Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
HappyJackWagon

Pres. Nelson Meets with Owner of Pulse Nightclub

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

 

Yes. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, USU78 said:

No big loss.  After all, the only thing they get is a sentencing enhancement if they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the perp intended specifically to harm somebody because of demographics.  So the original legislative intent of, say, a 1st degree felony with possibility of parole for each count, instead of the stepped-up 1st degree felony without possibility of parole, would still hold.  <No, I haven't researched Florida law specifically>

On the contrary, this is a huge loss to those who were invested in the idea that the attack was evidence of hate toward the LGBTQ+ community.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.  Rather than prejudice it sounds like straight-forward offensive bigotry towards my transgender friends.  For those that might care, using the term transgenderism is offensive, but now I suspect the offense was intended.

Try meeting some transgender people in person and get to know their stories.  First hand experience tends to change even the harshest critics.  

I have met some. I even count one as a friend but the process did them no favors and I would argue that it ruined their life. They drove everyone around them away.

And yes, I know I can look online and find happy stories where it all worked out but I can find those about anything and if there is one thing I have learned it is that people lie if they have a motive.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, USU78 said:

giphy.gif

Yeah, I have posted when I am tired and irritable too. I accept your apology and forgive you.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, cinepro said:

On the contrary, this is a huge loss to those who were invested in the idea that the attack was evidence of hate toward the LGBTQ+ community.

You get I don't much care for the whole antidemocratic concept of hate crimes, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I have met some. I even count one as a friend but the process did them no favors and I would argue that it ruined their life. They drove everyone around them away.

And yes, I know I can look online and find happy stories where it all worked out but I can find those about anything and if there is one thing I have learned it is that people lie if they have a motive.

Keep meeting them and don't judge outcomes based on the individual experiences of one or two people.  The only thing you've said that I might even partially agree with is that there are mixed results on the outcomes of different treatments, but we are really in the early stages of understanding the science and its much too soon to pass judgment on what someone who identifies as transgender should or shouldn't do for the best outcomes in their personal lives. 

We live in a society that is still very judgmental on this issue, and its extremely hard to know how much of the challenges these people have to go through is influenced by the treatment they receive from society.  It breaks my heart what these people have to go through.  They are vulnerable, marginalized and I believe Jesus would want me to love them, and withhold judgment about how they choose to navigate their experience, whether that is some form of transition physically or a presentation through dress or some combination of the two.  My job as a cisgender privileged white male, is to help lift where I stand, not to point a finger of scorn at those who already have so many fingers pointed at them from society.  

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Calm said:

Explain please.

The religion of Islam is based upon its law or Sharia. Sharia is much more than the Koran. Most of it is comprised of the Hadith and to a lesser extent other sunnah or biographies of Muhammed. Together these comprise Sharia or "the way/path." What is meant is that Muhammed was considered the way as opposed to Christianity in which Christ is the way. The Koran/Qu'ran provides little instruction in the way of governance, but does set forth punishments etc. There are a very few Muslims who strive to follow the Koran only - believing that the Hadith are not reliable, but are the musings of men after Muhammed. Political Islam is mainly derived from the Hadith in which the original "rightly guided caliphs" interpreted the Koran and what Mohammed had supposedly said.  These set forth the governmental system of Islam. However, there are two main branches of Islam - the Sunni and the Shi'ites. Their main differences are based upon different hadiths which they believe set forth their governance - the shi'ites by lineal inheritance and the Sunni by other means. Political Islam seeks to impose its will on all peoples - not just Muslims. If one refuses to convert to Islam, the best they can hope for is to pay the jizyah tax, and be mostly left alone. Islam is not some benign set of rules for Muslims only. It seeks to take over all other peoples through various means of jihad - settlement or colonization is one. Once Muslims approach being a majority in an area, they historically seek to impose Sharia on all peoples of the area/country. This is another aspect of political Islam. Their "police" harass or arrest anyone breaking the rules of Sharia such as drinking alcohol. These are "religious rules" but are imposed through political means. There is no separation of Church and state in Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Keep meeting them and don't judge outcomes based on the individual experiences of one or two people.  The only thing you've said that I might even partially agree with is that there are mixed results on the outcomes of different treatments, but we are really in the early stages of understanding the science and its much too soon to pass judgment on what someone who identifies as transgender should or shouldn't do for the best outcomes in their personal lives. 

