@mousethief As God's nearest representative, I'm probably going to disappoint you.
You are free, however, to take a shot every time:
1. UPPER CASE
2. Left wing (or its more intriguing relative, Left wind)
3. TERFy nonsense
4. Another C6 violation
5. Sentence construction worthy of a 4 year old who's just learnt to hold a pencil.
You'll be drunk in an hour, and this thread will make perfect sense by then.
Do you know how many people are killed for their Christian faith by left wind dictatorships all around the world?
Do you care ?
You should.
Admin Mode
We don't care that you dislike the whimsical adoption of a left-wing symbol on a thread about "left wing" Christians (even if "left wing" is applied in an idiosyncratic manner) by a member of the Crew advising you to chill.
We do care that you so readily ignored that official advice and disrespect the volunteers who help keep the Ship sailing.
We're giving you two weeks shore leave. Maybe by then you'll have sobered up and can make a coherent argument which we can discuss.
I have often thought the left-leanings of the Ship might be an interesting discussion (perhaps it's been had while I've been self-exiled on shore...) Often pondering if the Ship is a lefty vessel or if it is generally on the side of progress and equality...which can concern people as shown by the right wing parties making noise around the world. I've always wanted to discuss this with the more conservative (socially, I'm rather conservative theologically) posters who come on board, but they do overwhelmingly (not all) seem to be rather angry and spiteful. Which makes discussion hard.
I have often thought that in a community that is largely left wing (or indeed right wing), where so often discussion operates from certain assumptions, someone coming from the opposite side might often feel the need to be angry, aggressive, mocking or drunk to take on the task of challenging the default views. Because it would feel like a losing battle, and you'd know you'd be outnumbered. I think a lot of people looking for a community to have serious, respectful discussion wouldn't even bother joining a community whose default view was seen to be diametrically opposed to theirs. I'd like to think that someone could start such a discussion in Purgatory, expressing their views in a rational, logical way, though I also wonder how long it would take for someone to call them to hell and insults to begin. But I would think that to have a serious, meaty discussion about this sort of thing, rather than an explosive rant full of insults, it would need to be in Purgatory. And could be quite interesting.
What's more interesting is that the 'Right' appear to see civility, kindness and compassion as ideas they need to oppose.
I don't think that any of those are intrinsically 'left wing' because I know some real tankies who are utterly authoritarian and ruthless, but there's something very telling that the Right are willing to cede that ground.
I know what you mean @fineline - I personally find it hard, these days, to pop out of my echo chamber. It hurts me to read right wing views. I’m so very, deeply anti racist due to my upbringing (in 1960s apartheid South Africa) that I find racist views painful.
At art class I sit next to a right wing racist. She takes any opportunity to talk about ‘them’ in a disparaging way. In every other sense - as far as I can tell - she’s a lovely, kind, gentle, generous person. So I have to put her racism down to fear. But I’m a chicken these days and simply change the subject when she starts talking about ‘them’.
In the past I would have challenged her. As I did, many times, in staff rooms and with my MIL. But, the older I get, the harder I find confrontation.
I’m far too comfortable in my left wing echo chamber, I’m sure. But - how to get out of it and stay unhurt?
I don't always find that right wing people see civility, kindness and compassion as ideas to oppose. Many I come across see themselves as civil and good, kind people, and they see left wing people as claiming to be kind and compassionate, but in fact being the opposite because they are kind to bullies and abusers, allowing victims to suffer (their view, not mine - I'm expressing what I hear people express). They can see it in terms of being indiscriminately soft-hearted, rather than establishing boundaries to protect people. And many express the view that while left wing claim to be kind, peace-loving people, they then express violent views towards anyone who is right wing. And to be fair, I do see where they are coming from in that. I am left wing, but I do sometimes feel irritated by the very black-and-white views expressed by some left wing friends on FB - sweeping statements about all Tories being evil people complicit in murder, and who have personally ruined their lives. And then they wonder why their Tory friends unfriend them - they are convinced they've been so rational and accepting of all.
A bit of that, yes, though the people who say that they are intolerant of intolerance at least have this awareness. Some people seem genuinely unaware of how they are coming across, and of the inconsistencies in what they say and what they do.
