|
Dr Christmas posted:I have this image of Michelle Bachmann happening on the Matthew Shepherd murder. As they're hanging him on the fence, she screams, "Stop squirming! You're violating their freedom of religion!"
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
I don't mean to turn the thread into 24/7 liberal logic, but this one was too good to pass up. The point here is completely unknown to me. Obama inflicted gays on the military, treating them as his personal guinea pigs, and that same military then tracked down and killed bin laden, proving...? Honestly, can anyone help me out here? What the hell are they trying to communicate by linking an issue they hate with what can only be described as a resounding success?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 00:33
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:I don't mean to turn the thread into 24/7 liberal logic, but this one was too good to pass up. Barack Obama does obviously bad thing to the military (presumably because he hates them or something) but takes credit when they do something that is obviously good. They're saying he's a hypocrite because he does bad things to them but takes the credit when they do good things for him. edit: Of course I don't think that ending DADT was a bad thing, I meant from the point of view of crazy ring-wingers it was a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:I don't mean to turn the thread into 24/7 liberal logic, but this one was too good to pass up. That gays in the military helped kill Bin Laden?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
Military members hatred for gays and rage at Obama gave them the drive required to kill Bin Laden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 01:06
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:I don't mean to turn the thread into 24/7 liberal logic, but this one was too good to pass up. Also, 'social experiment'. Because the US is literally the first country ever to dare letting dem gays in the army.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 01:10
|
|
|
Fishstick posted:Also, 'social experiment'. Because the US is literally the first country ever to dare letting dem gays in the army. They would scoff at most of those countries (We single-handedly turned the tide of World War 2, remember?), but not at Israel. I'd like to see them respond to the fact that military service is mandatory for them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
Fishstick posted:Also, 'social experiment'. Because the US is literally the first country ever to dare letting dem gays in the army. More than that, the United States Army had a racial non-segregation policy before the actual United States did. It was much more a guinea pig for that concept than the current one is for sexual integration, given we're so far behind Europe in that regard (and Denmark hasn't yet been destroyed in a shower of brimstone). Laughably easy to draw parallels, given that most of the arguments against are the same as racist ones when a find/replace filter is applied. Is the liberal-logic site a crowd-sourced affair? If so, someone upload one about Eisenhower, Truman and their crazy ethnic integration experiment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
Or how about the simple fact that homosexuals were already there. All DADT repeal did was say that they could admit it, and not get fired. Dudes who dig other dudes had already been fighting along side dudes who dig chicks for decades. Hell, who am I kidding, there have been gays in the US Armed Forces since the Revolution.swarthmeister posted:
I think its actually just some guy who makes them. I don't think they are submitted... Photoshop Phriday idea?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
The thing that always gets me is how some conservatives can on the one hand act like every American soldier is a Perfect Hero who should be worshiped by all, and on the other hand say that those soldiers can't handle working with a gay guy, something that your average burger-flipper already manages to do okay, much less all the other countries that have tried it with their armed forces. But if there's one thing people never seem to get tired of, it's being wrong about gays. And there's also the thing that Obama did apparently give the order to go in when everyone else thought it wouldn't turn up anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 02:49
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:The thing that always gets me is how some conservatives can on the one hand act like every American soldier is a Perfect Hero who should be worshiped by all, and on the other hand say that those soldiers can't handle working with a gay guy, something that your average burger-flipper already manages to do okay... Well, you see, if the soldiers are all Perfect American Heroes, then they would be RIGHTLY DISGUSTED by the SATANIC AND SINFUL gaaaaaaaaaaaaay and refuse to serve, AS THEY SHOULD, because the gaaaaaaaaaaay is the greatest threat to America.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:But if there's one thing people never seem to get tired of, it's being wrong about gays.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 04:47
|
|
|
I wish I had self esteem that high, to think that there are thousands of people who want to rape me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
