Continuing on with the moronic, we now come to the what is possibly the worst of it:
"There simply is no corresponding set of "liberal conspiracy theories" that are as common and widespread and widely taken seriously."
This is as astoundingly false as anything Dan has ever said...and that's truly saying something.
"In fact, I did a search and just couldn't find anything serious."
Really. Where did he search? His socks and underwear drawer? But here's the thing: Dan once again is dictating what counts as "common, widespread or serious". How convenient. What this means is that he can once again insist what he regards as "right wing conspiracy theories" as "common, widespread or serious", while describing left wing conspiracies as UNcommon, NOT widespread and UNserious. This is typical Dan-style lying. Well, I've shown where those conspiracies he listed were far from widely believed or taken seriously by the average conservative and which weren't even properly presented, but purposely contorted to disparage conservatives and which weren't even "theories" at all, but beliefs based on facts, evidence and reality. Those like Dan dismisses them in the manner described above.
But as to a lack of any leftist parallels...well, that suggests what he said about "right wing conspiracy theories" was true in the first place. IF they are, then there are indeed parallels to the extent the left believes all manner of crap as if proven. But the truth is, they go way beyond what he wants to believe is true of conservatives. His first lie is what begins this post, followed by his doubling down that he couldn't find any leftist parallels. Maybe he should have tried searching the internet. That's what I did, and you'll see what I've found.
https://i2i.org/left-wing-conspiracy-theories/
https://insidesources.com/tag/liberal-conspiracy-theories/
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/sep/21/speaking-qanon-conspiracies-check-out-these-gems-l/
This next one argues that "conspiracy theories" are no less common among the left-wing as the moral.
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2020/07/23/how_the_left_fools_themselves_into_thinking_the_right_are_conspiracy_theorists.html
...as does this one, and it also affirms such behavior is not on the rise.
https://www.niskanencenter.org/conspiracy-beliefs-are-not-increasing-or-exclusive-to-the-right/
Now, I didn't do more than a cursory read of these and other links I chose against posting, but the Russian Collusion Hoax is an obvious one which might be among the links above. Also, the lefty morons like Dan still like to believe Trump is racist, with their very own Joey "Which One Is My Wife" Biden still repeating the "good nazis in Charlottesville" lie. How many lefties still believe Trump urinated on a bed in Russia because Obama slept in it? How many believe he grabs women by the crotch, like Dan and some of his leftist "enemy of the people" news sources still do? Then of course there's the conspiracy that there are more than two genders, that abortion doesn't kill a person, that Border Control Agents on horses whipped innocent Haitians.
If a "conspiracy theory" is a falsehood one needs to prove and support with evidence and data in order for a conservative to be taken seriously, there is far, far more bullshit the lefties...especially those like Dan...spew as truth. Hell...just read Dan's blog for a few days, and you'll have your fill of falsehoods.
Indeed, I haven't scratched the surface of all the nonsense the left puts forth. We're watching an example of leftist conspiracy theory with the kangaroo court Jan 6 hearings. Lies are essential for the left, for the Democrat Party, for "progressive" "Christians" and they present them as truth in a far more "this is gospel truth" manner than the wildest conspiracy theorist of the type Dan means when he use the term so pejoratively.
Dan encourages us: "Don't lie down with pigs in their stupidly false claim pit."
We don't. We don't lie with leftists/Democrats/socialists/"progressives" and fake Christians like Dan.
Danny Deception finishes with three links...two of which are far more critically biased to the left than the first of them, and all of which I read when I first saw his drivel posted. Frankly, I'll need to re-read them in order to comment on them at this point. I really don't want to put myself through it again, though I likely will, at which point I'll address the crapola therein. Stay tuned (but don't hold your breath).
119 comments:
Okay, I just picked one of your links about "proof" of "liberal conspiracy theories." Your inside sources link, I could only find ONE "conspiracy theory" and it's proving my point.
Here's what they "cited," with no links or proof.
"A reporter tweeted about a large supply of beer in the Capitol. Liberals took that ammo and fired off theories that spread like wildfire on social media that the beer was going to a GOP meeting celebrating the bill’s passage."
???!!!
WTH?
WHO has ever even heard of this theory? Where is Biden or Democratic members of Congress actively promoting this theory? WHO is "promoting" this theory and WHERE is the "conspiracy..."??
WHAT IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT'S HOLY is the conspiracy they're talking about? GOP is buying Beer? THAT's a "conspiracy theory..."??
I mean, seriously. You can't think this compares to Stolen Election or Democrats are engaging in Sex Slavery with Children nonsense??
The "source" itself looks like a conspiracy theorist's page. I just... can't.
What is wrong with you? Do you consider that nonsense something serious? Can't you read at a a more adult, rational level? I'm sorry if you can't and we're dealing with some kind of learning disability on your part, but I just can't believe that you're this emotionally/mentally stunted as to take that as a credible... anything.
I looked at the second link you provided first, just because it "sounded" a bit more legit. I then moved on to your first link. It was, at least, not written like a guy wearing a tin foil hat.
But again, an epic fail on repudiating anything I've said and, again, just reinforced how there are no serious widespread conspiracy theories on the left as there are on the right.
And let me be clear (again): I'm not saying that conspiracy theories don't exist on the Left, just that they don't enjoy widespread serious support, especially among serious scholars and politicians and reporters and experts and gov't types. That is, you don't have NPR promoting the "Great GOP Beer Scandal" nor do we see Biden and the congressfolk talking about it. Indeed, if a conspiracy theory is completely unknown, that is a testimony as to how obscure it is.
But on to your first link, the i2i website. Here's one thing they suggested:
"Many leftists seem to get a thrill from fantasies about right-wing violence. In the real world, however, large-scale domestic violence and intimidation come almost exclusively from the left rather than the right."
1. We don't thrill to fantasies of right wing violence. We recognize it as a real threat because of the real instances of right wing violence.
2. It's not "We liberals" who are worried about it. We're noticing even the FBI, NSA and LEO are reporting conservative white wing violence as the serious threat.
Now, you can choose to downplay what the experts are saying, but you can't say we're making it up. We're just noticing what's happening in the real world as reported by the experts.
So this is not a conspiracy theory. It's just a reality.
And that one was the most credible of the three non-conspiracies they cited.
Sorry, you're just proving your point.
Here's a hint: If you want to make a case, cite some sources that at least sound credible and provide scholarly support for their claims.
Also, your second tinfoil commentary cites a Professor Nyhan as his source. Here's some of what Nyhan has said about conspiracy theories...
https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.dartmouth.edu/dist/5/2293/files/2021/03/jep.pdf
and the article cited...
https://www.nhpr.org/politics/2017-05-24/dartmouth-professor-spread-of-liberal-conspiracy-theories-a-worrisome-trend#stream/0
He cites a Louise Mensch "theory" from 2017...
"Louise Mensch, who’s become an influential conspiracy monger, suggested that secret impeachment proceedings were underway"
WHO has heard of this "conspiracy..."?
As you can see, Nyhan is citing conspiracies from both the left and right, but the ones from the Left he cites are just not wide spread or being promoted by serious politicians or experts or the media. There is no liberal equivalent to Hannity on NPR or BBC. What he's doing is raising legitimate concerns about conspiracies and "fake news" on all sides. What he's NOT doing is saying that what liberals are doing is in anyway comparable to the scale and the acceptance of what conservatives are doing.
Recognizing what this one professor is saying - and NOT saying - is the kind of intellectual rigor which conspiracy theorists are lacking.
Marshal...
"Danny Deception finishes with three links."
I cite Business Insider, SPLC and Salon. Salon and SPLC are correctly considered liberal operations, but they're also respected and reliable. Business Insider is just a business news outfit, also reliable and trustworthy.
And all three of these are known entities with longstanding records.
Same for my other sources that I regularly cite: NPR, BBC, Washington Post, NYT, even CNN... these are all serious, trustworthy outfits. They're respectable and known for their integrity, even if they may lean (more or less) liberal sometimes.
On the other hand, you cite wingnut site after wingnut cite. Big splashy banners with skulls and crossbones and lost of just bad, amateurish, less-than-literate writing and, of course, nearly all of your sources are not just right wing (think Fox) but extreme right. They're shrill. Emotionally-spent. Irrational and amateurish. They are not respected outside of the irrational and emotionally fragile far right readers who want to believe in conspiracy theories.
If you want to be taken seriously, you have to start citing serious sources.
July 11, 2022 at 9:53 AM
So your strategy is to pick one of the more obscure CTs ("conspiracy theory/ies") and pretend it proves your point. Got it. I'm not at all surprised you'd take this deceitful route. But within all my links are quite a bit of false claims pushed by those like yourself, even if you personally are unaware of them or how widespread they may or may not be. YOUR argument is that there are no comparable theories on the left, which is an assumption that those on the right are widely held by most on the right.
So again, there are your typical falsehoods at play, summed up in this way:
---Overhype and overstate what you need to believe...and need others to believe...is a sin of the right, while dismissing as rare or outliers examples of leftist misconduct.
---You arrogantly presume you have the authority to define terms, dictate what counts as CTs and what doesn't.
This isn't your blog. Truth is important here. So while you try to pretend it's the "beer" conspiracy I'm offering, you lie to do so while ignoring CTs like "Russian Collusion", which is far more egregious and with far less evidence or basis than the stolen election, which is no "theory".
What's more, it doesn't matter who is spreading the lies you lefties tell, but only how many are impacted and influenced by it. Your asshat leaders constantly spoke of Russian Collusion, of "quid pro quo", of "some nazis are nice" and a host of other lies about Trump. Your asshat leaders constantly speak of "The GOP War On Women!!!!" when opposing the defense of innocent lives.
And that's MY point. When you decry CTs by right-wing people, you use the term to promote the claim that the right-wing lies...while of course never proving lies are being told ...never providing evidence to refute what you claim are lies. But the support your party gets is the result of lies told by your leftist masters and you chumps buy in big time. So while few have heard of a "beer conspiracy", they all know of "Russian Collusion", "more than two gender", the LGBT agenda, "Trump grabs women by the crotch", and a host of everyday Democrat/leftist/progressive/socialist lies. It's what you do. If you wish to make comparisons, you lose on the issue of lies every time, because lies are essential to Dem success.
"within all my links are quite a bit of false claims pushed by those like yourself,"
By all means. Cite your best conspiracy theory. Tell me which conspiracy theory you think it is that you have proof that It has widespread liberal support and is promoted widely by liberals and liberals at the highest levels.
Marshal...
"all know of "Russian Collusion", "more than two gender", the LGBT agenda, "Trump grabs women by the crotch",
Um. Those aren't conspiracy theories. Those are reality.
And this is the problem. Conservatives today are living in a world of alternative facts which are not any sort of facts at all.
I saw that one of your links was to something called "RealClearScience," and I was curious so I googled them. According to THEIR website:
"Unlike politicians or most other journalists, however, we do not arrive at our conclusions first and find data to support them later. Instead, we are guided by one overarching principle: Data comes first, and personal ideology comes second..."
This is SUCH an overwhelmingly irrational conservative thing to say. I hear this sort of BS from conservatives endlessly. "Oh, I just try to go where the data leads... I don't have an opinion ahead of time... UNLIKE those liberals!"
NEVER stopping to recognize that this opinion (it's only the LIBERALS who do that) is precisely the sort of unsupported and irrational empty false claim that betrays their allegiance to partiality.
Question answered. By them.
I said...
"There simply is no corresponding set of "liberal conspiracy theories" that are as common and widespread and widely taken seriously."
Marshal responded...
"This is as astoundingly false as anything Dan has ever said...and that's truly saying something."
Prove it.
Fully 70% of the GOP believes in the "election was stolen" fairy tale.
Where is there ANYTHING on the liberal side that is so thoroughly believed? Step up.
Further, the GOP President promoted this CT, as have several of his lapdopes. Where is there ANY such conspiracy theory that is promoted by the president or Democrat members of Congress?
Further, something like 1/4 GOP types believe in the Q-anon ghost stories. And that's some crazy shit.
Where is there ANYTHING like that in liberal land?
Answer: There isn't. You won't provide support to rebuke my position because it's non-existent. Even the craziest theories have significant support in the GOP.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-02-24/a-quarter-of-republicans-believe-central-views-of-qanon-conspiracy-movement
July 11, 2022 at 10:00 AM
"1. We don't thrill to fantasies of right wing violence. We recognize it as a real threat because of the real instances of right wing violence."
The "thrill" is in hearing it's an actual thing which allows you to set aside violence from your own.
"2. It's not "We liberals" who are worried about it. We're noticing even the FBI, NSA and LEO are reporting conservative white wing violence as the serious threat."
https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/11/study-obamas-tevus-crime-database-hides-blm-antifa-violence-and-inflates-white-right-wing-violence/
https://pjmedia.com/columns/robert-spencer/2021/05/03/fbi-goes-hunting-for-racially-motivated-violent-extremists-n1444256
https://thenewamerican.com/faking-hate-crime-statistics-adl-claims-right-wing-violence-greatest-threat/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/11/30/there_is_no_surge_in_right-wing_violence_138791.html
"Now, you can choose to downplay what the experts are saying, but you can't say we're making it up. We're just noticing what's happening in the real world as reported by the experts."
"Experts" again. One is more an "expert" if one is pushing leftist ideology and politics. Department like the FBI have always been political, but now???:
https://pjmedia.com/columns/kevindowneyjr/2021/10/05/why-is-the-fbi-working-for-the-democrats-n1521928
https://amgreatness.com/2021/12/30/the-fbis-criminal-lead-informant-in-whitmer-kidnapping-caper/
https://freebeacon.com/national-security/u-s-intelligence-institutionally-politicized-toward-democrats/
https://centerforsecuritypolicy.org/stop-the-politicization-of-intelligence/
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nsa-surveillance-and-the-dangers-of-unchecked-power
And I chose this one just because I know you'll wet your panties:
https://freepressers.com/washington-expose/proof-the-nsa-is-illegally-spying-on-americans-again
There's so much more I could add to this list of "experts" before whom you will curtsy so long as they continue to disparage the ideological right, and do so in support of your party of vermin. You're a total clown, Dan, and a true waste of my time...even now while I have some time to waste.
"Here's a hint: If you want to make a case, cite some sources that at least sound credible and provide scholarly support for their claims."
