The Regressive Left and Islam -- What is happening here?

[Jack4jill]

"All religion is organized ignorance for the ignorant" clearly is the most ignorant statement of the month.

Simple answers for stupid people. That is the comfort religion provides. Add in dogma and a justification for irrational action and policy, and you have the source of the evil that is religion. Not a one is worth a damn.

Yup, you are a silly anti-theist who is unhappy about the power of religious beliefs and principles in this country. Too bad.

You are as silly about that as 2guy and Mac are about Islam.

People like to believe that their religion is good, and the others are bad. Untrue. Anything dogmatic is always bad. And religion can't survive without blind faith and dogma. It's all its got.

Yes, I understand that is your unsupported opinion.

Unsupported? Hardly.

"In religion
See also: Roman Catholic dogma, Jewish principles of faith, and The six articles of Islamic faith

Dogmata are found in religions such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, where they are considered core principles that must be upheld by all believers of that religion. As a fundamental element of religion, the term "dogma" is assigned to those theological tenets which are considered to be unanimously agreed upon, such that their proposed disputation or revision effectively means that a person no longer accepts the given religion as his or her own, or has entered into a period of personal doubt. Dogma is distinguished from theological opinion regarding those things considered less well-known. Dogmata may be clarified and elaborated upon, but not contradicted in novel teachings (e.g., Galatians 1:6-9). Rejection of dogma may lead to expulsion from a religious group."

Dogma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[candycorn]

Its unfortunate.

Indeed it is, but it was predicted in the OP.

Despite the best efforts of the Regressive Left to change the subject, the point of the thread remains: Why is the Regressive Left so tolerant of Islam while being so intolerant of Christianity?

Nobody is intolerant of Christianity regardless of how much you wish liberals were. Are there some vocal dipshits who may be political liberals who are intolerant? Sure. Do they speak for all liberals anywhere? No. No and fuck whoever thinks they do.

There is no indictment of a religion there, as much as you would like there to be.

Its just in the title.

I have provided myriad examples, several posters have offered their theories, and I have provided published thoughts on the topic from multiple honest liberals. So it certainly isn't as if I was the first to come up with the question, is it? Even honest liberals see it.

Everything you folks are trying is just dishonest noise, in an effort to deflect from your behaviors.
.

My effort is to condemn the action and call the assaulter crazy.
Yours is to wait and see what color or religion they are and then paint Islam as one color and differentiate if the assaulter is white and make an excuse or two or eight hundred up to blaming gun control activists for some guy murdering someone.

Everything you guys are trying to do is just dishonest noise in an attempt to paint yourselves as fair and balanced.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Mac1958 is trolling his own thread as long as he won't admit the truth that he is insinuating regressive leftists are somehow supporters of jihad.

You folks literally won't get off this lie. I do realize all this deflection is proving my point. I'm merely providing examples of the point of the thread, and you Regressive Lefties don't like it.
Example after example. Too bad. .

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

Actually, you have contributed much, here, to proving its validity.

Keep up the good work.

 

[Mac1958]

Its unfortunate.

Indeed it is, but it was predicted in the OP.

Despite the best efforts of the Regressive Left to change the subject, the point of the thread remains: Why is the Regressive Left so tolerant of Islam while being so intolerant of Christianity?

Nobody is intolerant of Christianity regardless of how much you wish liberals were. Are there some vocal dipshits who may be political liberals who are intolerant? Sure. Do they speak for all liberals anywhere? No. No and fuck whoever thinks they do.

There is no indictment of a religion there, as much as you would like there to be.

Its just in the title.

I have provided myriad examples, several posters have offered their theories, and I have provided published thoughts on the topic from multiple honest liberals. So it certainly isn't as if I was the first to come up with the question, is it? Even honest liberals see it.

Everything you folks are trying is just dishonest noise, in an effort to deflect from your behaviors.
.

My effort is to condemn the action and call the assaulter crazy.
Yours is to wait and see what color or religion they are and then paint Islam as one color and differentiate if the assaulter is white and make an excuse or two or eight hundred up to blaming gun control activists for some guy murdering someone.

Everything you guys are trying to do is just dishonest noise in an attempt to paint yourselves as fair and balanced.

Okay, now you're just playing.

I remember this repeating game as a child, not interested.

Play with someone else. I've provided plenty of examples and pieces from honest liberals.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Mac1958 is trolling his own thread as long as he won't admit the truth that he is insinuating regressive leftists are somehow supporters of jihad.

