Does it feel as if the US is experiencing some sort of political coup?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 9, 2020:

I feel like the US was reaching a political coup when the Republicans straight up blocked impeachment witnesses, and when they let the president attack US citizens.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 9, 2020:

@Bay0Wulf well if the Reps didn't block witness testimony, we could have seen the facts, no?

Well.

Xtra comments on Jun 8, 2020:

Protesting the flag is not productive.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 8, 2020:

@DAN_STL, your family has defended this country since the Revolution? I assume that means they also were in the Civil War? Which side? If it was the North, I wonder how they would feel seeing people so blatantly displaying and worshiping the Confederate Battle Flag, the flag of the enemy who lost. My family fought in WWII - they'd be sickened to see people brazenly walking around with Nazi swastika flags, yet it is a free country and you are allowed to. Did you know the Supreme Court ruled that burning the US flag is protected as a First Amendment right? So your implied threat is nothing more than trying to trample on First Amendment rights, which is quite un-American of you. The flag is nothing but idolatry worship (which if you are a Christian, you should be against) and kneeling is not disrespecting it in any way to begin with. But, disrespecting is fine, again as a First Amendment right, and you even said we should question what we have done in the past. I think we should also question what we are doing now and in the future, and I see no reason a black person should be forced to show respect to a symbol of a nation that does everything in its power to hold them back and treat them as second class citizens. Perhaps we should all molest the flag, like Mr. Trump, is that what you want? Why don't you post your address here for all to see, so we can come by and make your day?

Well.

Xtra comments on Jun 8, 2020:

Protesting the flag is not productive.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 8, 2020:

Neither is needlessly idolizing and worshiping it, or trying to force patriotism and unquestionable loyalty.

Black Lives Matter developing highly trained 'military' arm to declare war on police- ...

JacksonNought comments on Jun 8, 2020:

The article says "they will send out armed 'Peace Officers' to 'patrol black communities"'... Sounds fine to me. If random white men can patrol the streets of Philadelphia with melee weapons, violating curfew, and the police ignore 911 calls of people being threatened by them in their own ...

JacksonNought replies on Jun 8, 2020:

@SpikeTalon of course, proper research takes time, no argument here. I will just say, based on their "take on all cops" statement, I see it as they are fed up with what they perceive as unjust violence against unarmed black people. This is violence they do not see used against white people, even armed and dangerous white people. They see cops claim an old man tripped and cracked their head open, until a video comes out that shows they clearly pushed him. They see a lawful gun owner shot several times in his car just for following the law and telling the officer he had a licensed firearm. They see an officer walk into the wrong apartment and shoot a man in his own home, and no charged filed until people rise up. They see unidentified police officers storm into a house to find a suspect who was already arrested hours prior, and when the homeowner thinks there are criminals breaking in and tries to defend himself, the cops shoot at him and kill his sleeping girlfriend - and not only are the officers not punished, they charge the homeowner with attempted murder. They see all of this and how they are not being protected by the police, and feel the need to take their protection into their own hands. I do not see this as them going to war with cops, or targeting them, but rather trying to protect their own communities and defend themselves from police brutality. To me, this is no different than Oath Keepers trying to protect communities with firearms - they just see the threat coming from the authorities, not other civilians.

Black Lives Matter developing highly trained 'military' arm to declare war on police- ...

JacksonNought comments on Jun 8, 2020:

The article says "they will send out armed 'Peace Officers' to 'patrol black communities"'... Sounds fine to me. If random white men can patrol the streets of Philadelphia with melee weapons, violating curfew, and the police ignore 911 calls of people being threatened by them in their own ...

JacksonNought replies on Jun 8, 2020:

@SpikeTalon can you link examples of BLM threatening violence, official BLM representation specifically, and not just claims of defending themselves? I am not trying to be clever here, I am sincerely curious as to what you have heard, as I will condemn it if true.

Until someone better comes along, Donald is our President.

JacksonNought comments on Jun 5, 2020:

What is the point of calling Barack Obama "Barry Soetoro"?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 6, 2020:

@David42 hide his sexuality and religion? He was a heterosexual male married to a heterosexual woman with two daughters, and he was a practicing Christian. Not sure what is so secret about that? And if he did decide to practice Islam, where is the issue? You realize it's not illegal to be a Muslim, and you cannot be impeached for being one either.

Until someone better comes along, Donald is our President.

JacksonNought comments on Jun 5, 2020:

What is the point of calling Barack Obama "Barry Soetoro"?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 5, 2020:

@David42 uh huh. The devil sent him, and he started everything bad in the world. Got it. Sure. And he goes by Barack Obama. Why not use his actual name?

Park Police calls out fake news: authorities did not use tear gas to clear protesters from Lafayette...

JacksonNought comments on Jun 3, 2020:

And we just trust them?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 3, 2020:

@TyKC honestly can't tell if they are a parody or not...

Park Police calls out fake news: authorities did not use tear gas to clear protesters from Lafayette...

JacksonNought comments on Jun 3, 2020:

And we just trust them?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 3, 2020:

See the comment above me. There are videos of the incident, and a witness account by the priest.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix ... you can't be a Satanist and a physicist at the same time? What is the physicist is a proud misogynist and cheater? Too many variables.

There was a public announcement from the AntiFa Facebook page.

808scotty comments on Jun 2, 2020:

https://www.facebook.com/emerienaverie.ramirez/videos/1395533723974022/ ........Soros sponsored

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

Do you have proof that it is Soros funded? Do you have proof that the stammering man claiming to be paid is actually a paid protester, and not a plant trying to make Dems and Liberals look bad? Why don't you follow his instructions and see if you can get paid?

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix I'm not trying to sell anyone on anything. You are free to do as you wish, just don't try and force me to submit to your beliefs.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix "Are those seven tenets better than the ten commandments at generating law-abiding people?" Well let's look at the Ten Commandments. First off, only four of them are worthwhile. Again, George Carlin has a great breakdown of them. No other gods before me, keep the Sabbath holy, no graven images, name in vain - all completely useless and just methods of controlling people. Also all against the Constitution and First Amendment. Honoring your parents - respect should be earned, not granted. What if you have abusive parents? Coveting - well what do you think keeps the economy going? Now we get to the ones that actually make sense. Don't commit adultery, don't steal, don't bear false witness, and don't kill. As I have already said, a lot of theists see killing as "negotiable" and sometimes justified, so it doesn't seem to stop them outright. But as a commandment, it is a good one. As are the others - namely when it comes to honesty and fidelity. As George Carlin says, you can refine the Ten Commandments into just two - always be honest and faithful, and don't kill people. If those were the commandments, no one would have a problem displaying them outside of courthouses - it is the forced obedience to a god that people take issue with. Here are the seven core tenets of The Satanic Temple. I will offer them with no commentary, and allow you to make your own conclusion. 1 - One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason. 2 - The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions. 3 - One's body is inviolable, subject to one's own will alone. 4 - The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own. 5 - Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs. 6 - People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused. 7 - Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.

What if what you think is "the right thing" is Evil?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You like to tell Atheists what they think. Google is not the moral compass of Atheism. And what if Christian's are wrong, and their moral compass is actually evil?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix "fixed morality" would you say Judeo-Christianity is a fixed morality? Should you sacrifice your son to please God or not? Can you eat pork and shellfish or not? Can you own slaves or not? If your daughter is raped, does she have to marry her rapist? Can you wear clothes with mixed fibers? Should you stone people for not honoring the Sabbath? Can you get divorced? Can a woman lead a prayer? Is polygamy okay? Can you use birth control? How many things has organized theistic religion changed stances on in the past 2000 years?

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix "It offers nothing." Correct. As I keep saying, Atheism is not a religion, it is not a philosophy, it is not a worldview, is tells you nothing fundamental about a person, and it offers nothing. It is simply a lack of belief in any god or gods. If you want to look at what influences an Atheist, how they see value, whatever, you need to look deeper into the person. I myself follow The Satanic Temple, which is a non-theist religion that follows 7 core tenets. You can't keep comparing Christians and Atheists, you need to compare Theists and Atheists. You say if you "take away God" but which god is that? I could say that polytheism (like Greek, Egyptian, or Hindu gods) is better than monotheism, as you have more gods trying to keep you moral and a better chance of pleasing one of them than the singular Abrahamic god / triune god. Why aren't you trying to make that argument? If we are looking at big generators of money, which amplifies human nature, look no further than mega churches - the ones which require their parishioners to give a percentage of their money as tithing, the pastors have mansions and private jets, and they don't need to pay taxes.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix: "Do you think they finally cleaned house for good?" Absolutely not, and yeah the legal ramifications are definitely a problem that needs to get better. But we have identified a lot of people, and while formal charges haven't been levied on many of them, they have been ousted and "canceled". The Catholic Church just moves their abusers to a new church somewhere else. Also keep in mind, while Hollywood may be more left-leaning overall, there are still a great number of Christians and Jews. So you trying to make it seem like Atheists are in control of Hollywood and responsible for any issues is presumptuous. "Murder is strictly prohibited by Christianity." Is it? What were all of those Crusades about then? Or the Inquisition? What about all the death in the Bible? What about all the people killed "in the name of God"? As George Carlin says, "the more devout they are, the more they see murder as being negotiable". You are falling into the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, where you can excuse the murder committed by Christians by saying that they weren't "true" Christians, that a Christian could never commit murder as that would no longer make them Christians, etc. How many Christians do you see wishing ill will and death on others in comment sections? Is this applied to other areas, like are you not a true Christian if you get divorced, or if you let a woman make a decision, or if you are a Catholic, or if you eat meat during lent, or if you drink alcohol? https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/killing-are-there-exceptions "Do you have those statistics?" I do not. Do you? How many people are murdered by self-professed Christians? How about Muslims? Would you rather live with a group of Atheists or Muslims? Many people seem to think Islam is a violent religion, condoning murder, yet a 2019 US poll found that more people would vote for a Muslim president than an Atheist one. When looking at the statistics, again, you cannot compare Atheist vs Christians. You would need to compare all Atheists vs all Theists. If you want to get more granular, you would need to compare groups that have shared philosophies, like Christians vs Secular Humanists, or Christians vs followers of The Satanic Temple.