There's nothing wrong with my sources or you'd do more than simply offer your typical "Nyuh uh" rebuttals.
July 11, 2022 at 10:15 AM
"There is no liberal equivalent to Hannity on NPR or BBC."
That's funny. NPR IS the equivalent to Hannity, except far less reliable. The same is true of the NYT, CNN, WaPo and every other proven unreliable sources from which you get your marching orders.
"What he's NOT doing is saying that what liberals are doing is in anyway comparable to the scale and the acceptance of what conservatives are doing."
It's YOU who are making the claim. Nyhan's not required to imagine there's a moron in Louisville suggesting he needs to debunk it.
"Recognizing what this one professor is saying - and NOT saying - is the kind of intellectual rigor which conspiracy theorists are lacking."
That would be leftist CTs, particularly the media sources upon which you rely.
July 11, 2022 at 10:48 AM
"I cite Business Insider, SPLC and Salon. Salon and SPLC are correctly considered liberal operations, but they're also respected and reliable. Business Insider is just a business news outfit, also reliable and trustworthy."
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 For certain, you clown, the SPLC and Salon are ONLY "respected" by morons like you. Honorable, honest and intelligent people don't rely on them for anything but proof of leftist falsehood. And Business Insider also has been accused of leftist bias. Being a business news source doesn't guarantee reliability or trustworthiness of anything beyond its business news reporting. In other words, when they don't stay in their lane, they're just as much hacks as all your other "trusted" sources of deceit and grade school journalism., about which I provided two or three posts filled with examples of their corruption. You're a joke.
"On the other hand, you cite wingnut site after wingnut cite."
I cite good sources who dig far more deeply and professionally than the hacks before whom you prostrate yourself.
"Big splashy banners with skulls and crossbones and lost of just bad, amateurish, less-than-literate writing and, of course, nearly all of your sources are not just right wing (think Fox) but extreme right."
Look, liar. I don't know to what you're referring about "skulls and crossbones" and all that other irrelevant crap. What matters is what is being reported and whether or not a low intellect wuss like yourself is capable of rebutting any of it with legit evidence. You don't even try.
"They're shrill. Emotionally-spent. Irrational and amateurish. They are not respected outside of the irrational and emotionally fragile far right readers who want to believe in conspiracy theories."
This is you just passing your typical lying lefty gas. Disparage those who bring forth truth, facts, evidence you don't like and write it off as "conspiracy theories" so you don't have to do any heavy lifting. Thanks for again proving what a worthless sack you are!
"If you want to be taken seriously, you have to start citing serious sources."
Taken seriously by whom? By the likes of you? Why would anyone give a flying rat's ass about what a moron like you takes seriously? You don't have the brain power to know what to take seriously and even less character to care to learn.
More importantly, I don't take YOU seriously at all. You're a pathetic clown with no honor, integrity or character. Only other liars take liars like you seriously.
I don't know how to help you, Marshal. As long as you continue to cite disreputable clowns and conspiracists from nutty looking sites, you won't be taken seriously.
I again chose one of your links about "FBI Conspiracies" and found that the author was a comedian. His expertise, according to his own bio?
"Kevin Downey, Jr. Is a comedian and columnist. When he isn't writing or performing on stage he is collecting surf records and perhaps practicing his mixologist skills at his tiki bar. His apartment, the Atomic Bunker, looks like it was furnished from George Jetson's garage sale."
You ever see the movie, "Conspiracy Theory," with Mel Gibson? That's what you all look/sound like. Do you have a map with photos up on your wall with colored string tying all the pieces together?
Come back when you have serious scholarly expert opinion. You're done and you don't know it. Your own belief in the irrational and your own emotional shrillness have undone you and your ilk where you believe in the most grade school of claims and writing ability. Your sources DO matter.
Get help.
July 11, 2022 at 5:30 PM
"By all means. Cite your best conspiracy theory. Tell me which conspiracy theory you think it is that you have proof that It has widespread liberal support and is promoted widely by liberals and liberals at the highest levels."
By many means, I've already done that with the many and varied links I've provided both in the post and in this comment thread. "Russian Collusion" is by far the most obvious leftist CT. And when I refer to "leftist CT", I most definitely mean "LIE", because there's never any shred of evidence upon which the initial charge is based. But the lefty chumps...like you...believe the lie and THAT is when it is appropriate to use the term "CT".
Conversely, that which the right-wing believes, even if later proven false (though that rarely actually happens, as in the case of the 2020 Stolen Election), is based on evidence and logical conclusions from that which is observed. Said another way, your kind just makes shit up versus good people wondering about that which can be seen and concluding foul play.
July 11, 2022 at 5:42 PM
""all know of "Russian Collusion", "more than two gender", the LGBT agenda, "Trump grabs women by the crotch",
Um. Those aren't conspiracy theories. Those are reality."
Um. None of those have been proven true. Certainly the Russian Collusion narrative was proven to be a hoax, except that it was Hillary who colluded with foreigners to negative influence the 2016 election. There is no proof there are more than two genders, but only pro-Let's-Get-Biden-To-Quit (LGBTQ) propaganda based on the willful corruption of data. And there is no proof of Trump having ever grabbed any woman by the crotch who wasn't consenting (unlike Joe Biden penetrating Tara Reid's without her consent), and no admission by Trump he ever did such a thing. Thus, you're a liar and not a very intelligent one.
"And this is the problem. Conservatives today are living in a world of alternative facts which are not any sort of facts at all."
And this is the problem. Progs are liars and will continue to disparage conservatives because it's not only so much easier than doing the heavy lifting required to disprove the truth conservatives bring to the table (not that it would result in actually finding conservatives are wrong), but they have so many moronic chumps like you who are quick to buy into anything they're told. You're a clown, Dan.
July 11, 2022 at 7:13 PM
"I saw that one of your links was to something called "RealClearScience," and I was curious so I googled them. According to THEIR website:
"Unlike politicians or most other journalists, however, we do not arrive at our conclusions first and find data to support them later. Instead, we are guided by one overarching principle: Data comes first, and personal ideology comes second..."
This is SUCH an overwhelmingly irrational conservative thing to say."
"Irrational"??? This is the only way honorable people (that is, conservatives) do it. It makes no sense to us to do things any other way. It's what we would hope your kind would do but never does.
"I hear this sort of BS from conservatives endlessly."
And once again we see Dan calling truth "BS" because he can't bear it.
"NEVER stopping to recognize that this opinion (it's only the LIBERALS who do that) is precisely the sort of unsupported and irrational empty false claim that betrays their allegiance to partiality."
Except that it's not only totally proven to be the case, I've proven it myself many times here at my blog, at Craig's and at yours prior to you deleting my comments. Indeed, the only comments you delete are those you cannot rebut, which means you delete a lot of comments, and it doesn't matter if they're supported with evidence or not. You delete because you KNOW they're incontrovertible. You're a clown, Dan. A lying, pathetic clown.
July 11, 2022 at 9:12 PM
"I said...
"There simply is no corresponding set of "liberal conspiracy theories" that are as common and widespread and widely taken seriously."
Marshal responded...
"This is as astoundingly false as anything Dan has ever said...and that's truly saying something."
Prove it."
I did, in these three posts responding to your inane post on right-wing "CT".
"Fully 70% of the GOP believes in the "election was stolen" fairy tale."
Never proven to be false, even a third of Democratic voters believe fraud led to the outcome:
https://www.westernjournal.com/poll-majority-likely-voters-now-believe-cheating-impacted-results-2020-election/
Even the very sketchy Public Religion Research Institute found 6% of Dems believe the election was stolen.
https://www.prri.org/research/competing-visions-of-america-an-evolving-identity-or-a-culture-under-attack/ (Scroll way down to find it)
"Where is there ANYTHING on the liberal side that is so thoroughly believed? Step up."
I did already. Several times. Stop lying.
"Further, the GOP President promoted this CT, as have several of his lapdopes. Where is there ANY such conspiracy theory that is promoted by the president or Democrat members of Congress?"
Are you freakin' kidding??? But since you're using CT to mean "lie" ("stupidly false and unsupported claims", as you put it) when applied to the right but not the left, here are a few examples presenting widely held lies most often told by your masters as well:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/chronicling-the-lefts-lies/
https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/10/25/america-is-drowning-in-the-lies-of-the-left-truth/
https://gemstatepatriot.com/blog/democrats-lies-exposed/
"Further, something like 1/4 GOP types believe in the Q-anon ghost stories. And that's some crazy shit."
It's doubtful that too many Trump supporters believe in or spend any time thinking about Q. I hear more about it from morons like you. It seems I'm typical in that regard:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/poll-most-people-have-never-heard-of-qanon-wealthy-educated-clinton-supporters-are-most-likely-to-know-about-it
"Where is there ANYTHING like that in liberal land?"
"Liberal land" IS the land of lies and false beliefs!!! You're such a clown!!!
"Answer: There isn't. You won't provide support to rebuke my position because it's non-existent."
I've provided tons of evidence which rebuke your position as I have form every position you've ever posted!!
"Even the craziest theories have significant support in the GOP.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-02-24/a-quarter-of-republicans-believe-central-views-of-qanon-conspiracy-movement"
Again:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/poll-most-people-have-never-heard-of-qanon-wealthy-educated-clinton-supporters-are-most-likely-to-know-about-it
More importantly, your USNews link refers to another PRRI poll and the "central views" of Q are really freakin' vague. Thus, as is typical, leftist polling is untrustworthy and intended to push a leftist agenda. But more important, when one considers most who call themselves "independents" tend to lean and vote left, the poll indicates pretty much the same amount of lefties buy into whatever the hell you morons think Q spews.
Here's yet another CT pushed and promoted as true by the asshat Kentucky morons try to insist is a better, more honest and honorable man than Trump:
https://amgreatness.com/2022/07/12/bidens-story-of-10-year-old-rape-victim-still-unverified/
re: the story of a 10 year old rape victim
You DO know that, given that it's a RAPE of a TEN YEAR OLD, any data about that would be protected/not made public because of perverts like you who would harass said rape victim.
I don't know if it happened or not, but certainly, some doctor reported that it happened and that's what Biden referenced.
The point would be that, IF it happened, perverts like you would try to force this child to have a baby.
Sick, sick, sick.
Information about the kid's identity would be withheld. The fact it happened...pretending it actually did happen...would not be. Indeed, in last Sunday's Life, Liberty and Levin, Bill Melugin, who's done more to bring the facts regarding the border crisis than all your leftist hack media outlets put together, reported on two small girls...both under 10 years old...raped at the border. There's no prohibition on reporting any crime took place, you apologist for assholes.
Legit and honorable news sources tried to find any evidence that what that abortion activist baby killer said was true. Law enforcement would NOT hide that it took place and not even the hag who claimed it happened was willing to respond to legit journalist inquiries on the subject.
There's nothing at all perverted about expecting any pregnancy should come to fruition. Only a sick twisted murderous progressive would seek to have the child killed, thereby psychologically scarring the young girl who is already traumatized you sick f**k.
You're a vile, contemptible, God-hating cretin.
Not every rape gets reported, you know.
Marshal...
"not even the hag who claimed it happened was willing to respond to legit journalist inquiries on the subject."
Also Marshal...
"You're a vile, contemptible, God-hating cretin."
Who fails to see the irony in his vile and hateful words and attacks.
The point remains is that IF (and WHEN, because it does and will happen) there were a 10 year old who was raped or a 12 year old who had "consensual sex" and got pregnant, vile people like you would make their young lives hell by forcing them to go through with the pregnancy because, TO HELL with their young lives, as long as their fetus gets delivered, that's all that matters to you.
Contemptible, indeed.
Some data to demonstrate how vile the MAGA segment of the GOP is, in this case, as it relates to health risks to women and girls:
"Adolescents age 15 through 19 are twice as likely to die during pregnancy or child birth as those over age 20; girls under age 15 are five times more likely to die."
https://www.advocatesforyouth.org/wp-content/uploads/storage/advfy/documents/fsmaternal.pdf
" The rate for women aged 40 and over was 7.8 times higher than the rate for women under age 25. Differences in the rates between age groups were statistically significant. Among age groups, the increase in the rates between 2019 and 2020 for women aged 25–39 and 40 and over were statistically significant."
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2020/maternal-mortality-rates-2020.htm#Table
"The maternal death ratio for Black women (37.1 per 100,000 pregnancies) is 2.5 times the ratio for white women (14.7) and three times the ratio for Hispanic women (11.8)."
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-brief-report/2020/dec/maternal-mortality-united-states-primer
"Many pregnancies among very young girls end in miscarriage or abortion, she noted.
“We know that their risk of poor pregnancy outcomes is the highest of any age group, even when compared with women who get pregnant at age 45,” Smid said...
About one in 1,000 girls under the age of 15 became pregnant in 2008, the researchers write in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology."
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pregnant-risks/pregnant-teens-under-age-15-face-unique-risks-study-idUSBREA191DE20140210
https://reverehealth.com/live-better/risks-teen-pregnancy/
But as long as we deliver that fetus to life, then to hell with whatever risks these women and adolescents and sometimes girls have to face. To hell with what their doctors advise them to do. Marshal and his minions want to force those pregnancies and if they get their way, they will.
We see the low regard for women and girls you have (or as you like to call them, "cows, sluts, hags and whores") and it is your great damning shame.
"Those aren't conspiracy theories. Those are reality."
virtually every aspect of the Russia theory has been proven false, and much has been linked to Clinton's campaign.
I've never seen on actual proven instance where Trump walked up to a random woman and grabbed them by the crotch.
That's "reality" in Dan's world.
As far as the alleged 10 year old rape victim, even WAPO fact checkers acknowledge the problems with the story. Not the least of which is that fact that the Dr is a mandatory reporter and there is no record of the Dr doing what is required by law.
FYI the liberal narrative about abortion pre Roe is virtually all a conspiracy theory. There is virtually zero evidence that any of the talking points are true.
July 13, 2022 at 7:41 AM
"Not every rape gets reported, you know. "
Irrelevant as hell. What's relevant to this discussion is that a particular case was reported by a pro-abortion activist doctor about which there's been no other testimony or evidence it ever took place, and YOUR politicians are running it as a fact in order to promote the notion that the SCOTUS ruling puts more biological females at risk. A leftist CT promoted your politicians and believed by leftists morons like you.