We live in a society that is still very judgmental on this issue, and its extremely hard to know how much of the challenges these people have to go through is influenced by the treatment they receive from society.  It breaks my heart what these people have to go through.  They are vulnerable, marginalized and I believe Jesus would want me to love them, and withhold judgment about how they choose to navigate their experience, whether that is some form of transition physically or a presentation through dress or some combination of the two.  My job as a cisgender privileged white male, is to help lift where I stand, not to point a finger of scorn at those who already have so many fingers pointed at them from society.  

I am not going to start chucking rocks. I just have not seen anything that has convinced me it is a good idea. Kind of like cocaine. I do not consider you to be scum or want to persecute you if you use it but I am not going to endorse it or pretend I think it is a good choice.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

The religion of Islam is based upon its law or Sharia. Sharia is much more than the Koran. Most of it is comprised of the Hadith and to a lesser extent other sunnah or biographies of Muhammed. Together these comprise Sharia or "the way/path." What is meant is that Muhammed was considered the way as opposed to Christianity in which Christ is the way. The Koran/Qu'ran provides little instruction in the way of governance, but does set forth punishments etc. There are a very few Muslims who strive to follow the Koran only - believing that the Hadith are not reliable, but are the musings of men after Muhammed. Political Islam is mainly derived from the Hadith in which the original "rightly guided caliphs" interpreted the Koran and what Mohammed had supposedly said.  These set forth the governmental system of Islam. However, there are two main branches of Islam - the Sunni and the Shi'ites. Their main differences are based upon different hadiths which they believe set forth their governance - the shi'ites by lineal inheritance and the Sunni by other means. Political Islam seeks to impose its will on all peoples - not just Muslims. If one refuses to convert to Islam, the best they can hope for is to pay the jizyah tax, and be mostly left alone. Islam is not some benign set of rules for Muslims only. It seeks to take over all other peoples through various means of jihad - settlement or colonization is one. Once Muslims approach being a majority in an area, they historically seek to impose Sharia on all peoples of the area/country. This is another aspect of political Islam. Their "police" harass or arrest anyone breaking the rules of Sharia such as drinking alcohol. These are "religious rules" but are imposed through political means. There is no separation of Church and state in Islam.

And if you want to know what the Jews are up to read the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I am not going to start chucking rocks. I just have not seen anything that has convinced me it is a good idea. Kind of like cocaine. I do not consider you to be scum or want to persecute you if you use it but I am not going to endorse it or pretend I think it is a good choice.

Comparing gender identity to cocaine use is very offensive, can you not see that?  What if I were to compare your dependence on religion to a cocaine dependence?  It’s things like this and that definitely look like you are throwing stones.  

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Comparing gender identity to cocaine use is very offensive, can you not see that?  What if I were to compare your dependence on religion to a cocaine dependence?  It’s things like this and that definitely look like you are throwing stones.  

I would suggest using science rather than indignation to refute his claims.

If his claims about the lack of improvement post transition are accurate (and they were several years ago when I last looked up the subject, but those might be out of date), then he is right to be concerned about encouraging surgery as treatment based on the risks of having major surgeryeven if one doesn't view it as selfmutilation, etc.

I have much the same concerns for those individuals who seek out extensive cosmetic surgeries to improve their feeling of connection and worth to their bodies (not restorative surgery such as that sometimes helpful for back pain post pregnancies) and appearance.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

And if you want to know what the Jews are up to read the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.

Not just them, but Catholics too. Yep, Judaism became very politicized - that's true. It's why God didn't want them to get a king. The Lord wanted to be their king...

