The Left Loses Ground...

[Skylar]

No one except you allies in Islam has said it does.

What 'allies in Islam' are you talking about? Your delusions just keep getting more random and elaborate. That I'm a 'British Subject'. That I'm a 'cultist'. And now that I have 'allies in Islam'.

And at each stage, its just you making shit up. Its same stupid story over and over and over again: 1) You make shit up. 2) You label them. 3) Based on your new label you now insist that whatever you made up is now 'objective truth'.

But its still just your imagination.

If you'll actually READ what I have said, you'll find that I have never said that I was or am going to harm anyone...

You included yourself in the 'we' that would be getting started with the 'wiping those people off the face of the earth'.

But if it helps, "WE" are merely patiently waiting for the signal which will present the sound moral justification, to erase you people from the face of the earth.

We do not know when, or in the precise conveyance that it will come. And while we are eager to get started, such is tempered by the unenviable nature of the task. Buoyed by the certainty that we have done everything possible to turn you from your destructive ways and that you presented no sign that you have any means to do otherwise.

So... Karl, whenever you're ready, we... are good to go.

Post 381

You even described how eager you were to get started with it. That's not god. That's you, Keyes.

You are the one that wants to kill all these people. You are the one that wants gays to be targeted. You are the on that want 'blacktown' to be attacked and wiped out by 'whiteyville'. Its you that wants to wipe Islam of the earth in the next 20 years.

Don't try and blame 'god' for your desire to hurt people.

Again, Keyes....using god as justification for hurting people is as old as dirt. By your own logic and standards, almost every one of the religious faithful is self deluded, misinterpreteing their own subjective beliefs, opinions and inventions (natural law of marriage anyone) as 'god'. Its almost certain that you're among them.

Especially since you rely on the same process of using your imagination as your basis of belief even when we're not discussing god. You made up a 'Charter of American Principles', a document that simply doesn't exist. But you insist the constitution is based on. You ignored the dictionary on the meaning of words and made up your own definition, based on your imagination. You made up a 'natural law of marriage', despite there being no marriage in nature.

Its overwhelmingly likely that you're just lying to yourself, just like all the other religious faithful that your own logic mandates MUST be wrong.

From where I stand, that strikes at the viability of your advocacy to be considered 'reasonable' people.

Yet you're not a reasonable person. And despite your claims, you don't 'appear to be god'. Nor do you speak for 'god'. Its just you. And you keep talking bout all the people you're eager to start 'wiping off the face of the earth'. That's not god. That's just you.

People you've never met, that have never done a thing to you, you insist must be wiped out. And stunningly....you're blaming them for your desire that they be wiped out.

That's batshit all the way down, Keyes. That's not well. You seriously need to get some help.

 

[Skylar]

and a few loud voices make the right and I seem ever-so foolish. playing the victim game to protect your "precious religion" which isn't in danger in the first place? please.

Oh, its so much wrose than you think. Not only playing the victim with religion. But insisting that 'those people' (which includes gays, muslims, blacks, liberals, etc, depending on the time of day), must be 'wiped from the face of the earth.

And using religion to blame the people you want wiped out for killing them.

That's some industrial grade batshit. And some of the most hateful religious sentiment I've heard this side of Inquisitor Torquemada.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

[QUOTE="Skylar, post: 11418953, member: 49869"
You even described how eager you were to get started with it. That's not god. That's you, Keyes.[/quote]

Nope, not eager, just tired of it.

And if that's the best you can do... then that's fine.

When you're packing your shit in a panic to get out of town, away from anyone that knows that you're a homosexual... running from a mob of pissed off assholes, it is a mathematical certainty that I won't be associated with that mob.

But I hope that before the final blow comes, you'll think of me, who spent an inordinate amount of my time BEGGING you and your cult to knock it the fuck off... and you remember how hard you fought for the ass-beating your about to bring down upon yourself.

It's not even a debatable point Skylar. These are undeniable forces which have played out time and again, as consistent as the sun rising and setting, only at a different pace.

You've made your decision... now, you live with it.

If you need to blame me for it... I don't give a dam'. It won't change anything.

 

[Skylar]

[Nope, not eager, just tired of it.

That's what you say now. This is what you said earlier today in this very thread:

But if it helps, "WE" are merely patiently waiting for the signal which will present the sound moral justification, to erase you people from the face of the earth.