July 13, 2022 at 9:32 AM
"Marshal...
"not even the hag who claimed it happened was willing to respond to legit journalist inquiries on the subject."
Also Marshal...
"You're a vile, contemptible, God-hating cretin."
Who fails to see the irony in his vile and hateful words and attacks."
I couldn't possibly care less how those like you who defend the wanton murderer of the most vulnerable and innocent of people might regard me. You only confirm your moral corruption.
"The point remains is that IF (and WHEN, because it does and will happen) there were a 10 year old who was raped or a 12 year old who had "consensual sex" and got pregnant, vile people like you would make their young lives hell by forcing them to go through with the pregnancy because, TO HELL with their young lives, as long as their fetus gets delivered, that's all that matters to you."
The point remains that you demanded an example of your leftist political leaders promoting a CT that moronic chumps like you swallow and I provided yet another.
As to your presumption that the trauma of pregnancy is so far worse than murdering an even younger child, you again prove what a contemptible God-hater you are. The lives of girls impregnated at such a young age are already traumatized, and you would compound that by insisting they murder their own child. What a stand up piece of shit you are! But instead of making a bad situation far, far worse as you prefer doing, what those like me propose would lead to better for both young mother and child. You disgusting reprobate f**k.
"Contemptible, indeed."
You most certainly are, as well as happy to prove it over and over again.
July 13, 2022 at 10:03 AM
Four links and not one of them supports the vile contention it is better to murder an unborn person than to deliver it.
Four links and not one even attempts to explain why maternal mortality is helped by murdering an unborn child.
Four links and not one even attempts to explain how murdering an unborn child is in any way necessary to prevent the death of the mother.
No more off topic comments, Wuss. That is, unless your goal is to further indict yourself as the contemptible f**k you've long ago proven yourself to be.
Scratch that...even IF that's your goal, restrain yourself and focus only on the topic of the post.
Craig,
Yeah..."Dan and reality". Those two things don't mesh very well at all. More importantly, how Dan describes any position or opinion depends upon who is expressing it and how what is expressed affects the morally bankrupt like Dan.
As to the doctor, I've said as much myself, and Dan wants to pretend that this alleged incident actually occurred. That doctor is required by law to report the rape and it doesn't require publicizing details such as the girl's name. Furthermore, it's unlikely any news source not of Dan's liking would be so vile as to dox the child, either. If this doctor hasn't reported this rape to the authorities, she's aiding and abetting the child's rapist...and that's just fine with Dan.
"FYI the liberal narrative about abortion pre Roe is virtually all a conspiracy theory."
This is a great point and is a narrative still being told to the leftist, child-murdering left, who are more than willing to believe it for the sake of the child-murdering cause. Thanks for reminding us.
I posted this at my place, but WAPO fact check literally announced that the 10 year old rape victim story was factual simply because it had been repeated a lot. That's the trustworthy MSM for you.
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2022/07/13/columbus-man-charged-rape-10-year-old-led-abortion-in-indiana/10046625002/
Art,
It looks like a Hispanic dude who entered the US illegally has been charged with the rape of a 10 year old girl in OH. The assumption is that this is the same one Biden mentioned. Clearly we'll need to see the evidence (unless he's persuaded to plead and no evidence is presented) to be sure that it's the same one. But it's looking like this story will be out of the spotlight very quickly because we can't talk about the heinous crimes of those who've benefited from lax border security. It'll be a part of the news cycle long enough to benefit the unrestricted abortion advocates, but not long enough to focus on the fact that this was preventable.
Of course, the one and only reason that the author of this site publishes any of Dan's comments is to show what a disgusting person that he is. It is not actually because he likes the guy.
Vinny beat me to it. I just saw the story before checking the comments here.
As Ducky Dan points out, the issue is whether or not the rape of a 10 yr old is justification for abortion. No rape is and there are better ways of dealing with the pregnancy of one so young than to compound her trauma with an unjust killing on her conscience. She'll have no lasting trauma from good prenatal care and likely grow up feeling good that she doesn't have the death of an innocent in her history.
So in the long run, it doesn't matter if the arrest of this scumbag has any relation to the 10 year old of which Biden spoke and the pro-aborts want to pretend is justification for protecting the right to murder the unborn.
Jesse,
You're absolutely correct. I don't like Dan at all. With every comment he posts, he reveals more and more how much in rebellion he is against the God he pretends he worships.
What's more, Dan's comments typical reflect "progressive" sentiment and I like to show how moronic and vile that is. It's destroying our culture.
Craig...
"It looks like a Hispanic dude who entered the US illegally has been charged with the rape of a 10 year old girl in OH..."
Damn. Instead of just admitting, "yes, of course this happened and we were wrong to doubt it and it and it was missing the point anyway..." Instead of that you just choose to divert and make a racist attack. That doesn't portray you all that well.
Tell us the truth. If this had been a white preacher from Kentucky would you appoint that out? Shame on you. Shame on you.
Y'all have no high moral ground here. You all are being the bottom dwellers. And as Marshal finally agrees, the point isn't the one girl in question. The point is that you are with forcing a child to go through pregnancy! Holy God in heaven!! What in the name of all that is Holy and decent and good is wrong with you all?! Do you truly not see evil that is?
Craig, you recognize how very wrong and perverse it is to force a 10 year old girl to go through with a pregnancy after she's been raped... right? Tell me you are not this far gone down the path of proversion.
Marshal (and Jesse)...
"I don't like Dan at all."
And this is one difference between us: I have no need to "like" or "dislike" you all. I don't know you. I like my conservative relatives who believe much as you do. I just disagree with some of their opinions very strongly.
But that disagreement has nothing to do with whether or not I like them.
That seems to be sort of a trademark of modern conservatism: It's important to demonize and "hate" and "dislike" our partisan opponents. But why?
My conservative friends and family who believe much as you do, I genuinely like them. We could meet and play music or have coffee and find many common ideas to talk about with no rancor.
This "need" amongst Trump and his acolytes to literally demonize the "enemy" seems quite unhealthy and considerably childish to me and not a good thing for our nation and world.
July 13, 2022 at 5:20 PM
"Damn. Instead of just admitting, "yes, of course this happened and we were wrong to doubt it and it and it was missing the point anyway...""
No. Intelligent people don't believe a liar like Biden and lefties in general who are willing to exploit tragic episodes or invent them if one is readily available. Intelligent people wanted two things from this story while it was still questionable (though in some ways still is):
1. Why can no one find evidence it ever took place?
2. Why do lefties exploit such stories to promote the murder of the innocents? The age of the child does not justify killing her child. To pretend she'll be somehow more traumatized from the pregnancy than from the sexual abuse is perverse...more perverse than either the rape of the child alone and more perverse than abortion alone. Good people...compassionate people...would see to it that her pregnancy goes as well as is possible for this specific child and not rush to exploit it for the BabyMurder Agenda and not rush to convince how horrible the next nine must be without murdering her unborn child.
"Instead of that you just choose to divert and make a racist attack. That doesn't portray you all that well."
There was no racist attack by anybody here until the above comment chose to make statements of fact "racist". That portrays you as what we've come to know you are...the true racist among us (you and your troll).
"Tell us the truth. If this had been a white preacher from Kentucky would you appoint that out? Shame on you. Shame on you."
If it was your preacher, we know you wouldn't. The fact is we don't care who rapes a ten year old child. But the fact this guy may be an illegal that morons like you welcome into the country speaks to another issue...another negatively impactful issue...your kind has brought about on our nation...and children like this poor girl. But you ignore the many ills imposed on your countrymen by your policies and positions, and then you have the audacity to suppose it is we who should feel shame? In-freaking-credible! You are so given over to your moral corruption and rebellion!
"Y'all have no high moral ground here."
Says he who has no Christian understanding of morality.
"And as Marshal finally agrees, the point isn't the one girl in question."
What do you mean "finally"? And in what possible way am I in agreement with you? It certainly isn't this foul crap:
"The point is that you are with forcing a child to go through pregnancy! Holy God in heaven!! What in the name of all that is Holy and decent and good is wrong with you all?! Do you truly not see evil that is?"
The POINT is that you are forcing a girl to murder her child. Good, Christian people would encourage her and any rape victim to do the right thing and not compound a great evil with a far more vile evil...murdering her child, the second victim of the rape. There is nothing at all "Holy and decent and good" in what you propose this poor child do to another innocent child you twisted f**k. We truly see how truly evil and vile you are.
"Craig, you recognize how very wrong and perverse it is to force a 10 year old girl to go through with a pregnancy after she's been raped... right?"
I recognize how very wrong and perverse and evil it is to force a 10 year old girl to murder her innocent child. You are true vermin.
July 13, 2022 at 9:18 PM
"And this is one difference between us: I have no need to "like" or "dislike" you all."
One of so very many. "Need" doesn't enter into it. The repugnance I feel for you is organic, provoked by your admission of evil moral corruption and rebellion against God. It's an involuntary response similar to what one might experience seeing a decaying animal on the side of the road.
"That seems to be sort of a trademark of modern conservatism: It's important to demonize and "hate" and "dislike" our partisan opponents. But why?"
Oh, stop pretending you have any understanding of what conservatism is. You don't. You never demonstrate any. This is just recognizing you for what you are...vermin who espouses unChristian belief and attitudes. I don't look to hate or dislike anybody. That would require a conscious decision. Again, the disgust and contempt for you is involuntary. It's provoked by you and what you say and do...the evil in you you've nurtured so eagerly.
"This "need" amongst Trump and his acolytes to literally demonize the "enemy" seems quite unhealthy and considerably childish to me and not a good thing for our nation and world."
This is just you being your ironically hypocritical self, projecting your own qualities on better people. You "literally demonize" Trump and conservatives constantly and you're doing it again here. You're pathetic. People like you are provably bad for our world. People like you ARE what's bad about our world. Forcing a 10 year old to murder her child is just one of so very many examples.
Marshal...
"The POINT is that you are forcing a girl to murder her child."
This, of course, is a damned and stupidly false lie. It's not even close to reality. It is a lie from the deepest pits of hell and anyone can see it.
The reality is I've never ever in my life ever suggested ever that anyone should ever ever force anyone to have an abortion. Do you recognize that this is a damned-by-God-almighty-and-all-of-human-history lie? Be a man. Step up. Admit that you made a stupidly ugly irrationally irrationally childishly false claim.
I have always been abundantly clear that women/children, families and their medical experts are the ones who should make the decision about dealing with pregnancies. I've never in my life suggested that anyone should be forced to have an abortion. This is a vulgar pathetic dumb as a rock lie.
Admit it and apologize.
Another of the endless false claims and stupidly false claims...
"provoked by your admission of evil moral corruption and rebellion against God..."
I've never admitted to any such thing. Indeed, I love God and God's world and strive to live in harmony with God and God's world. I have no desire to rebel against God.
On the other hand, I DO disagree with humans like Marshal when they presume to speak for God and say that God wants Marshal, et al, to force a ten year old who was raped to go through with her pregnancy - no matter what she, her family or her medical experts advise/want. I DO disagree with you humans when you demonize our LGBTQ friends and family. I DO disagree with you all on many of YOUR ideas. But I disagree with you all because I'm striving to live in harmony with (not rebellion against) God and reason and the world.
Now, you can say I'm mistaken in my sincere beliefs and you'd be welcome to your human opinion on that point. But you can't say I've "admitted" to living in rebellion against God or desiring immorality. It never happened.
Marshal...
"stop pretending you have any understanding of what conservatism is. You don't. You never demonstrate any. "
You say that immediately after demonizing me. Do you not understand how you undermine your own claims when reality, reason and decency smack you in the face? And I was quite specifically referring to Trump-style conservatism, this modern version of conservatism which regularly demonizes their partisan opponents.
And of course, Marshal demonizes and repeats stupidly false claims again when he repeats over and over the vulgar and indecent lie that I would ever force any woman or girl to have an abortion. Never happened, of course. But these overtly stupidly false claims are, too, part and parcel of modern Trump-style "conservatism."
"literally demonize" Trump and conservatives constantly and you're doing it again here. "
Prove it. Just another empty claim.
What I've said about Trump here is that he regularly demonizes, calls names, makes up false claims and attacks against his political enemies. Like him or not, you have to admit that's just reality. He does it all the time. Even when those political enemies are fellow conservatives (not that Trump is or ever was a conservative.)
"Damn. Instead of just admitting, "yes, of course this happened and we were wrong to doubt it and it and it was missing the point anyway..." Instead of that you just choose to divert and make a racist attack. That doesn't portray you all that well."
Actually, all of the original red flags of the story were valid areas of concern, and I've also seen enough reporting that OH law would have allowed the girl to have an abortion, and that the Dr failed in her responsibility to report the rape. As to the now meaningless charge of "racist", I say bullshit. The guy's name makes it clear as to his ethnicity, and Guatemalan isn't a race. The best reporting at the time was the he was in the country illegally, which I haven't seen contradicted.
So, I literally corrected the story at my blog and here withing an hour of the first reports I saw, and reported the new facts as they are currently known. Which is the opposite of diversion, it's about having to willingness to make corrections when new facts come to light.
"Tell us the truth. If this had been a white preacher from Kentucky would you appoint that out?"
Hypothetically, probably. If it was germane to the story. In this case, the immigration status is germane because it's likely that we'll either see the story disappear soon, or that the APL and MSM will conveniently obscure those facts.
"Shame on you. Shame on you."
Because correcting mistakes, and pointing out facts is something to feel shame over.
"The point is that you are with forcing a child to go through pregnancy!"
Name one person who was advocating that the child be "forced" co carry her unborn child to full term? Please point out where I have advocated this? Do you understand that I have repeatedly said that I would be for a compromise that allows abortion in cases of rape, incest, and endangering the life of the mother?
"Do you truly not see evil that is?"
Again, who was planning to force this girl to do anything? Would you be this zealous if she'd decided to carry the child to full term and give it up for adoption?
"Craig, you recognize how very wrong and perverse it is to force a 10 year old girl to go through with a pregnancy after she's been raped... right?"
