|
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 |
On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird.
On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related 
I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening.
|
On September 27 2025 21:16 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
No, I'm not the one who calls them far-right propaganda. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 17:41 Magic Powers wrote:
National Review is strictly far-right. They're a propaganda outlet, not a "right-of-center publication". The longer you deny this, the more convinced I am that you view far-right content as "moderately right-wing". What are we doing here buddy? Let's make it more than one page without personality transplanting. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
You can reject reality and live in a fantasy land, but I actively embrace reality. Okay. Tell us what outlets you think are merely right, but not far, strictly, or propagandaly so. (Notice I'm not requesting you tell us what MBFC labels right, but not far, strictly, and propagandaly so, which you will then abandon immediately and refuse to justify at the slightest scrutiny.)
You literally cut off my first quote to get rid of the full context and create a strawman. Razyda did the exact same thing recently and I also called him out for it.
Seems like you're following the exact same playbook as he does.
|
On September 27 2025 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
No, I'm not the one who calls them far-right propaganda. On September 27 2025 17:41 Magic Powers wrote:
National Review is strictly far-right. They're a propaganda outlet, not a "right-of-center publication". The longer you deny this, the more convinced I am that you view far-right content as "moderately right-wing". What are we doing here buddy? Let's make it more than one page without personality transplanting. On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
You can reject reality and live in a fantasy land, but I actively embrace reality. Okay. Tell us what outlets you think are merely right, but not far, strictly, or propagandaly so. (Notice I'm not requesting you tell us what MBFC labels right, but not far, strictly, and propagandaly so, which you will then abandon immediately and refuse to justify at the slightest scrutiny.) You literally cut off my first quote to get rid of the full context and create a strawman. Razyda did the exact same thing recently and I also called him out for it. Seems like you're following the exact same playbook as he does.
What is an outlet that is right, but not far?
|
On September 27 2025 21:28 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:On September 27 2025 21:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
No, I'm not the one who calls them far-right propaganda. On September 27 2025 17:41 Magic Powers wrote:
National Review is strictly far-right. They're a propaganda outlet, not a "right-of-center publication". The longer you deny this, the more convinced I am that you view far-right content as "moderately right-wing". What are we doing here buddy? Let's make it more than one page without personality transplanting. On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
You can reject reality and live in a fantasy land, but I actively embrace reality. Okay. Tell us what outlets you think are merely right, but not far, strictly, or propagandaly so. (Notice I'm not requesting you tell us what MBFC labels right, but not far, strictly, and propagandaly so, which you will then abandon immediately and refuse to justify at the slightest scrutiny.) You literally cut off my first quote to get rid of the full context and create a strawman. Razyda did the exact same thing recently and I also called him out for it. Seems like you're following the exact same playbook as he does. What is an outlet that is right, but not far?
Probably the wall street journal
You guys have lurched way right and dragged publications with you.
|
On September 27 2025 21:30 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:28 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:On September 27 2025 21:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
No, I'm not the one who calls them far-right propaganda. On September 27 2025 17:41 Magic Powers wrote:
National Review is strictly far-right. They're a propaganda outlet, not a "right-of-center publication". The longer you deny this, the more convinced I am that you view far-right content as "moderately right-wing". What are we doing here buddy? Let's make it more than one page without personality transplanting. On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
You can reject reality and live in a fantasy land, but I actively embrace reality. Okay. Tell us what outlets you think are merely right, but not far, strictly, or propagandaly so. (Notice I'm not requesting you tell us what MBFC labels right, but not far, strictly, and propagandaly so, which you will then abandon immediately and refuse to justify at the slightest scrutiny.) You literally cut off my first quote to get rid of the full context and create a strawman. Razyda did the exact same thing recently and I also called him out for it. Seems like you're following the exact same playbook as he does. What is an outlet that is right, but not far? Probably the wall street journal You guys have lurched way right and dragged publications with you.
