paying for Disney movies in theaters, I'll wait till they come out on redbox, they aren't gonna get a lot of revenue from that. Sure I'm just one guy, but if more people join in, they'll get the message. That message being stop throwing the rational Americans under the bus by constantly catering to the few irrational but loud Americans. Stop reporting with a very clear slant against one whole side of the country. Sports is an escape for people, shits bad enough watching the news, we want to get away from the bickering. It's like going on vacation but having to take work calls half the time you're sitting on the beach. STOP IT!

It's not even so much the Jemelle quotes, though that was just icing on the cake of a decision I already made. ESPNs slant has been very very clear, and on their radio stations (since their ratings have been steadily dropping across the board) caller after caller will ring in and tell them it's because of this slant they adhere too, and they dismiss it, ignore and mock the caller, claim they're not biased, and say declining ratings are for different reasons. HEY JACKASSES, your customers are telling you where you are ******* up, and what's upsetting them, you're not listening, BC you don't think they're worth listening too. Either because you don't give weight to anything they say or how they feel, or you don't want to deal with the mess from the other side of the few SJWs with nothing better to do after their humanities class. Yet when another caller calls in, claims that the entire NFL owners are racist and are working together to keep kapernick down to make the others fall in line, they entertain that caller, and say they might be on to something. The mere fact that they actually thought an Asian man named Robert Lee, would be associated with general lee, just goes to show how their thinking works, where their bias is. WHO THINKS OF THAT. WHO THINKS THAT SOMEONE WOULD BE "SENSITIVE" to that (unless they were a little sensitive themselves). AND WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD CATER TO THE FEW MORONS, that 99% of the rest of the country would agree they're idiots. STOP CATERING.

But moving back on to jemelle, she pissed me off even before this, taking a swipe at Dez Bryant...because he's not kneeling. Mind you this was in response to a pizza shop worker that tweeted that dez just gave them a 100$ tip, but they still don't like the cowboys, and dez tweeted back with lol emojis not going back to that place, obviously jokingly. And she just had to squeeze in her agenda into that situation, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH HER AGENDA. So because he's not protesting exactly the way you want him too...he's a sell out?!? An Uncle Tom!?! She should've been fired for that, she's all for protesting but only if it's what she cares about and the way she wants it to be done, damned with anything else outside of that. Very clearly she has an agenda, and she's working it in whenever she can very blatantly, and in the rudest, most disrespectful way possible to literally half of the country. Yet they fire shilling for making a comment about Muslim extremism...not muslims, but extremism. And that's their prerogative to fire him since they don't want him getting political, but they don't fire jemelle for comments 10 times as worse...Very very very clear bias. Guess what Espn doesn't care about half the country. They pay lip service to it, but their actions are LOUD AND CLEAR. It's time to boycott, until they start listening. And start by going after Mickey Mouse.

Oh and a little more ranting, how about that damn soccer announcer whose second language is English they decided was a good idea to throw into the lions den, all for the sake of diversity. They just HAD to throw him in there...along with the lady announcer, which I don't care as long as she's good at her job (I have yet to hear her) but they are clearly forcing "diversity" for the sake of diversity...to make political social statements...not to deliver good reporting on sports, which should be their primary goal, it isn't.

 

[Correll]

Noting in that implies any loss of Right to Religious Freedom by Christians.

Right, they can worship as they want. But stretching the bounds of what "worship" means is where my point of contention lies. That, and the inherent contradiction within the argument itself and I'm going to destroy it in three sentences;

1. They're Christians because they believe God forgives and Jesus died for their sins.
2. They say that baking a gay cake causes harm to their religious beliefs.
3. But their religious beliefs maintain that God forgives, so where's the harm?

A religious argument destroyed in three sentences.

It has been repeatedly explained to you that your theological complaints about Christianity is irrelevant to the Right of Religious Freedom.


You have done NOTHING to counter that point, other than to repeat your Theological complaint over and over again.


You are either very stupid, or purposefully using the Logical Fallacy of Proof By Assertion, as a propaganda technique.



And that has been repeatedly pointed out.


You are stone cold busted and your refusal to admit that, is just you being a dishonest person.


A fact that you have demonstrated with other lies in this thread.



