Trump May Not be a White Supremacist but He is In Fact a Bigot

[martybegan]

Supporting the exercise of someone else's rights does not mean endorsing their position.

Yes it does. You've literally said it does when you "support" their position. A position you seem to have a hard time defending. And you've yet to explain how baking a cake is a religious exercise. Where in the baking process does religion come in? When the flour and eggs and sugar are mixed? When the cake is put in the oven? When it's decorated with icing? At what point in that process does religion enter into it?

That is the problem with progressive's such as yourself, you can't actually support others expressing their own beliefs because you are so full of yourself you can't fathom someone thinking differently from you. That's the narcissism I've been talking about.

Their belief isn't a belief. It's bullshit. They "believe" that it's a religious exercise to bake a cake...when asked how they and/or you came to that belief, you don't say...only that the belief is the belief. Well that's bullshit. If you can't explain your beliefs then they're not your beliefs...they're dogma you've bought into because you're gullible as fuck. Why should your gullibility impose on someone else's civil rights? I can't help that you're a gullible knave, so why should I accommodate that? Why should anyone.

In all this, not one explanation as to how baking a cake is a religious exercise. Where does the religion come in during the baking process? After the cup of sugar but before the salt? So it's like, "add 1 cup of sugar, 1/3 cup of salt, 3 cups of flour, 3 eggs, and say a prayer to Jesus?" I've done enough as a home cook to know I've never seen that as part of the baking instructions for anything I've ever baked.

Defending freedoms means defending people you don't like. Anything else is just bull.

Not baking a cake because you hate gay people isn't a freedom. Try again. Stretching the bounds of worship to include any action isn't a freedom either, and sets a pretty horrible precedent for others to act in defiance of the law when it suits their bigotry and hatred. So like a muslim terrorist can simply claim his actions were a religious exercise and he cannot be held accountable for it because FREEDUMB!

It is free exercise, you just don't like the exercise, and you bigoted little mind can't fathom just letting them do what they want.

I've never seen any baking instructions that included "say a prayer to Jesus" between adding the ingredients, mixing them together, putting it in the oven, then decorating it after. Where does prayer or religion fall in that process? Can you answer that question?

I support their right to their position. Personally if I was a baker I would not feel the need to refuse working a SSM wedding. And Again, I don't care about why they don't want to do it, that's for them to figure out.

Again, not my call to make, nor yours, nor governments, without a compelling government interest.

More of the same bull of you not being able to fathom another's viewpoint, due to your small little progressive mind.

The question is not material to the discussion. Talk to someone who believes that SSM is a sin for an answer to that.

 

[The Derp]

It has been repeatedly explained to you that your theological complaints about Christianity is irrelevant to the Right of Religious Freedom.

How is it an act of religious freedom to not bake a cake because you, personally, hate homosexuality?

 

[The Derp]

And I don't care about their dogma or their sincerity.

You should because they're taking advantage of your gullibility to be discriminatory. You're just an (un)willing dupe in their parlor game of goalpost-moving and parameter-redefining all in service of the inherent bigotry they have in their hearts. I'm sure you'll claim victimhood at some point too because it wouldn't be a complete Conservative thought with whining like a whiny little bitch about how bad you're made to feel for having those thoughts.

I only care about them being able to enjoy free exercise of their religion, as long as there is no compelling government interest to do otherwise.

So you blindly accept what they say constitutes religious freedom, why? Because you're gullible? Because you believe what they tell you? Why do you take what they say at face value? You just blindly accept their claims that it's a religious exercise. Blindly. Like, you didn't even bother to question it, you just accepted it. That's fuckin' bullshit, and I think you know that. The fact that you know that yet continue to pretend you don't is what makes you a sophist here.

 

[martybegan]

And I don't care about their dogma or their sincerity.

You should because they're taking advantage of your gullibility to be discriminatory. You're just an (un)willing dupe in their parlor game of goalpost-moving and parameter-redefining all in service of the inherent bigotry they have in their hearts. I'm sure you'll claim victimhood at some point too because it wouldn't be a complete Conservative thought with whining like a whiny little bitch about how bad you're made to feel for having those thoughts.

I only care about them being able to enjoy free exercise of their religion, as long as there is no compelling government interest to do otherwise.