Spot on, good example. The fact of the matter is that I wouldn't give Introvert shit if he had named WSJ and other similar outlets. A very popular outlet and generally regarded as right-wing, but not radically so.
|
Worth noting that the NR is far right, but not MAGA. They'll generally avoid repeating Trump's bullshit, or at least report that "Trump said 'battery acid is good for you"', and then explain why he's probably wrong rather than the USA Today/Breitbart approach of
BATTERY ACID IS GOOD FOR YOU!
In a press conference today, Trump ....
Which is probably why they get the "mostly factual" right-wing label, as opposed to the screaming falsehoods MAGA propaganda rag that an outlet like Breitbart gets.
|
On September 27 2025 21:28 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:On September 27 2025 21:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
No, I'm not the one who calls them far-right propaganda. On September 27 2025 17:41 Magic Powers wrote:
National Review is strictly far-right. They're a propaganda outlet, not a "right-of-center publication". The longer you deny this, the more convinced I am that you view far-right content as "moderately right-wing". What are we doing here buddy? Let's make it more than one page without personality transplanting. On September 27 2025 21:06 Magic Powers wrote:
You can reject reality and live in a fantasy land, but I actively embrace reality. Okay. Tell us what outlets you think are merely right, but not far, strictly, or propagandaly so. (Notice I'm not requesting you tell us what MBFC labels right, but not far, strictly, and propagandaly so, which you will then abandon immediately and refuse to justify at the slightest scrutiny.) You literally cut off my first quote to get rid of the full context and create a strawman. Razyda did the exact same thing recently and I also called him out for it. Seems like you're following the exact same playbook as he does. What is an outlet that is right, but not far?
MSNBC. Chopping a story or EO or Legislation down to its most palatable parts and not discussing any kind of implications essentially normalizes the right's praxis of gish galloping scandal.
|
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD.
I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons.
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens,
On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion.
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking.
We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues.
People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination.
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity.
I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam.
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former.
Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good).
On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening.
Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it.
|
On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it.
You yourself are, if you're actually arguing sincerely and not trolling for the sake of it, a prime example of the cult of Trump. One day: Government spends too much on frivolous stuff! Next day: renaming DoD to DoW is good! Also Hegseth calling all generals together for in-person meeting is also good!"
One day: Biden is a corrupt nepotist who enriches himself and his son through dirty deals. Next day: why shouldn't Trump be allowed to accept a golden 747 from his Emirati friends? It's a gift!
One day: the constitution is paramount and it is the government's duty to follow and uphold it. Next day: well, storming Congress and chanting to hang Mike Pence was just a friendly school trip!
It's the Cult of Trump in action.
|
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it. You yourself are, if you're actually arguing sincerely and not trolling for the sake of it, a prime example of the cult of Trump. One day: Government spends too much on frivolous stuff! Next day: renaming DoD to DoW is good! Also Hegseth calling all generals together for in-person meeting is also good!" One day: Biden is a corrupt nepotist who enriches himself and his son through dirty deals. Next day: why shouldn't Trump be allowed to accept a golden 747 from his Emirati friends? It's a gift! One day: the constitution is paramount and it is the government's duty to follow and uphold it. Next day: well, storming Congress and chanting to hang Mike Pence was just a friendly school trip! It's the Cult of Trump in action.
That's not cult behavior, it's just nihilistic lying.
THIS is a cult.
|
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it. You yourself are, if you're actually arguing sincerely and not trolling for the sake of it, a prime example of the cult of Trump.
Interesting I'm an important political issue for you, okay let me indulge you and hopefully nudge you back from the borders of Making-shit-upville.
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: Government spends too much on frivolous stuff! Next day: renaming DoD to DoW is good!
I don't have strong feelings on Department of Defense vs. Department of War because I don't think anyone saying it will cost a bajillion dollars to also use the name Department of War has the faintest idea what they're talking about.
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
Also Hegseth calling all generals together for in-person meeting is also good!"
Every time Congress meets, every time the government is open, that costs money. Don't be absurd. This is the same as "USSS protection for Blumpf costs money! Trump went on a trip this weekend and it cost millions of dollars!" Yes. The existence of a president and his security costs money. The very existence of a government costs some money. Find an anarcho-capitalist to have that debate with.