There was a public announcement from the AntiFa Facebook page.

cRaZyTMG comments on Jun 2, 2020:

Imagine an organization that has no sponsors, no leadership, no organization and no platform that has the audacity to demand the very things it appears to be hell bent on destroying. Follow the money.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

Yeah, definitely odd to have no leadership or organization, but someone has ownership of the Facebook page and is making a statement. However, the author does acknowledge that they are making the statement on their own, with no agreement that they speak for the movement as a whole.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix I do. With the recent MeToo movement, we've seen people finally speak up about the sexual misconduct in Hollywood, with people being held accountable. The Catholic Church still hides and protects their abusers, and refuses to let the authorities investigate. And while no sexual assault is acceptable, keep in mind that the Catholic Church does it to children.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix The Catholic Church.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix I do disagree that being Christian is a deterrent to murder.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix a decent amount of the people in Hollywood have good activism, and use their wealth for worthy causes. I wouldn't say Hollywood is any better or any worse than other parts of the world or America. But I am interested in your opinion. Why do you equate Hollywood as people being left to their own devices, implying no moral compass? Do you see Hollywood as being bad?

What if what you think is "the right thing" is Evil?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You like to tell Atheists what they think. Google is not the moral compass of Atheism. And what if Christian's are wrong, and their moral compass is actually evil?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix depending on your coordinates, it also might not be wise to proclaim you are a Christian in public either.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix you are correct, as I said in your other thread, Atheists don't have a unified anything - they only share one thing in common, a lack of belief in a god, and nothing else. Any other commonalities is purely coincidental. While that can be a downfall, it can also be a good thing. If Christianity, as it did for some time, declares that all non-believers should be murdered, then the majority of Christians will go around murdering heretics. An Atheist can try to reason why that is or isn't a good idea, without submitting to the authority of some book and some people taking advantage of it. What is wrong with Hollywood, in your opinion?

What if what you think is "the right thing" is Evil?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You like to tell Atheists what they think. Google is not the moral compass of Atheism. And what if Christian's are wrong, and their moral compass is actually evil?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@Naomi I grew up in a Jewish household, but it was pretty much secular. We only did holidays as an excuse to be with family, and once my grandparents were moved to an assisted-living home, we stopped making a big deal of them. My parents never sent me to Hebrew School, and I never had a Bar Mitzvah. It was pretty typical of a lot of modern Jews, where it is more of a culture and no longer a religion. So, same as you, it was a secular environment. I agree with you, my "moral" standard is also based on reasoning and observation of law, and for the greater good. I align with Libertarianism in many ways, as I believe anything that doesn't impact someone else is perfectly fine, withing reason. For example, I have no problem with what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home. I have no problem with drug use, as long as you don't do something like drive while impaired, which could lead to you harming someone else. I have no problem with people practicing whatever religion they want, as long as they don't try to force it on someone else.

What if what you think is "the right thing" is Evil?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You like to tell Atheists what they think. Google is not the moral compass of Atheism. And what if Christian's are wrong, and their moral compass is actually evil?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix the problem is that being a Christian is usually more descriptive than being an Atheist. What I mean by this is that identifying as a Christian usually comes with other philosophies and practices and worldviews that can be pretty consistent among other Christians, at least of the same sect. Atheism is nothing more than a lack in a belief of a god or gods - there is nothing else Atheists inherently share, no rites or tenets or practices. Being an Atheist tells me only one thing about you, being a Christian usually can tell a lot about you. What if I am gay or trans? Should I want to live with people who don't believe I have a right to exist, and may potentially want to murder me? What if I am not a Christian? Should I want to live with people who think I should be murdered for heresy? What if I am a woman? Should I want to live with people who think I should get married and pregnant ASAP, that I am property, that I cannot speak up, and I should submit to the will of a man? What if I am deathly ill? Should I want to live with people who will just pray for me to be healed, rather than take me to the hospital? What if I am mentally ill? Should I want to live with people who think I am possessed by a demon and try to exorcise me? Like you say, every action is playing the odds. I do not think I have any better odds with either group.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

"I don't have to reveal something that is perfectly obvious." - @SupraLibrix June 2, 2020.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix "The question I get asked by religious people all the time is, without God, what's to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn't have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine. I don't want to do that. Right now, without any god, I don't want to jump across this table and strangle you. I have no desire to strangle you. I have no desire to flip you over and rape you." - Penn Jillette

What if what you think is "the right thing" is Evil?

JacksonNought comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You like to tell Atheists what they think. Google is not the moral compass of Atheism. And what if Christian's are wrong, and their moral compass is actually evil?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix wouldn't you also say Christians are subject to charisma? Look at all the snake-oil salesmen they flock to. And they don't know what to think either. Which version of Christianity is correct? Catholicism? Protestant? Baptist? Unitarian? Unification? 7 Day Adventist? LDS? JW? Christian Scientist? Is the Bible the inerrant word of God, completely literal in ever aspect, or is it allegorical and metaphorical? Was the Earth created in 6 days as we know them? Is the Earth thousands of years old or millions or billions? Do we forgive debts or trespasses? Christians can't seem to make up their minds on what is the right way to worship, and they often need some charismatic preacher living in obscene luxury to tell them what to think and how to behave, based on a book written 2000 years ago. I don't believe in objective evil, but by my standards of evil, most Christians are not. But definitely some are. Just as you will find bad people within any data set.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

MrShittles comments on Jun 2, 2020:

You have yet to reveal in what ways atheist moral compasses are all over the map and why Christian compasses would be any better, in all the arguments I've seen you make. That said, I may have missed some of your arguments because I've only been on this site for about a month. Why are Christian ...

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@MrShittles you won't really get the answer you are looking for. I've been going back and forth with them for a while, and it is all the same. They like to go around and criticize Atheists and make strawman arguments, like their recent "Google is the moral compass of Atheism" post. They think they are an AI and have a fool-proof mathematical equation for morality, and have some sort of "Physix" platform that will fundamentally change the world.

Don't you wish you had a moral compass that told you what was right?

Crikey comments on Jun 2, 2020:

I wish I had a moral compass like Christians do. I'm never sure how to treat my slaves or what to do with captured virgins.

JacksonNought replies on Jun 2, 2020:

@SupraLibrix except when they refuse to follow the law, like preventing a same-sex couple from acquiring a marriage certificate, or murdering abortion doctors, or molesting children, or smuggling in stolen artifacts.

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@Robert100 hmmm, should I respond to your post, even after you left our previous one after I gave you the examples you wanted? I mean I have a life as well, and can't keep arguing with you over and over. You like to mislead and deliberately distort things I have said. My comments are public, I have nothing to hide. Anyone can go see what I have said and see the truth, not your libelous attacks. I didn't bring up Jews here before you came in. I simply cited an ADL study. You were the first to interject and try to discredit the ADL. Can you even refute their points, or cite a study that presents different facts, or do you just dismiss them outright because you don't like them? Here they criticize ANTIFA - I wonder what you think of that? https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/who-are-antifa I don't see everyone against me. Where are these "109" people? I only see three people including you. One of them even blocked me, because they can't stand people who disagree with them. There seem to be enough people on this site that may disagree with you, as you had people report your last thread for anti-Semitism, leading to the Admin poll - I never gave it a second thought. Like I said, my posts are all public and accessible, you can easily see where I criticize Israel. And let me state it again, I am no fan of Israel, and find it perfectly okay to criticize them for any reason whatsoever - even being an ethno-state - as long as the reason isn't just because they are Jewish. I don't care if you want me to "make 5 points" - I have nothing to prove to you, and do not need to meet your arbitrary standards or do your work for you. Once again, you mislead. No, you never mentioned Scalise. But you did call a list of right-wing extremists "lone wolves" and dismiss any data that there was correlation with right-wing ideas. I will concede, I haven't seen you say it specifically, but many people on the right will use this excuse while at the same time saying any violence from the left is all connected and symptomatic of the left. Just because I don't bring something up doesn't mean I am intentionally ignoring it or dismissing it. I already condemned violence on behalf of ANTIFA. I don't see you addressing or condemning call to violence I quoted from the Proud Boys? I don't see what the "Blue Check Mark" has to do with anything? It is literally Twitter saying your account is verified and they know you are who you say you are. It has nothing to do with endorsement. Trump and his family say awful things - they have the check mark. Kellyanne Conway literally lies on the news - she has a check mark. Ben Shaprio says awful things - check mark. Dennis Prager, Steven Crowder, Charlie Kirk, Sean Hannity, Rudy Giuliani, Carmine Sabia, Stefan Molyneux, Mike Cernovich, ...