We do not know when, or in the precise conveyance that it will come. And while we are eager to get started, such is tempered by the unenviable nature of the task. Buoyed by the certainty that we have done everything possible to turn you from your destructive ways and that you presented no sign that you have any means to do otherwise.

So... Karl, whenever you're ready, we... are good to go.

Post 381

I don't notices the word 'tired of it' even once. Patiently waiting is there. 'Eager to get started' is there. 'Good to go' is there. 'Erase you people from the face of the earth is there'.

So were you lying then. Or are you lying now?

Because if that post represents your actual perspective......you're not well. And no, that's not god. That's just you. Your subjective beliefs that you're trying to use 'god' to justify.

Just like any of the self deluded theists that your own logic mandates must be wrong.

When you're packing your shit in a panic to get out of town, away from anyone that knows that you're a homosexual... running from a mob of pissed off assholes, it is a mathematical certainty that I won't be associated with that mob.

And your delusions just keep getting more and more randomly elaborate. Per your imagination, I'm a 'cultist' who is a 'british subject' and a 'homosexual' who has 'allies in Islam' who will be 'panicked to get out of town'.

Do I even need to be here for this subjective little fantasy of yours? And do you imagine that this latest piece of monologue is also 'objective truth'?

If so, you've proven my point yet again.

 

[Skylar]

It's not even a debatable point Skylar. These are undeniable forces which have played out time and again, as consistent as the sun rising and setting, only at a different pace.

The 'undebatable point' being that elaborate fantasy you just made up?

I'm not entirely sure you get that your imagination and the real world are separate and different.

Thankfully, you've got me to help you with it.

 

[Billy000]

Isn't it amazing that someone as narrow minded and laughable as PoliticalChic gets 10 "agrees"?

 

[Skylar]

Isn't it amazing that someone as narrow minded and laughable as PoliticalChic gets 10 "agrees"?

I don't think that its a matter of 'narrow-mindedness'. But simply apeing what people already believe. Which Polichick is good at....given that she literally cuts and pastes such sentiment verbatim. She often doesn't understand the arguments she's pasting. But you don't need to understand an argument to get 10 agrees.

 

[Billy000]

Isn't it amazing that someone as narrow minded and laughable as PoliticalChic gets 10 "agrees"?

I don't think that its a matter of 'narrow-mindedness'. But simply apeing what people already believe. Which Polichick is good at....given that she literally cuts and pastes such sentiment verbatim. She often doesn't understand the arguments she's pasting. But you don't need to understand an argument to get 10 agrees.

She is purely emotion. Emotion is what Rightwingers prefer when it comes to politics. Facts and critical thinking are so above them that they need people like her to speak in ridiculous absolutes about the left for them to feel validated about the bullshit they believe about the rightwing. Fox News operates the same way.

 

[bripat9643]

Hitler was not a liberal. But he was a progressive. That makes him a leftist.

Hitler's agenda was:
1) Nationalism...ULTRA nationalism. Hitler used religious reasoning to justify his own policies. Hitler focused on how the Aryan people had a "Christian heritage" with principles that must be adhered in order to rebuild the country.

2) Militarism...Hitler greatly increased the portion of the German economy devoted to military spending and further believed that the best defense was a good offense.

3) Purging Germany of undesirables...
a) Jews
b) homosexuals
c) Hitler outlawed labor unions in Germany

PLEASE highlight the 'progressive' agenda pea brain?

You left out socialism. Furthermore, Eugenics was a progressive creation.

That's pretty much the same agenda FDR had.

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

"As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nations goods". - Joseph Goebbels


"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew .. not the Sabbath Jew, .. the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? .. self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry". - Marx

"...This collection of capitalist interests on the one hand, Jewish instincts of hatred and the emigrants' lust for revenge, succeeded in increasingly beclouding the world".. Hitler


"They can wage wars for their capitalist interests, but in the end these wars will open the way for social risings within the nations" - Hitler

German Philosopher Theodor Adorno, strongly influenced the Left. He devised a scale known as the "F" scale which has been utilized to associate conservative elements of society as fascist. However, as is so frequently the case, his F scale was a twist of reality and a blatant oxymoron. The Adorno F scale is used to frame conservatives, and any opposed to Socialism as Nazis and latent fascists. The fascist label has come to mean anyone the liberal progressive sociofascists seek to defame or discredit.