@mousethief As God's nearest representative, I'm probably going to disappoint you.
You are free, however, to take a shot every time:
1. UPPER CASE
2. Left wing (or its more intriguing relative, Left wind)
3. TERFy nonsense
4. Another C6 violation
5. Sentence construction worthy of a 4 year old who's just learnt to hold a pencil.
You'll be drunk in an hour, and this thread will make perfect sense by then.
It's worth separating out social and political views. And you can obviously be politically left while maintaining racist, sexist and homophobic views. You can also be politically right while not being racist, sexist or a homophobe.
However, there's a very voluble (and as far as I can tell, large) group on the Right who actively boast of their socially reactionary views. The two shouldn't be synonymous, but they are.
Do I think there are an increased number of avoidable deaths in the UK directly due to policies brought in by the Tories? Yes. But I don't think that's a particularly contentious view. It's a logical step to say that those voting for those policies see them as acceptable collateral damage to achieve their political goals.
A bit of that, yes, though the people who say that they are intolerant of intolerance at least have this awareness. Some people seem genuinely unaware of how they are coming across, and of the inconsistencies in what they say and what they do.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
Having read this thread with increasing bewilderment (and consumption of nuts - not peanuts, but hazelnuts, since you ask), I can only congratulate @Pomona and others for resisting, and replying to, the sheer Drivel and Tosh being poured out by The Suspended One.
Being of Left-Wing™ views myself, I have no problem at all with being showered with Opprobrious Epithets. They make me realise that I'm right (IYSWIM).
It's worth separating out social and political views. And you can obviously be politically left while maintaining racist, sexist and homophobic views. You can also be politically right while not being racist, sexist or a homophobe.
However, there's a very voluble (and as far as I can tell, large) group on the Right who actively boast of their socially reactionary views. The two shouldn't be synonymous, but they are.
Do I think there are an increased number of avoidable deaths in the UK directly due to policies brought in by the Tories? Yes. But I don't think that's a particularly contentious view. It's a logical step to say that those voting for those policies see them as acceptable collateral damage to achieve their political goals.
Yes, the combining of social and political I see more often in American conservative Christians, to be honest.
And yes, I agree about the increased number of avoidable deaths due to the Tory policies, and I think this is an important topic to focus on in discussion. I also observe plenty of Tory voters not seeing it this way, and thinking that voting for the Tories is improving life, and that more people will die and suffer unnecessarily from Labour being in power. It needs to be discussed. But I don't think it's helpful to the discussion for left wing people to, say, post memes about Tory voters being evil murderers - that doesn't lead to constructive discussion, just like Peaceoftheaction666's emotive, accusatory posts here don't lead to constructive discussion. It just leads to more polarisation, and seeing the other side in black and white terms, as the baddies.
A bit of that, yes, though the people who say that they are intolerant of intolerance at least have this awareness. Some people seem genuinely unaware of how they are coming across, and of the inconsistencies in what they say and what they do.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
Thing is, if this is how the majority of people here see it, that they refuse to have Tory friends because Tory voters are complicit in murder, then realistically, we're not likely to have many Tories joining our community and staying, and so we won't be having the very kind of discussions we would need to have to create changes and influence each other.
I see similar in autistic communities - many autistic people see all neurotypical people as the enemy, ruining their lives, and they are hostile towards these neurotypical people. And this prevents progress, because then of course neurotypical people are likely to see autistic people are rude and hostile and not want to make the accessibility changes that autistic people see as important. It prevents any bridges being built, any meaningful conversation happening. I really do think that for positive change to take place, we all need to see each other as fellow humans, rather than seeing certain groups of people as the enemy, in 'them and us' terms.
Every so often it's worthwhile reading an outpouring of bile just to remind myself how effing reasonable I am in word and thought.
Yes, that's the kind of thing I mean. When people are hostile to the other side, the other side just feels more self-righteous about how they're the goodies and the other side is the baddies. No progress in communication is made.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
It's not as straightforward as Tories = bad, left-wing/Liberal/Labour = good.