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@Robert100 wow, I don't even know where to begin. If anyone else is curious, Robert here has a grudge against me because I dared to say anti-Semitism was bad in a previous thread, and that you shouldn't criticize or make baseless accusations against people just because they happen to be Jewish. Never did I say you can't criticize Jewish people for specific things an individual does, nor did I ever say you can't criticize Israel - in fact I criticize Israel plenty myself. Again, accusing me of being troll - I see you're going a step further calling me an "Israeli operative" - is nothing more than a tactic to try and discredit me without actually refuting any of my arguments or providing anything of substance. By the way, Robert, I notice you abandoned our previous conversation after I provided you with specific examples. So you completely dismiss any data because the ADL and SPLC are "far, far, far, far, left" groups, and are no different than Soviet Russia? Well then, I guess there's no point in ever having discussions or trying to provide examples or citations, as you will just dismiss any of my data as being biased from a far-left source - and I suppose I will have to assume all of your data is biased from a far-right source, no different than current-day borderline Christian theocratic Russia. Gotta love your cliche talking point about "lone wolves". Of course when Congressman Scalise was shot by a Bernie supporter at a baseball game, all Bernie supporters and all Democrats were violent thugs who needed to be arrested for treason; but when Cesar Sayoc sent pipe bombs to a number of people critical of Trump, he was just a lone wolf. Of course when an Atheist commits murder, all Atheists are immoral degenerates; but when a Christian commits murder, they are not a "true" Christian and again just a lone wolf. It's always indicative of a larger problem when you disagree with them - it's just a sad individual acting alone with no implications towards anything larger when you do agree with them. It'd be funny if it wasn't so predictable and sad. Oddly I still agree with you on some points. Again, I'm no fan of the methods used by people associated with ANTIFA. I think doxxing, harassing, and bragging about violence is wrong, and I do not deny that people associated are guilty of those actions. Are you trying to say that far-right groups are no guilty of the same? In my post to @MaskedRiderChris (which, let's have a moment to find some common ground, I like your username and was a fan of the Masked Rider show when I was a kid - Ferbus was my favorite) I quoted several examples of the Proud Boys bragging about and encouraging violence and harrasing people. As I have said in many many posts on here: if you blame only one side of a political spectrum for...

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@dd54 oh I'm sorry. Was this not a Slug-created thread asking specifically for opinions? I wasn't aware that only certain opinions were allowed here. Freedom of speech only for thee, hm? I'm sorry, I didn't mean to encroach upon your safe space.

Donald Trump, the Most Unmanly President [theatlantic.com]

liberty11 comments on Jun 1, 2020:

Ok, I clicked on this to see what it was. I am not opposed to have a conversation with progressive ms/ leftist ( whatever you choose to call yourself). My sister is one but she has no idea why. She is a sheeple but I blame it on her own self. She married a man that she submits to his every thought ...

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

Well said, and I fully agree. The people at the top, with the most to gain from division, are the ones trying to vilify and dehumanize the opposing side. We must rise above it, and have civil disagreements and find common ground.

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@MaskedRiderChris ok, so you "suspect" I am a troll. Which is just a nice way to dismiss any position I take as false and intended just to annoy people, so why even consider it as valid. Rather than even give my argument any consideration, you can just question if I am a troll and move on. I try not to be snide or combative, but I am certainly passionate. I wonder if you would consider yourself, or dd54, as combative in your posts as well? I will post on topics I see as misleading, or ones that like to throw a wide net on groups, or ones that peddle conspiracy theories. I get combative when people don't believe that others are deserving of basic human rights; when they just repeat right-wing talking points that all left-wing people are violent and brainwashed and moochers; when people throw out baseless accusations like all protests are funded by Soros, or Gates is a secret Satanist trying to inject baby parts into people, or Michelle Obama is a man, or things of that ilk. To be clear, I am not accusing you of doing this. We can never "dust off" the "very fine people" argument. We have a President who, after seeing a group of people marching with torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us" (and resulting in the death of a counter-protester), said that there were "very fine people" on both sides. I'm sorry, but neo-Nazis are not very fine people, no matter how you spin it. TDS isn't real, it's an easy label to throw on anyone who isn't a Trump loyalist so that you can excuse any of the questionable things he has done. Why bother trying to defend something he said or did, something which would have you foaming at the mouth if Obama did it, when you can just cry TDS and move on as if nothing matters? I'd carefully consider using anything SupraLibrix says. Have you looked at their posts? While I appreciate their defense that I am "bright and engaged", you can see they have a strong bias towards people who are Atheists. They believe they are an AI, they have an error-proof mathematical equation for morality and the meaning of life, and they post on random groups trying to promote their "Physix" platform. And again, I reject the notion that government is a greater authority than the individual, so by their logic, I do not have TDS then. It's also weird to be accused of both supporting ANTIFA (pro-individual, anti authoritarian government) and supporting authoritarian government over individuals. As for my data, if you bothered to look at the article I posted, it is cited in there. This is from the ADL's annual Murder and Extremism report, which is easily accessible from their website. From their 2019 report: "In 2019, domestic extremists killed at least 42 people in the United States in 17 separate incidents. This number makes 2019 the sixth ...

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@dd54 did you even read the article, or did you just see Newsweek and dismiss it because it is "too liberal" for you? How about the fact that between 2009 and 2018, of the 425 deaths related to violent extremism, right-wing extremists were responsible for 73.3 while left-wing extremists were to blame for only 3.2 percent? How about the fact that ANTIFA is amorphous and doesn't have central leadership or organization like other groups. And no, don't even try to BS with your conspiracies about Soros. How about the fact that the US government doesn't have legal authority to label a domestic group terroristic in the same way it designates foreign groups, because domestic groups have First Amendment rights that protect their activities. From the ACLU National Security Project Director, "...terrorism is an inherently political label, easily abused and misused. There is no legal authority for designating a domestic group. Any such designation would raise significant due process and First Amendment concerns." How about the fact that you can be labeled a "hate group" like the KKK or Proud Boys and still have all of your First Amendment rights to speak and assemble and march through the streets with torches and the President will call you "very fine people"? If you are labeled a "terrorist" group, guess what, police power just got a lot more authoritarian. Any protest that can be seen as left-leaning will then be suspected as "ANTIFA" and people can be detained and arrested and charged with terrorism just for peacefully holding up a sign. You have to love the irony of people (especially people like Trump) who will say things like "LIBERATE MINNESOTA" and encourage armed protests over the lockdown claiming the people fed up and using their Constitutional rights to rise up to dangerous authority; but when the people protesting the unjust violence of authority on its citizens are left left-leaning, they are nothing but "thugs" and "terrorists" and can't have any rights and the reporters will be silence and locked up for reporting on the events.

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on Jun 1, 2020:

@MaskedRiderChris, No, I am not a troll. You can't just label people trolls because they don't support your narrative. Can you explain what posts I have made in the past that make me seem even remotely similar to a troll? And as for what @SupraLibrix says - I do not have the made up "TDS" nor do I believe that the government is a greater authority than the individual. This is typical of attempts to discredit or dismiss Atheists, assuming they have no morality because they don't subscribe to the Bible's twisted view of it.

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on May 31, 2020:

@dd54 https://www.newsweek.com/trump-wants-declare-antifa-terrorist-organization-even-though-right-wing-extremists-have-been-1451444

What could go wrong with Trump declaring ANTIFA a terrorist organization?

JacksonNought comments on May 31, 2020:

So... we're just moments away from the KKK, Proud Boys, Incels, Richard Spencer's Alt-Right, and other far-right groups being labeled terrorists too... right?

JacksonNought replies on May 31, 2020:

@dd54 hate groups, but not terrorists. There's a distinction.

Punk Ass Cnn crew goes to jail, camera man sounds like he gonna cry, FUNNY SHIT!!!

JacksonNought comments on May 30, 2020:

Funny how the white CNN reporters were left alone, but the black ones were arrested, even when fully complying with police orders. Yeah, let's laugh at the death of free speech and free press in this country, as we slide further into totalitarianism.

JacksonNought replies on May 31, 2020:

@wutthafuk I hate to be "that guy" but it is a little humorous when someone accuses others of being low intelligence, while also committing spelling errors. Of course with many people using their phones, it can be excused, as typos can be common. So people who believe CNN or mainstream news lack intelligence? Would you also apply that to people who believe Fox News, Daily Wire, OANN, TruNews, Blaze, Townhall, Federalist, etc? Or do you only apply your criticism to those with a different narrative? If Hannity was arrested for reporting at the protests, would you be laughing then? It's laughable that you assume people who agree with you are truly informed and don't just listen to echo-chamber news. I consume all sorts of news - both left-leaning and right-leaning - and I do my own research to see what the truth is outside of bias. I make my own decisions, and come to my own conclusions. Again, the fact that you consider CNN to be treasonous, but not our incompetent and corrupt Commander In Chief, is laughable, and shows your true bias. I frequent many Conservative websites, and comment on them as well. I like seeing all sides. Do you know what I often see there? People commenting that left-leaning people should leave, as they do not want to hear any dissenting opinions. People saying they never ever ever would watch or read something from a left-leaning news outlet. And you think the left-leaning people are in a bubble? As for your video... yeah, you want to talk about bias? I looked up Millie's videos, and they are clear right-wing talking points to a T. It always has to be some deep-state conspiracy or "psyops" doesn't it? Oh, unless of course it fits with your narrative, then it is clearly on the up-and-up, hm? Now, do I disagree that things aren't quite as they seem on the surface? No. I actually agree with you that there are bad actors trying to take advantage of things right now. But again, I will say it is laughable that you think it is only Democrats. There have been recordings of police conspiring to attack and arrest protesters before there was any violence or looting. There has been footage of people, later identified as undercover police officers, breaking windows to instigate a riot and authorize police force. There are accounts of perfectly peaceful protests escalating when police show up in riot gear and fire rubber bullets and tear gas - hmm, you didn't see this kind of police response to the "peaceful" armed and shouting in cops' faces protests in Michigan, did you? There are white supremacists organizing to join protests and cause violence, people from out-of-town coming into hot spots to take advantage of the disarray to loot for themselves. Could there be Democrats among them, trying to start shit to undermine authority and ...

