| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Simberto
Germany12008 Posts
On September 14 2020 11:41 Danglars wrote: I hold my government to higher standards than you. Period. It is impressive that you can say that with a straight face, while also voting for Trump, a man who couldn't care less about democracy as a concept. | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On September 14 2020 14:59 Little-Chimp wrote: Supporting Trump while virtue signalling offence for Trudeau's blackface 20 year ago is pretty jokes. Also Biden does not support defunding the police. Be careful which media sources you're consuming, because that one is straight from Trump's ass. I do find it pretty hard to see why someone would vote for a guy that shit on the troops recently and lied about Covid to everyone before accummulating 190k deaths. Even if you were terrified of the "woke mob", they're running wild on your dipshit cult leader's watch right now, not Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton or any other dem boogeyman. H3 sAv3d th3 Ec0nomY th0!!!!!111 Edit: In all seriousness though, I don't see why Biden voting for the Iraq War makes him look so bad compared to Trump seeing as Trump supported it too (I'm pretty sure polling before start of war showed that most people were in favour of going to war). Lastly, let's be honest with ourselves. Do we really think Trump has done enough for peace that he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize? ig he's done a better job at creating peace than George W Bush but that's a pretty low bar. I'm not sure how his escalation of drone strikes in Afghanistan (and at this point the intelligence officials are no longer even obligated to count the casualties) and his actions towards Iran have been positive for world peace. His efforts to improve relations with North Korea don't seem very successful either. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On September 14 2020 13:56 Danglars wrote: Inasmuch as this thread ignores real issues that matter to the voting public, I’m doing the thread a service. The arguments in favor of dragging nuns into court on the pretense that Obamacare invented a right to no-cost abortifacients have been historically bad. The adherents rely on equally bad bases to argue abstractions like health care (nobody found injury to it) or balancing rights (right to force employers to offer specific drugs free of charge is quite an argument, but I guess they could find nothing better than it). In short, Democrats and leftists on this forum have long ignored religious freedoms in this country, and it falls in nicely with their ongoing attacks on evangelicals for voting the way they do. I don’t yet have a theory on how much this ignorance is a practiced trait, because it avoids adopting a more nuanced view of their opponents and considerations in their vote, or how much is a priori disgust at religious values they dislike. It will be a stumbling block to dialogue if posters here can’t accept obviously good reasons to vote for Trump, since they have no entry point to then argue that the negatives outweigh the positives. Single payer health care at the federal level. Boom, no more nurse problem or religious freedom in health care since the employer is not involved anymore. Any issue with that? Republicans are against actually solving these kind of problems, as it's useful to keep them to have leverage on religious voters. Still. Staying focused on one issue and forgetting the rest of the unacceptable bullshit is tunnel vision. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1967 Posts
On September 14 2020 08:46 Danglars wrote: I mean it shouldn't be so confusing. Biden and Democrat's message has been to fuck over people of religious faith. Nuns have to provide abortifacient drugs, even though they can't prove it's an accessibility problem and have many ways of providing these drugs apart from forcing religious organizations to be the means. The government had to confess at the Supreme Court that it could find no woman with a health access problem to demonstrate there was great need to overide First Amendment religious protections. Say the same thing for Colorado and the Civil Rights Commission. And adoption agencies. Honestly, even for the most hardcore lefty in this forum, it should be the easiest thing to imagine why evangelicals feel they have no choice in this election. They simply don't feel First Amendment protections have any business being surrendered, and the "women's health" argument is a stupid one made by people that ought to know better. There is only one candidate in the presidential field with any claim of letting business owners with sincere religious beliefs and religious organizations operate free of Government telling them they have no First Amendment protections for their operations. The Democrats always have the choice to not tweet out that they're gonna drag nuns back to court if elected. Danglars is certainly right to point out this is what Evengelicals migth be thinking in supporting Trump. It's ridiculous of course, but it shows what those people are about. The constitution is only there for me. A small group of nuns have to provide healthcare for their employees? Outrageous. Good chrisitains have to server homosexuals? Not cool. Banning all travelers from muslkim countries? Yaaaaay. I am allowed to treat you like shit because Jesus, you are not allowed to live here because Allah. That's the good old christian values, love thy neighbour unless he does not pray like i do. Religion in a nutshell. Only my rules apply. The other 6 billion people are wrong and talk to imaginary friends, my imaginary friend is the creator of the world. And he told me that i am special  | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22619 Posts
On September 14 2020 14:17 Starlightsun wrote: Abortions don't even infringe on Christian religious freedom because no one makes them get abortions.Is there anything else besides abortion that is considered to be infringing on Christian religious freedom? Other people being able to get abortions don't infringe on their freedoms. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