He literally lifted that nonsense from Stalin, who was at war with the fascists, and tended to refer to all political enemies, perceived or otherwise: as fascist; including Leon Trotsky... a lifetime communist... and given the one degree of separation between Histler's fascism and Stalinism, the Left which took most of its cues from Stalinism, Adorno simply used that intellectual bankruptcy as a basis to publish yet another invalid Leftist point.

BTW: It's good to see ya back in the game.

The self-described libs in here are actually all indistinguishable from Nazis.

 

[protectionist]

Emotion is what Rightwingers prefer when it comes to politics. Facts and critical thinking are so above them that they need people like her to speak in ridiculous absolutes about the left for them to feel validated about the bullshit they believe about the rightwing. Fox News operates the same way.

That is what LEFTwingers do. And liberal media the same way. Fox is fair and balanced just like they say. Liberal media is a joke that hides the truth from their ignorant viewers. I've already proven that many times in USMB.

 

[Skylar]

Hitler's agenda was:
1) Nationalism...ULTRA nationalism. Hitler used religious reasoning to justify his own policies. Hitler focused on how the Aryan people had a "Christian heritage" with principles that must be adhered in order to rebuild the country.

2) Militarism...Hitler greatly increased the portion of the German economy devoted to military spending and further believed that the best defense was a good offense.

3) Purging Germany of undesirables...
a) Jews
b) homosexuals
c) Hitler outlawed labor unions in Germany

PLEASE highlight the 'progressive' agenda pea brain?

You left out socialism. Furthermore, Eugenics was a progressive creation.

That's pretty much the same agenda FDR had.

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

"As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nations goods". - Joseph Goebbels


"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew .. not the Sabbath Jew, .. the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? .. self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry". - Marx

"...This collection of capitalist interests on the one hand, Jewish instincts of hatred and the emigrants' lust for revenge, succeeded in increasingly beclouding the world".. Hitler


"They can wage wars for their capitalist interests, but in the end these wars will open the way for social risings within the nations" - Hitler

German Philosopher Theodor Adorno, strongly influenced the Left. He devised a scale known as the "F" scale which has been utilized to associate conservative elements of society as fascist. However, as is so frequently the case, his F scale was a twist of reality and a blatant oxymoron. The Adorno F scale is used to frame conservatives, and any opposed to Socialism as Nazis and latent fascists. The fascist label has come to mean anyone the liberal progressive sociofascists seek to defame or discredit.

He literally lifted that nonsense from Stalin, who was at war with the fascists, and tended to refer to all political enemies, perceived or otherwise: as fascist; including Leon Trotsky... a lifetime communist... and given the one degree of separation between Histler's fascism and Stalinism, the Left which took most of its cues from Stalinism, Adorno simply used that intellectual bankruptcy as a basis to publish yet another invalid Leftist point.

BTW: It's good to see ya back in the game.

The self-described libs in here are actually all indistinguishable from Nazis.

Wow. Just straight to Godwin's Law. No lines. No waiting.

 

[Skylar]

Emotion is what Rightwingers prefer when it comes to politics. Facts and critical thinking are so above them that they need people like her to speak in ridiculous absolutes about the left for them to feel validated about the bullshit they believe about the rightwing. Fox News operates the same way.

That is what LEFTwingers do. And liberal media the same way. Fox is fair and balanced just like they say. Liberal media is a joke that hides the truth from their ignorant viewers. I've already proven that many times in USMB.

Wow again. You....you actually believe everything you just said.

Holy shit. I can wrap my head around someone not trusting the 'liberal media'. But genuinely believing that Fox is fair, balanced and impartial?

That's a degree of self deception I wasn't aware even existed.

 

[bripat9643]

You left out socialism. Furthermore, Eugenics was a progressive creation.

That's pretty much the same agenda FDR had.