You folks literally won't get off this lie. I do realize all this deflection is proving my point. I'm merely providing examples of the point of the thread, and you Regressive Lefties don't like it.
Example after example. Too bad. .

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

Actually, you have contributed much, here, to proving its validity.

Keep up the good work.

They've put a huge amount of effort into derailing this thread, several lies, several deflections, several great examples.

Win.
.

 

[candycorn]

Its unfortunate.

Indeed it is, but it was predicted in the OP.

Despite the best efforts of the Regressive Left to change the subject, the point of the thread remains: Why is the Regressive Left so tolerant of Islam while being so intolerant of Christianity?

Nobody is intolerant of Christianity regardless of how much you wish liberals were. Are there some vocal dipshits who may be political liberals who are intolerant? Sure. Do they speak for all liberals anywhere? No. No and fuck whoever thinks they do.

There is no indictment of a religion there, as much as you would like there to be.

Its just in the title.

I have provided myriad examples, several posters have offered their theories, and I have provided published thoughts on the topic from multiple honest liberals. So it certainly isn't as if I was the first to come up with the question, is it? Even honest liberals see it.

Everything you folks are trying is just dishonest noise, in an effort to deflect from your behaviors.
.

My effort is to condemn the action and call the assaulter crazy.
Yours is to wait and see what color or religion they are and then paint Islam as one color and differentiate if the assaulter is white and make an excuse or two or eight hundred up to blaming gun control activists for some guy murdering someone.

Everything you guys are trying to do is just dishonest noise in an attempt to paint yourselves as fair and balanced.

Okay, now you're just playing.

I remember this repeating game as a child, not interested.

Play with someone else. I've provided plenty of examples and pieces from honest liberals.
.

Most liberals are honest.
As am I when I condemn the actor and call the action crazy.

I don’t wait to see what color/race/religion the perp is—it doesn’t matter. They don’t represent anyone except their own bizarre beliefs and their victims are just as dead.

If you were honest, you’d admit that.

I won’t hold my breath.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Mac1958 is trolling his own thread as long as he won't admit the truth that he is insinuating regressive leftists are somehow supporters of jihad.

You folks literally won't get off this lie. I do realize all this deflection is proving my point. I'm merely providing examples of the point of the thread, and you Regressive Lefties don't like it.
Example after example. Too bad. .

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

You folks are denying it, even though I've provided plenty of examples and admission from honest liberals.

You guys hate the mirror, and that's understandable.
.

The herd instinct is strong in some. To say anything that does not conform to the herd mentality is just too scary a proposition as they derive so much of their sense of self from being part of it. The right wing fundamentalists are exactly the same in that regard.

These people do not base their attitudes on anything rational, principled, or with any actual ideology at work. If they understood liberal ideology, they would recognize their patent stupidity in defending its very antithesis. They are just too frightened by the prospect of social ostracism lest they utter an original thought, and so they all just bleat away with the confidence provided by their sense of safety in numbers.

It's the politics of children when it gets down to it. They have not grown up to the point where they can function as an adult individual as they need that family structure around them to feel safe.

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are principled and courageous liberals. These sycophants to Islam are just cowards too afraid of saying the wrong thing that they would lend themselves to anything rather than risk not being one of the herd.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Most liberals are honest.
As am I when I condemn the actor and call the action crazy.

I don’t wait to see what color/race/religion the perp is—it doesn’t matter. They don’t represent anyone except their own bizarre beliefs and their victims are just as dead.

If you were honest, you’d admit that.

I won’t hold my breath.

These are not liberals at work, here, however.

If they were liberals, they would not defend the antithesis of liberalism as automatically as they do.

As far as honesty is concerned, you should try some of the stuff because your trying to divorce the ideology people are attempting to spread from the actions they take to spread it is patently dishonest.

Mindless apologia is mindless apologia.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I doubt anyone in this thread is defending jihad.

 

[Ravi]

lol maher is an "honest liberal" because he likes to pretend all muslims are evil.

 

[Mac1958]

You folks literally won't get off this lie. I do realize all this deflection is proving my point. I'm merely providing examples of the point of the thread, and you Regressive Lefties don't like it.
Example after example. Too bad. .

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

You folks are denying it, even though I've provided plenty of examples and admission from honest liberals.

You guys hate the mirror, and that's understandable.
.

The herd instinct is strong in some. To say anything that does not conform to the herd mentality is just too scary a proposition as they derive so much of their sense of self from being part of it. The right wing fundamentalists are exactly the same in that regard.