So you blindly accept what they say constitutes religious freedom, why? Because you're gullible? Because you believe what they tell you? Why do you take what they say at face value? You just blindly accept their claims that it's a religious exercise. Blindly. Like, you didn't even bother to question it, you just accepted it. That's fuckin' bullshit, and I think you know that. The fact that you know that yet continue to pretend you don't is what makes you a sophist here.

Nah, as long as they have the 1st amendment to fall back on I don't care about their reasons, and government shouldn't either without a compelling interest otherwise.

Again, don't care, don't see a compelling government interest to stop them. That's as simple as it gets.

And attempted poisoning is a crime, and thus a compelling interest and thus not protected.

 

[The Derp]

Actually it does as long as government isn't the one doing it.

No, it doesn't. Try discriminating against someone's race in whatever junky bathtub-whiskey/incest porn business you own. You can't.

What bothers me most about this is that you blindly accept these bakers when they tell you that baking a cake is a religious exercise. Like, you just accepted it. Didn't question it, didn't bother to have them explain why (so you could explain why to me), you just accepted it because your brain shuts down the minute someone talks about "faith".

Why do you accept their claims at face value that baking a cake is a religious exercise in the first place?????

It doesn't matter what I think or what you think, it only matters what they think

Thank you for saying this because it confirms my suspicions about you. You blindly accept what religious people say at face value, then nonsensically defend what they say while trying to distance yourself from it because you recognize the hideousness of the position.

That makes you worse than them.

 

[pullURpantsup]

‘ESPN on Tuesday issued a statement disavowing host Jemele Hill’s tweets calling President Donald Trump “a white supremacist,” “a bigot” and “unqualified and unfit to be president.”’

ESPN disavows Jemele Hill's tweets calling Donald Trump a 'white supremacist'

Trump is in fact a bigot – and although ‘qualified’ per the Constitution, Trump is indeed unfit to be president.

America has never had a better President!

 

[martybegan]

Actually it does as long as government isn't the one doing it.

No, it doesn't. Try discriminating against someone's race in whatever junky bathtub-whiskey/incest porn business you own. You can't.

What bothers me most about this is that you blindly accept these bakers when they tell you that baking a cake is a religious exercise. Like, you just accepted it. Didn't question it, didn't bother to have them explain why (so you could explain why to me), you just accepted it because your brain shuts down the minute someone talks about "faith".

Why do you accept their claims at face value that baking a cake is a religious exercise in the first place?????

It doesn't matter what I think or what you think, it only matters what they think

Thank you for saying this because it confirms my suspicions about you. You blindly accept what religious people say at face value, then nonsensically defend what they say while trying to distance yourself from it because you recognize the hideousness of the position.

That makes you worse than them.

Again, it doesn't matter to me unless there is a compelling government interest.

What they think is they don't want to provide a cake for a SSM wedding. They have already said they will not deny point of sale items or services. I know exactly their position, and see no compelling government interest to force them to cater the SSM wedding,

Now if they wanted to deny services to gays for walk in, point of sale items, then i would have a problem with them.

 

[Correll]

THat's not "sophistry" and ironically claiming it is, is quite "sophistry" of YOU.

Oh, it's total sophistry. You're lying to yourself in order to make a lying point in an argument. Doesn't get more sophist than that, pal. Can you even make an argument that doesn't totally rely on a false point or narrative? No. You are incapable of doing so because of what you believe, who you are, and the shitty job your parents did raising you.

And I never claimed that dogma superseded law.

That's exactly what you claim when you say that fake Christians' bullshit religious dogma is immune to discrimination laws. So now we have an instance of you walking back your entire argument as you realize it's shit. So you try to distance yourself from it by saying "I'm not saying this, I'm just defending others who say it". Of course that means you're saying it, and you're under the mistaken belief that it's religious freedumb - even though you don't say how or why. But I've given up expecting an answer from you or any other Conservative on this. You know your position is wrong, yet you make it anyway. Why? Is your ego really that fragile? Such a snowflake!

So why are you taking the Christians' word for it that it's their beliefs? Why do you automatically accept the sincerity of that? Obviously because you share their views, duh.

Try to hear me over the voices in your head. My point stands, your disagreement with Christian dogma, as you understand it, is completely irrelevant.

