Nothing about this is a protest. (NSFW Racial Expletives)

[JoeWeber 2,294]

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

  

8 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Thank you again for more of your million word repetitive posts

I don't do it for you joe, nor the people like you that I'm replying to - that would be a waste of time.

But it does speak to the level of anti-religious bigotry, double standards and seeds of hate that we see in this forum, which I would say are in the germinating stages if compared to what we saw with the soviets.

 

8 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

At the end of the day all that you bring to the table are wish thinking and fear of being wrong. You have nothing that has a chance of proving what you believe is true. As your argument, you want we naysayers to accept as of equal value your gut feelings and the teachings of your parents.  You want us to feel the exaltation you have felt in the company of like believers.

I have no idea what you're talking about, and quite frankly neither do you.

Do not want unbelievers to believe as you have been taught to believe? Do you not want unbelievers to find Jesus and gather together in exaltation?

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

You were the one who got hot and bothered. I just made a few calm posts saying an "attack" wasn't really an attack and you eventually lost it.

Kinda funny when that happens, isn't it.  I get that same scenario A LOT.  

Posters say I'm enraged. 

As far as me overlooking posts - Wouldn't that be about the same as your first bullet point?

Quote

So you're attacking me for something I didn't say, "silence" on a particular topic because well, you have nothing else to attack with.

Funny how that works, eh?

[olofscience 420]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Funny how that works, eh?

Here's how it works:

1. You make a claim that you're a centrist
2. The logical consequence if (1) is true means that you should critique/defend both left and right equally. You should also recognise emotion in left/right posts equally.
3. Most posting evidence points to a heavy bias towards Trump. Even right-wingers who criticise trump are automatically labelled "far-left" like George F Will.
4. Therefore, claim in (1) can be concluded to be false, until further evidence emerges to balance out the posting history.

You know, the scientific method they teach in high school - you can't just REQUIRE proof of a negative out of the blue. The claim, or hypothesis, is where you start.

I actually continue reading your posts to gather more data to prove the claim (1), but it's getting a bit tiresome and you're not really providing much except support to Trump. So I do complain a bit about the lack of evidence. As soon as you provide that I will be happy to agree with your claim.

But since I made no claim yet (about the topic at least), Coreece had no basis to then shout "hypocrite" by choosing something arbitrary that I didn't say.

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by olofscience

[yoink 321]

It's been a number of years since I've seen this, but IBTL!

[Coreece 189]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

But since I made no claim yet (about the topic at least), Coreece had no basis to then shout "hypocrite" by choosing something arbitrary that I didn't say.

  And then I said it's about the silence and/or inability to recognize anti-religious bigotry in this forum, specifically wolfriverjoe's comments.

So here, do you think the following statements are an appropriate response to the covid crisis?  Do you not see the hate?  How would you feel if I had said something similar about the BLM protesters that were also exercising their 1st amendment right at a time when they felt they needed to the most?  What if Trump had decided to start documenting all people that were congregating in large numbers, denying them medical treatment and leaving them for dead?

 

On 3/26/2020 at 2:12 PM, wolfriverjoe said:

I'm finding out that I'm not quite as nice of a person as I'd like to think.

I'm perfectly fine with those idiot preachers calling their congregations in to mass.

If those fools think that "Jesus will protect them" or 'the whole thing is a hoax', great.
Let them infect each other, get lots of people sick all at once, overwhelm the health care system and die. 

The downside is that many of those morons are rich and influential enough that they will get care, displacing poor and minority patients who didn't do stupid shit like gather in large groups.

 

On 4/11/2020 at 3:15 PM, wolfriverjoe said:

I'm done being nice to stupid people who endanger others.

Take down their names, driver's licence numbers and a picture (easiest would be to take a pic while they hold the D/L next to their face).
Inform them that if they choose to join the large public gathering in violation of the law that they have then forfeited their right to get hospital care.

If they get seriously sick, God can heal them. Or they can die.

Seriously, it's disgusting and even more deplorable than much of the stuff listed in the deplorables thread.  I mean this is the mindset that allows atrocities to start if left unchecked, especially in times of crisis and instability, and it's how sick people justify it.

 

Extra credit:

Do you think my initial response below to wolfriverjoe's  comment was appropriate?

On 4/14/2020 at 1:20 AM, Coreece said:

That seems rather deplorable.   I mean even if people were going around deliberately wiping infected snot on others with criminal intent, they should still be entitled to due process and medical treatment like any other criminal.

There are millions of "stupid people who endanger others" everyday.  I hardly think this crisis warrants abandonment of foundational principles.