Share this post


Link to post

Off topic, but I would say yes that Wendy is a powerful force in awakening the brethren to new ideas. This is my opinion based on personal experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

It is a little more complex then that. The modern version of Islam practiced is the child of Western European colonialism and that makes Britain and France the midwife and they did a terrible job. Islamic groups tried experimenting with democracy under European rule but their attempts were largely beaten down. They were oppressed with such ridiculous ideas as trying to force Islamic colonies to give up their native languages because only French can convey modern concepts. After this colonial rush the only large independent Islamic state was the Ottoman Empire. While in the past it was a more civilized state then Western Europe it suffered in the 16th century as its trade importance fell when Europe developed reliable trade around Africa.

The Ottoman Empire was a bit of a punching bag in the Napoleonic Wars and eventually the Young Turks movement led the movement to modernize and bring in democratic reforms but were faced with tribal parties based on ethnic divisions within the Empire, most of whom wanted independence. While idealism was not strong it mostly died during the First World War in the Armenian genocide. This led to the Arab Revolt in 1916. The Entente Alliance backed the revolt with the British and French backing the rebels and promising independence once the war was over. The rebels were moderates politically and might have led to Islamic democracy if they had been supported and allowed to grow.

This ended in a great betrayal. The British and French reinterpreted the deal after the war and betrayed their allies. The Ottoman Empire was dismantled and almost all of the Empire except Turkey was cut up into French and British holdings. The first attempt at Arab nationalism that might have resulted in developing Arab states was stabbed in the back. From this point on the Arabs largely distrusted western democracies and democracy in general. After the Second World War Britain’s position on the world stage was diminished and France was occupied and its Vichy territories were taken. The colonial empires ended and the British unilaterally drew borders in their old holdings and set up new nations. This is why you get nations like Iran and Iraq which should have been multiple nations due to their internal divisions. Basically, nations where violent civil conflict was basically inevitable. Add in the decision to form Israel in a state where Christians, Jews, and Muslims were previously getting along relatively well and the West was giving the whole area a regional enemy and an enduring source of conflict and just washing their hands of it while they rebuilt. The one Hope was that the end of the Second World War brought a huge demand for oil and they were finding it everywhere so they had a commodity to bargain with.

Then came the Cold War and again they were pawns on the playing field of international diplomacy with the United States propping up tyrants in the region (and worldwide) as long as they would align with us (and bring their oil) against the Soviets. The CIA even helped in “discouraging” a few movements at liberalizing some middle eastern states for fear communism would take hold.

By the end of the Cold War is it even surprising so many of them hate the West? The Arab Muslims are by no means blameless but acting like the United States and its allies are getting unjustly blamed requires an ignorance of history or a carefully sanitized version of it. Saying Islam is inherently political is unfair. It very much is now and has been in the past but so was Catholicism. If the Islamic nations had been allowed to modernize and liberalize their religion would probably not be such a dominant force in politics.

There are jokes amongst history buffs that every world conflict has its roots in or were exacerbated by the First World War and that every territorial conflict is due to some British aristocrat ignorantly doodling a line on a map. It is not strictly true in all cases but it is true in a lot of cases.

Should we feel guilt over it? No, we were not born when our ancestors decided to betray the Arab revolt or divvy up Arab lands into nations with little foresight or set up Israel and factionalize a relatively peaceful region and then leave it to die and were all surprised when Israel almost inexplicably survived. I doubt any of use were deciding US foreign policy during the Cold War and advocating anti democratic rule to ensure they would align with us. We should acknowledge they were dealt a bad hand while we got a better one and avoid characterizing them as a bunch of wacko religious nuts bent on punishing the west for fabricated reasons because they struggle. Some were recruited to fight us using that kind of propaganda but that does not make our anti-Islam propaganda as to why things are the way they are right.

Looking at all the missteps and betrayals the west made for our own convenience instead of justice I can only imagine what would have happened if we had taken a different path: “For all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, ‘It might have been.’”

Cool story but you left out the whole Barbary Coast Pirates thing. You know where a million-and-a-half Europeans were taken as Slaves by the Ottomans and the Maghrebi. They are the ones that disrupted shipping in the Mediterranean  during 16th century. 