What is the disagreement? So you're saying it's Christian dogma to bake a cake? I want to know what you think it is about Christian dogma that I am "disagreeing" with, because I don't think you can think of things in complex terms...only in black and white..and again, that comes from the fact that your family is inbred and your parents did a shit job raising you.

All you are doing is attacking Christian dogma, as you see it, to justify denying them their religious freedom.

 

[Correll]

Your pretense that you don't know how you have mocked and demonstrated hatred against Christians is noted and dismissed.

Does God not forgive? Did Jesus not die for our sins?

Said the hater.

 

[Correll]

Now I think you are playing dumb. I did not say that Dogma is religious freedom. That was a lie you told. Liar.

Just because you didn't use those exact words doesn't mean you didn't say it. You -maybe it was you, but definitely either you or marty mcfuckup- said that the bigotry of these Christian bakers is dogma that I "disagree with". So if not baking a gay cake is religious dogma, and you're defending them not baking a gay cake, you are defending dogma.

Christ on a cracker!

Why do you support a position that you know it wrong?

That's a question for you, not me.

And you lie some more about what I said, in an attempt to draw me into a discussion of Christian Dogma to try to distract from the fact that you support taking rights away from people you don't like.

But you are saying Christian dogma is a religious right. So your argument contradicts itself. I know, I know...big shocker there...a Conservative argument that's an intellectual circle jerk. Not baking a cake isn't a right that can be taken away. Are you saying these bakers cannot bake unless they are allowed to be bigots? How does religion relate to baking in that scenario? It doesn't. And I think even you know that.

You're a bad person

And you're a whiny little bitch. I'm actually a very nice guy, and have held back quite a lot on this thread.

I'm defending religious freedom regardless of the religion's dogma.

As I pointed out with the Buddist and Amish dogma points. Which you ignored.


And no, you are an admitted, even proud bigot. You are full of hate and as you have demonstrated in this thread, a liar.


You are a bad person.

 

[The Derp]

I support their right to their position.

But it's not a position they have a right to...that's what you don't seem to get. You seem to think that anyone claiming "religious freedumb" has license to do as they wish, and that's incorrect. They don't. Throw on top of that the clear insincerity of their faith and what we have is a picture of someone looking for an excuse to be a bigot and hiding behind their dogma that they refuse to defend. That's not religious liberty, it's bullshit.

Personally if I was a baker I would not feel the need to refuse working a SSM wedding. And Again, I don't care about why they don't want to do it, that's for them to figure out.

Personally, I don't give a shit that you are trying to have it both ways.

Again, not my call to make, nor yours, nor governments, without a compelling government interest.

Actually, yes, it is our call to make. Using "religious freedumb" to justify bigotry is an easy call to make because this country went through it 50-60 years ago...that's what led to Loving v. Virginia and the Civil Rights Act. Christians using faith to justify Jim Crow. Just like you're doing today. I am not only questioning the dogma but also the sincerity behind those dogmatic beliefs. I don't think they're being sincere...simply because they are Christians and being a Christian means you believe and accept that God forgives and Jesus died for your sins.

If you're told by a Roman soldier to walk with him a mile and carry his gear, walk with him two. If you're given an order for a wedding cake for a gay marriage, bake two. Love and forgive your enemies and show them extraordinary grace, because Matthew 5:46-47: "If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?"

Scripture. Boom.

More of the same bull of you not being able to fathom another's viewpoint, due to your small little progressive mind..

Viewpoint? I thought this was about dogma. So now dogma is a viewpoint that is treated with the same respect as viewpoints not based on dogma? Wow, quite the standard you've set for yourself. Let's see if that shit holds up on closer inspection:

The "viewpoint" (not dogma anymore...just another goalpost shift on your part) is that their religious beliefs dictate that baking a gay cake is a sin. Yet their "viewpoint" is also that God forgives and Jesus died for your sins. So you see the contradiction in that argument? That's why I doubt its sincerity.

The question is not material to the discussion. Talk to someone who believes that SSM is a sin for an answer to that.

You're the one defending them, so you are the one I'm talking to. if you're now saying that you aren't informed enough to have these answers why the fuck are you defending the position on this thread?[/QUOTE]

 

[The Derp]

Nah, as long as they have the 1st amendment to fall back on I don't care about their reasons, and government shouldn't either without a compelling interest otherwise.