Case in point. Labour under Blair and Brown had 13 years during which they could have pretty much done what the liked, and yet there was no movement towards same-sex marriage, which as far as I'm concerned touches on the basic human right of two people being able to express their love for each other. Cameron's Tories, propped up by the Lib-Dems, brought in The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013. Cameron is even on record stating "I support gay marriage because I'm a Conservative".
Left wing bullies have had a long reign of terror haven't they? And those who fake a Christian faith are at the top of the tree when it comes to being smug, irritating and pathetic little fuckwits.
But I sense a sea change in the air...
Previously, if you disagreed with a left wing bully, they would start on the personal attacks... (wacist wacist bigot bigot… homophobe, transphobe, this or that phobe. wah wah wah)…
The dummy gets spat out of their mouths, their toys are hurled out of the pram.
Like Violet Elizabeth Bott they threaten with pure noise and go quote the "Just William" heroine's refrain.. "I'll scream and scream and scream till I'm sick, and I can.. "
Now, lets look at the tactic that these little shits use.
They cannot debate the issue.
They can only hurl verbal abuse, and "identify" a person who DARES to disagree.
and they LOVE to get into little covens when they do that …..
Just look at the way that they behave on here.
Dare to disagree with gay marriage, due to your Christian faith? WWWWAAAAH they will say.
Dare to challenge the trans-agenda, climate change agenda, any agenda, because you can see the media manipulation? Wwwwwwaaahhhhhhh .. they will say....
Dare, in fact TO STAND UP FOR THE CHRISTIAN FAITH and the coven of left wing fuckwittery on here will start a chorus line of screams and howls.
Listen you little shits.
You are brain dead
You are way too brain dead to be Christians.
You have a creed, but its not Christianity.
And your day is over. People are going to stand up to you.
Scared?
Yeah, bullies do tend to be.
but look all over the western world...
everyone's had enough of the social justice warriors.... setting up a kindergarten "for climate change" and calling it the "extinction" movement, when its clearly just Glastonbury-on-tarmac, but without the need to pay the huge ticket fee.
Look at how repulsive people found those "climate change protestors" and look how many people saw the exploitation of poor aspergers syndrome Greta, as totally amoral.
Look at Milo Yianopolis…. the rioters just added to his book sales, and I wonder who picked up the cost of the buildings they burnt down to try and stop free speech?
Look at Peterson - he won't be bullied by the trans-agenda that seeks to throw people in prison, for fucks sake, if they "fail" to use the "correct pronoun" Real Christians cheer this hero of a man, but the left wing fuckwits in the SOF coven, just put their snouts in the trough and squeal abuse...
Look at Stefan Molyneaux, Colin Flaherty, Richie Allen, …. bravely lifting the lid on the Left wing media dictatorship and telling the truth, backed up by video evidence. It would be good to have a discussion on here about this. Will the left wing bullies that constantly POLICE this place, allow THAT?
Hell no.
And why don't the moderators get wise this?
Look at the fact that people were so irritated by the dictatorship of the Left, that they voted for Trump..... A massive protest vote against the fact that the Left has taken away Free Speech....
Look at the fact that our churches are full of this Left Wing fuckwittery, so that what is preached is no longer Christianity, and people don't go because it is a waste of time. If you go to a service to thank those who gave their lives in War, you get some idiot female, (oh yeah, its always a female)… who claims to be a vicar going "People are all the same" from the pulpit.
Well, no dear. People are not all the same. People start wars. That's why brave men fight and die. To protect us from evil people who start wars.
What a slap in the face to those who lost their lives at a criminally young age? Protecting women and children, and some dumb female goes "Well,... people are all quite nice really".
Its embarrassing.
I wasn't the only one to walk out.
How did the idiot get to be a vicar?
Oh, you can bet your life she's been sucking at the tit of "liberal" academics … usually with blonde hair parted in the middle, unkempt, badly slurred speech and a slot on Thought for the Day.
Left Wing fuckwits in the church, HATE reality. Get a job as a vicar lovey, and you can form your own version of reality and sell it to the fools who turn up to your "very own version of the Archers.... with bible quotes too"
I am a woman you dribbling little shit.
And as for your pathetic left wing language of "TERF" .. oh fuck right off.
You might be a mind controlled little twat but the rest of us live in the real world.