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: Biden is a corrupt nepotist who enriches himself and his son through dirty deals. Next day: why shouldn't Trump be allowed to accept a golden 747 from his Emirati friends? It's a gift!
Biden's corruption paled compared to his incompetence. Boeing, with no competition, is suffering from much of the same, which is why the new Air Force Ones aren't ready. I don't think the interim one is golden. The existence of the new one will hopefully light a fire under Boeing's ass. If they still aren't ready, then the next president can use it, or Trump can in his 3rd term. Otherwise for all I know no new Air Force Ones whatsoever are needed, and all 3 are a waste, and the existing ones can keep flying for 20 more years.
I would not support him immediately transferring it to his library after using it for only 1 year just so he can have a presidential library equally as impressive as Reagan's.
But then again, you never fucking asked me that, did you?
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: the constitution is paramount and it is the government's duty to follow and uphold it. Next day: well, storming Congress and chanting to hang Mike Pence was just a friendly school trip!
I definitely disagree with the government (250 plainclothes FBI agents) storming Congress. So I can safely say you pulled the second sentence straight out of nowhere.
On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
It's the Cult of Trump in action.
I mean I could sit here and make up random stuff and say it's what you believe. That'd be the Strawman Cult.
|
On September 27 2025 22:56 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"?
Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation.
Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it. You yourself are, if you're actually arguing sincerely and not trolling for the sake of it, a prime example of the cult of Trump. Interesting I'm an important political issue for you, okay let me indulge you and hopefully nudge you back from the borders of Making-shit-upville. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: Government spends too much on frivolous stuff! Next day: renaming DoD to DoW is good! I don't have strong feelings on Department of Defense vs. Department of War because I don't think anyone saying it will cost a bajillion dollars to also use the name Department of War has the faintest idea what they're talking about. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
Also Hegseth calling all generals together for in-person meeting is also good!" Every time Congress meets, every time the government is open, that costs money. Don't be absurd. This is the same as "USSS protection for Blumpf costs money! Trump went on a trip this weekend and it cost millions of dollars!" Yes. The existence of a president and his security costs money. The very existence of a government costs some money. Find an anarcho-capitalist to have that debate with. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: Biden is a corrupt nepotist who enriches himself and his son through dirty deals. Next day: why shouldn't Trump be allowed to accept a golden 747 from his Emirati friends? It's a gift! Biden's corruption paled compared to his incompetence. Boeing, with no competition, is suffering from much of the same, which is why the new Air Force Ones aren't ready. I don't think the interim one is golden. The existence of the new one will hopefully light a fire under Boeing's ass. If they still aren't ready, then the next president can use it, or Trump can in his 3rd term. Otherwise for all I know no new Air Force Ones whatsoever are needed, and all 3 are a waste, and the existing ones can keep flying for 20 more years. I would not support him immediately transferring it to his library after using it for only 1 year just so he can have a presidential library equally as impressive as Reagan's. But then again, you never fucking asked me that, did you? Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: the constitution is paramount and it is the government's duty to follow and uphold it. Next day: well, storming Congress and chanting to hang Mike Pence was just a friendly school trip! I definitely disagree with the government (250 plainclothes FBI agents) storming Congress. So I can safely say you pulled the second sentence straight out of nowhere. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
It's the Cult of Trump in action.
I mean I could sit here and make up random stuff and say it's what you believe. That'd be the Strawman Cult.
Oblade
You are such a misleading troll with your 250 plainsclothes fbi agents. You are implying that it was in fact the fbi who staged the invasion of the capitol by the scum who were there that day.
Thats not what the article says at all. Theres people complaining about no equipment or chain of command and then a random person or two complaining about letting cities burn during blm.
Get out of here with your bullshit. And the washington examiner? Give me a break.
You are so dishonest with your framing of situations and responses here. You for sure are in the cult. Get out before its too late.
|
On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it.