Donald Trump, the Most Unmanly President [theatlantic.com]

SpikeTalon comments on May 31, 2020:

A group for leftwingers, eh? Fair enough, this site should be for all viewpoints, and guess everyone has to have their safe space. Might want to stick to a more substantial group title than "whatever you want to call it". Maybe perhaps Liberal Progressives? Personally, most if not all of the ...

JacksonNought replies on May 31, 2020:

Thanks for spreading the word. Yeah, I wasn't entirely sure what to call it, since people have different definitions of what a Liberal is, and I wanted to welcome anyone who is left-leaning. If I get a fair amount of members, I'll do a poll on what to name the group.

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 31, 2020:

@BlackoutNJ of course, I enjoyed our back and forth.

Punk Ass Cnn crew goes to jail, camera man sounds like he gonna cry, FUNNY SHIT!!!

JacksonNought comments on May 30, 2020:

Funny how the white CNN reporters were left alone, but the black ones were arrested, even when fully complying with police orders. Yeah, let's laugh at the death of free speech and free press in this country, as we slide further into totalitarianism.

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@wutthafuk the irony of your statement is just *chef's kiss* brilliant. You accuse others of being "low intelligence" (gee, it's almost like you have the same great words as our President likes to throw around) and being suckered and playing parts... and at the same time you parrot the narrative that CNN is clearly fake news and should be arrested for treason because they call out the President's bullshit. Go ahead and continue to laugh at the crumbling of our society and the degradation of our rights. Hopefully you open your eyes when it is finally you who is impacted.

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@BlackoutNJ I wasn't necessarily endorsing the quote I used, just thought it was an interesting perspective that not many people consider. I still do not support the rioting and destruction. Yes, there are a ton of people rioting, so one or two or several rouge cops causing destruction isn't really an excuse - but it definitely can be a catalyst to escalate. If undercover agents are in the midst, trying to encourage destruction and looting, and then allowing the riot cops to justify using violence, it can all reach a dangerous boiling point. I by no means excuse the rioting based on this, but I definitely think there is more to the story than what may be just gleamed on the surface or what is being reported by the media. And then it gives ignorant people the excuse to say racist things and try to condemn and entire race because they think no white people riot or loot ever. And yes, you are right, there are outside people taking advantage of the looting - both black and white. It is very unfortunate that people are taking advantage of this out of greed and personal gain, helping to drown out the actual issue.

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@BlackoutNJ no, there is no justification for the rioting and destruction happening right now. Though from accounts I have seen, the protests started off peaceful until police fired rubber bullets and tear gas to break them up. I've seen undercover police officers smashing windows to incite rioting. I've seen right wing news outlets continually demonize all attempts at peaceful protest in the past, such as kneeling or wearing shirts or holding up signs - at a point, when your voice is constantly ignored and drowned out, you start getting frustrated. Here is an interesting take I read yesterday: “Remember the whole 'tea party' thing. The actual one, not the movement from a few years back... ...it comes down to 'he who can destroy a thing controls a thing.' When people feel like they are not safe in their own lives, then they will lash out and destroy what they can as a control mechanism... ...it's still a control mechanism. It's taking something. Anything, back to feel like you somehow have control over some aspect of your life. It's just as much a physical manifestation of control as something like compulsive theft or anorexia is. 'I can’t control X thing, but I can control what I eat, destroy or steal.' Protesting/riots/looting/theft it’s all a manifestation of the feeling that you are not safe in your own neighborhood. These are not people thinking about their actions. These are people *reacting* to being scared. And you can’t expect rational thought from people who are scared and feel threatened. You’re looking at it from a safe distance. But this is one of those situations where the context of the action matters if you are going to fully understand it and it definitely matters if you are going to pass judgement on it.”

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@dd54 ignorant comment. Blame everything on "SJW" and assume everything is the fault of left-leaning people to destroy the comment, while assuming right-leaning Conservatives are all angels.

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@BlackoutNJ maybe selective outrage isn't the best descriptor for it, but it's dismissive of the problem at hand by trying to make it about something else, or saying there is something larger to focus on. We could tell people fed up with the lockdown that there was already rampant poverty and starvation going, so who cares about their complaints because there is a much bigger problem at hand. As I said, it is different when people in positions of authority are abusing their power. And it is different when time and time again we see police do everything in their power to restrain themselves and handle encounters peacefully with armed white men posing a threat, but when the perpetrator is black they will show unrestrained force and violence even when the perp isn't subdued and not resisting. It also always seems like the whole "black on black" crime talking point is only ever brought up when complaints about police violence come up. It always comes across as something like "why are you complaining about issues X when issue Y exists?" and it seems like it is only brought up to dismiss the issue at hand. I don't see why we can't worry about both.

Protesters (paid $oro$ thugs?

JacksonNought comments on May 30, 2020:

Paid Soros thugs, eh? Your fantasies about a shadowy manipulative Jew controlling everything you are against is laughable. I wonder if you ever think that wealthy Conservatives pay protesters for their own gains, or is it limited to Liberals? You know there is video evidence of undercover cops ...

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@warminster100 go ahead and block me? Do you think I care? Do you need a safe space away from dissenting voices?

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 30, 2020:

@BlackoutNJ does it matter how many times black people are killed by other black people? You also understand there is a fundamental difference between criminals committing gruesome murders, and police officers - who should be protecting us - committing blatant murder while on duty? Your own outrage is selective, as you seem to try and discuss this pattern of police corruption just because criminals kill each other.

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

I guess Trump's will be banned from Twitter then, since they don't need the liability of his tweets.

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

@Leroy_Dumonde what would you consider moral degeneracy? I'd classify Trump's tweets that way.

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

AdoptedTerror comments on May 28, 2020:

USA VoterID woud fix all this, too many examples of Fraud in the existing system. Open it up for all USA? what a joke... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/24/28_million_mail-in_ballots_went_missing_in_last_four_elections_143033.html ...

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

@AdoptedTerror did you read the article? First, the voter ID laws can be more strict than other IDs, allowing someone to have an ID adequate to cash checks but not vote. Second, you don't need a government issued photo ID for SNAP. Third, not all states have the same ID regulations - I live in PA, and while "Real ID" is on the horizon, we still can have IDs and drivers licenses without full names or the "Real ID" classification. Fourth, what about those whose IDs have expired, and they are unable to find the time to go get a new one? I never said I don't support voter ID - I simply said we should ensure that everyone can get an ID. Where do you have a problem with that? Care to comment on making Election Day a holiday?

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

This says it all. There are also videos of the looting in Minnesota - plenty of white people participating in it.

It's NBC, can't say that I'm surprised.

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

Color is only skin deep. But a certain group of people are the most represented in jails, and responsible for a percentage of crimes in society that far outnumber their per capita population!

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

Christians?

Chaotic explosion in Minneapolis sees the attack of a knife wielding woman in a wheelchair- ...

angelo comments on May 29, 2020:

I'm by no means excusing what that cop did to that man, the race/color of the victim or perpetrator has nothing to do with it. But I'm still wondering had the dead guy been white and the cop was African American, would the media still be in rupture?

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

Unfortunately, the race of the victim has everything to do with it. Time and time again we see black men (and children, don't forget Tamir Rice) killed, while white men are given the benefit of the doubt and rarely killed. Look at the videos of the Michigan Capitol, where rioters wearing tactical gear and brandishing long arms were storming the building and getting in the faces of the cops, screaming at them. Did anything happen? Earlier this month a white man named Anthony Trifiletti, a supposed white supremacist, murdered a black man over a road incident. He was brought in unharmed. Earlier this year, a white man named Benjamin Murdy fired on the police in a standoff. The police were familiar with the man from previous issues, and knew he had threatened to kill cops before. They never fired a shot on him, and he was taking into custody unharmed. How about when Cliven Bundy had an armed standoff with the federal government? He was considered a domestic terrorist at that point. The feds never shot on him, it was resolved peacefully. I could go on and on about well known incidents where white people posed threats, and yet the cops were calm and collected and the people were arrested and taken into custody with no violence. Then you have issues like George Floyd. The video clearly shows he was not resisting arrest in any way, and yet the cop was kneeling on his neck. Whether Floyd was a model citizen has nothing to do with it. What about innocent until proven guilty? What about Ahmaud Arbery? Whether he was trespassing is again besides the point - did a it give the McMichaels a right to approach him with guns? What about Botham Jean? A police officer entered his apartment and shot him, claiming she thought it was her apartment and he was a burglar. So you can't be safe in your own home anymore? What about Breonna Taylor? She was sleeping in her home when police stormed in with a search warrant, despite the suspect they were after having been arrested earlier. Her boyfriend thought people were breaking in to rob or kill them, and defended himself, as was his right - and the police killed the sleeping Taylor. So you can't be safe in your own home anymore? What about Atatiana Jefferson? She was also killed in her own home when police saw her look out her window (she saw strange men approaching her house) and thought she was a threat, and they killed her. So you can't be safe in your own home anymore? What about Philando Castile, who identified himself as a legal gun owner during a traffic stop, and the cop freaked out. Castile assured him over and over he was not reaching for his gun, as did his girlfriend and daughter in the car with him, and the cop shot him anyway. I could go on and on about well known incidents of black men and women ...