And as for the Greenham Common camp - I went there - it was an embarrassing mess, like a Caryl Churchill play. But a low level intellect might be impressed. YAWN.
You can't pretend to want to protect women and then call a woman priest 'some idiot female'.
Just what are you dribbling into your bib about now?
It is obvious that MEN fought in wars to protect women and children and homeland.
It is obvious that this sacrifice and courage and tenacity and sheer goodness, needs to be celebrated by somebody who doesn't waffle "All people are really good.. weally weally they are"
No fuckwit lefty female vicar.... People start wars.... Take your head out of your ass and get to grips with spiritual warfare....
Right, that's little Pomona dealt with .. NEXT..
I need to chew up and spit out at least six of these left wing coven members on here before I catch my plane to London. Get on with it.
All the moderators do on here is go "Oh, Oh, I'm just SO Pissed off!!" when they try to control the Left Wing Coven. That's just pathetic.
Hostly hammer and sickle raised aloft.
This (among other things) is a clear C6 violation. "Respect the Ship's crew" is a thing that you agreed to when you signed up here, and I'm referring you to Admin.
DT
HH
I'm weeping into my Women's Institute apron in FEAR !!!!!
Take four red capsules. In 10 minutes take two more. Help is on the way.
Does it bother you that the hammer and sickle is a symbol for those who seek to destroy Christianity ? No?
Do the tens of millions of Christians who died in gulags under that symbol, not trouble your tiny mind?
No?
SEE WHAT I MEAN ABOUT BRAIN WASHED LEFTY SCUM???
If you're a woman then why do you hate other women so much?
Now Pomona... go to your corner.
Sit.
Good
Here's a doggy treat for you.
Remember we talked about how you were making asumptions, cos you are brain washed lefty scum? Yeah?
Ok..
One of these assumptions is that when people object to the stupidity of female vicars, then they HATE WOMEN...
This is an assumption that fits your agenda.
It isn't the truth, but part of being a Lefty is not realizing the concept of truth, soaked as you are in moral relativism.
Now lie down.
If you feel you are not properly sedated, call 348-844 immediately. Failure to do so may result in prosecution for criminal drug evasion.
A bit of that, yes, though the people who say that they are intolerant of intolerance at least have this awareness. Some people seem genuinely unaware of how they are coming across, and of the inconsistencies in what they say and what they do.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
Thing is, if this is how the majority of people here see it, that they refuse to have Tory friends because Tory voters are complicit in murder, then realistically, we're not likely to have many Tories joining our community and staying, and so we won't be having the very kind of discussions we would need to have to create changes and influence each other.
I see similar in autistic communities - many autistic people see all neurotypical people as the enemy, ruining their lives, and they are hostile towards these neurotypical people. And this prevents progress, because then of course neurotypical people are likely to see autistic people are rude and hostile and not want to make the accessibility changes that autistic people see as important. It prevents any bridges being built, any meaningful conversation happening. I really do think that for positive change to take place, we all need to see each other as fellow humans, rather than seeing certain groups of people as the enemy, in 'them and us' terms.
It isn't marginalised people's job to be nice to their oppressors (as neurotypical people and the ableist world we live in are) in order to change their mind. It's the oppressor's job to listen, end of.
I wish more conservative Americans would post more in the Trump threads. The person recently planked was no good. They'd never explain themselves or engage. It was very frustrating.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
It's not as straightforward as Tories = bad, left-wing/Liberal/Labour = good.
Case in point. Labour under Blair and Brown had 13 years during which they could have pretty much done what the liked, and yet there was no movement towards same-sex marriage, which as far as I'm concerned touches on the basic human right of two people being able to express their love for each other. Cameron's Tories, propped up by the Lib-Dems, brought in The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013. Cameron is even on record stating "I support gay marriage because I'm a Conservative".
Where did I say that I thought Liberals/Labour were good? I think they are all bad, for different reasons.
Gay marriage only became a campaign issue for gay people due to the HIV/AIDS crisis and people not being able to see their dying partners in hospital. Prior to that, it wasn't a priority for gay people at all and gay people weren't interested in getting married. Thatcher along with her buddy Reagan played an incalculable role in the devastation caused by HIV to gay people and other groups, and Cameron is decidedly Thatcherite in his conservatism. Bringing in gay marriage decades later (with a spousal veto which makes trans people extremely vulnerable) does not excuse causing the deaths of gay people via HIV. It was no less than genocide.
