|
Here's a doozie for Thursday morning: Not sure what my favorite part is. The scare quotes around "bible," or the fact that a direct quote from the Quran made sure to include the parenthetical redirection that infidels actually means all non-muslims (sic).
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Pendevil posted:I know it doesn't get much traction here, particularly after the recent shootings in CO and WI, but as someone pretty loving leftist in politics, I've still maintained a pretty pro-gun opinion. Now granted, I'm from the Midwest and was raised in a military family and so guns were just kind of part of growing up, but even a cursory look at the history of labor and civil rights in this country indicates to me that an armed working class is in a better position to demand fair conditions. I think a lot of people agree with you. In fact this little topic was started by someone saying that it should be a privilege over a right. That strikes me as a very reasonable argument, know what the gently caress you are doing before you get to have objects designed to kill people. That’s why handgun laws are more strict then shotgun/rifle laws. Problem is the arguments you hear are. “THEY WANNA TAKE OUR GUNS” Gun control is seen as taking away all guns, because you know, people have tried that ever in America. Who in any position of power in the last decade has said anything about taking guns away? Serious question. Its telling when the NRA’s argument is that Obama relaxed gun laws to trick you into voting for him so he could literally take all your guns. Remember when there was a run on ammo in the south after Obama was elected because he was a’comin. Do these guys look at their gun rack and not realize they were loving wrong? Probably not. When Trevon Martin was killed foxnews was talking about how lieberals were going to use this to enact gun control laws. Part of me thinks that’s full of crap, the other part thinks. Yeah idiotic gated neighborhood vigilantes shouldn’t be allowed to shoot loving children with guns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:03
|
|
|
Iceberg-Slim posted:Here's a doozie for Thursday morning: "If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant, And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die." - Deuteronomy 17:2-5
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:15
|
|
|
Iceberg-Slim posted:Here's a doozie for Thursday morning: You can always respond with, an OT verse commanding the forces to go kill women and infants as some more sick beliefs these Muslims have, wait a bit then apologize for your mistake, that was from Samuel. http://bible.cc/1_samuel/15-3.htm For any religion with a huge text, it is super easy cherrypick things out of context and I bet you could assert any position you wanted for them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:16
|
|
|
Yeah, I have a little txt file of relevant verses to respond with when images like this occasionally appear. For all the effort it takes to point on the glaring fallacy to the individual who sent it, three more people are opening MS paint and conjuring up new macros with scarier brown people and increasingly illegible fonts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:20
|
|
|
I'm aware of the use of military forces to break labor disputes, I just don't see it going beyond conventional weapons, nor do I believe, given the recent actions of some police, that government would necessarily balk at using weapons on unarmed citizenry. Truthfully, if you could guarantee me a far better social safety net, universal mental health care and humane rehabilitative prison reform, which I'd think would go much further towards alleviating the causes of such crimes, I'd dump my guns tomorrow. At any rate I have no emails to offer, so I'll stop my part in the derail now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
Iceberg-Slim posted:Here's a doozie for Thursday morning: Well, you could always point out that 8:59 is "Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them)." Al-Anfal 8:60 posted:"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly." Soundly beaten on Deuteronomy 17:2-5 I see, thank you Preview Reply function.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 16:25
|
|
|
Anubis posted:I have equal confidence that [...] the government would balk at the concept of gunning down people participating in widespread civil disobedience or other widespread unarmed rebellion. I admire your hopefulness
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:You can always respond with, an OT verse commanding the forces to go kill women and infants as some more sick beliefs these Muslims have, wait a bit then apologize for your mistake, that was from Samuel. http://bible.cc/1_samuel/15-3.htm Or just send them this link http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/ and ask them to back up the 97% figure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
To be fair, the only reason I have any sort of confidence is that with 24 hour news and cameras everywhere I don't think they would be able to get away with it as easily. Not to say that they wouldn't try to instigate something with police plants or the like. Really I was specifically responding to the statement, "but even a cursory look at the history of labor and civil rights in this country indicates to me that an armed working class is in a better position to demand fair conditions." Which I don't hold true for the modern era, and arguably even previous eras since time and again when unions managed to put together a militia type force to respond to violence they where responded to with an escalation of force that they could not reasonably face. (IE: bombers or train mounted machine guns in the specific instance I noted.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