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by Coreece

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, olofscience said:

Here's how it works:

1. You make a claim that you're a centrist

 

You have to start with the correct statement.

I am more centrist than the vast majority vocal posters, like you, on this forum.

[turtlespeed 212]

I will ask this question.  Leaving BLM specifically out of it because that gives an illusion of color/race based thinking.

 . . .  What is the honest opinion of what the actual backlash from everyone (hopefully everyone would be on the same page as this) if I were to state the following - (forget that it would pretty much be against the constitution to do so, but morally.)

""Take down the protester's names, driver's licence numbers, and a picture (easiest would be to take a pic while they hold the D/L next to their face).
Inform them that if they choose to join the large public gathering in violation of the law that they have then forfeited their right to get hospital care.

If they get seriously sick, Their cause can heal them. Or they can die.""

 

Can you imagine if that question was race based?

Why is that OK when its faith based?

 

What if it were against the Jews, and not the Christians that it was intended for?

Isn't that thinking the same fascism that is being assigned to others in this forum?

 

[Phil1111 905]

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

  And then I said it's about the silence and/or inability to recognize anti-religious bigotry in this forum, specifically wolfriverjoe's comments.

So here, do you think the following statements are an appropriate response to the covid crisis?  Do you not see the hate?  How would you feel if I had said something similar about the BLM protesters that were also exercising their 1st amendment right at a time when they felt they needed to the most?  What if Trump had decided to start documenting all people that were congregating in large numbers, denying them medical treatment and leaving them for dead?

Seriously, it's disgusting and even more deplorable than much of the stuff listed in the deplorables thread.  I mean this is the mindset that allows atrocities to start if left unchecked, especially in times of crisis and instability, and it's how sick people justify it.

IMO Joe's comments are not so much anti-religious as anti those who endanger other peoples lives.

As far as trump is concerned: Mr. Trump’s Oct. 4 proclamation ordered consular officers to bar immigrants who could not prove they had health insurance or the ability to pay for medical costs once they become permanent residents of the United States.

The Trump administration has started denying pleas by non-citizens who are trying to extend their time in the U.S. in order to treat severe medical conditions. Letters issued by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and obtained by ABC News, tell those applying for medical relief that agency offices, "no longer consider deferred action requests," except for members of the military.

The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation has estimated that 27 million Americans have lost coverage in the pandemic;

Both you and trump cloak yourself in the bible. No offense to you but trump has zero credibility for any empathetic values or actions.

I will lean in Joe's direction and say that those who endanger other peoples lives should know that actions have consequence. That includes ministers of the church that as leaders allow gatherings without social distancing, masks, and other safety protocols.

[turtlespeed 212]

45 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

I will lean in Joe's direction and say that those who endanger other peoples lives should know that actions have consequence. That includes ministers of the church that as leaders allow gatherings without social distancing, masks, and other safety protocols.

Well then - shouldn't you be just as hard hearted against protesters?  What about the organizers of these protests?  Shouldn't they be lumped into the same category as your hated ministers?

That's a hell of a lot more people than I ever saw at an outdoor church gathering.

 

 

[Phil1111 905]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Well then - shouldn't you be just as hard hearted against protesters?  What about the organizers of these protests?  Shouldn't they be lumped into the same category as your hated ministers?

That's a hell of a lot more people than I ever saw at an outdoor church gathering.

 

 

For protestors, should have masks and social dist.

[Coreece 189]

5 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

IMO Joe's comments are not so much anti-religious as anti those who endanger other peoples lives.

Ok, so would you target minority groups the same way?  Not that it would make it any better.

There are millions of "stupid people who endanger others" everyday.  I don't agree with their actions either, but I hardly think this crisis warrants abandonment of foundational principles, like due process.  Unfortunately people like you disagree - and I could never get on board with those who suffer from such dysfunctional thinking.

 

5 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

That includes ministers of the church that as leaders allow gatherings without social distancing, masks, and other safety protocols.

If you even bothered to read any of stories on the subject at that time without all the bloodthirsty rush to judgement in this dog shit forum, you'd see that those churches did implement social distancing measures - one even purchased a $100k air purification system in addition.  Not sure about the masks, but that was before science changed it's mind again.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, Phil1111 said:

For protestors, should have masks and social dist.

As should any crowd.

[Phil1111 905]

48 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Ok, so would you target minority groups the same way?  Not that it would make it any better.

Why not?

There are millions of "stupid people who endanger others" everyday.  I don't agree with their actions either, but I hardly think this crisis warrants abandonment of foundational principles, like due process.  Unfortunately people like you disagree - and I could never get on board with those who suffer from such dysfunctional thinking.