First, tell me where I have advocated what you claim I've advocated? Second, I've heard multiple sources report that the child could have had an abortion in OH, can you prove those reports wrong? Third, NO ONE prevented the child from going a couple of hours down the road and ending the life of her child. I'm failing to understand who specifically tried to "force" her to do anything?
"Tell me you are not this far gone down the path of proversion."
No, I'm not far down the path of proversion at all.
Dan,
I am not really all that conservative, just moderate. Even so, you seem to consider a lot of moral positions to be "conservative" that are really not so (or should not be considered as such). By that, I mean you reject moral stances that should be espoused by any person who has any sense of decency and a sound mind. There was a time in this nation in which a commonly agreed to standard of morality existed. Obviously, that is no longer true of our culture. I've read through other comment threads on this site and see that you think children should be exposed to drag queens, even wishing that had happened to Marshal himself. Those people are basically just prostitutes. They do things which would not be appropriate even to describe. That testifies to how radical and degenerate people with a left leaning persuasion have become. If I were to adopt your kind of ideology, then those terms I used to describe you would become devoid of any meaning.
I agree with Dan that I don't know him well enough to like or dislike him. I also agree that like/dislike is irrelevant. The other side of this is that given his expressed beliefs, I seriously doubt I'd invest the time or effort to rectify the situation.
As I look at the left, their cancel culture, their labeling of those who disagree with them as "evil", the continued used of derogatory racial terms to attacks black conservatives, the use of derogatory/sex based terms to attack conservative women, and that sort of behavior I'm left to conclude that the APL is not a very likeable bunch. Nor are they interested in being liked. In general I'm not going to be disposed to like someone who constantly calls me (and other like me) names, refers to me (and others like me) with vitriol, and engages if frequent use of ad hom attacks. I'm more likely to ignore people like that than to try to like them.
Of course that doesn't mean I can't love them with the love of God and hope/pray for their salvation if appropriate.
July 14, 2022 at 8:48 AM
""The POINT is that you are forcing a girl to murder her child."
This, of course, is a damned and stupidly false lie. It's not even close to reality. It is a lie from the deepest pits of hell and anyone can see it."
This from a guy who supports the murder of one's own child. He supports that and somehow I'M lying from the deepest pits of hell! Dan indeed loves irony!
What's more, it's far more true (or less false) than the claim I seek to force anyone to "go through with her pregnancy" as if that would be a bad thing for mother or child...particularly the innocent child Dan seeks to see murdered. It's demonic Dan would insist there even be such a choice available to murder rather than to nurture one's own child...even if only for nine months.
"The reality is I've never ever in my life ever suggested ever that anyone should ever ever force anyone to have an abortion. Do you recognize that this is a damned-by-God-almighty-and-all-of-human-history lie? Be a man. Step up. Admit that you made a stupidly ugly irrationally irrationally childishly false claim."
No one could possibly be "damned" as quickly as one who murders one's own child, and worse, to lead a child to do something so vile and heinous as if there's no alternative available...such as bringing the child to term.
And just how does a 10 year old child come to even consider such a thing without some vile and contemptible God-hater suggesting it to her? What child even understands such an evil option exists for her or any other pregnant woman without being "encouraged" by a twisted progressive to indulge such an abhorrent possibility? That's far worse than "force". To lure a child to such evil is far worse than tying her to the table in order to brutally destroy the life within her.
"I have always been abundantly clear that women/children, families and their medical experts are the ones who should make the decision about dealing with pregnancies. I've never in my life suggested that anyone should be forced to have an abortion. This is a vulgar pathetic dumb as a rock lie."
Given there's next to no justifiable reason why the practice should be employed, you do indeed force by virtue of the fact you suggest it's the only viable option. Talk about a vulgar lie! Only God-haters would pretend it's an acceptable option. Worse, abortion providers are among the most evil in this regard. To assure any woman it's the best option when it rarely if ever is confirms the liars are those like you. But we knew that.
"Admit it and apologize."
Pound sand.
July 14, 2022 at 9:10 AM
"I've never admitted to any such thing."
Not in so many words.
"Indeed, I love God and God's world and strive to live in harmony with God and God's world. I have no desire to rebel against God."
Your positions, opinions and beliefs belie this claim. Indeed, it makes it laughable.
"On the other hand, I DO disagree with humans like Marshal when they presume to speak for God"
If by "speaking for God" you mean I'm simply repeating what God has said through His clearly revealed Word in Scripture, then yes...I speak for God in the same way I speak for our nation when repeating laws and policies, my boss when I speak of how one is to do the job, etc. Would that you truly loved God enough to defend His Word rather than the sinfulness of the world.
"...and say that God wants Marshal, et al, to force a ten year old who was raped to go through with her pregnancy - no matter what she, her family or her medical experts advise/want."
Yeah...because somehow it's reasonable to presume God would be cool with murdering one's own child. I would caution you against equating "expert" advice with moral recommendation. Those who make their living murdering the unborn aren't like to advise any alternative course of action.
"I DO disagree with you humans when you demonize our LGBTQ friends and family. I DO disagree with you all on many of YOUR ideas. But I disagree with you all because I'm striving to live in harmony with (not rebellion against) God and reason and the world."
You demonize those who abide, promote and repeat the Will of God. You use the word "demonize" to criticize the righteous acknowledgement of obvious sin and/or disorder, because you strive to live in harmony with the craven nature of mankind rather than the Will of God. It's plain in your every comment, position and opinion on human behaviors.
"Now, you can say I'm mistaken in my sincere beliefs and you'd be welcome to your human opinion on that point. But you can't say I've "admitted" to living in rebellion against God or desiring immorality. It never happened."
I wouldn't say that. Indeed, the fact is you're NOT "mistaken", but willfully rejecting the Will of God in order to appease the immoral. By doing so you admit to living in rebellion against God and expressing devotion to immorality.
"Marshal...
"stop pretending you have any understanding of what conservatism is. You don't. You never demonstrate any. "
You say that immediately after demonizing me."
If by "demonizing me" you mean you've been admonished for your depravity, I have no problem with the description, for it is the fact. As to conservatism, you don't know what it is.
"Do you not understand how you undermine your own claims when reality, reason and decency smack you in the face?"
You have no understanding of reality, reason or decency. The only alternative is that you do and reject them all.
"And I was quite specifically referring to Trump-style conservatism, this modern version of conservatism which regularly demonizes their partisan opponents."
The irony...something you truly love...is that you are demonizing Trump and whatever the hell you mean when you say "Trump-style" conservatism, because you're never saying those things as if they're terms of endearment. So cut the crap, Liar.
"And of course, Marshal demonizes and repeats stupidly false claims again when he repeats over and over the vulgar and indecent lie that I would ever force any woman or girl to have an abortion."
Because of course lying to a child so that she submits to abortion is better than tying her down and brutally destroying her child. You're a contemptible, God-mocking piece of shit.
July 14, 2022 at 9:26 AM
" "literally demonize" Trump and conservatives constantly and you're doing it again here. "
Prove it. Just another empty claim."
I don't need to. You're proving for me in the next quote:
"What I've said about Trump here is that he regularly demonizes, calls names, makes up false claims and attacks against his political enemies. Like him or not, you have to admit that's just reality. He does it all the time."
Thanks. You're a peach.
Just a reminder:
This post isn't about abortion, but about how Dan's suggestion conservatives are more required to support their positions is absurd given how absurd the positions of the left are, and how they are woefully unsupportable. Yet this story of the 10 year old rape victim, even with more details finally emerging, represents the willingness of the left to believe anything they hear from their masters in politics, science or anywhere else. While this tale remained unproven, it was ingested as true, and worse, the manner in which the leftists relate these tales amounts to as conspiratorial and false a narrative as anything they try to insist in false about right-wing beliefs and suspicions.
So, no more crap about forcing 10 year olds to give life to the product of their misfortune. How vile a notion she should be encouraged to murder.
Marshal...
"about how Dan's suggestion conservatives are more required to support their positions is absurd given how absurd the positions of the left are, and how they are woefully unsupportable."
Trump made a series of stupidly false and unsupported claims, grooming his followers to believe that the election might be stolen. He then immediately started making "the election was stolen" claims as soon as he lost to keep his groomed pets believing the conspiracy theory. These series of false claims that still haven't ended are not based on data or expert opinion. Indeed, the experts deny the claims.
On the other hand, with the actual news story on the ten year old: There WAS an actual news story from a legitimate journalism source citing an actual doctor relating what they'd heard about a rape victim.
That just was reported recently. Biden and others, then, noted that this news story (which was an actual news story, not something they made up, NOT a conspiracy theory, an actual news story citing actual people) referenced that actual news story (which was an actual news story from an actual journalistic source). Rational adults citing an actual news story that they have no reason to doubt - and follow VERY closely here - IS NOT AN EXAMPLE OF PASSING ON A CONSPIRACY THEORY.
The difference between Biden passing on this topic news story because it speaks to the actual concerns being raised by the Roe ruling and Trump making up a series of false claims about a stolen election - that even his evil crony, Steve Bannon has said was invented ahead of time! - is NOT referencing any actual legitimate news source, is not citing expert opinion and is, instead, just creating and passing on a conspiracy theory. That is, by definition, a conspiracy theory and the difference between the two instances is vast, as from one side of the known universe to the other.
One is rational, adult, well-reasoned and citing legitimate sources. The other is pulled out of Trump's ass for dangerous reasons to dangerous effect.
Again, I don't know how to help you. That's just the reality. Citing an actual news story is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT a conspiracy theory.
On an off topic false charge, Jesse said...
"I've read through other comment threads on this site and see that you think children should be exposed to drag queens, even wishing that had happened to Marshal himself. Those people are basically just prostitutes."
This tells me you know nothing about drag queens. I mean, ARE there drag queens who are "actual prostitutes..."? I guess it's possible. But are the people volunteering their time to read stories to children doing any harm? Of course not.
People who dress in drag are a reality. It's not a matter of thinking people should be "exposed" to them, any more than it would be appropriate to say, "Ooh, that Jesse, he wants people to be exposed to conservative preachers and teachers when they're basically prostitutes." It's an offensive and harmful thing to say about a group that has been routinely oppressed and demonized.
I know drag queens. They are, to the individual, lovely, loving, sweet, kind, forgiving and nurturing/helpful kinds of adults and it would be simply factually wrong to call them prostitutes. That's the sort of demonizing language that leads to conservatives like Marshal to want to see these good people beat up and harmed. It's harmful to abuse them in this manner and I hope you can be more rational and kind than that. Indeed, people like you two COULD benefit from being around and learning from the VERY kind and loving and helpful drag queens I know.
July 15, 2022 at 9:46 AM
"Marshal...
"about how Dan's suggestion conservatives are more required to support their positions is absurd given how absurd the positions of the left are, and how they are woefully unsupportable."
Trump made a series of stupidly false and unsupported claims, grooming his followers to believe that the election might be stolen."
This is not a proper response to the point I was making. Plus, you're just repeating an assertion you never support about allegations your "experts" have never supported.
"On the other hand, with the actual news story on the ten year old: There WAS an actual news story from a legitimate journalism source citing an actual doctor relating what they'd heard about a rape victim."
There was no evidence the story was remotely true when it was first put forth by a vile activist abortion doctor and then repeated by your political leaders, which was the point. What this creep "heard" is not evidence, but hearsay and the very thing you would call "conspiratorial" were it done by a right wing person. Your tap dancing doesn't change the point, despite how desperately you try to do so.
"That just was reported recently. Biden and others, then, noted that this news story (which was an actual news story, not something they made up, NOT a conspiracy theory, an actual news story citing actual people) referenced that actual news story (which was an actual news story from an actual journalistic source). Rational adults citing an actual news story that they have no reason to doubt - and follow VERY closely here - IS NOT AN EXAMPLE OF PASSING ON A CONSPIRACY THEORY."
Again, you're doing a happy dance now that it's been confirmed. Initially nobody could confirm it. That it is now confirmed doesn't mitigate the truth of how quickly morons bought into the story simply because morons like you wanted to believe it. Intelligent people awaited confirmation one way or the other. That's how it's supposed to work, while you disparage right-wingers who, more often than not, have far more to support a suspicion...even if later proven false or unlikely...than do morons like you. You still buy into all manner of falsehood in support of the myths of homosexuality. You seem to think a news story is worthy of belief simply because a news source you favor presents it. That's how conspiracy theories begin...by unreliable sources putting forth that which is not confirmed.
"The difference between Biden passing on this topic news story because it speaks to the actual concerns being raised by the Roe ruling and Trump making up a series of false claims about a stolen election"
The left has passed all manner of falsehood which "speaks to actual concerns". That doesn't justify speaking on an unconfirmed story as if it is. Indeed, it's irresponsible and an example of the dishonesty of your kind, that you would pass on a story which is not verified as if it was, just to push an agenda. It's a common practice about which conservatives have noted many times. It's a common practice of the leftist media which confirms they're the enemy of the people.
Conversely, there is all manner of evidence never adjudicated, never investigated, never proven true or false, which more than justifies the suspicion of a stolen election. Your conspiracy theory is that all claims are false and proven so.
"- that even his evil crony, Steve Bannon has said was invented ahead of time! -"
Where's your evidence? Prove it at your blog.
"is NOT referencing any actual legitimate news source, is not citing expert opinion and is, instead, just creating and passing on a conspiracy theory."
There have been many news stories dealing with claims supporting election irregularity and fraud, many of which are proven to be true, but still rejecting by morons like you. I've done posts describing these and you've never provided any evidence which effectively rebuts any of it. You cite no "experts" who do so, either. Indeed, I haven't seen any of your "experts" present a description of what they did to prove the election was legit. Nothing but
"Again, I don't know how to help you. That's just the reality. Citing an actual news story is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT a conspiracy theory."
Again, you're not capable of helping me do anything because you're a liar and promoter of falsehood and corruption. Citing an actual news story is meaningless if the news story is not confirmed. "News story" is not "truth"...especially if presented by the news sources you favor...until it can be confirmed beyond any doubt. It was not even close to that when your leaders first publicized it in their ongoing quest to legitimize the murder of innocent children. Note how you bastards still pretend it was common that women were dying from back alley abortions before Roe. The news sources you favor still repeat that as well, when it's never been verified. So it works this way, moron: Citing confirmed facts is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT a conspiracy theory. Citing leftist news is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT worth shit until a legit source provides proof it's true. If you want to cite "a news story", make sure it's true before pretending doing so is not CT.