Since you have demonstrated that you are dishonest, we have to consider if anything you say is what you really think or just shit you say for debating tactic reasons.

 

[Correll]

You lefties fined the shit out of some one for not baking a cake.

It wasn't leftists, it was the courts. And rightly so. The fine was too lenient as far as I'm concerned.

That victimizing them.

They made themselves victims when they pretended there was a religious basis for their bigotry.

And you are open about wanting to deprive them of the right to practice their religion openly in public.

Explain how baking a cake is "practicing religion". Baking a cake is practicing baking. Secondly, I thought their God forgives them...so how are they harmed by something their God forgives?

All already repeatedly addressed. Stop being a liar.


Except for the court part.

Yes, courts. Lefties has infested our courts.

 

[Correll]

Again, not my faith.

You're here arguing on their behalf, so it becomes your faith and just because you realized that it's a shit belief system now doesn't give you license to skate away from culpability for your defense of them.

Arguing in favor of someone's right to a religious belief does not mean that that faith becomes yours.


That was an absurd argument, and I don't believe that you really believe it.


I think you are lying just to try to put Marty on the defensive, since you can actually refute his argument.


Standard dishonest vile lefty tactic.

 

[Correll]

THat's an interesting claim, that a religious belief has to be proven before it is covered by Freedom of Religion.

Yes, because otherwise you could just do anything you want and pretend that it's a religious belief. Which is what these Christians are doing here.

And it's not about being "proven", it's about proving harm to your religious beliefs. Religious beliefs that dictate the deity worshiped forgives you of your sins, absolves you of guilt, and whose son died for you. If you're now saying all that is bullshit, then all religious claims based on that dogma are bullshit too.

Care to support that claim, with a link to a law or a ruling?

Loving v. Virginia.

I've reviewed that decision and seen nothing in it that supports your claim about religions having to be proven right to have Religious Freedom.

Indeed, it seems that you just dishonestly pulled that out of your dishonest ass, to just throw into the slot for "rebuttal", not that there is any real value to it.

 

[Correll]

I saw nothing addressing whether discrimination was easy or hard to prove, on topic at all.

Discrimination is very easy to prove. You all even admit you're discriminating, but you pretend it's OK because of your religion. A religion that seems rife with contradictions that undermine your case for discrimination. So you just avoid it like the whiny little bitches you are.

You state the discrimination is easy to prove, and then once again provide nothing to support that claim.


You put words AFTER the statement, as though they were a supporting argument, but they weren't.


They were just more anti-Christian bigotry from you.

 

[Correll]

You state that your acceptance of their opinion is not the issue, and then immediately explain why you disagree with their opinion, as though that is relevant.

Sooooo, it's an opinion that God forgives your sins? And it's my opinion? No. It's your dogma that says that. So if God forgives your sins, why wouldn't God forgive baking a gay cake?

And even though it has been repeatedly explained to you why your dogma complaints are not relevant, and you have been completely unable to refute that point,

here you are still pushing that same dogmaic complaint.

 

[The Derp]

Your disagreement with Christian dogma, as you understand it, is completely irrelevant.

Dogma doesn't supersede the law. But at least you're admitting it's dogma. And what is dogma if not self-inflicted sophistry?

 

[The Derp]

Your obvious hatred and bigotry against Christians makes a mockery of your pretended concern about the cake.

How am I mocking or being bigoted against Christianity by pointing out that what Christians preach and what they practice are polar opposites? Does God not forgive?

 

[The Derp]

My not commenting on a particular issue is not me agreeing with you.

Your comment seems to skate right by the obvious and overt contradiction between your faith and your feelings. How can you say God forgives if God doesn't forgive baking gay cakes?

 

[The Derp]

You agree that your opinion on dogma is irrelevant, then argue your opinion on dogma as a reason that bakers were wrong.

I'm pointing out that what the bakers say about baking gay cakes contradicts the underlying tenet of their dogma. My opinion is irrelevant to that...what is relevant, though, is discussing the contradiction. That's the conversation you don't seem to want to have because you recognize it pulls at a thread that can unravel the whole ******* thing.

If God doesn't forgive, why are these people Christians?!?!?!