Its the people who lead, encourage or pander dangerous conduct.. What happened to conservative "responsibility".

If you even bothered to read any of stories on the subject at that time without all the bloodthirsty rush to judgement in this dog shit forum, you'd see that those churches did implement social distancing measures - one even purchased a $100k air purification system in addition.  Not sure about the masks, but that was before science changed it's mind again.

Baloney, the stories were all about ministers wanting packed pews and full churches. Churches are well know for poor ventilation as a means to save construction  costs.

As far as dog shit and circle jerking. You seem to badmouth it yet come back to it like a moth to flames.

 

[Coreece 189]

6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Ok, so would you target minority groups the same way?  Not that it would make it any better.

Why not?

There are millions of "stupid people who endanger others" everyday.  I don't agree with their actions either, but I hardly think this crisis warrants abandonment of foundational principles, like due process.  Unfortunately people like you disagree - and I could never get on board with those who suffer from such dysfunctional thinking.

I explained it right there in that second paragraph.  It can't be any clearer, yet you still apparently have a problem with comprehension, which is probably why you often misrepresent the abundance of article's you repost ad nauseam - at least the ones I bother to check anyway.  Quality rather than quantity - you should try it sometime.

 

11 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

If you even bothered to read any of stories on the subject at that time without all the bloodthirsty rush to judgement in this dog shit forum, you'd see that those churches did implement social distancing measures - one even purchased a $100k air purification system in addition.  Not sure about the masks, but that was before science changed it's mind again.

Baloney, the stories were all about ministers wanting packed pews and full churches. Churches are well know for poor ventilation as a means to save construction  costs.

You only feel that way because you're blinded by your own hateful bias and deluded by your continual stereotyping of religious folks, much like the ignorant working class under soviet atheist rule and their vile propaganda.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

37 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I explained it right there in that second paragraph.  It can't be any clearer, yet you still apparently have a problem with comprehension, which is probably why you often misrepresent the abundance of article's you repost ad nauseam - at least the ones I bother to check anyway.  Quality rather than quantity - you should try it sometime.

 

You only feel that way because you're blinded by your own hateful bias and deluded by your continual stereotyping of religious folks, much like the ignorant working class under soviet atheist rule and their vile propaganda.

So soviet atheist rule over ignorant workers is your new denial schtick, lovely. But then it would take a propensity for credulity to buy that crap so no surprise.

[nigel99 143]

2 hours ago, Coreece said:

Ok, so would you target minority groups the same way?  Not that it would make it any better.

There are millions of "stupid people who endanger others" everyday.  I don't agree with their actions either, but I hardly think this crisis warrants abandonment of foundational principles, like due process.  Unfortunately people like you disagree - and I could never get on board with those who suffer from such dysfunctional thinking.

 

If you even bothered to read any of stories on the subject at that time without all the bloodthirsty rush to judgement in this dog shit forum, you'd see that those churches did implement social distancing measures - one even purchased a $100k air purification system in addition.  Not sure about the masks, but that was before science changed it's mind again.

I know you’ll likely see this as Christian bashing, but isn’t god supposed to protect his flock?

[Coreece 189]

26 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

I know you’ll likely see this as Christian bashing, but isn’t god supposed to protect his flock?

Several areas of scripture immediately come to mind:

Proverbs 27:12 - A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.

Other areas would be those that place more emphasis on spiritual life vs the temporal, as well as those speaking on the "wages of sin" and how each man is "appointed to die once."

 

And no, I don't see that as christian bashing - wolfriverjoe set a new bar for that in this forum.  What do you think?

https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/268741-nothing-about-this-is-a-protest-nsfw-racial-expletives/?do=findComment&comment=4911648

 

[Phil1111 905]

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I explained it right there in that second paragraph.  It can't be any clearer, yet you still apparently have a problem with comprehension, which is probably why you often misrepresent the abundance of article's you repost ad nauseam - at least the ones I bother to check anyway.  Quality rather than quantity - you should try it sometime.

 

You only feel that way because you're blinded by your own hateful bias and deluded by your continual stereotyping of religious folks, much like the ignorant working class under soviet atheist rule and their vile propaganda.

Adjective upon adjective to paint any non-believer into your prejudiced wonderland of christian pseudo superiority.. Its no wonder you and evangelicals love trump and his racist bigotry.

Tomorrow is your day of self congratulatory superiority. Where you can join those who would walk out the chapel doors and be ready to screw the world. Just like your other favorite idol of worship, trump.

[normiss 620]

38 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

I know you’ll likely see this as Christian bashing, but isn’t god supposed to protect his flock?