Sincerity of religious beliefs isn't a first amendment issue. Try again. I am saying their "religious freedumb" argument is insincere since their own faith and dogma contradicts it.

And now you're reduced to just blindly and generally throwing out things to defend yourself. How is baking a cake a first amendment issue? It isn't. It's not a constitutional issue, it's a baking issue. Ascribing some sort of religious connotation to it is bullshit, and you know it. That's what makes this whole thing incredibly stupid; you know your position is wrong, yet you make it anyway. That says a lot about you as a human being...namely that you're a piece of shit who blindly accepts what podunk, white trash, bigoted redneck assholes tell you about faith. You accept what they say without question. So it's hard to see how you're not an enabler of bigotry in this scenario.

Again, don't care, don't see a compelling government interest to stop them. That's as simple as it gets.

Discrimination is a compelling interest. You clearly think gays can be discriminated against. Why do you think that? Obviously the answer is that you're a bigot, but not a brave enough one to come out. Just a whiny little chickenshit bitch.

And attempted poisoning is a crime, and thus a compelling interest and thus not protected.

Is it? Discrimination is a crime too and that doesn't stop religious people from using their dogma to justify it. So why couldn't a baker poison a cake and claim it was an act of "religious freedumb"? If they're not willing to bake a cake, why would they not be willing to poison someone?

 

[The Derp]

Said the hater.

So you don't think God forgives and Jesus died for your sins. So if you don't think that, you're not a Christian. It's that simple.

 

[Correll]

Said the hater.

So you don't think God forgives and Jesus died for your sins. So if you don't think that, you're not a Christian. It's that simple.

You are still a hater, and you are still just trying to justify your desire to take away religious freedom.


And you claimed you were a bigot against all religions.


Yet, when I asked you for a link where you were as hateful towards Islam, you ignored my request.

 

[The Derp]

I'm defending religious freedom regardless of the religion's dogma.

No, you're accepting what bigoted people tell you without question. So you're not making an informed argument about this. You're just spitting justifications for bigotry because you are bigoted yourself. You're too lazy to bother questioning religious people because -gosh!- don't want to offend their delicate sensibilities. So you accept insincere arguments because what it boils down to is that you're afraid. Of what? Who fucking knows. Maybe of your own ego. Maybe of being wrong. Maybe of being called a bigot. I don't really care why you're a whiny little bitch, just that you are one.

What kind of person accepts what someone says at face value? Someone looking for confirmation of their own bias.

Eat shit.

As I pointed out with the Buddist and Amish dogma points. Which you ignored.

You didn't point anything out, actually. You just tried to divert the argument away from sincerity in religious freedumb, and you did that because even you recognize that the argument is insincere. That's why you're not defending it and trying to change the topic to other religions because you don't feel comfortable discussing this one. Once again, you've made it all about you and your ego. Pathetic.

And no, you are an admitted, even proud bigot. You are full of hate and as you have demonstrated in this thread, a liar.You are a bad person.

Oh, of course I'm bigoted against religion. I'm bigoted against it for the very reasons you'r arguing here; that there doesn't need to be a test of sincerity of faith in order to exercise religious bigotry. That's bullshit. And you know it.

 

[The Derp]

You are a bad person.

I'm not the one siding with bigots to justify homophobia. That's you. That makes you the bad person here. I'm actually a very nice guy who has held back in this thread.

 

[Correll]

I'm defending religious freedom regardless of the religion's dogma.

No, you're accepting what bigoted people tell you without question. So you're not making an informed argument about this. You're just spitting justifications for bigotry because you are bigoted yourself. You're too lazy to bother questioning religious people because -gosh!- don't want to offend their delicate sensibilities. So you accept insincere arguments because what it boils down to is that you're afraid. Of what? Who fucking knows. Maybe of your own ego. Maybe of being wrong. Maybe of being called a bigot. I don't really care why you're a whiny little bitch, just that you are one.

What kind of person accepts what someone says at face value? Someone looking for confirmation of their own bias.

Eat shit.

As I pointed out with the Buddist and Amish dogma points. Which you ignored.

You didn't point anything out, actually. You just tried to divert the argument away from sincerity in religious freedumb, and you did that because even you recognize that the argument is insincere. That's why you're not defending it and trying to change the topic to other religions because you don't feel comfortable discussing this one. Once again, you've made it all about you and your ego. Pathetic.