On September 14 2020 14:17 Starlightsun wrote: Is there anything else besides abortion that is considered to be infringing on Christian religious freedom? Yes. Danglars thinks i'm a religious bigot because i don't support the 'right' of Christian schools to bully pupils for being gay. Pretty much explains everything about the depth of the religious rights argument. Its arbitrary in the idea that religious rights take precedence over all other rights. Its arbitrary in who those rights apply to. etc. etc. The religious freedom danglars holds in such high esteem is exactly and precisely what gave birth to scientology, with their exploitative modern slavery and immunity from criminal prosecution which extends as far as not being investigated when people go missing or die. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On September 14 2020 17:52 Broetchenholer wrote: Danglars is certainly right to point out this is what Evengelicals migth be thinking in supporting Trump. It's ridiculous of course, but it shows what those people are about. The constitution is only there for me. A small group of nuns have to provide healthcare for their employees? Outrageous. Good chrisitains have to server homosexuals? Not cool. Banning all travelers from muslkim countries? Yaaaaay. I am allowed to treat you like shit because Jesus, you are not allowed to live here because Allah. That's the good old christian values, love thy neighbour unless he does not pray like i do. Religion in a nutshell. Only my rules apply. The other 6 billion people are wrong and talk to imaginary friends, my imaginary friend is the creator of the world. And he told me that i am special What you describe is not “religion in a nutshell,” rather it’s a particular approach to religion that is indeed very troubling. And all the imaginary friend bullshit is not only a flatly incorrect way to describe how an individual relates to God, it actively stokes the fires of discourtesy that Trump seizes on. You’re a smart guy, do better. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1967 Posts
Sure my language was provoking, but I really can't stand the hipocricy of fundamental Christians, or any other religion, to move the world backwards because a book that was written and rewritten in the last 2000 years tells them so. | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2944 Posts
On September 14 2020 20:26 Broetchenholer wrote: I am not describing faith, I am describing religion. I have zero problem with people believing in what ever spirituality. I don't understand it, but if they get something positive out of it, that's cool. But then you go to organized religion, and even the better ones can't simply live and let live. Into almost every organized religion, there is some code imprinted, where they fail to comply with some rule of modern society. Be it missionizing, be it condemning homosexuality or abortion, be it ritually demeaning women. Sure my language was provoking, but I really can't stand the hipocricy of fundamental Christians, or any other religion, to move the world backwards because a book that was written and rewritten in the last 2000 years tells them so. I'm with farva on this one, that was unnecessarily disrespectful. It lowered the level of discourse and had no purpose other than feeding the outrage machine. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On September 14 2020 20:26 Broetchenholer wrote: I am not describing faith, I am describing religion. I have zero problem with people believing in what ever spirituality. I don't understand it, but if they get something positive out of it, that's cool. But then you go to organized religion, and even the better ones can't simply live and let live. Into almost every organized religion, there is some code imprinted, where they fail to comply with some rule of modern society. Be it missionizing, be it condemning homosexuality or abortion, be it ritually demeaning women. Sure my language was provoking, but I really can't stand the hipocricy of fundamental Christians, or any other religion, to move the world backwards because a book that was written and rewritten in the last 2000 years tells them so. So here’s the thing, I agree with basically everything you say here, but I think the proper rhetorical approach towards those who do bad shit in the name of God is not one that casts broad aspersions as to how religion itself works as a thing humans do. There are millions of American Christians who know that fundamentalism and sola scriptura/fide are wrong and that they are used to justify all sorts of awful shit, but we’ll never get those people solidly opposed to Trump and his brand of political apologists a la Danglars if something they consider very important, religion, is routinely ridiculed like a Bill Mahar special. It’s folks like Bill Mahar and their one dimensional takes on religion that give conservatives the room to claim that the left wants to outlaw their faith and other silly shit. I grew up with multiple people who became pastors and feel it’s my duty to make sure they remember just how radically left Jesus was, so this is a topic near and dear to me | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
He also holds his gov to a higher standard. Which is why he will vote for the president who had countless friends and supporters indicted. The hypocrisy is killing me. I wonder, would you be ok with a muslim organisation forcing their female employee to wear a burqa ? | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8194 Posts
On September 14 2020 15:25 Simberto wrote: It is impressive that you can say that with a straight face, while also voting for Trump, a man who couldn't care less about democracy as a concept. Yeah, it's quite amazing. I just rolled my eyes and moved on when I read that. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On September 14 2020 22:08 Erasme wrote: Danglars will fight to protect the right of _Christian_ Church to fuck over their employees. But he won't lift a finger to protect the rights of american citizens. He also holds his gov to a higher standard. Which is why he will vote for the president who had countless friends and supporters indicted. The hypocrisy is killing me. I wonder, would you be ok with a muslim organisation forcing their female employee to wear a burqa ? I guess he would say yes, that employees have the choice to choose another employer. I'm curious if he would feel the same about "religions" like pastafarianism asking crazy exemptions for religious belief (one of their goals is to demonstrate that these things are pure idiocy by being recognized as an official religion themselves) | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On September 14 2020 22:47 Nouar wrote: I guess he would say yes, that employees have the choice to choose another employer. I'm curious if he would feel the same about "religions" like pastafarianism asking crazy exemptions for religious belief (one of their goals is to demonstrate that these things are pure idiocy by being recognized as an official religion themselves) Evangelicals are notoriously intolerant. If he was logic yes, he'd say that. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