I know plenty of christian believer friends with zero trust in their god's protection.

They are armed to the teeth!

[Coreece 189]

6 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I explained it right there in that second paragraph.  It can't be any clearer, yet you still apparently have a problem with comprehension, which is probably why you often misrepresent the abundance of article's you repost ad nauseam - at least the ones I bother to check anyway.  Quality rather than quantity - you should try it sometime.

 

You only feel that way because you're blinded by your own hateful bias and deluded by your continual stereotyping of religious folks

Adjective upon adjective to paint any non-believer into your prejudiced wonderland of christian pseudo superiority.. Its no wonder you and evangelicals love trump and his racist bigotry.

Tomorrow is your day of self congratulatory superiority. Where you can join those who would walk out the chapel doors and be ready to screw the world. Just like your other favorite idol of worship, trump.

QED

[nigel99 143]

3 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Several areas of scripture immediately come to mind:

Proverbs 27:12 - A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.

Other areas would be those that place more emphasis on spiritual life vs the temporal, as well as those speaking on the "wages of sin" and how each man is "appointed to die once."

 

And no, I don't see that as christian bashing - wolfriverjoe set a new bar for that in this forum.  What do you think?

https://www.dropzone.com/forums/topic/268741-nothing-about-this-is-a-protest-nsfw-racial-expletives/?do=findComment&comment=4911648

 

First off, obeying the law of the land is actually one of the teachings of Jesus. If they are going to flout the rules they deserve the consequences. His suggestion is one that I don’t necessarily agree with. However there should be consequences. They are selfishly placing other people at risk. Maybe they should be fined heavily and the money put into subsidising the costs of the innocent people they have harmed, and if that means they lose their homes and everything they own (due to your expensive health care system) that seems reasonable to me.

Secondly this cherry picking of the bible always amuses me. Didn’t Jesus teachings nullify the Old Testament it is stoning gays still acceptable?

And to ask you a question in return. Where do you stand on Ron’s eagerness to shoot liberals? Is he given a pass for wanting to inflict harm on people? I haven’t heard you advocate that, but to my knowledge you haven’t smacked that down either (could be wrong I don’t read every post in every thread)

But my point still stands, god seems impotent on protecting his flock

 

[Phil1111 905]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

So soviet atheist rule over ignorant workers is your new denial schtick, lovely. But then it would take a propensity for credulity to buy that crap so no surprise.

No he has to reach back to the old Soviet union to picture himself as the modern cross bearer for christianity. Like his other false idol trump, it helps his self imagery of playing the victim for his beliefs. Prosecuted for no reason since eternity.

[Coreece 189]

14 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

First off, obeying the law of the land is actually one of the teachings of Jesus. If they are going to flout the rules they deserve the consequences.

What part of "due process" in my post don't you understand?

 

15 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Secondly this cherry picking of the bible always amuses me.

So you don't agree with proverbs 27:12?  -  "A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences"

What was that whole thing about consequences you were just talking about?

 

18 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Didn’t Jesus teachings nullify the Old Testament it is stoning gays still acceptable?

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

 

21 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Where do you stand on Ron’s eagerness to shoot liberals?

I don't know what you're talking about, but I have no problem with self defense.  Do you?

[nigel99 143]

5 minutes ago, Coreece said:

What part of "due process" in my post don't you understand?

 

So you don't agree with proverbs 27:12?  -  "A prudent person foresees danger and takes precautions. The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences"

What was that whole thing about consequences you were just talking about?

 

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.

 

I don't know what you're talking about, but I have no problem with self defense.  Do you?

Well suffering the consequences could be exactly as was originally proposed. Deny them healthcare because they are ultimately costing society. So in some ways you are agreeing with him. To be clear I don’t care what religion or belief system you are from, the same would apply. Don’t put others at risk because of your selfishness.

Fair enough on casting the first stone. 

You’ve not seen Ron’s posts? They go well beyond self Defense. From the way he writes the message he is itching for the SHTF so that right wingers can go on a killing spree. 
 

As far as self defense, I’m lucky enough to live in a country with a functional police system and without one of worst gun and violence problems in the world.

[Coreece 189]

27 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Well suffering the consequences could be exactly as was originally proposed. Deny them healthcare because they are ultimately costing society. So in some ways you are agreeing with him.

No,  I've made it quite clear why I absolutely and unequivocally do not agree with him, and how repulsive it is to boot.

 

33 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

You’ve not seen Ron’s posts? They go well beyond self Defense. From the way he writes the message

Oh, "the way he writes the message." 

Okie-dokie.