It's the same reason why they slut shame, there's a base assumption that men can't (and shouldn't have to) control their sexual urges, so without a woman in the equation to keep everything on lock gay men obviously are just loving 24/7.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 05:56
|
|
|
What worries me is that they're simply projecting and that they assume that gays would rape men if given the opportunity because they themselves would (or do) rape women if they had the opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 05:59
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:What worries me is that they're simply projecting and that they assume that gays would rape men if given the opportunity because they themselves would (or do) rape women if they had the opportunity. Given what we've seen from hardcore anti-gay bigots, what makes you think they'd rape women?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 06:53
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:What worries me is that they're simply projecting and that they assume that gays would rape men if given the opportunity because they themselves would (or do) rape women if they had the opportunity. You're probably right about this; I recall a lot of people saying that God's wrath is the only reason they follow any kind of morality. Were it not for God they probably would rape anything they liked the look of, because God is the only morality, and atheism is just another word for Satanism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 06:57
|
|
|
Bobby Digital posted:Given what we've seen from hardcore anti-gay bigots, what makes you think they'd rape women? As others have said, they literally believe that men cannot control their own sexual desires and need to marry early to save themselves from 'sinful' acts. And they see woman as submissive to men, so who cares what they think? And they dress like sluts so should be treated like sluts! And... and!
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 07:23
|
|
|
I knew I should have bolded the word "women" 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:What worries me is that they're simply projecting and that they assume that gays would rape men if given the opportunity because they themselves would (or do) rape women if they had the opportunity. The same people tend to be the ones who claim atheists have no source of morality and are therefore dangerous/evil. Which of course implies that without some god telling them what to do and threatening them with eternal damnation, these people would be stealing, raping, and murdering their way through life. It is quite disturbing when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 13:27
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Well, you see, if the soldiers are all Perfect American Heroes, then they would be RIGHTLY DISGUSTED by the SATANIC AND SINFUL gaaaaaaaaaaaaay and refuse to serve, AS THEY SHOULD, because the gaaaaaaaaaaay is the greatest threat to America. The "my country right or wrong" crowd was awfully quick to jump onto "gays? That tears it, despite our family's 10-generation heritage of military service, none of us are ever enlisting again!" I'm standing by for a decade of armchair commandos in bars spouting: "I was totally going to join the NAVY and be a SEAL... but y'know, gays. So that's why I sling burgers."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 14:34
|
|
|
darthbob88 posted:You're probably right about this; I recall a lot of people saying that God's wrath is the only reason they follow any kind of morality. Were it not for God they probably would rape anything they liked the look of, because God is the only morality, and atheism is just another word for Satanism. Choadmaster posted:The same people tend to be the ones who claim atheists have no source of morality and are therefore dangerous/evil. Which of course implies that without some god telling them what to do and threatening them with eternal damnation, these people would be stealing, raping, and murdering their way through life. It is quite disturbing when you think about it. Turing sex machine fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Jun 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:The same people tend to be the ones who claim atheists have no source of morality and are therefore dangerous/evil. Which of course implies that without some god telling them what to do and threatening them with eternal damnation, these people would be stealing, raping, and murdering their way through life. It is quite disturbing when you think about it. Turing sex machine posted:There is a difference between what people "believe they believe," and what they actually believe. While theists do say that sort of things when debating atheistic morality, it doesn't actually mean they would murder and rape if they could somehow be convinced that God doesn't exist. They have moral principles which they've always rationalized as divine commands, so they start believing that those principles are caused by the divine commands. But that doesn't make it true.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2012 18:00
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Well, you see, if the soldiers are all Perfect American Heroes, then they would be RIGHTLY DISGUSTED by the SATANIC AND SINFUL gaaaaaaaaaaaaay and refuse to serve, AS THEY SHOULD, because the gaaaaaaaaaaay is the greatest threat to America. "No true soldier..."