Where did I say that I thought Liberals/Labour were good? I think they are all bad, for different reasons.
Gay marriage only became a campaign issue for gay people due to the HIV/AIDS crisis and people not being able to see their dying partners in hospital. Prior to that, it wasn't a priority for gay people at all and gay people weren't interested in getting married. Thatcher along with her buddy Reagan played an incalculable role in the devastation caused by HIV to gay people and other groups, and Cameron is decidedly Thatcherite in his conservatism. Bringing in gay marriage decades later (with a spousal veto which makes trans people extremely vulnerable) does not excuse causing the deaths of gay people via HIV. It was no less than genocide.
Thatcher lost power almost thirty years ago. Reagan over thirty years ago. And I think it is wholly unreasonable to call the death of homosexuals from HIV/AIDS genocide.
If you think they are all bad for different reasons then I don't know who you can be friends with.
I also observe plenty of Tory voters not seeing it this way, and thinking that voting for the Tories is improving life, and that more people will die and suffer unnecessarily from Labour being in power.
The problem is, is that really doesn't happen. The Iraq war notwithstanding (which, let's face it, lead to the slaughter of 100,000s), domestically, paying a bit more tax doesn't equate to people dying in the streets or starving to death in their homes. I find it incredibly hard to have a reasonable discussion, or even the expectation of a reasonable discussion with someone who thinks another 1p on the higher rate of income tax is somehow a gross violation of their economic autonomy, when there are actual children unable to learn in school because they're so hungry.
Someone who votes Tory, knowing that this is the case (and you'd have to have lived in a sealed bunker for the past 10 years not to know), is yes, complicit in the Windrush scandal, the PIP disaster, the UC debacle, the crushing of local government and democracy under the weight of Austerity, gross mismanagement of public funds, and the continuance of the most inept administration since ... I'm not a historian, but I'm going to say King Charles I.
I mean, I'd love to have a robust and frank exchange of views with any Tory voter, but when it comes down to it, I don't think I could be their friend.
No no no Fawkes Cat... You are too boring and long winded for me to beat up. I can't even read to the end of your dribblings.
NEXT
For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption has been standardized.
I have to say that I was rather taken with the logic that our friend was able to write at the length that suited them (viz. 2 full length posts) but that a response in under one post was too long.
And taking my tongue out of my cheek, apologies to hosts in general (and @Doc Tor in particular) for causing them extra work. I said that I would find out the hard way what would happen if I junior moderated, and (for suitably loose definitions of 'hard') I got precisely what I asked for.
@Peaceoftheaction666 I am really sorry that you have had bad experience of left wing Christians. Clearly when they hit you in your head, they did some serious damage.
Because you are spewing such a load of utter fucking shit on here it is either an indication of psychological problems or you just being unbelievably stupid.
I am generally drawn to the likelihood of you being as fucking stupid as you sound. Which, in case you don't get it, is extremely fucking stupid. There might be a village missing an idiot, but they are probably glad to get rid of you.
I mean, I'd love to have a robust and frank exchange of views with any Tory voter, but when it comes down to it, I don't think I could be their friend.
But you should be friends with those who offend you, or at least friendly. As bad as that sounds. That's one of the points JC made. You get close, you eat and drink together, you spend time together. And you learn why they think like they do, they understand where you're coming from, and empathy results. It's never okay to demonize even a bit another person, even a wee bit; I do it ally the time, sorry but not sorry I do it, it seems. Those who disagree with us on fundamental issues do so for real and genuine reasons, even though we may hate to admit it.
Comments
!!!111!!!!1111!!!!!!!!
He's RIGHT you know
Sharks have eyes but so does a potato
We don't care that you dislike the whimsical adoption of a left-wing symbol on a thread about "left wing" Christians (even if "left wing" is applied in an idiosyncratic manner) by a member of the Crew advising you to chill.
We do care that you so readily ignored that official advice and disrespect the volunteers who help keep the Ship sailing.