Edited by rodheadlee
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, RevTestament said:

No. Murder is the unauthorized killing of an innocent person. God authorized killing under certain circumstances for which people forfeited their lives. Critics point out that Israel committed "genocide" but under the law the people they killed in battle were to first be offered the chance to live under God's law, and then be warned. If then they did not agree or leave, they were to be killed in order to put "evil out of Israel." Nephi did not murder Laban. Laban had broken the law by stealing from Lehi, and then trying to murder his sons by which his life was forfeited to God. The Nephites went to battle to defend themselves from the unauthorized taking of their lives, so typically were justified. 

Women and children were murdered in the OT in the name of god.  Rapes and genocide were committed many times in the name of god.  Now, we can believe that god really sanctioned those terrible and horrible acts, or maybe it was just an iron age tribe that used their version of deity to justify their actions.  I'm thinking the later. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Cool story but you left out the whole Barbary Coast Pirates thing. You know where a million-and-a-half Europeans were taken as Slaves by the Ottomans and the Maghrebi. They are the ones that disrupted shipping in the Mediterranean  during 16th century. 

I left out a lot of things. It was only eight paragraphs long. The million and a half number is what I heard years ago and is now generally rejected as too high an estimate.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Women and children were murdered in the OT in the name of god.  Rapes and genocide were committed many times in the name of god.  Now, we can believe that god really sanctioned those terrible and horrible acts, or maybe it was just an iron age tribe that used their version of deity to justify their actions.  I'm thinking the later. 

False dichotomy.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Women and children were murdered in the OT in the name of god.  Rapes and genocide were committed many times in the name of god.  Now, we can believe that god really sanctioned those terrible and horrible acts, or maybe it was just an iron age tribe that used their version of deity to justify their actions.  I'm thinking the later. 

My point was they were supposed to be given a chance to surrender to Israel and God's rule. It is not a clear cut case of God saying just go wipe them out. Some did like the woman in Jericho who helped Israel and lived. God gives life and He takes it away - the vast majority of people on this earth will die because God made them mortal. Dying a little earlier because one refuses to heed God's warnings is not so bad in this light as you paint it. If people refuse to live under God's law, they really are kind of wasting their time here. Now, I am not saying that Israel lived this law perfectly. It seems they failed to do much the Lord instructed them to do - so the Lord stopped striving with them, and their campaigns stopped being successful with the death of Yehoshua. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Comparing gender identity to cocaine use is very offensive, can you not see that?  What if I were to compare your dependence on religion to a cocaine dependence?  It’s things like this and that definitely look like you are throwing stones.  

I bet cocaine addicts would find the comparison offensive as well. Both need help. Validating their desires to mutilate their own bodies to alleviate distress is not helping.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I left out a lot of things. It was only eight paragraphs long. The million and a half number is what I heard years ago and is now generally rejected as too high an estimate.

A lot of the reasons for the suffering of Europeans is that the Muslims cut off trade from the east. As you note, the Europeans eventually found their way around Africa, and resumed trade, which caused a lot of problems for the Muslims, and a decline in their economy. It was no fault of colonialism. It is not too surprising that the colonial powers were not kindly disposed towards Islam after that. 

Thomas Jefferson's Koran which is used in the United States' congress was obtained by Thomas Jefferson because the Muslims were pirating everything in the Mediterranean. When the United States complained to these Muslims, and tried to keep good relations, the Muslims did not respond with kind overtures, but resumed their pirating. Thus, Thomas Jefferson decided he needed to try to understand these Muslims. Despite his efforts, the United States ended up being forced to pay them off. It was thanks to these Muslim aggressions that the United States formed the first marine corp, and that we have the song singing about the shores of Tripoli. Muslims have never successfully experimented with democracy, and never will because it is contrary to their Sharia. The one good thing Dubya did do is give the Iraqis a chance to develop a democracy, but the first thing which happens is that the more "radical" parts of Islam will have nothing to do with it, and they destroyed Iraq's fledgling democracy - through no help of Obama... that's for sure.

