Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

At least the right-sided have a perspective.

Idaho

Having read some of the links and links in the links, I can say categorically that I don’t like the man, but he is clearly being smeared by innuendo and f**e news. Typical lefty hit job on a conservative politician and on the Christian religion.

PeterS

Sorry

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2019/04/gop-lawmaker-who-promotes-biblical-law-busted-planning-violent-attacks/?fbclid=IwAR1cjPOfvOjciiioMPTficwJbcJvAowjR9d46wtd96cK-2r7Wf9bNIcpMTs

badbob85037

All BS! No link, no names, no nothing and does anyone know a L*****t that don't lie? You must think we will believe anything but we were not the ones v****g for dirty hillary.

Morgan

No, you v**ed worse, for dirty Trump

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Your reading comprehension is as faulty as your ideology!

Where did I use the word “humane”?

For the record, I was not talking about, nor referring or replying to, being “humane” at all. So your argument was a pure straw man.

My definition of “whacko” is this: l*****ts who claim they support American liberty, and don’t trust government, but then PROMISE they can assure us of our American liberty and fix things by making government bigger and even more over-reaching with ever increasing taxes and regulations...and even more so for all the whack jobs that believe them! ...As further evidenced by people like you who jump into a conversation with a preconceived bias and respond without really grasping what the issue was, and, by creating a straw man to rail against, thinking they’ve won an argument let alone contributed meaningfully to the discussion!
Another fine example of a whacko is someone who thinks they are defending the doctrine of religious liberty by denying people in their company the right to their (the other’s) liberty to express or refer to their (the other’s that is) religion (in influential, important ways and in all areas of their private, civil, and public lives). Like the position stated in the original post of this thread, and your whacko, misguided, defense of it.
Thank you for providing easy examples for me to refer to.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

That one is excessively generous with her ignorance.

Morgan

Now you're following me around like a troll to insult me, you are very sick.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Get over yourself, that's total Bullbiden! You have nothing of t***h or relevance in your welfare status contribution.

We're done! It's over go home.

p.s.....Yo, bonehead, I was on this thread before you.

You should pay attention, you won't prove yourself to be so dull in the skull.

Morgan

You've not a clue what my ideology is. As far as reading your statement of humanism being a "religion" I would assume that would include being humane. Humanism is humanist beliefs which stresses the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasizing in common human needs and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems, this done through compassion, hence being "humane". Sorry if you don't see it that way, but silly me, that's where my comprehension goes.

Morgan

You make it a point to troll after me to insult me to other posters, you are a morgan troll.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Me me me me me me I i i i i i I ah ah ah ah ah wa we wa wa wawoo, Obama is that you??

Get over your Ego and drop the Narcissistic tone.

I talk about many too many...CAN YOU COMPREHEND THAT YOU ARENT THE OBJECT OF ATTRACTION, ITS YOUR FORCEFUL IGNORANCE!

Morgan

You have this very confused, it is the right who is anti-American government and promise to fix things just to hand over more of our tax money to corporations with incentives they never use, only to reinvest in themselves back into their own stock.

Regulations are a good thing, they stop the giant overreach of corporations, who have now taken the position of governing us to benefit them but I'm sure you don't see it that way. Regulations are protections to the people, so they're not being s**mmed, or living in the midst of a toxic dump.






FYI this is a forum and when you make a generalization of basically anyone left of your far-right party which I can come into to comment on, deal with it. I have not personally attacked you with my post, but typically of the right, you have. I didn't have a preconceived bias, that was you, that I questioned. I haven't even begun to think that I have won an argument.




If people are denied religious expression it must be due to the inappropriate place of it. It is never done in private, that is simply a lie. If any people are wacko, it is the wacko religious who force their beliefs on others in inappropriate public places, and they don't like being told they can't do it, again deal with it.

As a Christian I don't have a problem with it so why do you? Something for you to examine.

Now here's the real test... can someone as yourself reply without an insult?

Morgan

Stop then personally insulting me ya wanka... so funny and you say I'm emotional.

TommyRadd Loc: Midwest USA

Unless the things you say and support in your replies and in the topics you’ve created here at OPP are examples of you playing the devil’s advocate, or are you being just plain two-faced, yes, I do believe I have a “clue” of your ideology which you reveal by the things you say.

Now, I may not know all the details or nuances of your position on certain topics or issues, but we (you) are specifically talking about “a clue” of your “ideology.

Are you saying you didn’t provide “a clue” when you said,
“One doesn't have to follow a religion in order to follow morals of honesty, integrity, good ethics, to simply do the right thing. These are things taught yes, but they can be taught also without religion, that's the simple t***h.”

...Where, taken in context, you were defending disallowing the expression of one’s religious convictions in their civil and/or political life?

If you don’t think that is providing me with at least a clue of your ideology, then you are simply in denial or deliberately being deceptive of your ideological convictions.

If you don’t think “secular humanism” is a form of religion, I invite you to consider this article:

https://quillette.com/2019/04/11/is-secular-humanism-a-religion/

In particular where it states:

“In terms of moral rules, secular humanism is indistinguishable from a religion...
“But it is only the morality of a religion, not its supernatural or historical beliefs, that has any implications for action, for politics and law. Secular humanism makes moral claims as strong as any other faith. It is therefore as much a religion as any other...”

Therefore, when “secular humanists” deny others the right to express their religious point of view, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME IMPOSING THEIRS, they are acting both unconstitutionally and immorally tyrannical, and thus hypocritical, all at the same time. This is where the failure of secular humanist’s claim of morality for themselves reveals itself. And that is the ideology you have set yourself to defend which also gives me “a clue” of your ideology, and which also proves you, personally, to be a liar, thereby also throwing strong, substantiated doubt on your morality claims for secular humanists.