We're giving you two weeks shore leave. Maybe by then you'll have sobered up and can make a coherent argument which we can discuss.
Alan, Ship of Fools Admin
I don't think that any of those are intrinsically 'left wing' because I know some real tankies who are utterly authoritarian and ruthless, but there's something very telling that the Right are willing to cede that ground.
At art class I sit next to a right wing racist. She takes any opportunity to talk about ‘them’ in a disparaging way. In every other sense - as far as I can tell - she’s a lovely, kind, gentle, generous person. So I have to put her racism down to fear. But I’m a chicken these days and simply change the subject when she starts talking about ‘them’.
In the past I would have challenged her. As I did, many times, in staff rooms and with my MIL. But, the older I get, the harder I find confrontation.
I’m far too comfortable in my left wing echo chamber, I’m sure. But - how to get out of it and stay unhurt?
Dear God! We'd die of alcohol poisoning!
It's worth separating out social and political views. And you can obviously be politically left while maintaining racist, sexist and homophobic views. You can also be politically right while not being racist, sexist or a homophobe.
However, there's a very voluble (and as far as I can tell, large) group on the Right who actively boast of their socially reactionary views. The two shouldn't be synonymous, but they are.
Do I think there are an increased number of avoidable deaths in the UK directly due to policies brought in by the Tories? Yes. But I don't think that's a particularly contentious view. It's a logical step to say that those voting for those policies see them as acceptable collateral damage to achieve their political goals.
Well, some of us see justice as the goal, not tolerance. I'm not remotely interested in tolerating injustice. I don't have Tory friends on purpose, precisely because I do believe the Tories to be complicit in murder, particularly of disabled people. I think this is a really key issue for UK churches actually, who will have many members claiming to want to include everyone but who then vote to exclude disabled people from life, either literally in the case of people who die because of being denied benefits, or who struggle to live because of the tiny amount they are expected to live on and cuts to the social services and NHS services that are supposed to help them. It is an act of enormous hypocrisy. The Tory party at prayer is not listening to God's replies.
Being of Left-Wing™ views myself, I have no problem at all with being showered with Opprobrious Epithets. They make me realise that I'm right (IYSWIM).
Yes, the combining of social and political I see more often in American conservative Christians, to be honest.
And yes, I agree about the increased number of avoidable deaths due to the Tory policies, and I think this is an important topic to focus on in discussion. I also observe plenty of Tory voters not seeing it this way, and thinking that voting for the Tories is improving life, and that more people will die and suffer unnecessarily from Labour being in power. It needs to be discussed. But I don't think it's helpful to the discussion for left wing people to, say, post memes about Tory voters being evil murderers - that doesn't lead to constructive discussion, just like Peaceoftheaction666's emotive, accusatory posts here don't lead to constructive discussion. It just leads to more polarisation, and seeing the other side in black and white terms, as the baddies.
Thing is, if this is how the majority of people here see it, that they refuse to have Tory friends because Tory voters are complicit in murder, then realistically, we're not likely to have many Tories joining our community and staying, and so we won't be having the very kind of discussions we would need to have to create changes and influence each other.
I see similar in autistic communities - many autistic people see all neurotypical people as the enemy, ruining their lives, and they are hostile towards these neurotypical people. And this prevents progress, because then of course neurotypical people are likely to see autistic people are rude and hostile and not want to make the accessibility changes that autistic people see as important. It prevents any bridges being built, any meaningful conversation happening. I really do think that for positive change to take place, we all need to see each other as fellow humans, rather than seeing certain groups of people as the enemy, in 'them and us' terms.
Yes, that's the kind of thing I mean. When people are hostile to the other side, the other side just feels more self-righteous about how they're the goodies and the other side is the baddies. No progress in communication is made.
It's not as straightforward as Tories = bad, left-wing/Liberal/Labour = good.
Case in point. Labour under Blair and Brown had 13 years during which they could have pretty much done what the liked, and yet there was no movement towards same-sex marriage, which as far as I'm concerned touches on the basic human right of two people being able to express their love for each other. Cameron's Tories, propped up by the Lib-Dems, brought in The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013. Cameron is even on record stating "I support gay marriage because I'm a Conservative".