Jesse...
"There was a time in this nation in which a commonly agreed to standard of morality existed. Obviously, that is no longer true of our culture."
There was a time when it was OK and acceptable to abuse and harm and malign and mock and oppress LGBTQ people, including drag queens. But we're getting better than that. It is more, not less, moral to seek to end oppression of oppressed people.
Can you agree to that principle as it relates to LGBTQ people? That they should not be oppressed or maligned or mocked or beaten? This is a very basic level of morality that we're seeking. It is, indeed a good moral standard to hold. Can't you agree with that much?
July 15, 2022 at 9:52 AM
"This tells me you know nothing about drag queens. I mean, ARE there drag queens who are "actual prostitutes..."? I guess it's possible."
This tells me you know nothing of truth, common sense and are lacking in reading comprehension. Jesse didn't use the term "actual". He described them as "basically just" prostitutes, which is accurate in that they're selling a highly sexes up image of what women are for profit. Is it an exact description? Doesn't have to be to make an analogy, but unlike your analogies, it's close enough.
"But are the people volunteering their time to read stories to children doing any harm? Of course not."
You're a liar and stupid. They're grooming small children to believe people like them aren't the twisted cretins they are. They're grooming small children to be "tolerant" of perversion.
"People who dress in drag are a reality."
Not a good one. Just a reality. How does that legitimize the practice of exposing small children to them?
"It's not a matter of thinking people should be "exposed" to them, any more than it would be appropriate to say, "Ooh, that Jesse, he wants people to be exposed to conservative preachers and teachers when they're basically prostitutes.""
This is a bullshit attempt to legitimize perversion by daring to suggest Jesse would be no different in exposing children to good people and pretending it's a threat to kids by lying about those good people being "basically prostitutes". In the case of your perverts, it's a legit claim, while in your case, you're just blatantly lying again.
"It's an offensive and harmful thing to say about a group that has been routinely oppressed and demonized."
Ah...the "historically oppressed" angle. To whatever extent your pervs have been harmed by anyone is the result of their indulging their perversion. Demonizing perversion is not the same as you demonizing actual people of faith. I don't give a flying rat's ass what's "offensive" to immoral offenders like you or the pervs you love.
"I know drag queens. They are, to the individual, lovely, loving, sweet, kind, forgiving and nurturing/helpful kinds of adults and it would be simply factually wrong to call them prostitutes."
No it wouldn't. Ignoring their immoral means of earning money and overstating what you want us to believe is true about them (true or not) is lying. Parading around like oversexed women is indeed akin to prostitution whether you're honest enough to acknowledge it or not. It's a conspiracy theory that people are wrong to say so and that these pervs are great people being unjustly attacked for something that is not immoral.
"That's the sort of demonizing language that leads to conservatives like Marshal to want to see these good people beat up and harmed."
This is not only a conspiracy theory, it's a straight up lie you couldn't support if your life depended upon doing so. PROVE IT NOW!!!! or admit you just straight up lied like the man you laughingly expect people to believe you are!
"It's harmful to abuse them in this manner and I hope you can be more rational and kind than that."
If they feel "harmed" when exposed to truth, that's too bad. "The truth hurts" everyone for whom the truth is inconvenient, but it's not abuse to continue speaking the truth. You wouldn't know, because you're a liar and a reprobate.
"Indeed, people like you two COULD benefit from being around and learning from the VERY kind and loving and helpful drag queens I know."
That's funny. The pervs you know WILL benefit should they choose to repent of their immoral behavior and find legitimate work and stay the f**l away from small children.
It just dawned on me, liar. Perhaps you were referring to my position that men should step up and protect children from your pervs. If so, then you're lying again to suggest that means I "want" to see your pervs "beat up and harmed". I want to see them never again expose themselves to small children...or ANY children for that matter...and if men choose to violently remove them from the presence of small children, I've no problem with it, because as in Lev 20:13, "their blood will be on their own heads." It would be a just punishment for daring to corrupt small children.
Marshal...
", I've no problem with it, because as in Lev 20:13, "their blood will be on their own heads." It would be a just punishment for daring to corrupt small children."
Good God in heaven have mercy on your poor, corrupt soul.
Do you see, Jesse? Craig? Do you SEE how at least to some degree I and the LGBTQ crowd and the nurturing loving drag queens are the ones promoting love and justice and an end to oppression and violence and Marshal and his ilk are the truly perverse?
Take a stand with me and the drag queens, won't you, on the side of morality and love and grace.
Marshal...
"Where's your evidence? Prove it at your blog."
If you were following, you know, news and stuff from actual journalists, you'd know this. There's a recording of Bannon talking about Trump plotting this insurrection/undermining the election. It was in the Jan 6 investigation news.
And THIS is why you should listen/watch/heed NPR, BBC and other actual news organizations and not "rightwingnutsandtinfoil.net"
Look, Marshal, you were groomed by a pervert and were used by a deviant as his little useful idiot. You've been played. What's sad is that it was such a stupid con, so obvious to anyone who wasn't willing to be groomed by the pervert. His repeated assertions/false claims about the press... His repeated false claims/grooming about "if I lose, it will be because the election was stolen..." His immediate announcement that the election was stolen when it became clear that he lost the election... His continued repetition of the lie... ALL of this is extremely obvious and stupidly false scam that Trump knew would work on some portion of his groomed idiots.
You've been played. Give up your delusions and get angry at Trump for fooling you so thoroughly. And get angry at yourself for being a useful idiot to that pervert groomer. And then, repent. Apologize for all the false claims and attacks you've made.
Save yourself, man. I believe in you. I believe somewhere in you there lives a heart that can be redeemed and, glory be!, what a great story that will be when you've finally turned around.
Repent, brother.
"On the evening of October 31, 2020, Steve Bannon told a group of associates that
President Donald Trump had a plan to declare victory on election night—
even if he was losing.
Trump knew that the slow counting of Democratic-leaning mail-in ballots meant
the returns would show early leads for him in key states.
His “strategy” was to use this fact to assert that he had won,
while claiming that the inevitable shifts in vote totals toward Joe Biden
must be the result of fraud, Bannon explained."
You've been played.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/leaked-audio-steve-bannon-trump-2020-election-declare-victory/
Marshal...
"stay the f**l away from small children."
Fortunately, that's not your decision to make and no amount of threats of violence will change that. In the meantime, it remains deadly perverted to make such threats.
July 15, 2022 at 11:13 AM
"Take a stand with me and the drag queens, won't you, on the side of morality and love and grace."
I would much prefer you restrict your recruitment of child molesters to your own blog. Don't do it here.
Grooming small children to accept men dressing as hyper-sexed women is not an example of "morality and love and grace" any honorable person would tolerate. Not being an honorable person, you wouldn't know that.
And once again, I would prefer no harm come to anyone, but especially to the small children you have no problem abusing and molesting by exposing them to perverts. If pervs won't leave peacefully, then they do indeed bring upon themselves whatever harm they may suffer by being forced to leave the presence of small children. So should any suffer such harm, I wouldn't feel bad for them given the harm they're inflicting upon small children.
July 15, 2022 at 11:15 AM
"If you were following, you know, news and stuff from actual journalists, you'd know this. There's a recording of Bannon talking about Trump plotting this insurrection/undermining the election. It was in the Jan 6 investigation news."
I watch and read legit news sources all the time. You watch NPR, BBC and other leftist hacks and liars. I'll get to your Bannon nonsense later
July 15, 2022 at 11:24 AM
"Look, Marshal, you were groomed by a pervert and were used by a deviant..."
Not true. I resist all efforts by you and those like you to corrupt me to be as corrupt as you are.
"What's sad is that it was such a stupid con...."
I know you like to believe that, but you still can't explain what the con was. Was Trump getting richer by being in politics like those you support have? I don't think so. Was the nation brought low by Trump's policies? Not at all and certainly not like during Obama's eight years or even worse by Biden's first two. How does this con work?
The reality is liars like you con yourselves into believing your moral corruption is actually godliness.
"His repeated assertions/false claims about the press..."
...are routinely proven true. You just reject truth because you're a corrupt asshole.
"His repeated false claims/grooming about "if I lose, it will be because the election was stolen...""
...have been proven true in most of the few cases where the claims were examined in a court of law. The vast majority of claims have never been adjudicated.
And YOU, you vile piece of shit, have offered no evidence to rebut any of it. You just parrot whatever your lying party feeds you.
"His immediate announcement that the election was stolen when it became clear that he lost the election... "
...has never been proven false just because you mention it again.
"ALL of this is extremely obvious and stupidly false scam that Trump knew would work on some portion of his groomed idiots."
This is your routine drivel, your own CT, that no one would ever have suspected election fraud were it not for Trump saying it took place, as if we're all sitting by the TV waiting for him to tell us what to think. We're not progressives, Danny-girl, and he was not responsible for all the very many people crying foul. That was happening and would have happened regardless of whether or not Trump ever said a word.
"Save yourself, man. I believe in you. I believe somewhere in you there lives a heart that can be redeemed and, glory be!, what a great story that will be when you've finally turned around."
Go fuck yourself. Don't ever call me "brother". Call me asshole, faggot, Satan...don't ever call me "brother", because that's worse. You're not my brother. You're not worthy.
more....
As regards the MotherJones link...this is just spin. Had I seen a link to the full podcast, I might think better of the attempt, but I didn't. Maybe I missed it. In any case, I doubt it would have changed the attempt to frame this as evidence of some "plan" by Trump. He's doing no more than simply predicting how things will go down. We saw attempts to subvert the 2016 results by Dems, and thus to suppose there was an attempt to prevent a replay is just common sense. As such, given Trump is an open book, it doesn't take a genius to presume how Trump would act in the face of obvious chicanery. To head it off, he would assert victory, and why wouldn't he given his popularity and great work as president? That cheating would take place by Dems was a given. No one who pays attention could possibly believe otherwise. So to take action was wise. What haters can't do is pretend he's wrong to do so and they can't pretend they can prove any of what Bannon says indicates a plan to overturn a legit election, no matter how desperately they try to do that.
Thus, if anyone is being conned, it's those who have no problem being conned by the worst people in American politics, the Democrat party.
July 15, 2022 at 11:57 AM
""stay the f**l away from small children."
Fortunately, that's not your decision to make and no amount of threats of violence will change that. In the meantime, it remains deadly perverted to make such threats."
There's nothing at all "perverse" about protecting small children from perverts and deviants like you and those you defend. It's the duty of every honorable man. You wouldn't know about such things. You're reprobate.
We are all brothers, sisters and family, Marshal. I don't always like it either, but reality is reality. We're the family of humanity, one race, one people, divided by religions and partisan politics, sometimes, but still family.
And in spite of your ugly bigotry and overtly violent, sexist, homophobic language, you are my brother. For better and worse.
Marshal...
"If pervs won't leave peacefully, then they do indeed bring upon themselves whatever harm they may suffer by being forced to leave the presence of small children....
It's the duty of every honorable man."
Craig? Jesse? Will you be honorable men and rebuke Marshal and his sexist and homophobic threats of violence?
This dangerous kind of oppression can not stand, boys. Which side are you on? Decency and morality? Or the side of the Marshals and the sexists and abusers?
Those who fail to speak out against violent oppression enable the violent oppression and the actual perverts who breathe out such threats.
July 15, 2022 at 4:17 PM
"We are all brothers, sisters and family, Marshal."
No we're not, Slug. My family are those who are, if not good Christians, those whose behaviors and beliefs closely mirror those of a good Christian. You're a heretic and promoter and defender of perversion and other forms of rebellious God-hating behavior.
"We're the family of humanity, one race, one people, divided by religions and partisan politics, sometimes, but still family."
Luke 14:26. Also, and even more directly to such as you: 1 Cor 5:11-131 and 1 Cor 6:18.
You're not my family in any way.
"And in spite of your ugly bigotry and overtly violent, sexist, homophobic language, you are my brother. For better and worse."
Don't believe it. I rebuke you and will have nothing to do with you except to rebuke you. You are evil and infect others with your evil. I am indeed bigoted against what you are and wish for others to be, because you mock the Lord by daring to pretend you're Christian while doing that which is clearly antithetical to the faith.
July 15, 2022 at 6:52 PM
"Craig? Jesse? Will you be honorable men and rebuke Marshal and his sexist and homophobic threats of violence?"
The only threats are those against children by your presence among them and your enabling of exposing them to perverts. Doing whatever is possible to protect small children from exposure to those like you and those you enable isn't a threat. It's an obligation from one who cares about the well being of small children and their immortal souls.
"This dangerous kind of oppression can not stand, boys."
The danger is the moral and spiritual oppression visited upon the innocent by exposure to the creeps you defend as if they're the victims.
"Which side are you on? Decency and morality?"
We know which side you're on, Slug. The side of craven immorality and child molestation. The side which results in 10 year old rape victims, millions of unborn torn limb from limb and thousands of other molested, abused and scarred for life. I don't see your appeals to better men like Craig and Jesse resulting in their joining up with that shit.
"Those who fail to speak out against violent oppression enable the violent oppression and the actual perverts who breathe out such threats."
I speak out against vile and contemptible vermin like you who would expose small children to sexually immoral perverts while daring to lie by saying they're good people. Call me anything you like, bitch. You are the enemy of all that's good and holy. You're false labeling is meaningless except to highlight your moral corruption.
Oh...by the way...note how your bile hasn't resulted in any of your lies being deleted. How long that will last is hard to say. You're a stench hard to dispel.
Marshal,
How long have you known this Dan? Was he always this bad in your experience or has he gone from bad to worse over time?
She'll have no lasting trauma from good prenatal care and likely grow up feeling good that she doesn't have the death of an innocent in her history.
No doubt the nine months she was forced to carry her rapist's baby will be one of her fondest childhood memories. Maybe she'll get some nice stretch marks and a Cesarean scar so she can be reminded every day of that joyful time in her life.
Jesse...
"How long have you known this Dan?"
So, you're siding with the molester and abuser of an oppressed people, thinking THAT is moral and standing in their defense is not moral.
All I can say, if so, is what an upside down morality you all live in.