evilbastard posted:Well, you could always point out that 8:59 is "Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better (of the godly): they will never frustrate (them)." And don't forget that 8:61 says "If they resort to peace, so shall you, and put your trust in GOD. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient." I guess we should just keep bombing the poo poo out of them, though, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 18:27
|
|
|
So is it reasonable to take any quote from any religious text out of context? It always seems like no matter what the quote is there's always a contradiction, either in the next passage or in another book that doesn't seem to recognize what the other books said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
Religious books contradict themselves, shocking I knowQuran 109:6 posted:Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 19:11
|
|
|
myron cope posted:So is it reasonable to take any quote from any religious text out of context? It always seems like no matter what the quote is there's always a contradiction, either in the next passage or in another book that doesn't seem to recognize what the other books said. Religious texts tend to not be very reasonable, so quoting them either which way isn't going to be so hot. When talking to someone who believes they are literally the word of some deity or something close to that however, I guess it can be useful to point out these contradictions to try to get their brains to start working or something. Can't say I've ever seen it work though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 19:11
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Religious texts tend to not be very reasonable, so quoting them either which way isn't going to be so hot. When talking to someone who believes they are literally the word of some deity or something close to that however, I guess it can be useful to point out these contradictions to try to get their brains to start working or something. Can't say I've ever seen it work though. A friend and I were debating with a guy on his Facebook wall about gay marriage. He argued that the Bible says it's wrong. We threw a bunch of lines about wearing polyester, getting tattoos, eating shellfish, marrying your brother's widow, and other stuff at him. He was like, "Those were different times, and those rules weren't supposed to apply to everybody." He didn't seem to think the same applied to homosexuality, though. Then he started telling me that being a homosexual is dangerous due to higher rates of suicide and drug abuse. I responded "Because attitudes like this stigmatize being gay, leading to depression." He denied the connection and then quit the debate before he told me whether or not he thought homosexuality was a choice. Though I assume he thinks it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 19:34
|
|
|
Sulphuric Sundae posted:Then he started telling me that being a homosexual is dangerous due to higher rates of suicide and drug abuse. I responded "Because attitudes like this stigmatize being gay, leading to depression." He denied the connection and then quit the debate before he told me whether or not he thought homosexuality was a choice. Though I assume he thinks it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
Walter posted:If you insist on using numerals in the chart itself, include a $ before each one. Someone should never have to spend a significant amount of time trying to figure out what your numbers mean, it should be abundantly clear. Thanks for this. The color options in Numbers are exceptionally lovely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Just had my wife's friend tell me she loves :24: because of how accurately it portrays terrorists, terrorism... etc.. muzzzlimmssss. But hated the later seasons because they went "PC." I felt like we didn't watch the same show. I liked it, but because how silly and over the top it was. Reminds me of that congressman who used 24 as an example to push what lovely ideas he had.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:49
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:Just had my wife's friend tell me she loves :24: because of how accurately it portrays terrorists, terrorism... etc.. muzzzlimmssss. But hated the later seasons because they went "PC." I felt like we didn't watch the same show. I liked it, but because how silly and over the top it was. Not congressman, Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia quote:"Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles. ... He saved hundreds of thousands of lives," Judge Scalia said. Then, recalling Season 2, where the agent's rough interrogation tactics saved California from a terrorist nuke, the Supreme Court judge etched a line in the sand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:52