I'm not just talking about "on football night". I'm talking about all day, every day. Every day. If the opinions of Tom Brady mattered more than anyone else's opinions; if someone would choose the well-being of Tom Brady over their own well-being and the well-being of their family; if they would make every decision based on what Tom Brady had to say (about immigration, healthcare, education, democracy, etc.), if they filled their car bumpers, closets, and houses with Tom Brady memorabilia, if they believed that Tom Brady was the only person who could save their country and the world, if they believed Tom Brady over communities of experts when it came to everything, then yes, I would say that that level of fanaticism is cult-like and religious.
"Name two times" [MAGA chose Trump over Jesus]
1. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ (Matthew 25:35-40)
2. When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. (Leviticus 19:33–34)
3. Contribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers. (Romans 12:13)
4. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19:24)
5. Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. (Luke 6:27-28)
6. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. (Ephesians 4:32)
Not to mention breaking the 1st Commandment... and forgetting this important patriotic message:
Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
(Statue of Liberty  )
"Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake"
My post that you responded to was explaining that replacing one religion for another is not the same thing as saying religion is declining.
|
On September 27 2025 20:29 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 20:11 oBlade wrote:
I just opened National Review and the current main page has 4 articles about why charging Comey is wrong, one about why retaking Bagram is wrong, and one vague one about how the fed isn't independent but the more we pretend it's independent the more it actually is which is good. "Today morning I looked outside the window and I felt the warmth of the sun on my skin. I conclude the whole week, month and year it's always sunny and warm from sunrise to sunset in the whole city, state and country."
I will try one more time to make my point since apparently other people are also confused.
You don't have to like any of the publications I mentioned in that post however many weeks ago. Yes, NR is an self-admitted conservative opinion magazine. My problem is you seem to think, as you said above, that you are very familiar with the American right. But you clearly aren't very familiar with the American right that I am a part of. The results of the little survey oBlade did is actually not that uncommon of an occurrence.
I don't want to sound gatekeeper-ish, because plenty of conservatives don't from NR, but the point is that in most of your posts I find an arrogance and intransigence that is unearned. I've been here for years, I've quoted stuff from conservative outlets but never news (WSJ reporting is famously less Republican than the editorial page). To disagree with my ideas you don't need to start with "well he mentioned National Review once (a publication I never knew existed btw) and now I'm going to start every post about something he says by opening with that and what score it got on my scoring wrbsite." Again, not inspiring confidence that you are not the one who is in fact running the argument backwards.
+ Show Spoiler +Sorry if this post is too meta thread like
|
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it. I'm not just talking about "on football night". I'm talking about all day, every day. Every day. If the opinions of Tom Brady mattered more than anyone else's opinions; if someone would choose the well-being of Tom Brady over their own well-being and the well-being of their family; if they would make every decision based on what Tom Brady had to say (about immigration, healthcare, education, democracy, etc.), if they filled their car bumpers, closets, and houses with Tom Brady memorabilia, if they believed that Tom Brady was the only person who could save their country and the world, if they believed Tom Brady over communities of experts when it came to everything, then yes, I would say that that level of fanaticism is cult-like and religious. "Name two times" [MAGA chose Trump over Jesus] 1. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ (Matthew 25:35-40) 2. When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. (Leviticus 19:33–34) 3. Contribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers. (Romans 12:13) 4. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19:24) 5. Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. (Luke 6:27-28) 6. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. (Ephesians 4:32) Not to mention breaking the 1st Commandment... and forgetting this important patriotic message: Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! (Statue of Liberty ) "Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake"
My post that you responded to was explaining that replacing one religion for another is not the same thing as saying religion is declining.