Jesse,
I believe I've dealt with him since I began this blog in 2008. There were other lefties at the time which resulted in Dan being able to blend in with them, especially since he was more passive/aggressive in tone at the time. Now, as pretty much the only lefty who visits prior to Vinny's return, he expresses his corruption much more boldly.
Vinny,
It's quite the moot point now, given she's had her child brutally destroyed by an activist abortionist happy to accommodate her for cash. But I've seen no details which suggest the girl had any desire to destroy her baby at all, nor that she was particularly traumatized by the sexual experience. I know only two things at this point: She was impregnated and had her unborn aborted.
Unlike the left, I prefer to shield kids from any morally questionable behaviors. I prefer they be allowed to be kids. Unfortunately, we live in a fallen world where unChristian behavior abounds and too often kids are negatively impacted to varying degrees...sometimes far worse than being impregnated. What some must endure often last their entire childhood and even lives. For the left to believe that bringing a child to term is the worst part of a situation such as that which this particular 10 year old would have endured is just an absurd and insincere concern falsely expressed in defense of the pro-abortion agenda and I'm not the least bit swayed by it. If the left truly cared that these things happen, they would abandon the ideology which makes them more possible and more likely.
July 16, 2022 at 10:19 AM
"So, you're siding with the molester and abuser of an oppressed people, thinking THAT is moral and standing in their defense is not moral."
No Dan...he's not siding with you at all, it seems. It seems clear Jesse is siding with God's Will and morality and character.
"All I can say, if so, is what an upside down morality you all live in."
You've rejected God's morality, Dan. Thus, things only seem upside down to one as perversely corrupt as you.
I molest no one, Dan. You celebrate and promote child molestation.
For pervert Dan,
I know drag queens. They are, to the individual, lovely, loving, sweet, kind, forgiving and nurturing/helpful kinds of adults and it would be simply factually wrong to call them prostitutes.
All drag queens are prostituting what sexuality is and all drag queens are perverts who should be kept away from children.
LGBTQ+ people SHOULD be oppressed back into their closets. They mock God and spread their perversion all over, corrupting the culture. Evil is not to be sanctioned in any way. The Bible says, “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” And that is what REAL Christians do—Expose the evil for what it is.
Real love doesn’t support and promote what God calls an abomination. Real love would teach them the Gospel of repentance and salvation. Real love would lead them away from their perverse and evil lifestyles.
Only those in Christ are a “family” of brothers and sisters, and perverts like you and those you promote have nothing to do with a family of humanity, only a family of deviant perverts destroying what used to be a moral culture.
For the left to believe that bringing a child to term is the worst part of a situation such as that which this particular 10 year old would have endured is just an absurd and insincere concern falsely expressed in defense of the pro-abortion agenda and I'm not the least bit swayed by it.
I don't know what the worst part is or what the best part is, and I don't think that it's really any of my business. I think that it's up to the family and their doctor to decide what to do about a pregnancy that was forced on the child. If they conclude that it would be better for the health and well being of the child not to carry the pregnancy to term, I'm not going to second guess them.
Glenn...
"All drag queens are prostituting what sexuality is and all drag queens are perverts who should be kept away from children."
As with Marshal, fortunately, it's not your decision to make. You and all the religious zealots and pharisees can choose to hide under a rock, living in fear of LGBTQ people and drag queens if you want. Your loss.
But don't you dare try to force your religious fascism on any one else. Why don't you move to an extremist Muslim nation that doesn't value religious freedom. .? You might be more comfortable there instead of the land of the free.
Glenn...
"LGBTQ+ people SHOULD be oppressed back into their closets. "
Again, I would appeal to Craig, maybe Jesse, maybe a few other slightly less extremist zealots: LOOK at what the Glenns, Marshals and other eextremistsare openly saying. They're openly advocating oppression and violence against LGBTQ people.
Save your souls. Take a stand with the rational majority against the active oppressors. Denounce the dangerously deluded conservative extremists.
History and your own descendants will judge you harshly.
"And that is what REAL Christians do—Expose the evil for what it is."
No, Glenn. That is what the pharisees, the KKK, the white supremacists, the violent zealots throughout the ages do. Jesus denounces your sort of violence and oppression.. Repent.
"I don't know what the worst part is or what the best part is, and I don't think that it's really any of my business."
"Mankind was my business." --Jacob Marley
I never can understand how anyone thinks it's a legit response in any way to say "it's really none of my business" in discussions such as these. Why express an opinion at all, then?
But you are expressing an opinion and your opinion is that the life of the unborn is meaningless despite all scientific understanding and thus your opinion indicts you in a most negative manner.
I would expect a loving family for whom honor and morality is essential to their lives would decide a far more compassionate end than to destroy innocent life on the pretense a rape justifies doing so. There's no limit to what a family and their doctor might decide in any situation involving one of their own and those like you believe in this case, destroying an innocent life is a legitimate option when there is no explanation for how that is so...ever.
"If they conclude that it would be better for the health and well being of the child not to carry the pregnancy to term,..." ...it is absolutely legitimate for a society to question the "experts" who make such a claim. Given the circumstances as has been revealed thus far (more may have come out about which I've not yet heard)...that the child's mother did not press charges against the rapist and claims the child is fine...I doubt the welfare of the child will not be improved by remaining among her family and that should concern everyone who dares claim they care about the welfare of children in this country. But hey...the pro-aborts are happy another innocent was put to death.
July 16, 2022 at 5:08 PM
""All drag queens are prostituting what sexuality is and all drag queens are perverts who should be kept away from children."
As with Marshal, fortunately, it's not your decision to make. You and all the religious zealots and pharisees can choose to hide under a rock, living in fear of LGBTQ people and drag queens if you want. Your loss."
Paul was zealous for the faith...the teachings and truths of Christ. To Dan, this is somehow a bad thing and something common to the pharisees...except that Dan presumes the pharisees Jesus scolded were representative of all of them. This level of superficiality likely plays a strong role in Dan's poor understanding of Christianity and Scripture. Truly serious and prayerful study would not have resulted in this comic strip level of understanding.
We don't "live in fear" of the perverts Dan defends as if their akin to the Apostles of Christ. To the extent we have any fear about them at all, it's the fear for their own immortal souls, and more importantly, on the immoral impact they'll have on small children to whom Dan would see them exposed. I would appreciate the loss of these perverts from our culture. The culture would not suffer in the least from such a loss. Indeed, it would improve by having one less source of immoral influence on the culture, and that's a really good thing...especially for small children.
"But don't you dare try to force your religious fascism on any one else."
Dan would prefer to have his perversion forced upon us and small children. He and his kind aren't satisfied with indulging their immoral corruption in private...in the shadows. They want that all should join them in eternal damnation.
"Why don't you move to an extremist Muslim nation that doesn't value religious freedom. .?
Why do You might be more comfortable there instead of the land of the free."
"Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.”
― John Adams
There was never any intention that this notion of "religious freedom" would be provided for as those like Dan would demand. The teachings of Christ does not support Dan's position. "Freedom" to act immorally is neither a Christian nor an American principle. It is an abuse of freedom for Dan and his kind to indulge their vile corruptions and a crime against the people to impose it as they've always intended.
"Glenn...
"LGBTQ+ people SHOULD be oppressed back into their closets. "
Again, I would appeal to Craig, maybe Jesse, maybe a few other slightly less extremist zealots: LOOK at what the Glenns, Marshals and other eextremistsare openly saying. They're openly advocating oppression and violence against LGBTQ people."
The only "oppression" promoted by either Glenn or myself (if Glenn disagrees he can say so), is the oppression truth and morality imposes on us all. Some of us gladly submit for His sake. Others rebel for their own. Dan is among the latter, caring little for the Will of God, devoted as he is to immorality and deviancy. Most who prefer their sin over reason and truth indulge away from public view. This is how the perverse Dan loves above God lived at one time. They did so because the truth of their immorality forced them to indulge in the closet.
"Save your souls. Take a stand with the rational majority against the active oppressors. Denounce the dangerously deluded conservative extremists."
Dan views those who defend the faith, who abide truth and reason, who rely on evidence and fact...Dan regards such people as "extremists". That's funny. He's a clown.
"History and your own descendants will judge you harshly."
This suggests a very dark future. I have faith that at least my descendants will be moral people, not reprobates like Dan.
July 16, 2022 at 5:10 PM
""And that is what REAL Christians do—Expose the evil for what it is."
No, Glenn. That is what the pharisees, the KKK, the white supremacists, the violent zealots throughout the ages do."
No, Dan. That's exactly what real Christians do. They don't lie about which behaviors are wicked or godly in order to appease the world. Jesus denounces your sort of perversion of truth.
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
--Jesus Christ
Matthew 7:22-24
King James Version
Repent, Dan.
Repent of what? Disagreeing with YOU?
Hard pass. You ain't god enough.
Repent of working for justice for an historically oppressed group?
Pass, my Lord says otherwise.
Repent of being welcoming and affirming of my dear LGBTQ family?
Pass, I'm striving to be welcoming and loving, as Jesus taught us.
Repent of being opposed to stupidly and dangerously false claims and irrational conspiracy theories?
Again, pass.
Unless you can present something that stands up from what reason and my Lord, Jesus, teaches, I'm going to have to side with Jesus (as best I understand him) and reason.
I'd encourage you to do the same.
July 16, 2022 at 9:11 PM
"Repent of what? Disagreeing with YOU?"
No. Of course not, Clown. Repent of your rebellion against God.
"Hard pass. You ain't god enough."
Not good enough for God. More than good enough for you. But you're not good at all. You're a rebellious reprobate.
"Repent of working for justice for an historically oppressed group?"
Repent of grooming small children to regard perversion and deviancy as true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, commendable, excellence, and worthy of praise.
"Pass, my Lord says otherwise."
I won't try to guess what your "lord" says. But the One True Lord, Jesus Christ says "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness." and especially "If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
"Repent of being welcoming and affirming of my dear LGBTQ family?"
Repent of enabling them in their behaviors, beliefs about their sexual self-delusion and the corrupting influence of doing so, especially on children. "Affirming" sexual depravity is not the Way of Truth...not the Way of Jesus.
"Pass, I'm striving to be welcoming and loving, as Jesus taught us."
Jesus taught nothing at all akin to what you preach and enable.
"Repent of being opposed to stupidly and dangerously false claims and irrational conspiracy theories?"
Repent of lying about claims and theories which have a more truthful, factual basis than the crap you pretend is taught by Christ. What you describe in the manner you've expressed in the above quote are simply things you in your depraved corruption oppose. There's nothing stupid, dangerous or false about them.
"Unless you can present something that stands up from what reason and my Lord, Jesus, teaches, I'm going to have to side with Jesus (as best I understand him) and reason."
I've done that countless times, and with far more Scripture proofs and evidence than you've ever brought forth in defense of the perversions you champion. You don't side with Jesus at all and you mock Him by falsely claiming you do. You're a reprobate liar and pervert. Repent.
"I'd encourage you to do the same."
What you encourage is displeasing to God.
Hard pass.
Dan,
But don't you dare try to force your religious fascism on any one else
Hey, it’s the LGBTQXYZ+ who are forcing their perversion on the rest of us. SO, let’s leave religion out of it and look at biology— Male to male or female to female sex is an abomination and not what our bodies are designed for. A man pretending to be a woman is still a man and woman pretending to be a man are still what they were born as regardless of how much surgery or brainwashing they’ve had. Only stupid and fooling people believe otherwise.
They're openly advocating oppression and violence against LGBTQ people.
LIAR, LIAR, PANTS AFIRE! No one suggested violence.
History shows conservatives aren’t the extremists. Marshall is 100% correct about the “oppression” we force on perverts—TRUTH and MORALITY.
"And that is what REAL Christians do—Expose the evil for what it is.”
No, Glenn. That is what the pharisees, the KKK, the white supremacists, the violent zealots throughout the ages do. Jesus denounces your sort of violence and oppression.. Repent.
No Danny boy, Ephesians 5:11 “says to have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.” That’s not the KKK, pharisees or white supremacists, but is the WORD OF GOD.
Repent of what? Repent of your blasphemy against GOD and Jesus Christ when you claim God approves of sexual anarchy and perversion.
Glenn...
"Repent of your blasphemy against GOD and Jesus Christ when you claim God approves of sexual anarchy and perversion."
And as always, I don't blaspheme against God, I disagree with you. I don't confuse the two.
Now, is it POSSIBLE that I'm mistaken in what God thinks in this case? Sure, I'm a fallible human being. AND it is also possible that YOU two and your ilk are mistaken (indeed, given your advocacy of oppressing people back into the closet, I'd say it's extremely likely and obviously so that you are mistaken).
But I'm not deliberately rejecting God when I reject your hunches about God. Indeed, I'm seeking to OBEY and FOLLOW God in spite of what the religious zealots in their human traditions think. So, the worse you can accuse me of is being mistaken in my attempt to work for love and justice and moral decency. Whereas, the worse I can accuse you two of is actual oppression and wanting to intimidate people into hiding.
How so very indecent, immoral and vulgar. And oppressive.
At any rate, as noted, I'm disagreeing with you, not God. And we should not conflate the two. Ever.
Humble thyselves, boys.
Glenn...
"it’s the LGBTQXYZ+ who are forcing their perversion on the rest of us."
Oh really? How many times have they said you can't marry the person of your choice? That you had to marry a guy?
Answer: Never. People wanting the liberty to be themselves and choose their own mates without religious zealots trying to legislate their bedrooms and lives are NOT "forcing their perversion" on anyone. They're just living their lives.
If YOU don't want to marry a guy, then NO ONE - literally no one in the whole world - is trying to tell you that you must marry a guy. Marry the person of your choice, as long as it's consensual (we know how so many religious conservatives like to court those little girls, like Roy Moore). But on the flip side: YOU don't get to tell other gay men, lesbian women or anyone else what gender they must marry. Shame on you for wanting to try to force your religious views on others.
No. You all are the bigoted zealots trying to force your religio-fascism on others by weight of law.
Stop it. You don't get to decide.
Keep repeating that to yourself until you understand.
Glenn...
"SO, let’s leave religion out of it and look at biology— Male to male or female to female sex is an abomination and not what our bodies are designed for.
That is NOT what science tells us. It's what sick religio-fascists want to TRY to tell us and TRY to force us into following your sick, sick, perverted religious views. But you don't get to do that.