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:Just had my wife's friend tell me she loves :24: because of how accurately it portrays terrorists, terrorism... etc.. muzzzlimmssss. But hated the later seasons because they went "PC." I felt like we didn't watch the same show. I liked it, but because how silly and over the top it was. Didn't they not have Muslim terrorists until a few seasons in? Then again, they were the ones who actually managed to detonate a nuke on American soil.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Didn't they not have Muslim terrorists until a few seasons in? There was "Second Wave" in season 2 with Syed Ali. Season 4 had Habib Marwan. Season 6 had Abu Fayed. Then some Islamic Republic of Kamistan dudes in season 8. So maybe like half of the show's villains were "Middle Eastern"? Then they had a bunch of Russian-type dudes too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 23:05
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:Just had my wife's friend tell me she loves :24: because of how accurately it portrays terrorists, terrorism... etc.. muzzzlimmssss. But hated the later seasons because they went "PC." I felt like we didn't watch the same show. I liked it, but because how silly and over the top it was. A friend of mine tried to get me into the 2nd season. I watched part of it where they talk about a virus being spread inside of mp3s that would somehow destroy the entire internet. I immediately turned it off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 23:32
|
|
|
myron cope posted:So is it reasonable to take any quote from any religious text out of context? It always seems like no matter what the quote is there's always a contradiction, either in the next passage or in another book that doesn't seem to recognize what the other books said. This particular set of verses doesn't really have a contradiction at all if you read them in sequence. It basically says that the enemies of God are your enemies, and you should take up any arms available to defeat them. If your enemies are peaceful, though, then you should also be peaceful, because God will sort out the right from the wrong. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what it says because people that want to be terrorists will just make something up, just like freepers will make up Quran verses, paragraphs of legislation, UN resolutions, and whatever else out of whole cloth just because it fits their narrative of being both an overwhelming majority and a persecuted minority.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
I would imagine this has been posted before, but this is the first time I've seen it. Nothing like that down-home straight-talkin' common sense! Time was you could kill a black man for looking cross-ways at a white woman, now you'll get the gas chamber for it! WHAT HAPPENED TO AMERICA?!? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
Relative on facebook was just railing against the minimum wage increase first saying that it would cause inflation, then he moved the goalposts and said it would cause a recession. He also says that any moron who knows anything about 'free-market economics' knows that increasing the minimum wage does this and anyone who doesn't already know this is not fit to vote. Maybe I live in a blue cocoon, but that is the first time I have heard ANYONE, not even mises moron, say anything about how minimum wage increases cause recessions. I mean, sure, its kind of convincing to see increases in minimum wage followed by... at some time... a recession but its like he totally just doesn't remember that other things that could cause a recession. Doctor Butts fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Aug 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 01:56
|
|
|
Who has those welfare/medicaid links? Normally I'd just defriend the guy who posted this, but he was a good friend a long time ago. He's just a poorly educate blue collar highschool drop out and doesn't know any better. If I get called out on calling him out, I want some sources.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:06
|
|
|
We get recessions for shittier payoffs. I'd be okay with a year of negative gdp growth if it meant the minimum wage increased to 12.50. At least there's a tradeoff, the last recession only benefited the finance industry and real estate agents.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:11
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I would imagine this has been posted before, but this is the first time I've seen it. Parts of it have shown up here before, if not all of it at one time or another. If I was in a better mood I'd probably respond to each point, but they pretty much all boil down to complete falsehoods or strawmen. Yep you can't have a nativity scene in a PUBLIC park; but you can still have one in front of every church (or private business if you wanted). I'd like to see them put pornography in all those places. I think what is most impressive is that the whole thing is only 7 sentences.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:25
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:Who has those welfare/medicaid links? If you look up TANF for your state (or the state he lives in) it will probably give you the best info, since it can vary some. For example, here's Texas; on this site you can find out all kinds of things like: 1) TANF has work requirements. 2) TANF has time limits for adults. 3) A single mother with 3 kids can receive a maximum of $316 a month. $3700 a year to support a family of four? gently caress yeah, sign me up! Also, little known fact (apparently because people are loving stupid), but you can be well off and then fall on hard times. And when you do, the poo poo you already bought, back when you were working, like your iPhone, doesn't just magically disappear.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:38
|
|