And no, you are an admitted, even proud bigot. You are full of hate and as you have demonstrated in this thread, a liar.You are a bad person.

Oh, of course I'm bigoted against religion. I'm bigoted against it for the very reasons you'r arguing here; that there doesn't need to be a test of sincerity of faith in order to exercise religious bigotry. That's bullshit. And you know it.

I don't question people's religious beliefs because I don't care about them, and am not looking for an excuse to deprive them of their rights, like you are.



Your bigotry and hatred are noted.

 

[Correll]

You are a bad person.

I'm not the one siding with bigots to justify homophobia. That's you. That makes you the bad person here. I'm actually a very nice guy who has held back in this thread.

No, you are the one that wants to put people in jail for not baking a cake.


And your bigotry and your desire to force the Free Practice of Religion from the Public Square shows that you are worse than that.


You are certainly the bad person here.

 

[The Derp]

You are still a hater, and you are still just trying to justify your desire to take away religious freedom.

Now hold on a second...let's back up and address the whole underlying faith thing. The underlying faith in Christianity is the faith in God that he will forgive you for your sins because his son died on the cross. Is that not accurate?

And you claimed you were a bigot against all religions.

And I'm explaining to you why. Explanations aren't something you do, but I do them. I am happy to tell you why I am bigoted against religion. Yet you cannot tell me why baking a cake is an act of religious exercise. You don't want to explain why. You only want blind acceptance of it. You want us to accept the sincerity of their beliefs when I don't have a good reason to do so. So you try to force me into accepting that their religious beliefs with regard to gay cakes are sincere, and I doubt that sincerity. The fact that you don't says to me that you believe just as they do. Why don't you question the sincerity of their beliefs? Is it because you're close minded? Is it because you are ignorant? Is it because you're scared? I don't understand how you can question my sincerity, yet you don't bat an eye to question theirs.

The obvious answer is that you're a bigot who shares their bigotry, and you're too much of a whiny little bitch to admit it.

For shame.

Yet, when I asked you for a link where you were as hateful towards Islam, you ignored my request.

I've said several times on this board that I THINK ALL RELIGIONS ARE EQUALLY STUPID. So it seems to me like you need to have someone go after Islam, which has no presence on this thread, in order to what? Why? Why do I need to go after Islam when it is a Christian issue we're discussing? Obviously because you are desperate for a way to derail the topic because you're a piece of shit.

 

[Correll]

You are still a hater, and you are still just trying to justify your desire to take away religious freedom.

Now hold on a second...let's back up and address the whole underlying faith thing. The underlying faith in Christianity is the faith in God that he will forgive you for your sins because his son died on the cross. Is that not accurate?

And you claimed you were a bigot against all religions.

And I'm explaining to you why. Explanations aren't something you do, but I do them. I am happy to tell you why I am bigoted against religion. Yet you cannot tell me why baking a cake is an act of religious exercise. You don't want to explain why. You only want blind acceptance of it. You want us to accept the sincerity of their beliefs when I don't have a good reason to do so. So you try to force me into accepting that their religious beliefs with regard to gay cakes are sincere, and I doubt that sincerity. The fact that you don't says to me that you believe just as they do. Why don't you question the sincerity of their beliefs? Is it because you're close minded? Is it because you are ignorant? Is it because you're scared? I don't understand how you can question my sincerity, yet you don't bat an eye to question theirs.

The obvious answer is that you're a bigot who shares their bigotry, and you're too much of a whiny little bitch to admit it.

For shame.

Yet, when I asked you for a link where you were as hateful towards Islam, you ignored my request.

I've said several times on this board that I THINK ALL RELIGIONS ARE EQUALLY STUPID. So it seems to me like you need to have someone go after Islam, which has no presence on this thread, in order to what? Why? Why do I need to go after Islam when it is a Christian issue we're discussing? Obviously because you are desperate for a way to derail the topic because you're a piece of shit.

You say that, but I don't believe you. (and why should I? You shown yourself to be a liar)


I think you hate Christianity, because Christianity is a problem for your marxist agenda.


I think you are FINE with religion when it helps your agenda.


Bet you never once had a problem with Rev Wright, did you?