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
Ooh! Ooh! I got one. A friend who is growing more and more distant and weird every day replied to some post from a page called Angry White Guy Blog. Look at this turd. Just look at it (my bold)Entitled Racist Moron posted:Two Black girl murder White women for just delivering a pizza they ordered in Georgia ... will it be called racially motivated? Will it be a hate crime? Will Jesse and Al condemn their actions? Will the American media report it (this story is from a UK paper) - if you said No, no, no and no you'd be right. A few of the comments: quote:What the .... I feel as if the unrest lies squarely on our leadership. quote:Where's Sharpton?? I wonder if Obama will call the fiance and 4 year old that was left behind and give his condolences???? probably not.... RIP to the young lady quote:Maybe Whoopi will discuss it on the View!!! NOT! quote:Lovely. Here's this young woman, who is out working, not sitting on her rear end collecting a check and using a link card and look what happens to her. what a drat shame. quote:Why is the Trayvon Martin story all over the media and this is reported in the UK? It's becoming painfully obvious. Keep in mind that, according to the report they have cited (not that they bothered reading it beyond the title before getting into full outrage mode), the police immediately started a manhunt after the suspected killers, which are now in custody pending at the very least a murder charge. I point all of that out, and how it critically contrasts with the Trayvon Martin case, only to end up getting called a troll for my trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2012 22:21
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Keep in mind that, according to the report they have cited (not that they bothered reading it beyond the title before getting into full outrage mode), the police immediately started a manhunt after the suspected killers, which are now in custody pending at the very least a murder charge. I point all of that out, and how it critically contrasts with the Trayvon Martin case, only to end up getting called a troll for my trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
DoctorWhat posted:Well, you see, if the soldiers are all Perfect American Heroes, then they would be RIGHTLY DISGUSTED by the SATANIC AND SINFUL gaaaaaaaaaaaaay and refuse to serve, AS THEY SHOULD, because the gaaaaaaaaaaay is the greatest threat to America. I can not read this post and not imagine Neil Boortz' voice speaking it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 16:06
|
|
|
I've found it reported by local news and by Fox News and CBS News; but sure, only reported in the UK. And I think Je suis fatigue is right. It sounds like they would have killed the delivery person even if they had been a black man. It's not like they ordered "a cheese pizza, delivered by a white woman". In the Martin case, a white teen walking through the neighborhood would have been left alone. But sure, they're both racially motivated. At least based on what little is known now; maybe they really were only looking to kill a white woman. In that case it would have been racially motivated. But until the suspects come out and say, "we did it because we hate white people", there's no reason to assume it was a racial thing. Plus, the suspected killers were arrested, unlike in the Martin case. In fact a big part of the issue in the Martin case was nothing to do with race, but rather the issue of "Stand Your Ground" laws. The idea that Zimmerman could instigate a confrontation and then kill Martin and it was totally legal was the biggest part of the outrage; the fact that Martin was targeted because he was black made it that much worse. It's almost as if these people lack any sense of nuance. Why isn't everything treated exactly the same?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
Sarion posted:It's almost as if these people lack any sense of nuance. Why isn't everything treated exactly the same?! Because that's how you get Communism, that's why.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 16:54
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Keep in mind that, according to the report they have cited (not that they bothered reading it beyond the title before getting into full outrage mode), the police immediately started a manhunt after the suspected killers, which are now in custody pending at the very least a murder charge. I point all of that out, and how it critically contrasts with the Trayvon Martin case, only to end up getting called a troll for my trouble. "Why won't someone do something about *this* then?!" "Because the police already took care of it?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 18:11
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:It's been a thing for a little while now that people bring up some case of black people killing white people and trying to compare it to the Trayvon Martin case, and ignore how in the incidents they bring up the black suspects are caught and indicted instantly. Yeah, and in some cases they even pull out old old cases where the people have already been convicted and are sitting on death row right now. Yet you still get "WHY ISN'T THE LIEBERAL LAMESTREAM MEDIA TALKING ABOUT THIS?!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2012 19:07
|
|
|
