Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Arx]

If Christians were really concerned about saving living souls then they would go full Jain and wear small clothes over their mouths to prevent themselves from swallowing and killing insects. Maybe the Pro-Life party would be able to conjure up a modicum of morality and apprehension about constantly instigating endless wars across the planet that kill and immiserate millions of people with living souls.

But Bay12 Forums user grave worm, that's the problem! (American) Christians by and large do not consider non-Christians to be people, and therefore do not experience empathy for them.

Remember folks, Bay12 is a friendly and open environment with no overt hostility towards any demographics, and there's no reason for anyone conservative to feel like there's no point trying to have a discussion.

[Eschar]

Huh, looks like I just missed yet another abortion discussion

[Doomblade187]

If Christians were really concerned about saving living souls then they would go full Jain and wear small clothes over their mouths to prevent themselves from swallowing and killing insects. Maybe the Pro-Life party would be able to conjure up a modicum of morality and apprehension about constantly instigating endless wars across the planet that kill and immiserate millions of people with living souls.

But Bay12 Forums user grave worm, that's the problem! (American) Christians by and large do not consider non-Christians to be people, and therefore do not experience empathy for them.

Remember folks, Bay12 is a friendly and open environment with no overt hostility towards any demographics, and there's no reason for anyone conservative to feel like there's no point trying to have a discussion.

We are a friendly and accepting community though. Just understand that some people feel super salty about some topics. The fact of the matter is that some Christians do believe that. Not all Christians, obviously, the religion is wayyyy too varied for that.

As it is, the United States is a secular nation, and really should start behaving like one. All faiths are valid, just so long as you don't get in someone else's way.

[Eschar]

Not all Christians, certainly, but "some Christians" is also downplaying it a bit since it's not a simple set of Christians but several powerful interconnected Christian or affiliated groups: the Religious Right, fundagelicals, white supremacists, QAnon (note the similarities between QAnon and the Satanic Panic), etc.

[Doomblade187]

Not all Christians, certainly, but "some Christians" is also downplaying it a bit since it's not a simple set of Christians but several powerful interconnected Christian or affiliated groups: the Religious Right, fundagelicals, white supremacists, QAnon (note the similarities between QAnon and the Satanic Panic), etc.

As a non-christian, I feel hesitant to judge a sect unless I have done my reading on them and their practices. Hence the hedging. In addition, even the interconnected groups you mention are not united in "non-christians don't matter". Many of them feel strong empathy/pity for the "unsaved" or whatever word they're using nowadays. They just show it in destructive ways.

[MrRoboto75]

please abstain from having unprotected sects

[McTraveller]

please abstain from having unprotected sects

Win!

[Dunamisdeos]

I think this is a much more complicated statement than you seem to think. 

Defining is life is a contested task, both philosophically and biologically rather than open and shut case, after a few millenia we're not even close yet.  (In fact the concept of life is likely incomplete and flawed, but I digress.) 

I bristle a bit at this, since my arguments for my position on human life have precisely zero to do with any sort of religious belief in a soul, or for that matter metaphysical reasoning whatsoever. Your assumptions on what I base my beliefs upon are a bit presumptuous. Regardless, I can't blame you for that assumption. That is exactly how a very large (and very vocal) subset of the population builds their view.

I'd rather not turn this into 10 pages of Duni's personal views (again) so I ain't gonna go into all the whats and whys of my own beliefs. But I absolutely agree that a subjective belief in the "spark of life" should not be the basis for a position on abortion, regardless of the source of that belief.

I'm listening to a podcast going into "journalist" Andy Ngo who covers antifa violence. - snippa snip, this Ngo guy sounds like a tuna can chode -

Could you link me to this I want to fume angrily at it in solidarity.

[Reelya]

Could you link me to this I want to fume angrily at it in solidarity.

It's part of that other Podcast I mentioned repeatedly, they have episodes on a variety of topics, also in the link in my bio.

QAnonAnonymous episode 95 was about Andy Ngo, while episode 97 was about General Flynn.

Now the interesting thing about Flynn is that the Q-tards love him, and he's been amplifying some Q slogans, but in an extremely aware sort of way compared to the oblivious way some other Republicans retweet Q stuff.

Flynn knows what he's doing. My real fear now is that Flynn will hijack the entire Q thing, since Q is supposedly a high-ranking military intel operative, Flynn could very easily just jump up and say "I was Q all along!" and he'd instantly have a literally brainwashed army of goons and opportunists jumping onto the bandwagon for Trump 2: Flynn Q Boogaloo. Flynn gave a "digital soldiers" speech where he really hammers down on this stuff. They're not keyboard warriors, they're the good type: digital soldiers, spreading memes to own the libs in the Great Meme War. We ask how it could get more fucked up than Trump, and i present my answer to that.