These people do not base their attitudes on anything rational, principled, or with any actual ideology at work. If they understood liberal ideology, they would recognize their patent stupidity in defending its very antithesis. They are just too frightened by the prospect of social ostracism lest they utter an original thought, and so they all just bleat away with the confidence provided by their sense of safety in numbers.

It's the politics of children when it gets down to it. They have not grown up to the point where they can function as an adult individual as they need that family structure around them to feel safe.

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are principled and courageous liberals. These sycophants to Islam are just cowards too afraid of saying the wrong thing that they would lend themselves to anything rather than risk not being one of the herd.

As we've discussed, these are not liberals like Maher and Harris. They are distortions, perversions, mutations. Harris and Maher are indeed principled and courageous because they don't hold fast to a simplistic ideology. Real liberals.

I knew I'd take heat for this thread, but I'm still surprised at how much effort they've put into it. The only people they're convincing are each other, the standard echo chamber groupthink that afflicts ideologues on both ends of the spectrum.

Flattering, in a way.
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

lol maher is an "honest liberal" because he likes to pretend all muslims are evil.

You are a frightened and ignorant child who mocks those who are light years more intelligent than yourself rather than risk the wrath of those you defend.

He has never said all Muslims are evil, but you have little ability to understand the world and so reduce what he does say to your own level of childish simplicity.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

You folks are denying it, even though I've provided plenty of examples and admission from honest liberals.

You guys hate the mirror, and that's understandable.
.

The herd instinct is strong in some. To say anything that does not conform to the herd mentality is just too scary a proposition as they derive so much of their sense of self from being part of it. The right wing fundamentalists are exactly the same in that regard.

These people do not base their attitudes on anything rational, principled, or with any actual ideology at work. If they understood liberal ideology, they would recognize their patent stupidity in defending its very antithesis. They are just too frightened by the prospect of social ostracism lest they utter an original thought, and so they all just bleat away with the confidence provided by their sense of safety in numbers.

It's the politics of children when it gets down to it. They have not grown up to the point where they can function as an adult individual as they need that family structure around them to feel safe.

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are principled and courageous liberals. These sycophants to Islam are just cowards too afraid of saying the wrong thing that they would lend themselves to anything rather than risk not being one of the herd.

As we've discussed, these are not liberals like Maher and Harris. They are distortions, perversions, mutations. Harris and Maher are indeed principled and courageous because they don't hold fast to a simplistic ideology. Real liberals.

I knew I'd take heat for this thread, but I'm still surprised at how much effort they've put into it. The only people they're convincing are each other, the standard echo chamber groupthink that afflicts ideologues on both ends of the spectrum.

Flattering, in a way.
.

They sure are petulant little Heathers at times, aren't they?

 

[Mac1958]

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

You folks are denying it, even though I've provided plenty of examples and admission from honest liberals.

You guys hate the mirror, and that's understandable.
.

The herd instinct is strong in some. To say anything that does not conform to the herd mentality is just too scary a proposition as they derive so much of their sense of self from being part of it. The right wing fundamentalists are exactly the same in that regard.

These people do not base their attitudes on anything rational, principled, or with any actual ideology at work. If they understood liberal ideology, they would recognize their patent stupidity in defending its very antithesis. They are just too frightened by the prospect of social ostracism lest they utter an original thought, and so they all just bleat away with the confidence provided by their sense of safety in numbers.

It's the politics of children when it gets down to it. They have not grown up to the point where they can function as an adult individual as they need that family structure around them to feel safe.

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are principled and courageous liberals. These sycophants to Islam are just cowards too afraid of saying the wrong thing that they would lend themselves to anything rather than risk not being one of the herd.

As we've discussed, these are not liberals like Maher and Harris. They are distortions, perversions, mutations. Harris and Maher are indeed principled and courageous because they don't hold fast to a simplistic ideology. Real liberals.

I knew I'd take heat for this thread, but I'm still surprised at how much effort they've put into it. The only people they're convincing are each other, the standard echo chamber groupthink that afflicts ideologues on both ends of the spectrum.

Flattering, in a way.
.

They sure are petulant little Heathers at times, aren't they?

Nerve, struck.


.

 

[Jack4jill]

I doubt anyone in this thread is defending jihad.

Depends on the jihad. One for finishing college or world peace? Let's rock.

 

[Seawytch]

Its unfortunate.

Indeed it is, but it was predicted in the OP.

Despite the best efforts of the Regressive Left to change the subject, the point of the thread remains: Why is the Regressive Left so tolerant of Islam while being so intolerant of Christianity?