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

"As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nations goods". - Joseph Goebbels


"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew .. not the Sabbath Jew, .. the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? .. self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry". - Marx

"...This collection of capitalist interests on the one hand, Jewish instincts of hatred and the emigrants' lust for revenge, succeeded in increasingly beclouding the world".. Hitler


"They can wage wars for their capitalist interests, but in the end these wars will open the way for social risings within the nations" - Hitler

German Philosopher Theodor Adorno, strongly influenced the Left. He devised a scale known as the "F" scale which has been utilized to associate conservative elements of society as fascist. However, as is so frequently the case, his F scale was a twist of reality and a blatant oxymoron. The Adorno F scale is used to frame conservatives, and any opposed to Socialism as Nazis and latent fascists. The fascist label has come to mean anyone the liberal progressive sociofascists seek to defame or discredit.

He literally lifted that nonsense from Stalin, who was at war with the fascists, and tended to refer to all political enemies, perceived or otherwise: as fascist; including Leon Trotsky... a lifetime communist... and given the one degree of separation between Histler's fascism and Stalinism, the Left which took most of its cues from Stalinism, Adorno simply used that intellectual bankruptcy as a basis to publish yet another invalid Leftist point.

BTW: It's good to see ya back in the game.

The self-described libs in here are actually all indistinguishable from Nazis.

Wow. Just straight to Godwin's Law. No lines. No waiting.

Godwin's law was created to protect libs from the truth.

 

[Skylar]

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

"As socialists, we are opponents of the Jews, because we see, in the Hebrews, the incarnation of capitalism, of the misuse of the nations goods". - Joseph Goebbels


"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew .. not the Sabbath Jew, .. the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? .. self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry". - Marx

"...This collection of capitalist interests on the one hand, Jewish instincts of hatred and the emigrants' lust for revenge, succeeded in increasingly beclouding the world".. Hitler


"They can wage wars for their capitalist interests, but in the end these wars will open the way for social risings within the nations" - Hitler

German Philosopher Theodor Adorno, strongly influenced the Left. He devised a scale known as the "F" scale which has been utilized to associate conservative elements of society as fascist. However, as is so frequently the case, his F scale was a twist of reality and a blatant oxymoron. The Adorno F scale is used to frame conservatives, and any opposed to Socialism as Nazis and latent fascists. The fascist label has come to mean anyone the liberal progressive sociofascists seek to defame or discredit.

He literally lifted that nonsense from Stalin, who was at war with the fascists, and tended to refer to all political enemies, perceived or otherwise: as fascist; including Leon Trotsky... a lifetime communist... and given the one degree of separation between Histler's fascism and Stalinism, the Left which took most of its cues from Stalinism, Adorno simply used that intellectual bankruptcy as a basis to publish yet another invalid Leftist point.

BTW: It's good to see ya back in the game.

The self-described libs in here are actually all indistinguishable from Nazis.

Wow. Just straight to Godwin's Law. No lines. No waiting.

Godwin's law was created to protect libs from the truth.

Or to make everyone laugh at the poor sop who just starts comparing everything to Nazis.

 

[G.T.]

Fuck, I'm 54 years old... fat and happy. I did my time doin in ANY of that shit, you're fully ignorant of knowing anything aboutBut, you can rest assured, that if my ass is shoved back into that nonsense... it's gonna be ugly.

And I am telling YOU that it's comin', if you people do not find a way to shut the fuck up and learn to go along to get along. And this marriage thing, it's a non-starter.











.

Thats right. If your self admitted fat ass is pulled into any fight, because your self admitted slovenly self will have a sweatty fat man heart attack and the paramedics will have to excuse the stench of smelly sweatty fat body in attempt to save your self admitted gluttonous fat ass.

 

[Bfgrn]

What part of "I don't see Hitler as a Christian. And he did not follow the teachings I learned as a Catholic." do you need help comprehending?

If you READ Mein Kampf, instead of attacking me, you would be going after PC and her ilk for claiming Hitler was a liberal or a 'leftist'...

Hitler was not a liberal. But he was a progressive. That makes him a leftist.

Hitler's agenda was:
1) Nationalism...ULTRA nationalism. Hitler used religious reasoning to justify his own policies. Hitler focused on how the Aryan people had a "Christian heritage" with principles that must be adhered in order to rebuild the country.

2) Militarism...Hitler greatly increased the portion of the German economy devoted to military spending and further believed that the best defense was a good offense.

3) Purging Germany of undesirables...
a) Jews
b) homosexuals
c) Hitler outlawed labor unions in Germany

PLEASE highlight the 'progressive' agenda pea brain?