Q created a special oath, and this was spread on social media, it's a mutation on the normal oath of office, but with Where We Go One, We Go All at the end. Flynn videoed himself doing the oath:
https://www.news8000.com/i/michael-flynn-posts-video-featuring-qanon-slogans/

“This is absolutely pro-QAnon,” said Mike Rothschild, who recently published a book examining and debunking some of the most prominent conspiracy theories.

^ very unfortunate surname for a conspiracy debunker.

[bloop_bleep]

It's at times like these when I wonder how exactly the historians are going to phrase this in the history books.

[Reelya]

Last thing on this for a while, but the 'Baby Q' scandal must be read to be believed:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-a-trash-talking-upstart-infuriated-qanon-boomers

... anonymous posts from a mysterious person or group of people named “Q.” For the majority of QAnon believers, Q is Ret. Gen. Michael Flynn, or maybe Trump social media director Dan Scavino. In this wacko world, Donald Trump himself bears the moniker “Q+.”

QAnon watchers—both believers and non-believers—have been very curious about Q’s identity. So it was a big deal last week when Steinbart revealed who Q really is: him! As a result, Steinbart’s fans have dubbed him “Baby Q.”

Steinbart initially said he was just following QAnon clues. More recently, though, he’s claimed that he actually is Q. How does that make sense? Well... time travel.

In Steinbart’s telling, Q is Steinbart from the future, who’s traveled back in time to leave present-day Steinbart clues. This is obviously a lot of nonsense, but plenty of people are getting on board with it!

The comments on Steinbart’s videos are filled with QAnon fans amazed that the truth about Q has been revealed after so long. The latest 8Chan message board has lit up with discussions of Steinbart and the “Baby Q issue.” After I tweeted about Steinbart, one of his fans emailed me to ask if I could get Steinbart to help her with her personal problems.

What he’s laying out is absolutely nuts. But it’s been driving the QAnon old-guard absolutely nuts too. When I tweeted an interview request at Steinbart in an attempt to figure out what exactly he’s up to, more established QAnon hucksters moaned that my attempt to contact him was proof that he’s a deep-state puppet.

[Egan_BW]

It's at times like these when I wonder how exactly the historians are going to phrase this in the history books.

This will be remembered as a dark age with few reliable records. We may be writing down everything that happens but like 80% of it is incomprehensible screaming.

[JoshuaFH]

It's at times like these when I wonder how exactly the historians are going to phrase this in the history books.

This will be remembered as a dark age with few reliable records. We may be writing down everything that happens but like 80% of it is incomprehensible screaming.

"The folklore and traditions of these ancient peoples were recorded in their ancient records, known to them as 'tweeting' and their 'twits' were regarded as chroniclers of unimpeachable integrity."

[feelotraveller]

I think this is a much more complicated statement than you seem to think. 

Defining is life is a contested task, both philosophically and biologically rather than open and shut case, after a few millenia we're not even close yet.  (In fact the concept of life is likely incomplete and flawed, but I digress.) 

I bristle a bit at this, since my arguments for my position on human life have precisely zero to do with any sort of religious belief in a soul, or for that matter metaphysical reasoning whatsoever. Your assumptions on what I base my beliefs upon are a bit presumptuous. Regardless, I can't blame you for that assumption. That is exactly how a very large (and very vocal) subset of the population builds their view.

I'd rather not turn this into 10 pages of Duni's personal views (again) so I ain't gonna go into all the whats and whys of my own beliefs. But I absolutely agree that a subjective belief in the "spark of life" should not be the basis for a position on abortion, regardless of the source of that belief.

My apologies for making assumptions (and making you all bristly, yuk!). 

To be honest though you have said nothing about what constitutes the 'human life' in the (your) 'pro-life' position.  Which is one of the important points of contention in the abortion debate.  I certainly agree with you on how much easier it is for those who want to assert that life only begins with birth (not that it's my own position) and the criticism that 'spark of life' is a not a touchstone for orientation on abortion.

[Reelya]

More relevant thing, I want to draw attention to Lauren Boebert, a new congresswoman for Colorado.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/04/us/politics/colorado-election-Lauren-Boebert.html

Her background is QAnon / gun's right activist, who with her husband runs a gun-themed restaurant where all the waitresses are packin' heat called Shooters Grill, in the town of Rifle, Colorado.

In her primary, she beat a 5-term Republican incumbent, basically by accusing him of being too sane (not being sufficiently enthusiastic about Trump) and in the general, she beat a Democrat former state legislator.

This is a rising star right here, one to watch.