I agree that the United States has meddled in their affairs, and therefore has earned some hate. We need to change our energy policy to stop this temptation to meddle in Middle Eastern affairs. Let them battle it out themselves. However, the oil lobby, and other special interests are against any discretionary funds from the DOE going towards a rational technology such as thorium-based nuclear energy in LFTR plants or some other new, improved technology, and rather we get all kinds of spending on "renewables" which end up getting manufactured in China, and which as a practical matter are just not going to meet our energy needs any time soon. Well, I doubt my little rant will get anyone anywhere so I am going to stop now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

A lot of the reasons for the suffering of Europeans is that the Muslims cut off trade from the east. As you note, the Europeans eventually found their way around Africa, and resumed trade, which caused a lot of problems for the Muslims, and a decline in their economy. It was no fault of colonialism. It is not too surprising that the colonial powers were not kindly disposed towards Islam after that. 

Thomas Jefferson's Koran which is used in the United States' congress was obtained by Thomas Jefferson because the Muslims were pirating everything in the Mediterranean. When the United States complained to these Muslims, and tried to keep good relations, the Muslims did not respond with kind overtures, but resumed their pirating. Thus, Thomas Jefferson decided he needed to try to understand these Muslims. Despite his efforts, the United States ended up being forced to pay them off. It was thanks to these Muslim aggressions that the United States formed the first marine corp, and that we have the song singing about the shores of Tripoli. Muslims have never successfully experimented with democracy, and never will because it is contrary to their Sharia. The one good thing Dubya did do is give the Iraqis a chance to develop a democracy, but the first thing which happens is that the more "radical" parts of Islam will have nothing to do with it, and they destroyed Iraq's fledgling democracy - through no help of Obama... that's for sure.

I agree that the United States has meddled in their affairs, and therefore has earned some hate. We need to change our energy policy to stop this temptation to meddle in Middle Eastern affairs. Let them battle it out themselves. However, the oil lobby, and other special interests are against any discretionary funds from the DOE going towards a rational technology such as thorium-based nuclear energy in LFTR plants or some other new, improved technology, and rather we get all kinds of spending on "renewables" which end up getting manufactured in China, and which as a practical matter are just not going to meet our energy needs any time soon. Well, I doubt my little rant will get anyone anywhere so I am going to stop now.

The externally imposed democracy in Iraq was rightly seen as a US puppet government and a tool of US imperialism. Its collapse was inevitable unless it could be perpetually backed by the US military.

One could argue that Judaism and Christianity are incompatible with democracy based on their scripture and history. Hinduism has a caste system as an integral part of the faith and India has a democracy (albeit not a particularly good one). Faiths adapt. To say Islam cannot because of Sharia law is silly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

9 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Political Islam is mainly derived from the Hadith in which the original "rightly guided caliphs" interpreted the Koran and what Mohammed had supposedly said.  These set forth the governmental system of Islam. However, there are two main branches of Islam - the Sunni and the Shi'ites. Their main differences are based upon different hadiths which they believe set forth their governance - the shi'ites by lineal inheritance and the Sunni by other means. Political Islam seeks to impose its will on all peoples - not just Muslims. If one refuses to convert to Islam, the best they can hope for is to pay the jizyah tax, and be mostly left alone. Islam is not some benign set of rules for Muslims only. It seeks to take over all other peoples through various means of jihad - settlement or colonization is one. Once Muslims approach being a majority in an area, they historically seek to impose Sharia on all peoples of the area/country. This is another aspect of political Islam. Their "police" harass or arrest anyone breaking the rules of Sharia such as drinking alcohol. These are "religious rules" but are imposed through political means. There is no separation of Church and state in Islam.

Thank you taking the time to explain your viewpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I left out a lot of things. It was only eight paragraphs long. The million and a half number is what I heard years ago and is now generally rejected as too high an estimate.

Well you did a fine job and the low estimate is 850,000.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...