winsor

Again, I sure as hell would. Religion is a communicable form of mental illness, and most religions have the potential to be seriously virulent. Islam pretty much pins the meter. I hold Islam in the same high esteem as I do National Socialism, and the Third Reich was underwritten by the Vatican. Thus I react to a hijab or a habit as I would a swastika.

If he was a follower of the Illiterate Pervert Psychopath rather than the Magic Jewish Zombie I'm sure I wouldn't give him a pass

I can only guess what this is thread is about, but I'm getting weary of the process of impeaching every scumbag we elect to the Oval Office. Trump was true to form from Day 1. Anyone who was surprised by Clinton's behavior didn't do their homework. Biden's been a lying, cheating sonofabitch for his whole career. In fact that has been his career. Looking at his identifiable income vs his assets, it is apparent that his 'money management' skills are on a par with Serbian cops I witnessed, who made like $100 a week and had a $100,000 car as a daily driver. Wanting to be president should be an instant disqualifier. Given our political system, we should get used to cretins and criminals getting elected. The scum rises to the top. BSBD, Winsor

The claim that he's the subject of an endless string of witch hunts tends to support the thesis that maybe he's a witch. The unpleasant kind.

I briefly had a Twitter account on the advice of a Rabbi. After rapidly coming to the conclusion that it was a waste of time, I cancelled without a moment's regret.

He was the best. I'm glad I could spend good times with him. Blue skies, Chuck!

Whe Whether or not you liked his music, he was an amazing guy.

Drano

You realize, of course, that everything you think you know is wrong. Let's start with your invisible friend, a supposedly omnipotent entity that took human form a couple of thousand years ago. You use a name for him that raises a number of flags. For one thing, there is no 'J' in either Hebrew or Aramaic, and I can't think of the Greek version. For another, the 'us' ending of the name is strictly Roman. The bottom line is that the fable upon which you depend is a Roman invention used to wield power, the Magic Jewish Zombie bears only passing similarity to anyone who may or may not have existed in Judea in the time frame in question, and the bulk of the narrative is demonstrably nonsense. As you were, Winsor

If you read Acts you'll find out that being rich is bad, and the solution is to give your wealth to the church. All of it.

Since Communism and its variants are based on True Belief (tm) in demonstrably false ideology, it qualifies nicely as religion. National Socialism is a pathological variant. Take this into consideration and the virulence of religion outweighs most other forms of evil.

Secular psychopaths do not typically kill in the 'name of secularism.' Delusional religious types routinely and explicitly kill in the name of their particular invisible friend. By all means feel free to demonstrate the fact that the distinction is lost on you.

Historically speaking, an awful lot of people have been killed in the name of the Magic Jewish Zombie.

An acquaintance once bemoaned the fact that people with mental illness were not accorded the same sympathy and consideration as, say, cancer patients. My response was along the lines that the mentally ill are, of course, sick, but they can also be dangerous. Having them burn down the house, or drive suicidally with passengers aboard, or hang people for witchcraft after getting advice from invisible friends is too close to the norm. The form of communicable mental illness we call 'religion' is among the most malevolent forms of insanity in existence. The number of otherwise innocent people butchered in the name of <insert deity> is simply breathtaking. I rate Communism as a religious grade delusion, so Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot's excesses are in good company. Reading pretty much anyone's religious text suggests that anyone who takes its contents at face value is batshit crazy. Cherry picking what parts of a particular holy book one wants to espouse is typical - if a true believer even sees fit to read it. As an aside, how many times inTorah is heaven, hell or any version of 'the devil' mentioned (hint - it's a round number). Remember, religion is like genitals. Fine to have and enjoy with pride, but waving it around in public is generally offensive. BSBD, Winsor BTW, the Applegate Fairbairn is a vast improvement over the V-42