As pointed out previously, the real issue is that employer and health care are linked. They really shouldn't be, as it leads to other things like jehova's witnesses having to pay for blood transfusions. A totally necessary medical procedure, without any debate (unlike abortion, which has a lot of it), but deeply against JW's beliefs. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On September 14 2020 23:00 Nevuk wrote: I'm somewhat confused by that specific religious discrimination example anyways. Evangelicals hate catholics. It wouldn't be better for them if evangelicals were in charge. As pointed out previously, the real issue is that employer and health care are linked. They really shouldn't be, as it leads to other things like jehova's witnesses having to pay for blood transfusions. A totally necessary medical procedure, without any debate (unlike abortion, which has a lot of it), but deeply against JW's beliefs. Isn't it a general health insurance? And not a payment for specific treatments, items or whatever? And yes, that insurance may cover those "undesired" things. But it is still a massive difference. Because by that logic as a pacifist (and be it for religious reasons) you can suddenly declare that you refuse to pay any taxes, because some of those taxes are used for the military. Creationists can stop paying taxes too, because otherwise they would be paying for the teaching of sinful thoughts like evolution. I'm sure everyone will find a reason suddenly. So I really see no reason, why anyone would support this awful framing of "Poor nuns have to suddenly support child murdering tools" Thats about equivalent to "Capitalists wants to kill employees by refusing them cancer medications." | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On September 14 2020 23:00 Nevuk wrote: I'm somewhat confused by that specific religious discrimination example anyways. Evangelicals hate catholics. It wouldn't be better for them if evangelicals were in charge. As pointed out previously, the real issue is that employer and health care are linked. They really shouldn't be, as it leads to other things like jehova's witnesses having to pay for blood transfusions. A totally necessary medical procedure, without any debate (unlike abortion, which has a lot of it), but deeply against JW's beliefs. There’s a humorous ongoing saga in my family where my step uncle’s extremely Baptist wife continuously tries to proselytize to my devoutly Catholic step mother, only for the whole jig to go up in smoke once saints are mentioned. The alliance across anti-abortion denominations of Christianity is a delicate one, so as someone who likes to agitate from time to time, that’s something I like to focus on. On September 14 2020 23:18 mahrgell wrote: Isn't it a general health insurance? And not a payment for specific treatments, items or whatever? And yes, that insurance may cover those "undesired" things. But it is still a massive difference. Because by that logic as a pacifist (and be it for religious reasons) you can suddenly declare that you refuse to pay any taxes, because some of those taxes are used for the military. Creationists can stop paying taxes too, because otherwise they would be paying for the teaching of sinful thoughts like evolution. I'm sure everyone will find a reason suddenly. So I really see no reason, why anyone would support this awful framing of "Poor nuns have to suddenly support child murdering tools" Thats about equivalent to "Capitalists wants to kill employees by refusing them cancer medications." Yes, this is about how I see it. The important distinction is that nuns in the general case are not being forced to do anything, only nuns that want to employ others who are not nuns are at issue. The responsibilities and obligations inherent to being an employer is where the meat of the dispute is. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9999 Posts
On September 14 2020 22:02 farvacola wrote: So here’s the thing, I agree with basically everything you say here, but I think the proper rhetorical approach towards those who do bad shit in the name of God is not one that casts broad aspersions as to how religion itself works as a thing humans do. There are millions of American Christians who know that fundamentalism and sola scriptura/fide are wrong and that they are used to justify all sorts of awful shit, but we’ll never get those people solidly opposed to Trump and his brand of political apologists a la Danglars if something they consider very important, religion, is routinely ridiculed like a Bill Mahar special. It’s folks like Bill Mahar and their one dimensional takes on religion that give conservatives the room to claim that the left wants to outlaw their faith and other silly shit. I grew up with multiple people who became pastors and feel it’s my duty to make sure they remember just how radically left Jesus was, so this is a topic near and dear to me I don't think there's such a dividing line between fundamentalists and your average everyday Christian, even the ones who agree with much of what i think about politics. The issue of massive grassroots belief that being gay will send a person to hell, for example, is harmful way beyond each individual that believes such things. You cannot take that homophobia out of the religion because its there in the texts. Sure, tone is important when addressing religious people, but the idea that they might change their mind about something like that because we are respectful is something I just can't see any evidence of, and these are important issues that leave alot of people having a shitty life. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games summit1g6522 Liquid`RaSZi5890 Beastyqt784 shahzam466 B2W.Neo256 Pyrionflax166 KnowMe120 ArmadaUGS106 ToD104 ZombieGrub91 IndyStarCraft  69 |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Leta vs Soulkey
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
FEL
BSL: Ladder Tournament
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