|
There are people who unironically argue you should have to sell poo poo before you go on welfare if that happens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:50
|
|
|
Soonmot posted:Who has those welfare/medicaid links? Do you actually know him IRL? Haul him down to Health and Human Services and show him just how easily he qualifies for food stamps, and the poo poo you have to go through in order to get them. If not, poo poo, time goes on and people change; not necessarily for the better, and I don't think you really want to chase his arguments down the ratholes they'll go down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 02:59
|
|
|
Hey true story: my mom had too much money in her 401k and she had too many assets (25k into a 100k mortgage) and she couldn't get any benefits! That means she couldn't get any assistance and died because she couldn't get any help or medication. She worked almost her entire life (until she was laid off) and paid a lot into the system that hosed her. So, yea, its a personal anecdote, but anyone who thinks someone should be dirt poor before they get assistance can try arguing with my baseball bat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 03:02
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:Hey true story: my mom had too much money in her 401k and she had too many assets (25k into a 100k mortgage) and she couldn't get any benefits! That means she couldn't get any assistance and died because she couldn't get any help or medication. I was just going to say there almost is no real welfare, it's mostly just food stamps or medicaid, and in some states you have to be near homeless to qualify for medicaid, but this is a better response.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 03:09
|
|
|
I finally had to unsubscribe from an old high school friend's facebook feed. It's nonstop Libertarian Obama bashing and complaining about how the government wastes money. His job? Facility Manager at one of the Smithsonian Institute Museums.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
mints posted:I finally had to unsubscribe from an old high school friend's facebook feed. It's nonstop Libertarian Obama bashing and complaining about how the government wastes money. His job? Facility Manager at one of the Smithsonian Institute Museums. So, he's an ivory tower elitist sucking the tax payers dry instead of getting a real job in the private sector. Edit: Regarding the welfare stuff. Every time I go pull info on welfare/medicaid eligibility its kind of a shock. Which it shouldn't be, I've been posting in this thread a long time and the fact that you have to be unbelievably poor isn't news to me. I think what it is though, is that it drives home the point that, not only do we do a lovely job helping people at the bottom, but there are still millions of people who actually do qualify for it at some point in their lives. Its almost unbearably depressing that there are people out there who meet these abysmal requirements. Our country has access to unprecedented amounts of wealth and resources, it just loving shouldn't happen. Sarion fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Aug 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:The thing to remember about Vietnam and Iraq is the insurgencies had outside funding and help. Especially Vietnam. The North didn't win till the US left and the NVA were able to defeat the ARVN in open combat. But by the same token, the American revolutionaries would have lost but for the assistance from France. Iceberg-Slim posted:Here's a doozie for Thursday morning: I want to know where the "97%" figure comes from. It's not sourced so I'm guessing it's just bullshit, because I can think of a dozen non-Muslim terrorists and terrorist groups off the top of my head, e.g. Anders Breivick, the Hutaree, Timothy McVeigh, KKK, FARC, AUC, Shining Path, Tamil Tigers (though defunct since 2009), IRA/Real IRA, Ulster Defence Association, Lord's Resistance Army, and Aum Shinrikyo. Sulphuric Sundae posted:A friend and I were debating with a guy on his Facebook wall about gay marriage. He argued that the Bible says it's wrong. We threw a bunch of lines about wearing polyester, getting tattoos, eating shellfish, marrying your brother's widow, and other stuff at him. He was like, "Those were different times, and those rules weren't supposed to apply to everybody." He didn't seem to think the same applied to homosexuality, though. I frequently do the same thing when it comes to the people quoting the Bible as an authoritative source for condemning homosexuality, gay rights, and gay marriage, but you don't even have to do that because our laws aren't supposed to be based on any given religion anyways. If they pull this "But America is a Christian nation" bullshit, ask them how they'd like it if the US were a majority Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. nation due to changes in immigration patterns and religious conversions. Would they be willing to live up to the tenets of another religion simply because it was favored by the majority of American citizens? I'm guessing that the answer will always be "no," which is the right answer, so they can't honestly pull this special pleading bullshit that we should all have to live up to the stupid loving Bible. Aeka 2.0 posted:Just had my wife's friend tell me she loves :24: because of how accurately it portrays terrorists, terrorism... etc.. muzzzlimmssss. But hated the later seasons because they went "PC." I felt like we didn't watch the same show. I