There is no indictment of a religion there, as much as you would like there to be.

I have provided myriad examples, several posters have offered their theories, and I have provided published thoughts on the topic from multiple honest liberals. So it certainly isn't as if I was the first to come up with the question, is it? Even honest liberals see it.

Everything you folks are trying is just dishonest noise, in an effort to deflect from your behaviors.
.

It's unfortunate you ignored the rest of his post.

What is unfortunate is that the far Right has decided to demonize all Muslims due to the actions of a small minority of cult followers.

 

[jillian]

[
.
Papa, please follow that link and read what I wrote.

In no way did I say they defend terrorist acts, nor would I.

But they have convinced themselves that I did.

This is why I no longer try to communicate with them. Their minds are literally distorted.
.

You make reference to APOLOGISTS

the definition of which is "a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial."

If you want to deny you're accusing 'us' of defending terrorists, then by all means clarify,

1. Who are the 'apologists' you're referring to above?
2. Who and what are they defending, specifically?

Please see post 667. Follow the rules of the board.

To cut down on the abuse and to increase the quality/exchange in threads in the Politics Forum, it is imperative that we begin to eliminate "off topic" posts, aka trolling, in the Politics Forum. Below you will find examples of what is unacceptable and will be removed from the the forum.

Source: Trolling/"Off Topic" Posts Will be Removed From the Politics Section

.

So you refuse to identify the apologists you're referring to and what they are defending?

People,

he is making the accusation, outright, that people here like myself are apologists for Muslim terrorism. It couldn't be clearer,

his comical deflection notwithstanding.

I've said it many times: You Regressive Lefties do not support or defend terrorism.

You can play all the games you want, because you live in a fantasy world.

Seriously dude, get help.
.

Then explain what and who the 'apologists' above are defending.

Secondly, what makes me a REGRESSIVE lefty, specifically?

the fact that he doesn't understand what "regressive" actually means and language isn't a precise thing with him. he'd rather toss around inappropriate words because he thinks they sound negative.

 

[jillian]

I doubt anyone in this thread is defending jihad.

Depends on the jihad. One for finishing college or world peace? Let's rock.

a jihad for finishing college?

world peace a jihad?

only someone with a sixth grade education would come up with that idiocy.

 

[Ravi]

lol maher is an "honest liberal" because he likes to pretend all muslims are evil.

You are a frightened and ignorant child who mocks those who are light years more intelligent than yourself rather than risk the wrath of those you defend.

He has never said all Muslims are evil, but you have little ability to understand the world and so reduce what he does say to your own level of childish simplicity.

Partisans like you pose more danger to Americans than Muslims do. And probably help recruit more terrorists.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes, you insinuate "regressive leftists" support jihad, directly or indirectly, without any convincing proof. That is where we are at right now.

That where you are, because that's where you want it to be. It's how you folks think. You have to be the victim. Poor you. Please stop trying to derail my thread..

The basis of your thread is a false assumption that has been pointed out above. Until you give up the false assumption, it is fair game in this thread for rebuttal.

You folks are denying it, even though I've provided plenty of examples and admission from honest liberals.

You guys hate the mirror, and that's understandable.
.

The herd instinct is strong in some. To say anything that does not conform to the herd mentality is just too scary a proposition as they derive so much of their sense of self from being part of it. The right wing fundamentalists are exactly the same in that regard.

These people do not base their attitudes on anything rational, principled, or with any actual ideology at work. If they understood liberal ideology, they would recognize their patent stupidity in defending its very antithesis. They are just too frightened by the prospect of social ostracism lest they utter an original thought, and so they all just bleat away with the confidence provided by their sense of safety in numbers.

It's the politics of children when it gets down to it. They have not grown up to the point where they can function as an adult individual as they need that family structure around them to feel safe.

Sam Harris and Bill Maher are principled and courageous liberals. These sycophants to Islam are just cowards too afraid of saying the wrong thing that they would lend themselves to anything rather than risk not being one of the herd.

As we've discussed, these are not liberals like Maher and Harris. They are distortions, perversions, mutations. Harris and Maher are indeed principled and courageous because they don't hold fast to a simplistic ideology. Real liberals.

I knew I'd take heat for this thread, but I'm still surprised at how much effort they've put into it. The only people they're convincing are each other, the standard echo chamber groupthink that afflicts ideologues on both ends of the spectrum.

Flattering, in a way.
.

Now that we've dragged a confession out of you that you don't think the people who you refer to as 'regressive leftists' actually defend Muslim terrorists,

what's left for you to rant about?