logo Sign In

Warbler

This user has been banned.

User Group
Banned Members
Join date
7-May-2003
Last activity
28-May-2021
Posts
18,708

Post History

Post
#1130631
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

I found this article interesting.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/what-if-democrats-majority-hinged-on-a-child-molester.html

In all honesty, if a sexual predator was the Democratic nominee for a position, I think the Democratic Party at large would still support that candidate. I think many of the liberals here would. I’d have a good chance of doing so as well.

Well, I guess I am not a liberal then, because I would not support a candidate from either party that was a sexual predator.

That’s what you tell yourself. But would you actually do it? People say all sorts of things, but never do them.

I really don’t appreciate this response.

Yeah but it’s a reasonable response.

You have a unique definition of the word reasonable.

Sounds reasonable.

😕

Post
#1130630
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Dude, calm down.

I voted for Bill Clinton. So I possibly voted for a sexual predator. Would I vote for him today in the same exact situation? Maybe? I dunno.

I voted for him too, at the time I did that, I didn’t know he was a sexual predator.

I’m so old that my memory is shot, but I’m pretty sure women were accusing him before his first term, and definitely before his second term.

Maybe they were. But, I didn’t know whether to believe them or not, and it was my first election and I was only 18. I did not vote for Clinton in his second election.

Post
#1130626
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

I found this article interesting.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/what-if-democrats-majority-hinged-on-a-child-molester.html

In all honesty, if a sexual predator was the Democratic nominee for a position, I think the Democratic Party at large would still support that candidate. I think many of the liberals here would. I’d have a good chance of doing so as well.

Well, I guess I am not a liberal then, because I would not support a candidate from either party that was a sexual predator.

That’s what you tell yourself. But would you actually do it? People say all sorts of things, but never do them.

I really don’t appreciate this response.

Yeah but it’s a reasonable response.

You have a unique definition of the word reasonable.

Post
#1130622
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

I found this article interesting.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/what-if-democrats-majority-hinged-on-a-child-molester.html

In all honesty, if a sexual predator was the Democratic nominee for a position, I think the Democratic Party at large would still support that candidate. I think many of the liberals here would. I’d have a good chance of doing so as well.

Well, I guess I am not a liberal then, because I would not support a candidate from either party that was a sexual predator.

That’s what you tell yourself. But would you actually do it? People say all sorts of things, but never do them.

I really don’t appreciate this response.

Post
#1130619
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

I found this article interesting.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/what-if-democrats-majority-hinged-on-a-child-molester.html

In all honesty, if a sexual predator was the Democratic nominee for a position, I think the Democratic Party at large would still support that candidate. I think many of the liberals here would. I’d have a good chance of doing so as well.

Well, I guess I am not a liberal then, because I would not support a candidate from either party that was a sexual predator.

That’s what you tell yourself. But would you actually do it? People say all sorts of things, but never do them.

I DON’T SUPPORT SEXUAL PREDATORS!!! GOT IT‽‽

Post
#1130605
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

yhwx said:

I found this article interesting.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/what-if-democrats-majority-hinged-on-a-child-molester.html

In all honesty, if a sexual predator was the Democratic nominee for a position, I think the Democratic Party at large would still support that candidate. I think many of the liberals here would. I’d have a good chance of doing so as well.

Well, I guess I am not a liberal then, because I would not support a candidate from either party that was a sexual predator.

Post
#1130593
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

oojason said:

Thought this was quite good re Trump’s claims 😃

https://twitter.com/JustADCohen/status/929367356689862656

An incomplete list…

Mueller: giving alternate facts
Comey: giving alternate facts
Obama: giving alternate facts
Clinton: giving alternate facts
Federal judges: giving alternate facts
His sex assault accusers: giving alternate facts
Scientist about climate change: giving alternate facts
Doctors about Affordable Care Act: giving alternate facts
Mother of slain U.S. soldier: giving alternate facts
Putin: He means it.

with additional mentions later to…

The Media: giving alternate facts
Mayor of San Juan: giving alternate facts
US intelligence community: giving alternate facts
FBI agents: giving alternate facts (about Comey’s popularity)
Two Bush presidents: giving alternate facts
Reform-minded police chiefs: giving alternate facts
Bob Corker: giving alternate facts
Veteran journalists: giving alternate facts
John McCain: giving alternate facts
CBO reports: giving alternate facts
Immigrants: giving alternate facts

fixed.

Post
#1129573
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

Bingowings said:

I’ve made an appointment with my GP. People who advise people about mental health issues are often bad at taking their own advice. Felt better for making the call. Talked to my boss too. I couldn’t have a better job really for this situation. Meanwhile my twitching and ticks are getting much worse. Making some audible ones now. Random words, yelps. I was at a very important meeting the other day and had to sit on my hands because the tremors were so bad. I don’t feel as doomy though. Just wish I had the courage to be honest and open with my partner. I feel really bad cooking the dinner while contemplating arranging to dismantle our lives but with his SAD and Christmas coming up it’s just not the right time. It would be cruel and I never want to do that.

Sorry, you are having a difficult time. I think it is a good idea to seek help. Sorry things are not going well in your relationship and that it looks like you are heading for a break up. I hope you able to get the help you need and that things get better for you.