You left out socialism. Furthermore, Eugenics was a progressive creation.

That's pretty much the same agenda FDR had.

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

You dont understand socialism. Or Nazism. Or a dozen other things. But that doesnt mean you can't spout an opinion about them.
It's what makes America great--idiots sounding off about shit they know nothing about.

Let's see..I provided proof, and you provided emotes and insults...

You claim Hitler was a 'progressive'...and bripat claims Hitler was a socialist...

Yet in 1927 Hitler wrote a pamphlet entitled The Road to Resurgence only meant for the eyes of the top industrialists in Germany to argue that "capitalists had worked their way to the top through their capacity, and on the basis of this selection they have the right to lead." Hitler claimed that national socialism meant all people doing their best for society and posed no threat to the wealth of the rich.

Hitler expressly attacked Marxists, socialism and 'progressives', called for a 'meritocracy' and exalts 'individual personality'


excerpts:

The survival and the future of the various folk groups on this earth depend on:

1. The merit of their own race;

2. The extent to which they accord significance to the role of the individual personality;

3. Recognition of the fact that life in this universe is synonymous with struggle. It is, however, precisely the repudiation of these three great laws to which I attribute our present-day decline rather than to all the petty failures of our current political leadership.

Instead of raising aloft the merits of race and folk, millions of our folk pay homage to the idea of internationality.


The strength and genius of the individual personality are, in line with the absurd nature of democracy, being set aside in favor of majority rule, which amounts to nothing more than weakness and stupidity.

And rather than recognize and affirm the necessity of struggle, people are preaching theories of pacifism, reconciliation among nations, and eternal peace.

...


The National Socialist movement is no parliamentary party. It does not expect that questions involving the fate of the German nation could ever be resolved by majority rule. It is convinced that the spirit it advocates will one day become the spirit of that institution which is all that remains of the old army and, at the same time, the school for the future. The organisation of the military might of a folk, be it large or small, is always intimately connected with a doctrine of the value of individual personality, struggle, and patriotism. Unintentionally and unconsciously, to the extent that the official state becomes more and more corrupt in its folkish content, discredited by its personnel, and filled with pacifistic cowardice, the movement and the army will draw ever closer together.


In these seven years of progressive deformation of the German national body, a state within the state has slowly evolved which ideologically as well as politically will be the Prussia of the coming era.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Some believe so.

"I've had several right wingers tell me now that "Pew Is a left wing thing tank headquartered in DC. They produce polls that tend to support left wing progressive talkling points." What exactly can I say to this?
As for Pew's bias, I trying to think of a thread hear lately. Seemed to me that their questions were biased to the left by asking not about an action, but about an echo of it. I thought the bias was obvious. I felt the pollsters have a vested interest that is forwarded by finding the 'facts' that their customers most likely want to hear. More left leaning customers, more left leaning results."
Credibility of Pew Research - International Skeptics Forum

So to be clear, you are arguing that Pew is not just skewing-left, but is actually engaging in studies deliberately designed to shore up the left, and your only evidence is that on another random internet forum, some random other person claimed that Pew skews left?

What I'm stating is that, in the face of the following...

"...the religious liberty movement is showing increasing, not decreasing cultural strength.While it is easy to grow discouraged in the face of events like Brendan Eich’s departure from Mozilla, the wave ofthreats directed at vendorslike Memories Pizza, Republican politicians’ continued timidity on “culture war” issues, andthe climate of intolerance that exists on campuses and in the mainstream media,the Left’s prominent failures are starting to outnumber its recent successes.



§ Cultural conservatives answeredthe Left’s attempted Chick-fil-A boycottwith a “buycott” that swamped stores nationwide, even causing some to run out of food for customers eager to show their support for a beloved restaurant, owned by people who share their moral principles.



§ Leftist pressureagainst Hobby Lobby failed.Customers were either supportive of the owners or indifferent to politics, and boycotts had no effect on Hobby Lobby’s bottom line or its willingness to fight. Not only did Hobby Lobby win its Supreme Court case, its owners are set to open a massive new Museum of the Bible near the National Mall.