My time is yours...
Very good, proceed...
Yes, I understand...
Yes, fine...
Yes... yes, I understand...
Yes, fine...
Excellent...
Yes...
Could you be more... specific?
For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption has been standardized.
Take four red capsules. In 10 minutes take two more. Help is on the way.
Does it bother you that the hammer and sickle is a symbol for those who seek to destroy Christianity ? No?
Do the tens of millions of Christians who died in gulags under that symbol, not trouble your tiny mind?
No?
SEE WHAT I MEAN ABOUT BRAIN WASHED LEFTY SCUM???
[/quote]
Are you now or have you ever been?
If you feel you are not properly sedated, call 348-844 immediately. Failure to do so may result in prosecution for criminal drug evasion.
Is a row of 14 consecutive posts some sort of record?
It isn't marginalised people's job to be nice to their oppressors (as neurotypical people and the ableist world we live in are) in order to change their mind. It's the oppressor's job to listen, end of.
Where did I say that I thought Liberals/Labour were good? I think they are all bad, for different reasons.
Gay marriage only became a campaign issue for gay people due to the HIV/AIDS crisis and people not being able to see their dying partners in hospital. Prior to that, it wasn't a priority for gay people at all and gay people weren't interested in getting married. Thatcher along with her buddy Reagan played an incalculable role in the devastation caused by HIV to gay people and other groups, and Cameron is decidedly Thatcherite in his conservatism. Bringing in gay marriage decades later (with a spousal veto which makes trans people extremely vulnerable) does not excuse causing the deaths of gay people via HIV. It was no less than genocide.
Good guess, by no cigar. By 28 years.
Thatcher lost power almost thirty years ago. Reagan over thirty years ago. And I think it is wholly unreasonable to call the death of homosexuals from HIV/AIDS genocide.
If you think they are all bad for different reasons then I don't know who you can be friends with.
THX1138
George Lucas' finest moment (it was all downhill thereafter
I'm assuming it's T1000 saying "I'll be back" in Terminator.
The problem is, is that really doesn't happen. The Iraq war notwithstanding (which, let's face it, lead to the slaughter of 100,000s), domestically, paying a bit more tax doesn't equate to people dying in the streets or starving to death in their homes. I find it incredibly hard to have a reasonable discussion, or even the expectation of a reasonable discussion with someone who thinks another 1p on the higher rate of income tax is somehow a gross violation of their economic autonomy, when there are actual children unable to learn in school because they're so hungry.
Someone who votes Tory, knowing that this is the case (and you'd have to have lived in a sealed bunker for the past 10 years not to know), is yes, complicit in the Windrush scandal, the PIP disaster, the UC debacle, the crushing of local government and democracy under the weight of Austerity, gross mismanagement of public funds, and the continuance of the most inept administration since ... I'm not a historian, but I'm going to say King Charles I.
I mean, I'd love to have a robust and frank exchange of views with any Tory voter, but when it comes down to it, I don't think I could be their friend.
I have to say that I was rather taken with the logic that our friend was able to write at the length that suited them (viz. 2 full length posts) but that a response in under one post was too long.
And taking my tongue out of my cheek, apologies to hosts in general (and @Doc Tor in particular) for causing them extra work. I said that I would find out the hard way what would happen if I junior moderated, and (for suitably loose definitions of 'hard') I got precisely what I asked for.
Because you are spewing such a load of utter fucking shit on here it is either an indication of psychological problems or you just being unbelievably stupid.
I am generally drawn to the likelihood of you being as fucking stupid as you sound. Which, in case you don't get it, is extremely fucking stupid. There might be a village missing an idiot, but they are probably glad to get rid of you.
Kindly STAFU.
Thanks.
I think...
But you should be friends with those who offend you, or at least friendly. As bad as that sounds. That's one of the points JC made. You get close, you eat and drink together, you spend time together. And you learn why they think like they do, they understand where you're coming from, and empathy results. It's never okay to demonize even a bit another person, even a wee bit; I do it ally the time, sorry but not sorry I do it, it seems. Those who disagree with us on fundamental issues do so for real and genuine reasons, even though we may hate to admit it.
YES!!! And yes...