There's some FB image making the rounds among my conservative relatives that sperges on about how everyone on welfare should be drug-tested, etc... In response, I put up a big post talking about the Florida welfare drug-testing program, how it's actually cost Florida money, how the company that's contracted to do the testing used to have Governor Rick Scott as its CEO, how only 2.6% of people tested positive for drugs (and 8.6% of the general Florida population uses drugs, so you're ALREADY at 1/3 of the rest of the state), and how it puts a burden on already financially strapped people by requiring them to front the cost for the test and then wait to be reimbursed by the state. Did anyone respond to it? NOPE.AVI Just a bunch of people posting "I AGREE WITH YOU, *relative's name here*!" and the like. For gently caress's sake, you idiots, at least TRY to make some kind of counterargument rather than just "HERP DERP STATISTICS AND INFORMATION DON'T MATTER gently caress THE POORS!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 19:21
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:There's some FB image making the rounds among my conservative relatives that sperges on about how everyone on welfare should be drug-tested, etc... "But I have to get drug tested (by my employer) to get MY money! Why shouldn't THEY have to!?": every single person i've had this argument with. Seriously, I can explain to them with facts that it costs more money then it saves, that's it's unconstitutional, etc, and actually get them to AGREE with me and come right up to the brink of having an epiphany...and then they fall right back on that line. It's like their twisted idea of 'fairness' trumps reality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 21:54
|
|
|
Popular Human posted:"But I have to get drug tested (by my employer) to get MY money! Why shouldn't THEY have to!?": every single person i've had this argument with. Seriously, I can explain to them with facts that it costs more money then it saves, that's it's unconstitutional, etc, and actually get them to AGREE with me and come right up to the brink of having an epiphany...and then they fall right back on that line. It's like their twisted idea of 'fairness' trumps reality. It's amazing how the conclusion they always reach is "drug test those fuckers too" and not "stop drug testing me".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
Soviet Commubot posted:It's amazing how the conclusion they always reach is "drug test those fuckers too" and not "stop drug testing me". It's because using drugs is considered a moral failing and we must destroy the morally corrupt at any cost. Obviously they would never use them and have nothing to hide so they have nothing to fear and anyone who is against drug testing is a meth-addled monster that must be denied.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:05
|
|
|
Popular Human posted:"But I have to get drug tested (by my employer) to get MY money! Why shouldn't THEY have to!?": every single person i've had this argument with. Seriously, I can explain to them with facts that it costs more money then it saves, that's it's unconstitutional, etc, and actually get them to AGREE with me and come right up to the brink of having an epiphany...and then they fall right back on that line. It's like their twisted idea of 'fairness' trumps reality. I think we should extend this to other public services. Want to use the library? Drug test. Public park? We don't want drug users having a picnic. Get a tax rebate or deduction? Not until you go see the testing center first. I mean hell, if we're really concerned about drug users public safety seems a bigger issue than wasted tax dollars. Mandate that all cars have an ignition lock system that only comes unlocked if you pee into a special device that tests your urine for drugs or alcohol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Mandate that all cars have an ignition lock system that only comes unlocked if you pee into a special device that tests your urine for drugs or alcohol. Christ, don't give them ideas. Also, I've never had to get drug tested at my current job 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
I've been drugtested once, when I worked retail. I can only assume anyone complaining about getting drug tested doesn't bootstrap hard enough and should lose their right to complain until they get some ambition.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:I've been drugtested once, when I worked retail. I can only assume anyone complaining about getting drug tested doesn't bootstrap hard enough and should lose their right to complain until they get some ambition. Same. I was drug tested to work weekends as a cashier, but haven't been drug tested in nearly a decade within my profession.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2012 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 16:38 |
|
|
Tried searching the thread and couldn't find good statistics about drug use and welfare. I googled to find the amount testing costed Florida, but idiot on Facebook says "it's worth it to keep drug users off welfare!" edit: oh gently caress, one of his friends jumped in and said that statistics lie. should I just throw my hands up and call it a day? bairfanx fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Jun 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 04:46
|
|