This is just more of the gaslighting and victim blaming from the conservatives in this thread. You can see all the fucked up domineeeing family dynamics from statements like these and the way they never admit or acknowledge fault. Its always spin spin spin. You see it was not my fault i beat my wife. She made me angry. She knows how i get when im angry. She should know better.
|
On September 27 2025 22:56 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:26 Acrofales wrote:
One day: Biden is a corrupt nepotist who enriches himself and his son through dirty deals. Next day: why shouldn't Trump be allowed to accept a golden 747 from his Emirati friends? It's a gift! Biden's corruption paled compared to his incompetence. Boeing, with no competition, is suffering from much of the same, which is why the new Air Force Ones aren't ready. I don't think the interim one is golden. The existence of the new one will hopefully light a fire under Boeing's ass. If they still aren't ready, then the next president can use it, or Trump can in his 3rd term. Otherwise for all I know no new Air Force Ones whatsoever are needed, and all 3 are a waste, and the existing ones can keep flying for 20 more years. I would not support him immediately transferring it to his library after using it for only 1 year just so he can have a presidential library equally as impressive as Reagan's. But then again, you never fucking asked me that, did you?
Are you then saying that the gifted plane was completely justified and above board?
Is the 3rd term some kind of tongue in cheek joke?
I don't really understand.
"Because Biden is an idiot, and the degradation of Air Force One was unique to 2020-2024, Trump 'had to' accept a shady gift from an a non-allied sketchy nation. There was no other solution." Surely I'm misinterpreting what you mean....
|
wtf is this shit? there really should be temp bans or mutes or something for the kinda bullshit that is on full display here. i'm not saying we should censor anyone, but come the fuck on. really? this is a reddit forum/thread in everything but name at this point
|
On September 27 2025 23:26 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 20:29 Magic Powers wrote:On September 27 2025 20:11 oBlade wrote:
I just opened National Review and the current main page has 4 articles about why charging Comey is wrong, one about why retaking Bagram is wrong, and one vague one about how the fed isn't independent but the more we pretend it's independent the more it actually is which is good. "Today morning I looked outside the window and I felt the warmth of the sun on my skin. I conclude the whole week, month and year it's always sunny and warm from sunrise to sunset in the whole city, state and country." I will try one more time to make my point since apparently other people are also confused. You don't have to like any of the publications I mentioned in that post however many weeks ago. Yes, NR is an self-admitted conservative opinion magazine. My problem is you seem to think, as you said above, that you are very familiar with the American right. But you clearly aren't very familiar with the American right that I am a part of. The results of the little survey oBlade did is actually not that uncommon of an occurrence. I don't want to sound gatekeeper-ish, because plenty of conservatives don't from NR, but the point is that in most of your posts I find an arrogance and intransigence that is unearned. I've been here for years, I've quoted stuff from conservative outlets but never news (WSJ reporting is famously less Republican than the editorial page). To disagree with my ideas you don't need to start with "well he mentioned National Review once (a publication I never knew existed btw) and now I'm going to start every post about something he says by opening with that and what score it got on my scoring wrbsite." Again, not inspiring confidence that you are not the one who is in fact running the argument backwards. + Show Spoiler +Sorry if this post is too meta thread like
I know the American right very well. I used to hang out in the same spaces as people from all kinds of political backgrounds, and it was mainly Americans. It was a free speech space, and all voices from moderate to radical, far-left to far-right, liberal to authoritarian, all of them were tolerated as long as they weren't breaking any laws, doxxing people, posting porn or violent imagery, etc.
The American right has had a heavy presence in such spaces. The discussions ranged from civil to incredibly toxic. For the most part it was right-wingers who dominated the discourse, so I learned a lot about their views.
On occasion I was even invited to their far-right sub-groups, an offer I took up - and quickly regretted due to the insane viewpoints being spread, leading to me leaving that space soon after.
I left the space years ago when I finally had enough and started cleaning up with various false beliefs I had adopted.
You can say what you will about me, but if you think I don't know the American right, you couldn't be much further from the truth. I know them almost intimately. I know what they're willing to say in private, with the exception of law-breaking behavior. I got to know right-wingers who are more hardcore than some KKK members or other white supremacists. Though those were rare.
I got to know white supremacists, traditional conservative Christians, various alt-righters, libertarians, and on the other side one communist, rather few progressives and socialists, and a small number of liberals. The group host was right-wing, which is why not so many left-wingers knew of/joined the space.
