|
|
|
|
#1
12-02-2015, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
You claim muslims dont condem terrorisim
Yet neither do americans.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ef3_story.html They aint no different than you or I they just believe in a different ghost story. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#4
12-02-2015, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
I liked this part:
"Second, conservatives have blamed Black Lives Matter protesters for inspiring the killing of police officers; what makes my critique fair and theirs not? The answer is pretty simple actually. BLM has explicitly called for the death of police officers. Republican presidential candidates have not. On topic: I don't follow how this relates to condemning terrorism. Republican candidates as well as a number of anti-abortion organizations have condemned the attack. Also, even if we take a step back and assumed for a moment that the attack had not been condemned. How would that justify other random acts of violence? | ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
12-02-2015, 03:06 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#6
12-04-2015, 07:59 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Gnawlunzs Phrogphry
Master Angler, Baker, Cadger, Drunk "If you can't eat a frog, then eat two." | |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
12-02-2015, 02:42 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
And the point was never as simplistic as "they don't condemn terrorism", but that they have incompatible cultural values on a wide range of issues ranging from free speech, women's rights, due process, the rule of law, etc, and they tend to resist assimilation. Take all the hate, retardation, and backwardness associated with Republicans on this one issue, abortion, and multiply it by 10, and you get something like Sharia law. If anything, this is an example of why religious-motivated values tend to be shit values, Christian or Muslim. You see how annoying it is when they cling violently to one belief like this, imagine if it were 20 of them. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#8
12-02-2015, 05:58 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
The only motivation with this particular value is the preservation of human life which is shared by secular society. The 'problem' comes from differences in understanding of what constitutes a person. Law holds that once something possesses a majority of the physical characteristics of a person it is a person. Social conservatives tend to hold that once it has begun the process of developing those characteristics it is a person. It is an extreme. The other extreme would be the belief that it is not a person until it has finished developing. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#9
12-04-2015, 08:01 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Gnawlunzs Phrogphry
Master Angler, Baker, Cadger, Drunk "If you can't eat a frog, then eat two." | |||
|
|
||||
|
#10
12-04-2015, 08:41 AM
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Seriously though, we're going to have fucked up people in America. We should try to fix the problem. How the fuck does that make it a rational policy to let more fucked up people in? I'm not gonna lie, I don't see how massive immigration is anything other than a way to diminish the economic value of the average American. But assuming we need a continuously growing population for some fundamental principle of economics, why not let in argentines, Venezuelans, Vietnamese, spaniards, the Portuguese.... Why does this one group of people bear no responsibility for their actions and get unfettered access to the western world even as they REPEATEDLY demonstrate their hatred of us and our values? I wish one of you bleeding heart liberals were A) a woman and B) forced to live in ANY majority Muslim country. After comparing that experience to your cultural relativist ideology, you'd change your tune in 30seconds.
__________________
God Bless Texas
Free Iran | ||||
|
|
|||||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