liked it, but because how silly and over the top it was. What's interesting is that there was a "study" of "24" which found that Jack Bauer tortures people on average of 12 times per season. Since each season comprises a single 24-hour day, that means Jack Bauer uses torture 12 times per day, which is just insane and sociopathic. Sarion posted:Parts of it have shown up here before, if not all of it at one time or another. If I was in a better mood I'd probably respond to each point, but they pretty much all boil down to complete falsehoods or strawmen. Yep you can't have a nativity scene in a PUBLIC park; but you can still have one in front of every church (or private business if you wanted). I'd like to see them put pornography in all those places. It only works if you don't actually think about these things at all. You can't have a nativity on public property but you can have something offensive like porn on TV and the internet? How outrageous. Wait, you can't have porn on public property either, but you can have virtually any Christian iconography, symbolism, etc. on TV and the internet. TV at Christmastime is filled with Christian programming. It's not at all an apt comparison. We spend so much money on rehabilitating criminals but no money on victims, that's terrible. Wait a second, victims can sue their perpetrators for damages, compensatory and punitive, and there are plenty of government (local, state, and federal) programs that benefit them, from actual victims services funds (which may cover medical expenses for injuries incurred in the crime, though a universal healthcare would guarantee that this would always happen) and other programs directly dedicated to crime victims, to disability insurance (e.g. if they have PTSD from the crime and can't hold down work or were physically injured) and witness relocation (not necessarily just the US Marshall Service's WITSEC, but also state programs to fund victim and witness relocation). More importantly, the point of spending money on rehabilitation is so that criminals don't reoffend when they leave prison and make more victims, which means that rehabilitation costs are actually preventative victims services. mints posted:I finally had to unsubscribe from an old high school friend's facebook feed. It's nonstop Libertarian Obama bashing and complaining about how the government wastes money. His job? Facility Manager at one of the Smithsonian Institute Museums. You've got to be loving kidding me. The guy's job is dependent on federal funding and he's whining about the government spending money? I really hate the conservative and libertarian canard that they are just against government waste, because it's more of that Orwellian semantics, implying that people who disagree with them are somehow in favor of waste and abuse. No one likes waste and corruption and everyone wants to reduce it as much as possible but that doesn't mean it's possible to eliminate all waste, as it's inevitable to be somewhere below 100% efficiency. Here's David Mitchell summarizing this better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zoz5EuIF_y8
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 04:22
|
|
|
Sarion posted:So, he's an ivory tower elitist sucking the tax payers dry instead of getting a real job in the private sector. The problem is that many people just don't know much about how American social welfare programs work in practice, all they know is the propaganda and stereotypes. Hell, the bullshit spread by the Reagan Administration against welfare is still alive and well, it's just been adapted to modern technology, e.g. "welfare queens with Cadillacs" is now "welfare queens with Escalades/Hummers," "welfare queens with cellular telephones" is now "welfare queens with iPhones," "welfare queens with color TVs" is now "welfare queens with plasma/LED/DLP TVs," etc. Even worse than not understanding what it takes to qualify for welfare programs is not understanding what it's like to actually try to live on welfare, which is the cause of all those stupid right-wing comments from wealthy people claiming they're going to quite their jobs which garner hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars a year in favor of living on welfare becuase taxes are too high and punitive towards the successful. Anyone who currently or has ever actually lived on TANF, WIC, etc. would jump at the chance make $500,000/year with a 38% top marginal income tax bracket.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
mints posted:I finally had to unsubscribe from an old high school friend's facebook feed. It's nonstop Libertarian Obama bashing and complaining about how the government wastes money. His job? Facility Manager at one of the Smithsonian Institute Museums. Oh gently caress, I'm going into Museum Studies and I was hoping I could avoid libertarian assholes.  All the managers at local museums I've interviewed at have been really cool at least, so there's still hope, right? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:Oh gently caress, I'm going into Museum Studies and I was hoping I could avoid libertarian assholes. In this case, facility manger almost certainly means 'leads building maintenance'
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
There's often a big cultural disconnect at intellectual institutions between facilities and every other department because of the white/blue collar split.
Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 07:17 on Aug 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 07:14
|
|