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

I guess Trump's will be banned from Twitter then, since they don't need the liability of his tweets.

JacksonNought replies on May 29, 2020:

@Leroy_Dumonde I do not think they censored him. Censoring would be removing his tweet. They added a fact check label. Hell, just now they also added a label about him glorifying violence (against their TOS), but specifically left the tweet up because it may be in the public's interest to see it. As many misunderstand, the right to free speech applies to government action - the government can't lock you up for your speech. You do not, however, have a right to use a social media platform. Twitter makes their own rules, and if you do no follow them, they can stop you. Let me ask you, when it was discovered that ISIS terrorist cells were using Twitter to communicate and plan attacks, were you fine with this? Did you say Twitter better not censor them or ban them from the platform?

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

AdoptedTerror comments on May 28, 2020:

USA VoterID woud fix all this, too many examples of Fraud in the existing system. Open it up for all USA? what a joke... https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/04/24/28_million_mail-in_ballots_went_missing_in_last_four_elections_143033.html ...

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

There certainly are examples of fraud. Voter ID is perfectly acceptable, as long as there are proper methods in place for people to get the IDs. Studies have shown that there are significant barriers for some in getting IDs. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html We also need to 100% make Election Day a federal holiday, or allow for a multi-day span to allow people to go to the polls without worrying about losing their next rent or food payment, or who will watch their kids.

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

drptree comments on May 28, 2020:

I disagree with you 1000% you are delusional.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

Well you seem stable...

Twitter Was Warned!! Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability ...

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

I guess Trump's will be banned from Twitter then, since they don't need the liability of his tweets.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

@drptree they can be liable for hosting his hurtful accusations about Lori Klausutis' death. The widower is pleading for him to stop. He can sue Twitter for letting Trump tweet about it, if their protection is removed. So they should ban him to prevent being sued. How about a tweet like "The president of the pathetic Club For Growth came to my office in N.Y.C. and asked for a ridiculous $1,000,000 contribution. I said no way!" Which was said to be false. Again, they can be sued for allowing libel. How about a tweet like "Nancy Pelosi, a month later, was in Chinatown in San Francisco. She’s dancing in the streets of Chinatown, trying to say, 'It’s okay to come to the United States. It’s fine. It’s wonderful. Come on in. Bring your infection with you.' And then she said, 'He should have done it earlier' — about me. And she’s dancing a month later. These people are sick." Again, can be sued for libel. How about when he re-tweeted a video yesterday where someone was saying the only good Democrat is a dead Democrat? What if someone goes and tries to kill a Democrat? Again, Twitter can be held accountable if they are now responsible for all of their content. There's his phony claim about mail-in voter fraud. Yet he was fine mailing in his ballot, same with his new Press Secretary. That's what led to the fact check label. You say his tweets are factual. I disagree. Twitter would want to protect themselves by playing it safe.

ok, so youtube took this video down since it "violates community guidelines".

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

While the title of the page seems correct, no video is displayed. "Sorry, we couldn't find that page"

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

Found it. The link should be https://vimeo.com/423747309

Biden gets confused again in his basement: mixes up D Day with Pearl Harbor Day- [redstate.com]

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

Hey, remember when Trump messed up the date of 9/11? Perhaps when trying to take down a candidate, don't use examples also exhibited by their opponent.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

@SpikeTalon I looked into Jo, and I definitely like her policies. It is unfortunate, however, that the current setup means she is doomed from the start. Until the major news networks allow for a third party candidate to participate in the presidential debates, there will never be any real chance.

Biden gets confused again in his basement: mixes up D Day with Pearl Harbor Day- [redstate.com]

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

Hey, remember when Trump messed up the date of 9/11? Perhaps when trying to take down a candidate, don't use examples also exhibited by their opponent.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

@SpikeTalon fair point, it just seems these days that many on this platform parrot the Trump narrative. I am in full agreement that the two-party system is terrible, and no one free of the influence of oligarchs can ever make it to the highest office.

Biden gets confused again in his basement: mixes up D Day with Pearl Harbor Day- [redstate.com]

JacksonNought comments on May 28, 2020:

Hey, remember when Trump messed up the date of 9/11? Perhaps when trying to take down a candidate, don't use examples also exhibited by their opponent.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

@SpikeTalon correct, the article had nothing to do with Trump. What I am saying is, there has been a recent torrent of criticism of Biden when it comes to his gaffes, claiming he has dementia and is unfit to run for President. Yet the same people looking for any excuse to criticize Biden never seem to care when Trump does the same thing. As I said originally, be careful when your candidate has the exact same issues you attempt to use against the opposing candidate. Both Biden and Trump have mental deficiencies, both have been accused of sexual assault, both are guilty of nepotism, both have said racist things, etc.

Mandatory masks aren't about safety, they're about social control- [thefederalist.com]

73jazzbass comments on May 27, 2020:

Scary. Very scary. It’s beyond the scope of my understanding why so many people are afraid of this virus but not afraid of their government.

JacksonNought replies on May 28, 2020:

@Dmwils not fear Trump. You know that. Fear of a dangerous migrant caravan invasion, that mysteriously went away after mid-terms. Fear of people stealing your guns away. Fear of the country becoming less Christian, less white, less conservative. A war on Christmas. Deep-state conspiracies of secret Satanists trying to traffic your children. Fear of the virus being a hoax, brought on by 5G, so that Bill Gates can inject baby parts into you and euthanize half the world. Yeah, those last two weren't Trump specifically. But that is the kind of fear-mongering I mean.

Mandatory masks aren't about safety, they're about social control- [thefederalist.com]

73jazzbass comments on May 27, 2020:

Scary. Very scary. It’s beyond the scope of my understanding why so many people are afraid of this virus but not afraid of their government.

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

@Dmwils Is that why the current President constantly fear-mongers?

Mandatory masks aren't about safety, they're about social control- [thefederalist.com]

maxmaccc comments on May 27, 2020:

Americans dead from Covid19 just past 100K. How many is too many?

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

@SpikeTalon as is commonly misunderstood, the mask (if not an N95 mask) is more for the protection of others. Droplets from your mouth will be mostly caught by the mask, decreasing the risk of spreading the virus to others. And you can have the virus and spread it while not realizing you have it. Hence why it is seen as common courtesy for everyone to wear a mask in public.

Mandatory masks aren't about safety, they're about social control- [thefederalist.com]

73jazzbass comments on May 27, 2020:

Scary. Very scary. It’s beyond the scope of my understanding why so many people are afraid of this virus but not afraid of their government.

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

Why can't you be afraid of both?

Donald Trump, the Most Unmanly President [theatlantic.com]

iThink comments on May 27, 2020:

In your group description you complain about disparaging dialogue against the leftists and your very first post opens with a very personal attack against Trump. See the contradiction? Besides that Obama was a very effeminate acting president himself.

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

Well, to be clear, I said this group is for the opposite of the Trump narrative. Also, this isn't really even a personal attack against Trump. It doesn't take a stance against Trump, or claim that his "unmanly" actions are negative, or really even categorize his actions as "unmanly". It simply states that by the criteria many of his followers use to describe "manliness" he doesn't fit. It is more of a critique and question of the hypocrisy of many of his supporters.

"Shouldn’t America just hurry up and pass a Constitutional Amendment saying no white woman can ...

johnlondon comments on May 26, 2020:

We have already legalized prositution, it's called single bars. And abortions are single bar birth control. Then they scream MEEEEETOOOOOOOO

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

Wrong.

Donald Trump, the Most Unmanly President [theatlantic.com]

johnlondon comments on May 27, 2020:

So full of BS psychobabble almost unreadable!!!! In a nut shell it should read : Trump and his followers are not girly men and I resent it.....girly men are the wave of the future as nothing can make America more weak.....

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

"...almost unreadable..." so you clearly didn't read it. The whole point is that Trump IS a "girly man" as far as his followers would define it. From the article: "Trump behaves in ways that many working-class men would ridicule: 'He wears bronzer, loves gold and gossip, is obsessed with his physical appearance, whines constantly, can't control his emotions, watches daytime television, enjoys parades and interior decorating, and used to sell perfume.'" And those are only some of the examples.

Today (Wednesday) we discuss the new snitch based 'Karen Culture’ that has become dominant during ...

MaskedRiderChris comments on May 27, 2020:

Heh, makes me wonder why I've not been ratted out yet for popping into my local supermarket down the street from me on the regular--GASP--not wearing a mask. Then again, the employees seem to get it and I've not heard a word from them about it yet, and I imagine that if someone tried ratting me out,...