I've had discussions with these people for years. I know their arguments inside out. I know viewpoints you've literally never heard of. I know about the backgrounds of these people, as they occasionally gave some insight into their daily lives. I still knew some of them during the early Covid days, which was shortly before I left the space (the pandemic made everyone go extra crazy).
Don't tell me how much I know or don't know. You don't know me.
|
United States43020 Posts
The problem is that people keep getting baited into trying good faith responses to bad faith posters.
|
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 13:34 Gorsameth wrote:
One would expect that as people become less religious they become more receptive to facts and scientific evidence, not less.
It's been weird. On September 27 2025 14:33 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 12:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 27 2025 11:19 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2025 00:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 22:19 Introvert wrote:On September 26 2025 16:19 EnDeR_ wrote:On September 26 2025 12:21 Introvert wrote:
I would say it's more a hope born of necessity. For reasons both ideological and cultural it can be harder for people on the left to countenance people who disagree with them very strongly but that's part of why I think it will take some great national struggle or disaster to return our government to better functioning. Things will have to be placed aside, on both left and right.
Could you explain a bit more about what you mean by "it's harder for people on the left to countenance people that disagree with them very strongly"? Anecdotally, the two times I've had a conversation with someone heavily pro-Trump, even mild disagreement was taken as a personal offense that could not be countenanced. Neither time was a pleasant conversation. Anecdotically, also, the couple times I've had a strong disagreement with someone who identifies as 'on the left', it was fairly amicable and we reached a point where we could understand where each of us was coming from. If you want to know, a specific example was about trans people on TV and how this was going to mess up his kids, another was about DEI implementation in the workplace. Sent hit the nail on the head. In less rancourous times there was a saying, iirc penned by commentator Charles Krauthammer that "Conservatives think liberals are wrong, liberals think Conservatives are evil." I think this is mostly true (keep on mind we are saying "liberal" in the American sense of the word). For the criticism that the right is very "moralistic" i think surely that criticism (if you would even call it that) applies to the left at least as much. There is also the cultural dimension as well. American popular culture and academia has become so insular and increasingly left-wing that it's far easier, from what i can tell, for someone on the left to hear almost nothing from someone they disagree with than the opposite. It’s surely true on campus, and I and many others could attest to that personally. I'm sure it's not quite so overwhelming in a more conservative state, but any conservative who has ever attended college or seen a single thing a famous actor has said or read a news story in a legacy newspaper has had to read and interact with people they disagree with. Some Trumpers are incredibly annoying though, yes. I don't disagree that this may have been the case back in the day. But is it true now? I don't think right-wingers are moralistic; that kind of went when Trump became the standard-bearer. There was a clear shift from "holier than thou, you must uphold family values or you will go to hell" to "owning the libs", I don't think this is really arguable to be honest. In fact, it is becoming more and more common for right-wing people to describe anything left of center as their "enemies". You're painting conservatives as some kind of responsible parent with an unruly leftwing teenager, and I just don't think that image holds in modern America. Somewhat related to what you saying there is an interesting thing happening in the Republican party that it is getting less obviously religious. I think for a long time Democrats yearned for such a day,, now I wonder if they are reconsidering lol. Why would I reconsider wanting Republicans to be less religious? Like Gorsameth said, I'm not sure how well it's working out from a Democrat perspective. Assuming of course these things are related I disagree with the premise. Republicans may (or may not) be identifying as less Christian fundamentalist, but the deification of Trump with the MAGA movement is precisely demonstrating an increase in conservative religiosity. They're just praying to Trump instead of Jesus. It's WWDD (What Would Donald Do) instead of WWJD. I want to take a second to engage with these extreme religious premises, projections, overgeneralizations, semantics, and improper comparisons. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They proudly wear and display far more MAGA tokens than Christian tokens, On football night, people wear more Dallas Cowboys paraphernalia than crosses. That doesn't make ESPN a religion. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