Repeat that over and over until you understand: It's not YOUR decision to make.
Now, go away. You've lost this fight, you and your ilk can retreat to whatever slime-covered rock you crawled out from. Live your life in peace and let others do the same.
You are and remain free to make your decisions but you don't have the authority to make those decisions for others. You're just not god enough, little man.
I'll simply point out that Dan keeps appealing to a standard of morality that he can't define, ground in anything besides individual/societal preference, apply in a universal sense, or demonstrate to be objective.
I would just ask that Glenn and Marshal consider the story of the woman caught in adultery where the pharisees wanted to stone her and wanted Jesus to stone her and Jesus refused To stone her and refuse to even condemn her. I would ask you to ask yourselves yourselves, in this story who am I? Jesus or the pharisees?
Hint.... You're not being Jesus.
You all are the accusers, saying, "Yes! We condemn you! We want you to crawl into the shadows and hide in fear!" And keep up, Glenn..., Marshal has said that he supports Drag Queens being beaten up if they show up to help with children.
You all publicly are supporting oppression and suppression and violence against LGBTQ people. You all are literally being the pharisees in this story.
And it drives you crazy that Jesus is saying, neither do I condemn you.
Get on the right side of Christianity.
You see, it's "possible" one might be mistaken when clear, direct and unequivocal commands of God needn't be taken seriously. It's "possible" when God says "Thou shalt not..." and we repeat the exact same words that one could disagree with us and not be disagreeing with God at the same time.
One must never oppress sinners by insisting their behaviors are sinful compelling them to hide where others can't see them sin. That's indecent, immoral and vulgar...not the sin itself.
At any rate, if someone like Dan can't provide any solid Scriptural evidence we have it wrong, while we provide solid Scriptural evidence confirming what we say, then somehow there's enough uncertainty there for Dan to pretend he's right with God.
In what possible, honest manner can one be mistaken when God says, "Thous shalt not?" The correct answer is: there is no confusion Dan didn't invent for himself.
Frankly, I don't care what reprobates like Dan pretend or how they insist there's some difference between God saying, "Thou shalt not" and others repeating what God says. It's enough to saying openly and boldly that those like Dan are wrong, they're liars and they are a corrupting influence leading others, including children, to sin. That's clear and I'm in no way mistaken about it.
Craig...
"I'll simply point out that Dan keeps appealing to a standard of morality that he can't define, ground in anything besides individual/societal preference, apply in a universal sense, or demonstrate to be objective"
1. Of course Dan, has defined morality as it applies to humanity. Don't cause harm to others. Don't deprive people of their human rights. It's not that hard to understand. Do you have a hard time understanding that?
Now I guess that it can be complicated in certain limited circumstances. But not that complicated. Causing pain to give a child a shot is not really causing harm. For instance.
2. This extremely rational and understandable concept is grounded in the notion of human rights which, as the founders noted, are self evident. Again, I would ask you, do you have a hard time understanding thou-shalt-not cause harm to others?
3. The advantage to this criteria is that it can be applied universally fairly consistently. Not entirely universally, but fairly universally. The great advantage this is over your religious bigotry and human traditions is that your religious bigotry and hunches and personal human traditions are not in any way at all applicable in any kind of universal manner. Do you recognize that?
4. You keep saying that I can't objectively prove it as if that means anything. YOU cannot objectively prove your religious hunches and human traditions as it relatesto morality. You can't. You just can't. You say that as if there's an alternative where some people like you CAN objectively prove your human traditions. But you can not do so. If you could, you would have by now. You can't. So why do you keep saying that?
It's like if you were saying Dan keeps talking about flying but he can't fly independently, just grow wings and fly through the air. As if you could... but NONE of us can. It's an irrational and nonsensical claim or statement.
I'll ask you again. Do you recognize the reality that YOU cannot objectively prove your system of morals in your particular subset of human traditions and biases?
Marshal...
""Thou shalt not" and others repeating what God says. "
1. God has not ever anywhere in the whole world, not in The Bible and not to Marshal, said two gay guys should not get married. That's a fact.
2. God has never said that lesbians should not adopt children. That's a fact the fact. It's never happened.
3. God has never said thou-shalt-not be a drag Queen and read stories to children. That's a fact and anyone who says otherwise is a damned liar and a stupid one presuming, at that... presuming to speak for God. It hasn't happened, not in the real world.
4. God has not said anywhere in all the history of God saying stuff that we should not have abortions. That's a fact.
These are the facts. And another fact is that Marshall reads these things into The Bible that aren't there and thanks that God has said it. God has not. You cannot prove in any way at all that God said these things because God has not said them. If you could prove it, you would. You can't and you won't. But you're too cowardly to admit that you can't prove your stupidly false claims.
Grow up. Or at least get out of the way of the adults who are trying to help make the world a better place.
Re: Craig's irrational complaint that using harm and denial of human rights as a measure...
Marshal said...
"One must never oppress sinners by insisting their behaviors are sinful compelling them to hide where others can't see them sin. That's indecent, immoral and vulgar...not the sin itself."
You see, the problem with relying on human religious traditions is that some idiots like Marshal think it's perfectly fine to tell people -to the point that they need to hide in shame and fear - that they're evil sinners and their actions (that aren't causing harm to anyone and which brings joy, love and beauty to their lives) are sinful ("an abomination!") and evil.
Marshall chooses to see no harm in what hes doing, even though it's incredibly harmful and deadly. Using the harm and human rights criteria that I advocate, it's quite abundantly clear that marshall's in the wrong morally. Using his human religious traditions just leads to harm, in this case.
Are you not able to see how faulty and flighty and whimsically irrational and unreliable your human traditions and biases are?
"You see, it's "possible" one might be mistaken when clear, direct and unequivocal commands of God needn't be taken seriously..."
Oh, I take the words of God and Jesus seriously. Indeed, that is precisely the reason my beliefs evolved away from traditional conservative human traditions... because I couldn't take Jesus' teachings seriously without abandoning much of human conservative traditions. Believe it or not, that is exactly how I became progressive.
Jesus who literally said he'd literally come to preach good news to the literally poor, who was abundantly clear that he'd come not to condemn poor sinners but to save... who came to preach good news to the poor and marginalized and a gospel of welcome to the marginalized, children, the sick and disabled, the foreigners etc AND to warn the rich oppressors that their way was a way of destruction... I couldn't take that Jesus literally and seriously without seeing problems in much of modern conservatism. I read NO "liberal books" to reach these conclusions. I read the Bible and took it seriously.
That's just the reality of my story.
Marshal...
"In what possible, honest manner can one be mistaken when God says, "Thous shalt not?"
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven..."
Do you have a savings account, Marshal? What part of "DO NOT STORE UP TREASURES FOR YOURSELF..." are you not understanding? What possible, honest manner can you be mistaken when Jesus said, "THOU SHALT NOT..." in a clear and unmistakable manner?
Or, if you're correct and "men shall not lie with men" is a biblical command against any and all homosexual acts, even loving marriage arrangements, then WHY do you fail to heed the "If they do, stone them to death..."?
I know, I know. You come up with some rationalized out reason NOT to take that passage literally in its entirety. Same with the commands about not wearing polyester or other commands that are quite clear that you don't take literally.
But that's the point, isn't it? We ALL have reasons for not taking every line of the Bible as literal universal commands. And righteously so. Trying to follow all the OT commands literally would result in all manner of evil, including selling your children into sexual slavery and raping the virgin girls of the enemy. At some level, you recognize that we ought not take all the biblical commands literally, because you don't.
The question, then, isn't "Should we take all biblical commands literally and with no consideration of context or rational morality?" None of us do that. The question is, WHY do you think YOUR exceptions are the only valid exceptions?
Pharisaical arrogance, perhaps?
I think if Dan posts another comment which does not address the topic of the post, I'll Trabue the shit out of it. It won't matter if anyone chooses to respond to any of his last five comments, either. Including me.
July 18, 2022 at 5:40 PM
"1. Of course Dan, has defined morality as it applies to humanity."
Dan has defined morality as it applies to his love of perversion. He speaks of harm to others as if those who support actual morality are causing any harm to others. But his defense and promotion of perversion and sexual immorality has caused harm which from which our culture may never truly recover. It is his conspiracy theory that conservatives are denying "human rights" to his favored perverts.
"Now I guess that it can be complicated in certain limited circumstances."
It's not complicated at all. You're a supporter and enabler of perversion and that perversion causes harm.
"2. This extremely rational and understandable concept is grounded in the notion of human rights which, as the founders noted, are self evident."
That which you espouse would in no way be that which the founders would favor, nor would've had in mind. That was a time in which homosexuals could be strung up. It was a capital crime in several states until recently in American history. To dare suggest what you want is in any way similar to what the founders believed is as absurd.
"3. The advantage to this criteria is that it can be applied universally fairly consistently."
"Universal" acceptance of perversion is not a good thing, nothing to which any civilized society should ever aspire and is already proven to be culturally suicidal. There is no legitimate application for what you propose.
"The great advantage this is over your religious bigotry and human traditions is that your religious bigotry and hunches and personal human traditions are not in any way at all applicable in any kind of universal manner. Do you recognize that?"
Only a pervert would insist that perversion is a legitimate goal for any society. The only true bigotry here is your bigotry against those who adhere to and revere the clearly revealed Will of God.
"4. You keep saying that I can't objectively prove it as if that means anything. YOU cannot objectively prove your religious hunches and human traditions as it relatesto morality. You can't. You just can't."
Say it again, little petulant girl. It won't make it truer. We've proven the truth about morality many, many times, and when we do, you deflect to the secular world to which you defer over the Will of God. Scripture is clear. There is no other source for determining what is or isn't moral that is anything more than your human traditions and hunches. As such, we've proven what morality is...what it looks like, especially to Christians, and have done so many times. But you reject Scripture as the source of our knowledge of good and evil, because it exposes you as evil.
"It's like if you were saying Dan keeps talking about flying but he can't fly independently, just grow wings and fly through the air."
No. It's not like that at all.
"I'll ask you again. Do you recognize the reality that YOU cannot objectively prove your system of morals in your particular subset of human traditions and biases?"
Don't bother, because this isn't an honest question at all. It's meant to deflect from the truth you find so inconvenient for your love of perversion.
Also, it has nothing to do with this post.
July 18, 2022 at 6:17 PM
"1. God has not ever anywhere in the whole world, not in The Bible and not to Marshal, said two gay guys should not get married. That's a fact."
He doesn't have to. At least not to actual Christians who don't need the obvious spelled out. The underlying behavior by which such people are identified is clearly prohibited by God, who called it detestable...an abomination. Yet you would pretend He'd approve of two who engage in abomination joining in a faux-marital union and somehow that behavior is no longer detestable to Him? Only a lover of perversion would dare suggest such an absurdity.
"2. God has never said that lesbians should not adopt children. That's a fact the fact. It's never happened."
God was quite clear about disapproving of leading children to sin. "That's a fact the fact."
"3. God has never said thou-shalt-not be a drag Queen and read stories to children. That's a fact and anyone who says otherwise is a damned liar and a stupid one presuming, at that... presuming to speak for God. It hasn't happened, not in the real world."
This, too, has been proven to you...both parts of the lie. There's no doubt about God's disapproval of cross-dressing and indoctrinating children in sinfulness. Only an evil pervert would pretend otherwise.
"4. God has not said anywhere in all the history of God saying stuff that we should not have abortions. That's a fact."
Uh, it's the 5th Commandment. You need to engage in serious and prayerful study of Scripture sometime. You'll learn all this stuff you pretend God never said.
"These are the facts. And another fact is that Marshall reads these things into The Bible that aren't there and thanks that God has said it."
You're liar who desperately needs to believe I don't know what Scripture says, or that perhaps I'm as dishonest as you are in pretending if God doesn't say something in a specific way, then one cannot know what He would find pleasing or displeasing. It's the "put Mom said no cookies before dinner and these are pretzels" logic only a moron would regard as a legit argument.
"You cannot prove in any way at all that God said these things because God has not said them. If you could prove it, you would."
I have proven my position, many times. But you're dishonest and perverse to acknowledge what you know is true.
"Grow up. Or at least get out of the way of the adults who are trying to help make the world a better place."
You're about as lacking in maturity as any leftist perv out there. You're NOT making the world a better place, nor even coming close. You're making it a cesspool of perversion and deviancy.
July 18, 2022 at 7:23 PM
"Oh, I take the words of God and Jesus seriously."
That's hilarious.
"Indeed, that is precisely the reason my beliefs evolved away from traditional conservative human traditions."
More comedy gold!
"Believe it or not, that is exactly how I became progressive."
You were never anything else.
"Jesus who literally said he'd literally come to preach good news to the literally poor, who was abundantly clear that he'd come not to condemn poor sinners but to save... who came to preach good news to the poor and marginalized and a gospel of welcome to the marginalized, children, the sick and disabled, the foreigners etc AND to warn the rich oppressors that their way was a way of destruction... I couldn't take that Jesus literally and seriously without seeing problems in much of modern conservatism. I read NO "liberal books" to reach these conclusions. I read the Bible and took it seriously."
There's no way to read Scripture and come to the conclusions you prefer over the Word of God. You've had this argument above shredded numerous times and you still try to pretend it's more than just cover for your vile, world-centered beliefs.
"That's just the reality of my story."
The reality of your story is one of two possibilities...you're lying or a moron. OK, three: you're a lying moron.
July 18, 2022 at 8:17 PM
"Marshal...
"In what possible, honest manner can one be mistaken when God says, "Thous shalt not?"
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven..."
Do you have a savings account, Marshal? What part of "DO NOT STORE UP TREASURES FOR YOURSELF..." are you not understanding?"
Here's another example which belies your claim you've "seriously and prayerfully" studied Scripture. You take that verse out of context because it strokes your socialist bent. You want to pretend it's about money. It's not.
"Or, if you're correct and "men shall not lie with men" is a biblical command against any and all homosexual acts, even loving marriage arrangements, then WHY do you fail to heed the "If they do, stone them to death..."?"
You're really going to try running this lie again? Are you really that given over to your perversion? This has been explained many times, and you ignore the truth of the explanation so as to provide yourself more wiggle room for the celebration of perverse behavior.