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

I wonder if the supermarket has a policy on wearing masks. If you are willfully disregarding their policy, don't be surprised if you are eventually asked to leave or prevented from entering. It's no different than if you walked into a store with a "no shirt" policy while not wearing a shirt, or open carried in a store that banned guns. It doesn't matter whether the masks actually help or not. It doesn't matter whether people choose to wear or not wear them them because of a political statement, fear of transmission, courtesy, whatever. All that really matters in that case is whether the store has a policy and if you are breaking it. Some people complain that regulations to wear masks are akin to slavery and taking away Constitutional rights. There are a ton of regulations around nudity in the US - some states and cities ban public nudity, some ban women from being topless, etc. Why don't these same people complain that people (mostly women) are having their Constitutional rights taken away by being forced to wear clothes under penalty?

A few days ago, a member posted the following graphic which contains anti-Semitic and other ...

Edgework comments on May 26, 2020:

I don’t see the anti-semitism, other than a couple of references to an unidentified “them” and “they,” but that could just as easily refer to the deep state. I have to agree with what seems to be the consensus here: offensive speech is still free speech. I’d welcome a post by a rabid ...

JacksonNought replies on May 27, 2020:

@Leroy_Dumonde what exactly is the JQ?

A few days ago, a member posted the following graphic which contains anti-Semitic and other ...

Edgework comments on May 26, 2020:

I don’t see the anti-semitism, other than a couple of references to an unidentified “them” and “they,” but that could just as easily refer to the deep state. I have to agree with what seems to be the consensus here: offensive speech is still free speech. I’d welcome a post by a rabid ...

JacksonNought replies on May 26, 2020:

Agreed. I don't know what is going on, whether some YouTubers are promoting the site now, but there have been a lot of new members lately, and the homepage feed is flooded with non-stop memes now. It is hard to find the actual posts of substance anymore.

"Shouldn’t America just hurry up and pass a Constitutional Amendment saying no white woman can ...

johnlondon comments on May 26, 2020:

Yes, Steve, How about an amendment that all whites worldwide are responsible for the black pimps that run the majority of ho's in America?

JacksonNought replies on May 26, 2020:

Let's legalize prostitution. Problem solved.

Vaccines are great, if you want to be a remote controlled cyborg.

MrShittles comments on May 26, 2020:

I think if a God exists, the thought process was more like this: "I gave humanity the tools to fix the world. If they don't, they'll experience their own punishment." That's what history has shown anyway. _________________________________________________________ I heard this story told of ...

JacksonNought replies on May 26, 2020:

Agree completely. If you use the logic of the meme, why wear glasses? God is clearly making your vision blurry for a reason. Why get surgery? Why run away from gun fire? Why do anything, if God can save you and made it so you can survive anything you should? Why not all be Christian Scientists, and pray away all ailments.

A few days ago, a member posted the following graphic which contains anti-Semitic and other ...

ForeverFree76 comments on May 26, 2020:

It’s a blurry meme, but could you point out where it’s anti-Semitic? The Hitler-Gates picture? That’s not anti-Semitic at all. That supports the idea that Gates wants to eliminate people based on the Third Reich ideals, which I find to be factual.

JacksonNought replies on May 26, 2020:

I absolutely do not agree that Gates wants to eliminate people or that there is any factual basis to him using Third Reich ideals, but I do agree it isn't anti-Semitic.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 21, 2020:

@Robert100 finally, you want some examples? Here you go. Rick Wiles of TruNews openly called the Trump impeachment a "Jew coup" planned by a "Jewish cabal." He and his network have been outspoken with anti-Jewish sentiment. Yet despite this, the White House awarded them formal press credentials to attend the World Economic Forum earlier this year. Rep. Ilhan Omar has been widely accused of being anti-Semitic, and is an open supporter of the anti-Israel BDS movement. She hasn't been removed from office or subjected to any ethics investigations. Speaking of elected representatives, you have Steve Scalise, who in 2002 attended a white supremacist convention founded by notorious KKK leader and Holocaust-denier David Duke. You have Matt Gaetz, who invited Holocaust-denier Chuck Johnson to be his guest to the State of the Union, and peddles conspiracy theories about George Soros (a popular conspiracy target for anti-Semites who like to claim he is the invisible hand who controls everything they disagree with) funding the "migrant caravan". You have Steve King, who is a proud white nationalist and anti-Semite, and has re-tweeted Neo-Nazis. You have Paul Gosar, who claimed the 2017 Charlottesville "unite the right" rally, in which Neo-Nazis marched and chanted "Jews will not replace us", was in fact funded by "the left" in an attempt to smear "the right". All of these representatives are still in office, and still hold power. Speaking of Charlottesville, how about President Trump, probably the most powerful man in the world right now, claiming that Neo-Nazis were "very fine people"? Leaked emails have shown Trump's senior adviser, Stephen Miller, to be a white nationalist and anti-Semite. He is still in his role, and has faced no repercussions. One of his former advisors, Steve Bannon, was also a noted white nationalist - he never faced issues due to this, and was only removed for unrelated reasons. You don't think Christians hold all the power in this country? A 2020 poll shows that half of Americans want the Bible to influence US law. In America, it is "tradition" to swear oaths on the Bible. Many government officials will swear their oaths on the Bible. Recently, Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema decided to swear her oath of office on a US law book, not the Bible. You should have seen the hate she got for that, saying she should be disqualified and kicked out of office immediately. You also have the phrases "so help me god" or "under god" in many official oaths, such as to enter the military or apply for citizenship, and any attempts to remove them (because not everyone believes in a god) have been struck down by influential Christian lawmakers who want to force their god into official language and law. Ever hear of Project Blitz? They have ...

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 21, 2020:

@Robert100 now let's discuss your ask. You want me to identify a Christian group which openly declares that they "Hate all Non Christians in America" - does this imply that the Jewish groups you identify are openly hating on non-Jewish people? Are there groups you are calling out who openly hate all Christians? The ADL is strictly against anti-Semitism and prejudice. They make no claim towards hate of any non-Jewish groups. The SPLC is strictly a group which identifies rhetoric, positions, and actions which are deemed hateful and prejudiced. Do they label some Christian groups as hate groups? Sure. But they also classify "Black Separatists" as a hate category, and identify the New Black Panther Party as a hate group. They identify Jewish groups as hate groups as well, such as the Jewish Defense League and the Jewish Task Force. They are not openly hating on Christian groups. Here is a statement on their website: "A major misconception – one that is deliberately promoted by anti-LGBTQ hate groups in order to accuse the SPLC of being 'anti-Christian' – is that the SPLC considers opposition to same-sex marriage or the belief that being LGBTQ+ is a sin as the sole basis for the hate group label. This is false. There are many organizations, such as Focus on the Family, and hundreds of churches and other religious establishments that oppose marriage equality or oppose being LGBTQ+ on strictly Biblical grounds that the SPLC does not list as hate groups." You are asking me to provide support for my position using criteria that you yourself are not providing. You are trying to judge my position in a way you are not willing to be judged. "Being a majority means nothing if you have no power, money or organization." Are you honestly saying that there aren't powerful Christian groups out there with power, money, and organization? To say they do not exist is laughable.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 21, 2020:

@Robert100, first off, let's once again discuss the balance of power in America. Comments which "punch up" at groups in power are generally seen as more acceptable than comments which "punch down" at groups notoriously subjugated and prejudiced against. This also applies to celebrations of this subjugated status, taking pride and trying to overcome a history of hatred. This is why you will have black-centric TV channels and magazines, but no white-only TV or magazines. This is why you have LGBT Pride events, but no straight pride events. This is why you have the Bechdel test or the term "fridging" when it comes to women's representation in media, but nothing to discuss the depiction of men in media. This is why it is generally frowned upon to make derogatory comments about Jewish people, but there is less outrage when criticizing Christianity. Cis straight white Christians, mostly males, are the ruling class in America and hold the overwhelming majority of power. This is why you can call someone "white trash" and no one bats an eye, but say the N word when you are not black and it is an issue - only one of these terms has the weight of a history of violence behind it. These groups have been enslaved, segregated, executed, and deprived of human rights, so there is more outrage when the people with the most power and protection in the country feed into the systematic prejudice against these subjugated groups.

America is a Christian nation.

JacksonNought comments on May 19, 2020:

America is not a "Christian Nation" nor were all of the Founders Christians - it is a nation found on Freedom of (and from) Religion where all religious viewpoints are to be treated equally and given equal accommodation. "Good news is that there are hundreds of thousands of young people flocking ...

JacksonNought replies on May 21, 2020:

@RobBlair you may be correct, though I wonder why it still took a supposed "Christian Nation" almost 100 years before abolishing slavery.

One of the greatest mysteries of our time.

JacksonNought comments on May 20, 2020:

When people believe in "TDS" and that no one has been unjustly criticized more than Trump, and that he is the most honest person and people still trust him...

JacksonNought replies on May 21, 2020:

@Haraldson I don't disagree. Just find it silly that the majority of people screaming "TDS" at any criticism whatsoever are the same people who had no problem criticizing Obama for every little thing.

America is a Christian nation.

JacksonNought comments on May 19, 2020:

America is not a "Christian Nation" nor were all of the Founders Christians - it is a nation found on Freedom of (and from) Religion where all religious viewpoints are to be treated equally and given equal accommodation. "Good news is that there are hundreds of thousands of young people flocking ...