and worship everything Trump says and does without any sort of skepticism, reflection, or critical thinking. We just last page had a far-right newspaper disagreeing with him on multiple issues. People don't worship everything Trump says or does, he has a high in-party approval from actually doing basic things on big issues, like securing the border. He doesn't have a 90% approval rating on "One of the wettest we've seen from the standpoint of water" or Bondi or Patel or Epstein or a million little things. But he still gets by. It's among far wider of the left that everything from the way he walks across a carpet to EOs saying to enforce federal law get obsessed over because he is playing the psychological role of the antichrist for them, and why they cheer "can someone do Trump next" after Charlie Kirk's assassination. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
They've consistently sacrificed their lives and well-being to appease their new deity. I don't know what this means, but if true every soldier who got the purple heart's deity must be Uncle Sam. On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Their obsession and obedience to Trump is cult-like and religious in nature, and nearly every time a Jesus quote contradicts a Trump quote, the Republicans still favor the latter over the former. Name two times (preferably ones Jesus was clearly right, otherwise you're describing rational behavior of people who separate politics and religion and don't pursue theocracy, which is good). On September 27 2025 21:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The Republican party's two main religions are Christianity and Trumpism. It'd be great if conservatives were less religious, but that's not what's happening. Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it. I'm not just talking about "on football night". I'm talking about all day, every day. Every day. If the opinions of Tom Brady mattered more than anyone else's opinions; if someone would choose the well-being of Tom Brady over their own well-being and the well-being of their family; if they would make every decision based on what Tom Brady had to say (about immigration, healthcare, education, democracy, etc.), if they filled their car bumpers, closets, and houses with Tom Brady memorabilia, if they believed that Tom Brady was the only person who could save their country and the world, if they believed Tom Brady over communities of experts when it came to everything, then yes, I would say that that level of fanaticism is cult-like and religious.
You are well and duly amenable to ideas that were foreign to your understanding a year ago. Nice evolution.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
"Name two times" [MAGA chose Trump over Jesus]
You've managed to supply the "Jesus" half for lack of a better word but having to assume what Trump said that you think is contradictory is a case of ellipsis. Leaving me no choice but to guess.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
1. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ (Matthew 25:35-40)
What's the Trump quote against this? Pretty sure he values loyalty.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
2. When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. (Leviticus 19:33–34)
It is not a difficult challenge for an adult in the Western world to know Jesus wasn't in the cast of Leviticus.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
3. Contribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers. (Romans 12:13)
You've interpreted this as "open your borders to everyone?" so Trump contradicted it, and the voters are exhibiting religious behavior by choosing Trump over their religion? Heads you win, tails I lose?
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
4. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19:24)
What is the point here? Did Trump say it's really easy for rich people to go to heaven?
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
5. Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. (Luke 6:27-28)
"The unprecedented success of the United States of America will be my ultimate and absolute revenge." - Donald Trump
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Not to mention breaking the 1st Commandment... and forgetting this important patriotic message:
One of the cornerstones of Christianity is "judge not, lest ye be judged" - which is why Christians find a way to participate in politics by voting for someone other than the most porridge-eating celibate monk who has never hurt a fly, for president. The fact that every president has to kill people is not something most Christians will judge in the way that the book says their creator would judge them.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door! (Statue of Liberty )
Poems don't override national sovereignty. They don't override the constitution. This looks like your own secular religion though. Neither would "Jesus said" override the government in any other context, especially for you. So I'm not buying it here.
On September 27 2025 23:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
"Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake"
My post that you responded to was explaining that replacing one religion for another is not the same thing as saying religion is declining.
That's what my quote said. That was the point. Are you kidding me on this one?
On September 27 2025 22:16 oBlade wrote:
Perhaps cheering the decline of religion was a mistake if you view people substituting other beliefs as religions is a negative consequence of it.
Let's try to make this misunderstanding-proof. Perhaps cheering the decline of traditional organized spiritual religious beliefs was a mistake if you view people increasingly substituting politics and other belief systems as religions as a negative consequence of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