If you did the tiniest bit of research, you'd find that nothing that you claim has any solid basis. You speak of "The Bible" as though it is monolithic - a contention that is patently false. 'The Book' originally referred to Devarim ('Deuteronomy) until Ezra the Scribe attached the four prequel texts, Bereshit, Shemoth, Vayiqura and Bamidbar at the end of the Babylonian exile to give us the Torah. Over rather a long time a variety of books were added, becoming Nevi'im and Ketuvim, which round out the Hebrew Scriptures. Now we get to the addenda generated on a different continent, in different languages, by people with no understanding of family traditions. Since we hold the copyright on the original, the 'New' and 'Old' nomenclature is inappropriate. 'Scarlett' was similarly touted as the further adventures of the 'Gone with the Wind' saga, though unauthorized, by a different author with different agenda. The first four of these books use the Tanakh as a claim to legitimacy, and were written for a Roman audience. They reference Isaiah to claim messianic status - Matthew and Luke even start of with paternal lineage to verify the lineage of being the first born of the House of David, which doesn't fly without having a perfectly normal family tree. The hero of the story is given a Roman name (there is no 'j' in Hebrew or Aramaic) and his family is blamed for his being executed in accordance with Roman law (nothing suspicious about that...). Even a passing evaluation of the claims made over the centuries by 'Christian' sources show all of them to be politically motivated tripe. Credo quia absurdum is the basis of the whole system of belief (don't feel alone, Islam, LDS, Scientology et al. every bit as bad). One is tasked to 'respect' all religions, which I suppose is good advice. One should similarly respect Brown Bears in that failing to take into consideration their basic nature has historically resulted in people being made dead in short order. Many a Rabbi, when asked if, say, Adam was 'created' knowing how to keep track of the date, the significance of his age, and so forth might roll their eyes and say "Bubbie, it's Bronze Age family lore - don't read too much into it. It gives us the basis of our calendar, so take it for what it's worth." The Children of Israel are one big, dysfunctional family. The universal religions that use the Tanakh as a basis consist of wannabes whose perception of the underpinnings of their faith is born of consummate ignorance. As you were, Winsor

Apparently atheist.

You attribute much to one of my cousins that is both unsupported and nonsensical.

"In the beginning God created man. Man, being a gentleman, returned the favor." Clarence Darrow

Seppuku would be the honorable option.

A wild guess says you weren't Infantry.

I suppose you're right. One side of the aisle gets to wave the banner saying "We suck less!" All things being equal, I need to be reminded which one that is.

Which one in particular?

Peace through superior firepower is the only option available to Ukraine. The Russian - Ukrainian Friendship Treaty is still in effect, so a negotiated peace is pretty well covered. You are perhaps recommending that Ukraine do the same thing and expect different results? That's precious.

The closest I get to 'diversity' is "Equal rights, equal responsibilities - no more and no less." James Webb's discussion of women in combat applies nicely. He was fine with it until they began to lower the physical training standards so women had a better shot. He pointed out that training by touch football rules is all well and good until you go up against the Green Bay Packers. If I take a round through the pelvis, a woman who can throw me over her shoulder and get me out of harm's way has my vote, and a guy who can't get me out of the line of fire is undeserving of a participation medal. If a woman can shoot the eyebrows off a fruit fly at 800 meters and is cool with life in the field, I'm happy to have her in my squad. From a practical standpoint, I'd prefer she have an IUD or birth control implants so her fire team doesn't have to deal with pregnancy issues. Statistically speaking, sailors and soldiers who serve together tend to wind up with pregnancies if there is no intervention. For some reason telling them not to have sex doesn't work 100%. I still find it offensive that the women that stepped up to the plate and did an outstanding job of producing war materiel ('Rosie the Riveter' et al.) were sent packing after the war so that men could take their place. This flies in the face of my concept of equality. Despite the denial now at work, biological realities are realities, not abstract constructs. I thought PMS was make believe until I witnessed it up close and personal. It's not good or bad per se, it's just a factor to be considered in some cases, and some women need a sick day at least once a month as a result. Female impersonators are spared these particulars. I have exactly the same right to try out to play in the NBA as did, say, Michael Jordan. Lucky for the NBA, they are allowed to discriminate against people who are singularly unsuited to playing basketball such as me. There is a big difference between legitimate discrimination and illegal discrimination. I am also fine with not qualifying for NAMBLA, since the North American Marlon Brando Look Alikes should be limited to people with a passing resemblance to Marlon Brando. BSBD, Winsor

Beat Serbia by a long shot.