JacksonNought replies on May 20, 2020:

@RobBlair "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" still very much only applied to white men when the Constitution was written. If you want to claim it was inspired by Christianity, then you also have to admit that Christianity was perfectly fine with owning slaves, treating people as 3/5ths of a human, and subjugating women as property. And does that really speak to true liberty? I agree that the First Amendment says the government is not the final authority; however, this does not equal that there is a higher power, much less an intelligent higher power. It can also be argued that the government does have final authority, as they can outlaw certain types of speech (threats, libel, slander) or legalize what you may consider to be immoral based on this supposed higher power (homosexuality, gambling, alcohol). There were plenty of moral systems in place pre-Christianity. There was the Code of Hammurabi, Socrates' Euthyphro dilemma, Plato's Republic, etc. And if we are using Christianity as the main source of the Constitution, then why are there so many things that contradict the teachings of the Bible? And can we definitively say that things would not have happened in a similar manner, or perhaps even a better manner, if there was a different religion in its place, or no religion? It's all speculative. I do agree, we are not inherently good. But I also do not think that doing nice things because you are afraid of punishment or expecting a reward makes you good either - so most Christians are not good people, and I do not think Christianity in general is good.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 20, 2020:

@Andyman well first, I would say that Jewish people are white people. No different than how Italians are white, Russians are white, Irish are white, Germans are white, etc. Second, I guess I would have to come back with, I recognize certain groups that seem united in their own hatred for non-white people and for non-Christians. Christians are very open in their hatred for anyone who doesn't subscribe to their very specific viewpoints, and they do it without fear because they are the majority in the US and hold the power, and have no consequences (even if they claim persecution all the time). Christians most definitely have a superiority complex, and use their influence to try and shape the laws of the US and turn it into a Christian Theocracy. I don't see how any reasonable person can deny that there is a network of Christians that help each other get ahead, but anyone who notices is labeled as "anti-First Amendment" or "anti-Freedom" or "anti-American" for daring to call into question the blatant Christian favoritism in the country.

America is a Christian nation.

JacksonNought comments on May 19, 2020:

America is not a "Christian Nation" nor were all of the Founders Christians - it is a nation found on Freedom of (and from) Religion where all religious viewpoints are to be treated equally and given equal accommodation. "Good news is that there are hundreds of thousands of young people flocking ...

JacksonNought replies on May 20, 2020:

@RobBlair Christianity didn't invent the idea of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", and the Constitution was not influenced solely from the Bible and Christianity. It is interesting that the Ten Commandments states "no other gods before me" yet the Constitution specifically throws that out the window with the First Amendment. Personally, I think Christianity and other such religions held us back in some areas, especially science. Now, I do not deny the positive effects that Christianity had on the world, or other religions. I am sure they helped shape society in good ways. However, you do not need religion to come to rational ideas of "morality". Penn Jillette says, "the question I get asked by religious people all the time is, without God, what's to stop me from raping all I want? And my answer is: I do rape all I want. And the amount I want is zero. And I do murder all I want, and the amount I want is zero. The fact that these people think that if they didn't have this person watching over them that they would go on killing, raping rampages is the most self-damning thing I can imagine." So, basically, if the only reason you aren't killing and raping is because you are afraid of eternal punishment, and you are promised a reward if you don't, perhaps you aren't inherently a "good" person? To say the issues with Communist China are due to non-Christianity, or non-religion, is incorrect. You can look at other countries with terrible policies and human rights issues, and you can see a lot of them are theocracies. Uganda is a borderline Christian theocracy, and passed a bill to "kill the gays". On the other hand you can look at other countries which are majority secular, such as Japan and Sweden, and see that they are democracies with good policy and human rights. You cannot blanket state that all religious countries are good, and all secular ones are bad, or all Christian countries are good. As for your Supreme Court comment, again you can be perfectly "moral" and rational, and understand the law, without needing to believe in or fear any afterlife.

America is a Christian nation.

JacksonNought comments on May 19, 2020:

America is not a "Christian Nation" nor were all of the Founders Christians - it is a nation found on Freedom of (and from) Religion where all religious viewpoints are to be treated equally and given equal accommodation. "Good news is that there are hundreds of thousands of young people flocking ...

JacksonNought replies on May 20, 2020:

@dmatic again America is not a Christian nation. And the Constitution guarantees Freedom of Religion. To want America to become a Christian nation is anti-American.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 20, 2020:

@Andyman I guess you also missed where I did indeed criticize Jews? I have ire for any crazy fundamentalist religion, whether that involves Christianity, Islam, Judaism, whatever. I am no fan of the extremely racist, misogynistic, anti-science Orthodox Jewish communities that exist in New York, who are currently disregarding quarantine safety regulations. I am no fan of the Jewish sects who still have Rabbis suck on a baby penis during a circumcision. I am no fan of blind support for Israel. Am I hypersensitive about criticism of Judaism? Absolutely not. The interesting thing about Jews is that it is both a religion and an ethnicity. You want to criticize the religion, be my guest. I am an Atheist, and see issues with all religions. Just don't think your Christianity is free from criticism, or is any better than any others. The country was indeed settled by fanatical Christians. Are you saying it wasn't? It seems to me that you are hypersensitive about criticism of Christianity? Again, being Jewish is an interesting case where it can describe both a religion and an ethnicity. As I said, I am a stalwart Atheist, but I am ethnically Jewish. This is no different than being a Christian who is Irish, or a Buddhist who is Chinese. Religion is a choice, ethnicity is not. Where I take issue is with your attack on the ethnic part - which is what this all really boils down to. The majority of people who attack Jews couldn't care less about their religion, and even if they converted to Christianity or were Atheists or whatever - they are still ethnically Jewish, and therefore are still deserving of hatred in their eyes. Why else in the original post do you have people bringing up ancestry? Someone called out Sean Penn because his paternal grandparents were Jewish, even though his mother was Irish Catholic and he was Agnostic as a child. They call out Judd Apatow, admitting he is non-religious but ethnically Jewish, so that is enough to call him out. In fact, a good amount of Jews in Hollywood are non-religious, so again this is hatred seems to always be about the ethnic part, which as I previously said, the original thread used to try and "other" people are label them as foreign influence and not true Americans. @Robert100 seemed to compare them to the devil even. I will go right out and ask. Do you hate Jewish people? I'm all for Freedom of Speech and Opinion, so if you do, that is fine, it is your right to feel that way. But I am also in my rights to call it out and argue against it. Look at the new post here, from Slugo, who clearly hates Jewish people.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 19, 2020:

@Andyman did you miss where I said I myself am critical of Israel, and I have no issue with people being critical of Israel for any reason other than just "they are Jewish"? Go ahead and criticize Israel all you want - the fact that they are an ethno-state, that they are guilty of human rights abuses with Palestinians, etc. Just don't attack them simply for the fact that they are Jewish, and you might not like Jews. Yes, the US was originally settled by fanatical Christians, running from the tyrannical Christianity of Europe, but still imposing their own tyrannical Christianity. Yes, they definitely would have scoffed at "multiculturalism" and "diversity" - they were the type to ban music, ban Christmas celebrations, and burn supposed witches. They probably wouldn't approve of the current state of Christianity in America any more than non-Christian religions or cultures, and certainly wouldn't approve of free speech. The US was founded (Founding Fathers) by majority Christians, yes, but there were also free-thinkers and diests. They specifically ensured there could be multiculturalism and diversity, by specifically leaving any gods out of the Constitution, and allowing for Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion. Sure, they were flawed, and had slaves, and they probably weren't necessarily thinking that non-whites and women and non-traditional people would have the same rights. But then again, they probably didn't think people would be walking around with the crazy advanced guns we have today. It really doesn't matter what they thought, they still granted us these Constitutional rights. You think Jews are pushing multiculturalism and diversity? There are strict Orthodox groups in New York who are as crazy as fundamentalist Christian Americans with their anti-vaxx stance and desire to discriminate. And what is your problem with diversity really? Do you wish America was all cis straight white Christians? And does it matter if the there are rich Jewish people out there with control of media or banking? You realize we have never had a Jewish president or VP?

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 18, 2020:

@Robert100, the Oscars So White criticism came out in 2015, when all acting category nominations were white people. Coincidentally, none of the acting nominations were Jewish. While I am certainly not accusing you, I think that 9 times out of 10 when people complain and try to piggy back off of a complaint / trend like this, whether that is saying Oscars are "so Jewish" or that "all lives" matter, it isn't really meant to ask a real concerning question or bring up hypocrisy or injustice. Most of the time it is an excuse to lessen and bury the injustice felt by the original party, and to try to use their prejudice to make themselves the victim. Are their a lot of Jewish people in Hollywood, and do a fair amount win Oscars? Sure. Does that change the complaint of people of color criticizing being shut out of the Oscars? Also, here is a list of Jewish Oscar noms / winners. Doesn't really look like it is significant more than non-Jews. Finally, the problem a lot of people have with "Oscars So Jewish" is because it is similar to if you said "Oscars So Black" or "Oscars So Female" - you are taking a marginalized group (specifically in the USA, anyone not cis straight white Christian males) and trying to further marginalize them. It is no different than complaining that you need a Straight Pride parade.

When is someone expressing anti-Semitism?

JacksonNought comments on May 18, 2020:

I saw the original post. Seeing that it was on the RamZPaul group, I ignored it, because that seems to be a group for people who have a white nationalist / anti-Semitic slant. I have no need to be in that group, and respect their free speech, so I moved along. But yes, the original post does seem...