"But that's the point, isn't it? We ALL have reasons for not taking every line of the Bible as literal universal commands."
No. That's NOT the point. You conflate moral behavior with that which isn't. Are we to ignore other sexual sins? (No doubt you do). You're a liar, Dan. Only a reprobate tries to run your argument as if it's intelligent. I've never heard ANYONE try to push that bullshit argument who wasn't trying to legitimize sexual immorality, most specifically homosexuality.
:"The question, then, isn't "Should we take all biblical commands literally and with no consideration of context or rational morality?" None of us do that. The question is, WHY do you think YOUR exceptions are the only valid exceptions?"
That's not the question at all. The question is, what possible Scriptural support exists for supporting, enabling, promoting and celebrating homosexuality...particularly when every word in Scripture related to it is prohibitive? Don't pretend it's about other Biblical commands...despite how many you pervert in the same manner.
Devotion to perversion, perhaps? Indeed you are far more devoted to perversion than to the God you mock by daring to speak of Him.
Dan,
You deny biology with homosexuality
You deny that marriage is between members of opposite sexes.
You deny God's word.
You deny common sense.
You are a perverted reprobate who thumbs his nose at God and say people who prove your asininity with God's Word are just having "hunches." TO you 2+2=7. You are not worth my time; I don't like throwing pearls before swine like you. And that is why you were banned from my blog. You are wickedly evil and a pawn of Satan
So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
Dan attempted to post four more comments after my request he no longer post anything unrelated to the topic. Those comments are still in moderation and I'm taking time to decide if I'll allow them or Trabue them out of existence...as he's deleted so many much more relevant and on topic comments of mine at his blog.
In those comments, he does his usual thing, pretending it matters that God has not commanded something more than X number of times and therefore to obey them is not mandatory.
He tries to pretend what he's written about why he supports sexual immorality is sufficient to address questions regarding how it's at all possible any true Christian could. He needs to believe there's some inability to understand his "reasoning", as if his explanation is an indication of actual reasoning. It's not. It's cheap rationalization for enabling evil. What's more, if he refuses (and it's always been refusal, nothing more) to provide what is requested...Scriptural support...then he hasn't explained himself at all.
And again, he believes there's more value in a command of God repeated 10 times versus only 1 or 2 times because he wants to pretend he's more devoted to God's word. But the more important thing to remember is understanding the command as intended, and Dan needs to muddy such understanding in order to reject that which he finds inconvenient and overstate that which he wants to pretend is more important. His "understanding" of wealth and poverty in Scripture repeatedly requires misapplication of a verse...and purposely so, I would argue...which isn't speaking of wealth at all. That is, if "money" or "wealth" appears in a verse or passage, to Dan the passage is about money or wealth. The "laying up of treasure" passage is the current example. It's not about money.
Dan continues to pick and choose when to take something in Scripture literally. He thinks it's about the words used, as opposed to taking the message/lesson/command literally. No. He doesn't "think" that. He willfully perverts the concept to his favor.
He continues to assert he was once conservative and to this day has failed to demonstrate any understanding of conservatism. The reality is what he pretends he was versus what he thinks is a better understanding of God's will now is no better than "going to the dark side", as it were. There's no justification for his enabling embrace of perversion, and no way in which opposing it is "oppressive" simply by virtue of that opposition. Dan hates truth because truth is oppressive to those who find it inconvenient.
I don't much care how someone like Dan feels I'm "coming across". He's a liar embracing lies and as such his opinion isn't worthy shit, except to shitty people. He wants to pretend all manner of crap about my positions because he has no legitimate way of disproving or rebutting them. He simply disparages them.
In any case, none of that crap has anything to do with this post, except that it amounts to his very own conspiracy theories about conservatism and me personally. To use his own words, he's providing nothing better than "stupidly false claims" and doing nothing to provide support they might at all be true. So. He is unlikely to see those last four posts published here. It's nothing he hasn't lied about before and he's provided nothing new to make them worth seeing the light of day. I may save them to create a new post or just Trabue them away for good. I've not yet decided.
Marshal, there's nothing more to say on the topic of the post. You've lost. There are no comparable conspiracy theories with wide acceptance in any way similar to the delusions on the Trumpright. You've lost. That's all.
Move on.
Beyond that, I was only addressing false charges and mistaken complaints that you all raised in my comments.
Hide from them if you want, the problems remain obvious to all but the partisan-sick.
July 19, 2022 at 8:30 PM
Don't confuse my boredom with your trite and moronic corruptions and lame attempts to present yourself as thoughtful when you're really just lying with "hiding".
I've presented more than enough to demonstrate your views on what is or isn't "conspiracy" is dependent on which side is saying what and nothing more deep than that. I've also presented enough to prove CT isn't "just" a "right-wing" thing if it's a right-wing thing at all. I've not only not lost, I've won yet again. You're a pathetic clown who is something far more twisted than mere partisan hack.
I never can understand how anyone thinks it's a legit response in any way to say "it's really none of my business" in discussions such as these. Why express an opinion at all, then?
You are confusing having an opinion with having a say. There are many issues about which I have an opinion but about which I nonetheless accept that I don't have a say. For example, I don't have a say in which religious beliefs you embrace no matter how silly I think they may be. I respect your right to choose to believe because I expect you to respect my right not to believe.
I don't believe that anyone besides me has a say in my bodily autonomy. No one can force me to donate a kidney, or even to donate blood, to save someone else's life no matter how innocent the potential recipient may be or how little risk I might run by doing so. Because I believe in my own bodily autonomy, I respect others' right to make decisions about their bodies, including the right not to carry their rapist's baby.
But you are expressing an opinion and your opinion is that the life of the unborn is meaningless despite all scientific understanding and thus your opinion indicts you in a most negative manner.
That isn't my opinion.
I would expect a loving family for whom honor and morality is essential to their lives would decide a far more compassionate end than to destroy innocent life on the pretense a rape justifies doing so.
You can expect whatever you like, but the question here is a rape victim's legal obligation to let her body be used to produce her rapist's baby. I don't believe the rape victim has that legal obligation while you think she does.
You can expect whatever you like, but the question here is a rape victim's legal obligation to let her body be used to produce her rapist's baby.
If she's pregnant, she already produced the baby. The only question then is the disposition of the baby. It's not about bodily autonomy because the baby is not her body. The baby has the right to live regardless of how it was conceived.
"You are confusing having an opinion with having a say. There are many issues about which I have an opinion but about which I nonetheless accept that I don't have a say."
I'm not confusing anything. You're confusing abdicating your honor in order to posture as open-minded toward one of the most heinous practices devised by man. "Far be it from me to interfere when another wishes to unjustly take an innocent life!" How f**king noble of you!
"I respect your right to choose to believe because I expect you to respect my right not to believe."
I don't "believe" anyone who's willing to allow the unjust taking of innocent life is unworthy of respect. It's a given.
"I don't believe that anyone besides me has a say in my bodily autonomy."
How very feminist of you. How very irrelevant to the situation.
"No one can force me to donate a kidney, or even to donate blood, to save someone else's life no matter how innocent the potential recipient may be or how little risk I might run by doing so."
I can't believe you're actually trying to run this crap argument. But for the record, it's true no one can force you. You're free to be a dick to allow to die someone you could save.
"Because I believe in my own bodily autonomy, I respect others' right to make decisions about their bodies, including the right not to carry their rapist's baby."
The baby isn't the woman's body. That baby was no more allowed to give consent to its conception than the woman who would see the child die as if it did. But it's not "the rapist's" baby. It's his AND hers and both are obliged to provide for it. Anyone who believes the child's life should be foreit is of far less value to the world.
"You can expect whatever you like, but the question here is a rape victim's legal obligation to let her body be used to produce her rapist's baby. I don't believe the rape victim has that legal obligation while you think she does."
There is no such legal obligation, it's true. More's the pity. The current legal question is the result of the current moral and cultural decay. Legal doesn't mean moral and moral obligation carries far more weight. Those who reject that moral obligation are far less worthy of life than the child they'll unjustly kill. Those with no morals can't grasp that fact.
You probably shouldn't use big words that you don't understand, like "honor."
The Republicans who are telling the truth about Donald Trump's efforts to undermine the Constitution, democracy, and the rule of law are acting honorably. The Trumpers who are trying to justify Trump's treasonous actions on January 6th, 2021, are not.
It's very disappointing to see you stoop to Dan's level of applying words like "honor" to anyone based on their opposition to Trump. I guess I was foolish to expect better from you. There's nothing in the least bit "treasonous" about contesting an election, and certainly not an election won by Dems, who never fail to contest elections they lose, as they did when they lost to Trump in 2016. But then, Dems are known for hypocrisy.
There's nothing in the least bit "treasonous" about contesting an election...."
It really depends on the manner in which the election is contested. Contesting the election through legitimate legal channels isn't treasonous, but sending an armed mob to storm the Capitol in hopes of disrupting the peaceful transfer of power is.
Whew!! Then it's a damned good thing he never freakin' did that! "Armed mob". Put down the freakin' crack pipe!
That's exactly what he did, which you would know if you did not have your hands clamped so tightly over your ears and eyes.
I didn't say "take another hit off the crack pipe", I said put it down. He sent no one to do more than lodge their objections to the counting of what might be illegitimate votes, which is far less "treasonous" than the typical Democratic contesting of any GOP win. If you want to run with the "armed mob" bullshit, bring the evidence...which is something your hearings didn't uncover.
Marshal...
"which is something your hearings didn't uncover."
Um, yes. Yes, it did. Which you'd know if you watched, you know, the actual news and stuff, you know, from actual journalists.
"The chatter included reports of a man with an AR-15 in a tree on Constitution Avenue who was accompanied by two men with pistols on their hips. Another officer radioed, “I’ve got three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s, copy, at 14th and Independence.”
The recordings aired during the June 28 hearing in which former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that Trump reportedly “was angry that we weren’t letting people through the [metal detectors] with weapons.”
The full picture of how many among the crowd were armed before the riot occurred is unclear, but court records, trial testimony and accounts from police officers and rioters have supplied growing evidence that multiple people brought firearms to Washington for Jan. 6, 2021. Six men were arrested that day for having guns in the vicinity of the U.S. Capitol, and a seventh who arrived after the riot ended was arrested the following day."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/07/08/jan6-defendants-guns/
Also, they made weapons out of flag poles and pipes, etc. Which has all been covered in the actual news reporting actual facts. Embrace reality.
Then there were the actual gallows they built as they actually chanted "hang Mike Pence" as they actually tried to find him to hang him.
But, it's all fun and games, boy scouts and butterflies and dainty little children dancing about a May Pole.
Good Lord.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/us/politics/jan-6-gallows.html
"July 23, 2022 at 8:32 AM"
"Um, yes. Yes, it did. Which you'd know if you watched, you know, the actual news and stuff, you know, from actual journalists."
That's funny! You speak of "actual news" and "actual journalists" and then you go on to cite WaPo! When are you taking that act on the road?
""The chatter included reports of a man with an AR-15 in a tree on Constitution Avenue who was accompanied by two men with pistols on their hips. Another officer radioed, “I’ve got three men walking down the street in fatigues carrying AR-15s, copy, at 14th and Independence.”"
"Chatter". That's supposed to mean something? Your own article states the guy in the tree had no rifle. The end result is that this "bombshell" doesn't seem to report anything that wasn't known back in Oct '21 with regard to how many had firearms. Further, no one fired a shot that wasn't a DC cop aiming at an unarmed woman.
"The recordings aired during the June 28 hearing in which former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that Trump reportedly “was angry that we weren’t letting people through the [metal detectors] with weapons.”"
Is this the same Cassidy Hutchinson with the sketchy testimony Secret Service officers are hot to rebut?
"The full picture of how many among the crowd were armed before the riot occurred is unclear"
An actual full picture would be nice. Was one ever shown?
"...but court records, trial testimony and accounts from police officers and rioters have supplied growing evidence that multiple people brought firearms to Washington for Jan. 6, 2021."
Testimony means nothing, especially when it's no more than "I saw some guy..." ...especially if the one giving testimony isn't fully questioned by someone not a Trump-hater. Given how eager the Trump-haters are in putting Trump people away for the slightest thing, I would question everyone's testimony who speaks against Trump or his supporters. Unfortunately, only Trump-haters are allowed to ask questions and likely, only Trump-haters or those threatened by them are giving testimony.
"Six men were arrested that day for having guns in the vicinity of the U.S. Capitol, and a seventh who arrived after the riot ended was arrested the following day."
Again, this was known back in Oct 21, if not way sooner. Piling on this already known information with "chatter" is typical leftist crap of trying to make things worse to serve the "destroy Trump" agenda.
July 23, 2022 at 8:32 AM
"Also, they made weapons out of flag poles and pipes, etc. Which has all been covered in the actual news reporting actual facts. Embrace reality."
Sure, Dan. It's not hard to take a common, every day item and bash someone over the head with it. But the total number of implements, including the few firearms never fired if actually carried number about 80...and that's counting absolutely anything and everything which may have been picked up and thrown or swung or used in an uncivil manner. But it's still a stretch to pretend it was an "armed insurrection" as opposed to just a gathering of pissed off people which got out of hand. But hey...lefties like to lie, so making a bad situation worse for profit is right up your freakin' alley.
July 23, 2022 at 8:36 AM
"Then there were the actual gallows they built as they actually chanted "hang Mike Pence" as they actually tried to find him to hang him.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/16/us/politics/jan-6-gallows.html"
This is by far one of the funniest ones...in a pathetic "we'll try anything to destroy Trump" kinda way.
https://www.independentsentinel.com/the-continuing-saga-of-a-gallows-for-mike-pence/
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Jan+6+gallows+pictures&t=newext&atb=v251-1&iax=images&ia=images&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gannett-cdn.com%2Fpresto%2F2021%2F01%2F07%2FUSAT%2F247dbc80-2689-4c87-bc21-b31a1142185e-XXX_TH__DC_protests697.JPG
Dan the Pedo...
Big Mike...welcome. While Dan's enabling of LGBT promotions in school do make his regard for children and what's best for them highly questionable at best, I would much prefer one present an argument for why labeling him in any way is believed appropriate. Here, even low character people like him are to be given that much consideration. Keep this in mind should you decide to post comments in the future.
Post a Comment