What is this SAD thing you refer to?

Post
#1129283
Topic
Ask the Muslim! (a.k.a. interrogate the Muslim)
Time

YodaFan67 said:

darthrush said:

I am curious about what your thoughts on Sharia law are?

I often found it similar to the ridiculous content in the old testament in which God commits genocide for one person being gay. And it annoys me to no end when people think they can attack Sharia law but not admit the faults of their own holy book.

Nevertheless I still feel like both set of the teachings I refer to are quite reprehensible from a modern moral sense and am curious how you reconcile the teachings of Sharia law within your own personal beliefs?

And thanks for putting the thread up! I could use some more first hand knowledge on this religion which most definitely has so many beautiful aspects to it and I have a close Muslim friend of mine who I never have the nerve to talk to about his religion.

Hey Darthrush! Before I get started–Many people make the mistake of thinking that Sharia law is all from the Quran. Some of it is based in that, but in fact it was all built up over the years throughout history. So, some of it is based on precedent, and not on actual teachings.

Realizing that fact, I think that where Sharia law has become messed up in many Muslim communities is that they use it in a reactionary way in relation to the depraved ways of the outside world. In other words, they feel like because the rest of the world is so materialistic/immoral, they need to double down and make sure their world becomes nothing like the outside world. In that way, they are letting the world control them-- just not in the way they think.

So anyway, a couple of my thoughts:

  1. Some people say that Muslim law is oppressive. To Western values, I suppose it is. But who says western values are the best values? Properly applied, muslim law protects. Specifically, it protects our religion, human life, intellect, sanctity, lineage, and wealth.

  2. Sharia law is for Muslims. It is not for non-Muslims! If you do not want to follow it, do not become a Muslim.

What about those that are Muslim? shouldn’t they be free to leave the faith and not follow Sharia Law?

What about all the oppressive rules on women? I’ve heard horror stories about women being beaten up just because they decided to drive a car or because they were raped.

  1. This is something that many of the wacko-Muslims in the middle east have forgotten. Back when we were the conquerors, we treated societies we conquered kindly. We let them live their own ways. Perhaps, because we often feel conquered (western influences in Middle East), we feel like we need to go around forcing Sharia law on everything. It’s like we feel that if we don’t do this, we’ll just collapse. I think this shows a huge lack of faith in God and in the beauty of our religion. Which leads me to my next point…

  2. An ideal worldwide would be one that is a theocracy (and ruled by sharia law). However, we know that this is not going to happen until the end times. So, until then we are commanded to spread the faith by Jihad (holy war). “Holy war” does not necessarily mean violent acts. It could also mean what is called by Christians “missionary work”.

does not necessarily mean violent acts? Does that mean that it could sometimes mean violent acts?

  1. The Islamist extremists (like al-qaeda) claim that they are waging Jihad against the USA and the West. This is just dumb. The USA had never tried to kill Muslims. The west had tried to interfere in our politics in order to protect the UK’s oil interests. While this is bad, this is also the basis of the extremists’ beef with the west. Who’s the real materialist? It would appear to be al-qaeda.

Anyway, sorry, I think I’ve kind of gone off on some tangents. Your question was more about me personally.
I believe that the laws prescribed for us in the Quran are the way to happiness. However, I do struggle with the punishments the Quran sometimes prescribes for those who might fall short. But then, What does it really mean? How strict are we to read it? Scripture can always be so ambiguous. I think we need to realize that just because one community interprets it one way, that does not need to be the way everywhere does it. It isn’t an issue of literalism vs. being lax, it’s an issue of applying the scripture to yourself. I think I am lucky to live in a place where Muslims are in the minority, and strict Sharia cannot be implemented among the government. Faith is a matter of personal choice.

I wish C3PX were still here. It would make for an interesting conversation.

Post
#1128970
Topic
Current Events. No debates!
Time

suspiciouscoffee said:

SilverWook said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

oojason said:

George Takei responds to allegations made against him…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/11/george-takei-responds-to-accusation-he-sexually-assaulted-a-young-actor

https://twitter.com/GeorgeTakei

Oof. Even Spacey’s response was better than this.

How so? The consensus seems to be Spacey outed himself as an excuse.

While that consensus is correct, he also, iirc, admitted that it was at least possible he committed the assault while drunk. Takei gave a flat denial. While looking into some of these claims, I stumbled upon this clip, which seems pretty terrible, almost damning, now.

There is only one logical response to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nSKkwzwdW4&feature=youtu.be&t=2s

Post
#1128959
Topic
Current Events. No debates!
Time

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

yhwx said:

I’m extremely reluctant to give anybody the benefit of the doubt, regardless of their game or belovedness.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

I can believe whoever I want to,

Well I would caution you to not just automatically believe the accuser. Sometimes people lie. Remember this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

Post
#1128951
Topic
Current Events. No debates!
Time

SilverWook said:

Nobody says you have to, but you don’t have to break out the torches and pitchforks either. It’s good that celebrities with long histories of abusive behavior are being exposed, but at what point does hysteria take over and it becomes a mass witchunt?

Anybody with an axe to grind is going to get their 15 minutes in the limelight, (even though it’s not the good kind) take someone’s career down and won’t have to prove a thing in the court of public opinion.

This is a good point.