JacksonNought replies on May 18, 2020:

@Andyman could you please provide this "hard to dispute" evidence that media and pop culture is controlled by Jews? Remember that eerie video a couple years ago of all those local news stations reciting the exact same script? That was due to control from Sinclair Broadcast Group, a Christian-run group. Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch, a Christian. How much influence do you think Koch Industries has, again Christians. Look at the Green family, ultra-Christian owners of Hobby Lobby, who were able to influence US policy with their insurance exemptions. The CEO of Google is Sundar Pichai, a Hindu. The *only* attacks you've seen on Jews is from African Americans in NY? Are you serious?

Point taken. 😂

JacksonNought comments on May 15, 2020:

Not that you actually wanted an answer, but the molecules that carry odors are significantly smaller than other molecules. This is why you can wash your hands vigorously after touching garlic, but they still smell - the garlic itself has been washed off, but the odor molecules remain. Odor molecules...

JacksonNought replies on May 15, 2020:

That's due to a specific acid found in asparagus, which is broken down into sulfuric chemicals that come out when you urinate.

Why is that???

JacksonNought comments on May 12, 2020:

Mitch McConnell literally said "I don't think we have yet felt the urgency of acting immediately" when it came to another round of stimulus, which the Democrats are trying to support. The Republicans are blocking efforts to help.

JacksonNought replies on May 12, 2020:

Food for thought

Free thinkers ❤️

JacksonNought comments on May 11, 2020:

I already have a chip in my hand, and there are a lot of cool things I do with it.

JacksonNought replies on May 11, 2020:

@drptree me or ForeverFree?

Free thinkers ❤️

JacksonNought comments on May 11, 2020:

I already have a chip in my hand, and there are a lot of cool things I do with it.

JacksonNought replies on May 11, 2020:

@ForeverFree76 it's called NFC, near-field, and only works within millimetres of an active sensor. I use it around my house to open my front door, start my car, deactivate my security system, etc. Very useful. Not everything is a rabid conspiracy, or some entryway to Satan. I take it you are probably Anti-Vaxx as well? You use a drivers license? Or SSN?

Our First Lady

1patriot comments on May 7, 2020:

oh great smear! you think this doesn't happen to any others

JacksonNought replies on May 8, 2020:

@GeeMac I don't really agree with your assessment. First, I don't necessarily agree that Melania is the most detested First Lady in history. Have you seen the vitriol directed towards Hillary Clinton from both sides of the aisle? Michelle might be very well regarded by those on the left, but she dealt with quite a lot of hate from those on the right. I have seen many many people celebrate Melania as the First Lady, claiming that we finally got someone classy and beautiful in the White House. You also have many people on the right claiming that Obama was the worst President of all time, and many on the left claiming Trump is. Your opinion of Michelle vs Melania is very much influenced by your political leaning. Despite that, popularity does not dictate what is satire and what is bullying. Just because you think Michelle was very popular, does that mean it is all in good fun and clever satire to call her ugly and say she looks like a man, and go around spreading lies on the Internet that she is a man and Obama is gay and their kids were adopted? I would call that bullying. You aren't going after Barack's policies, or Michelle's initiatives, or anything of substance - you are just going after Michelle's looks and using schoolyard tactics (btw, not saying you personally). Just look at the response by 1patriot above me. You may think Melania is unpopular, so going after her is bullying. I have seen memes comparing her looks to Caitlyn Jenner, calling her a prostitute, criticizing her fashion taste, etc. I didn't use any of those, as I agree that would be bullying and in very poor taste. Instead the meme I shared (which is very much an attempt to balance the string of anti-Obama memes lately) is calling out actual things Melania has done, and using satire to show that these are in direct opposition to Donald Trump's platform. It shows the blatant hypocrisy with Trump, as he is fine going against his "ideals" if it benefits himself and his family, such as allowing chain migration for Melania's parents. Is the use of a nude photo of her in poor taste with this meme? Sure, though that is what I happened to find - I didn't make it myself. I would still say it is satire (criticizing her actions and how her husband is okay with it just for her) vs bulling (saying Michelle looks like a man). I would also say that Melania isn't really innocent in all of this, with her "I Really Don't Care. Do U?" jacket, and her blatant dismissal of her husband's rampant bullying while she is trying to encourage others to stop bullying.

Interesting! 6 Takeaways from the Largest-Ever Study of Atheists in America | Hemant Mehta | ...

JacksonNought comments on May 7, 2020:

Yes, Atheists are absolutely discriminated against in the USA. In a 2019 poll, on 60% of people said they would vote for an Atheist as President. This was lower than the percentage for a Muslim person or a Gay/Lesbian person (no data on Trans or other identities), and 20% lower than the ...

JacksonNought replies on May 8, 2020:

@Naomi thank you. It is very similar in the US. Many would consider us a "Christian Nation" as there is very much Christian favoritism - holidays, archaic laws, traditions, etc - yet our Constitution explicitly prohibits discrimination based on religion and guarantees freedom of religion. That doesn't mean there isn't still rampant prejudice and attempts to undermine our freedoms. Many people will try to argue that the US is definitely a "Christian Nation" and therefore the religion deserves favoritism. Some will say it is because our Founding Fathers were Christians - though many were Deists and Free Thinkers, and they specifically wanted religious freedom to be a core tenet. Some will argue that our money has "In God We Trust" on it, but that was only added to paper money in the 50's as a scared response to our Cold War with Russia (the so-called "Godless Communists"). This same response was also when we added "Under God" to our Pledge of Allegiance. I have definitely heard of Project Blitz. It is a scary thing, they want a Christian Theocracy in America. And I also am very familiar with The Satanic Temple - I am a member myself.

Our First Lady

1patriot comments on May 7, 2020:

oh great smear! you think this doesn't happen to any others

JacksonNought replies on May 7, 2020:

@GeeMac in addition, I do agree with you that "Michelle is a man" memes are in poor taste. I do find it interesting, however, that the several instances of it on this group are either ignored or commented with praise and laughter, whereas a meme about Melania is instantly met with scorn. As to one that is clever and one that is cruel... I would say that accusing a woman of secretly being a man (which fuels a common conspiracy theory I hear all the time) is rather immature and cruel, whereas using actual facts (as Adrian agrees with) to point out the blatant hypocrisy of her husband's platform is more clever.

Our First Lady

1patriot comments on May 7, 2020:

oh great smear! you think this doesn't happen to any others

JacksonNought replies on May 7, 2020:

@GeeMac who do you say is loved by the public and who is detested? Depending on the leaning of the person you ask, you will get a widely different answer.

Our First Lady

redrummm comments on May 7, 2020:

whats the point of this!

JacksonNought replies on May 7, 2020:

It's a joke meme? Isn't that the point of this group?

Our First Lady

1patriot comments on May 7, 2020:

oh great smear! you think this doesn't happen to any others

JacksonNought replies on May 7, 2020:

Dude, it's called a joke. This group is jokes and memes. Don't get so triggered. I don't see this much hate for the "Michelle Obama is a man" memes on this group.

Prager U. "Social Justice Isn t Justice." [youtu.be]

JacksonNought comments on May 4, 2020:

Good thing we (who live in the USA) have a Constitution and a First Amendment with Freedom of Religion. That means it doesn't matter what it says in the Bible - we don't need to follow it. So starting with that is pointless, why bring it into the equation at all? You immediately disenfranchise ...

JacksonNought replies on May 4, 2020:

@TimTuolomne we do agree on the principle. The state laws (for holding office) are actually unenforceable, as they are indeed un-Constitutional. Same with sodomy laws, which 16 states still have on the books - even though un-Constitutional. I'm all for States' Rights when applicable, but it just further shows why we need "social justice" in cases where states are denying rights, in many cases due to religious preference. I live in PA, which has some of the country's strictest liquor laws, which I am perfectly okay with when it comes to the state's rights to govern itself - but I am not okay when it is something that conflicts with the Constitution, i.e. First Amendment. While the whole "separation" is not explicit in the Constitution, if you believe that the use of "Congress" in the First Amendment only applies to federal government, and not states, then you could also argue that a state could restrict speech or decide to ban all Churches in favor of Mosques.

Prager U. "Social Justice Isn t Justice." [youtu.be]

JacksonNought comments on May 4, 2020:

Good thing we (who live in the USA) have a Constitution and a First Amendment with Freedom of Religion. That means it doesn't matter what it says in the Bible - we don't need to follow it. So starting with that is pointless, why bring it into the equation at all? You immediately disenfranchise ...

JacksonNought replies on May 4, 2020:

@TimTuolomne we will just have to agree to disagree on certain things, as I am an Atheist and do not believe in a god or in the Bible. As for examples of discrimination: Did you know there are eight State Constitutions which include a variation of "no person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state" or "the following persons shall be disqualified for office: first, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God." Many state council meetings will start with an invocation (which was ruled Constitutional as long as there is no discrimination as to which groups can deliver it), but Atheist, Satanist, Muslim, etc groups have been denied in their attempts to deliver invocations - states have even gone to court and wasted taxpayer money on lawsuits in order to prevent a different religion from speaking. The Ten Commandments and other Christian monuments have been erected on government land, such as courthouses, which were deemed only Constitutional if other viewpoints are allowed to be presented with them - when other groups tried to add their viewpoint, the local government decided to ban the "free speech zones" altogether, rather than allow other viewpoints to be expressed. Prior to 2007, the US Department of Veterans Affairs refused to approve a Wiccan symbol for use on its headstones, despite many years of petitions and lawsuits, erasing the religion dead soldiers who did not subscribe to their "approved" religions. You can also see plenty of cases of modern day hate for any military member who practices a non-Judeo-Christian religion, and wants to practice their religion as others are free to.