§Efforts to drive Phil Robertson—ofDuck Dynastyfame—off the airafter controversial comments on sexual morality failed, giving cultural conservatives a victory in a medium (cable television) seen as almost uniformly hostile to orthodox Christianity. While Robertson has remained a polarizing figure (and often says things that make many of his supporters uncomfortable), there has been no serious repeat effort to remove him from the air.



§ In Houston, leftist government officials were forcedto backtrack within days after issuing subpoenas requiring area pastors to turn over the contents of their sermonsand other communications. The public outcry was so swift and so great that the city capitulated even before a judge could rule on motions to quash.



Even in Indiana, as Republican politicians quickly caved to corporate and media pressure,the grassroots response in support of Memories Pizza soon swamped the Left.A GoFundMe account set up to support the owners raised more than $800,000 in small donations in a matter of days (including over $200,000 in one day), putting the pizza restaurant in a far superior financial position than it had enjoyed before the controversy. The message was clear: Cultural conservatives are not, in fact, culturally isolated but rather have the support of millions of Americans who oppose leftist bullying."Imprimis A monthly digest on liberty and the defense of America s founding principles"


....it was more than convenient for the Left to claim the Pew Poll as the fact.

This is almost a complete non-sequitor which has nothing to do with the topic at hand. What you've done is cherry picked a few examples where the anti-gay side has had some success. How is that at all relevant to answering my question?

She's the designated non sequitur-er on the RWnut team. She does that constantly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

He claimed I lied by saying that most Catholics supported birth control...

No Gilligan, I stated as FACT that you lied... I then challenged you to post the evidence you used to advance your assertion, which merely provided that fact with unnecessary validation, which you were more than happy to provide, through your feckless google search... which substantiated the fact that at the time you asserted the falsehood, you had no information to stand upon, supporting such.

But... in your defense, as an imbecile, there was no way you could have known that.

Evidence was posted, in contrast to your 'lie' about the percent of people who are gay, for which you posted no evidence.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The extremist rightwing overreach with insane legislation like the RFRA has hurt the religious right.

Instead of achieving their theocratic goals they alienated corporations who chose to take their business elsewhere rather than risk losing customers nationwide.

As a theist PR exercise it was a complete and utter failure of monumental proportions.

To pretend otherwise, as the OP is trying to do, just exposes the fact that those who use religion as a cudgel to impose their bigotry on We the People are completely out of touch with reality.

"....those who use religion as a cudgel to impose their bigotry..."


....cudgel...

...bigotry....


Exactly the sort of faux pas one would expect from a dunce line you.



"A prominent Silicon Valley chief executive stepped down just days after his appointment, amid a firestorm across the Internet that was sparked by employees who complained about his opposition to gay marriage.

Brendan Eich resigned from Mozilla, the organization behind the Firefox Web browser, after intense criticism over a six-year-old, $1,000 donation he made in support of a 2008 California ballot initiative to ban gay marriage."
Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Steps Down - WSJ

You want to trade anecdotes?

1. Lisa Howe (Tennessee)
This former Belmont University soccer coach was fired in December 2010 after she came out to her soccer team that she is a lesbian and announced that she and her partner were expecting their first child. While the university’s official statement at first said that she had resigned, it was soon amended to say that the decision had been mutual, and that her continuing to work for Belmont would not be beneficial to her or the university. Demonstrators protested Howe’s termination, as she was a highly successful and popular coach, and they called for an official apology, which they never received. Although Belmont had terminated its ties with the Tennessee Baptist Church in 2007, chairman of Belmont’s board of trustees Marty Dickens told The Tennessean that, “We expect people to commit themselves to high moral and ethical standards within a Christian context.” -

See more at: 5 People Who Were Fired for Being Gay And The 29 States Where That Is Still Legal Williams Institute

Lost her job to the cudgel of conservative Christian anti-gay bigotry.

And...

2. Jodi O’Brien (Wisconsin) O’Brien, a sociology professor at Seattle University who is openly a lesbian and writes about sexuality, was originally offered a job as dean of one of Marquette University’s colleges. In May 2010, her offer was rescinded. The Roman Catholic and Jesuit-run University told the New York Times that she lacked “the ability to represent the Marquette mission and identity.” University President Rev. Robert A. Wild argued that the choice not to hire O’Brien wasn’t due to her sexuality, but rather to her academic writing, in which he found “strongly negative statements about marriage and family.” O’Brien has written extensively about the topic of gay marriage; if this isn’t discrimination based on sexual orientation, it’s certainly discrimination based on beliefs about sexual orientation. Is there a substantial difference between the two?

- See more at: 5 People Who Were Fired for Being Gay And The 29 States Where That Is Still Legal Williams Institute

So I'm ahead 2 - 1.

Your turn.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hitler was not a liberal. But he was a progressive. That makes him a leftist.

Hitler's agenda was:
1) Nationalism...ULTRA nationalism. Hitler used religious reasoning to justify his own policies. Hitler focused on how the Aryan people had a "Christian heritage" with principles that must be adhered in order to rebuild the country.

2) Militarism...Hitler greatly increased the portion of the German economy devoted to military spending and further believed that the best defense was a good offense.

3) Purging Germany of undesirables...
a) Jews
b) homosexuals
c) Hitler outlawed labor unions in Germany

PLEASE highlight the 'progressive' agenda pea brain?

You left out socialism. Furthermore, Eugenics was a progressive creation.

That's pretty much the same agenda FDR had.

There was no 'socialism' in NAZI Germany...

Hitler worked with the industrialist of Germany and allowed a tremendous profit incentive to remain. The Nazis were a socialist party in name only. The State did not take over all the major factors of production in the German economy which is the hallmark trait of socialist state. In addition when Hitler did use government to control the economy he used his dictatorial powers and terror as the means of control. Progressives like Teddy Roosevelt used the democratic process to allow more government control of the economy. Hitler could literally use the army to take over a business. Roosevelt used his Justice Department to break up trusts using the laws enacted by an elected legislature. There is a tremendous difference between the two....ref

You dont understand socialism. Or Nazism. Or a dozen other things. But that doesnt mean you can't spout an opinion about them.
It's what makes America great--idiots sounding off about shit they know nothing about.

Let's see..I provided proof, and you provided emotes and insults...

You claim Hitler was a 'progressive'...and bripat claims Hitler was a socialist...

Yet in 1927 Hitler wrote a pamphlet entitled The Road to Resurgence only meant for the eyes of the top industrialists in Germany to argue that "capitalists had worked their way to the top through their capacity, and on the basis of this selection they have the right to lead." Hitler claimed that national socialism meant all people doing their best for society and posed no threat to the wealth of the rich.

Hitler expressly attacked Marxists, socialism and 'progressives', called for a 'meritocracy' and exalts 'individual personality'


excerpts:

The survival and the future of the various folk groups on this earth depend on:

1. The merit of their own race;

2. The extent to which they accord significance to the role of the individual personality;

3. Recognition of the fact that life in this universe is synonymous with struggle. It is, however, precisely the repudiation of these three great laws to which I attribute our present-day decline rather than to all the petty failures of our current political leadership.

Instead of raising aloft the merits of race and folk, millions of our folk pay homage to the idea of internationality.


The strength and genius of the individual personality are, in line with the absurd nature of democracy, being set aside in favor of majority rule, which amounts to nothing more than weakness and stupidity.

And rather than recognize and affirm the necessity of struggle, people are preaching theories of pacifism, reconciliation among nations, and eternal peace.

...


The National Socialist movement is no parliamentary party. It does not expect that questions involving the fate of the German nation could ever be resolved by majority rule. It is convinced that the spirit it advocates will one day become the spirit of that institution which is all that remains of the old army and, at the same time, the school for the future. The organisation of the military might of a folk, be it large or small, is always intimately connected with a doctrine of the value of individual personality, struggle, and patriotism. Unintentionally and unconsciously, to the extent that the official state becomes more and more corrupt in its folkish content, discredited by its personnel, and filled with pacifistic cowardice, the movement and the army will draw ever closer together.


In these seven years of progressive deformation of the German national body, a state within the state has slowly evolved which ideologically as well as politically will be the Prussia of the coming era.

Stalin preached international socialism.
Hitler preached national socialism.
There was little difference between them.
Hitler's Germany provided a social safety net with cradle to grave benefits (granted, a lot of that he inherited from Bismark). His unions worked hand in hand with industry and government, creating a tight relationship among the three entities. He believed in state planning of the economy.
Hitler was popular with progressives in the US when he started out. Even the Blue Eagle of the NRA was taken from the Nazis.