|
LeJackal posted:There's been enough talk of repealing the 2nd, why stop there? Repeal everything but the Second Amendment. Delete the US Code. Abolish Civil laws and the entirety of American Jurisprudence. In it's place: Single Payer GunCare. Nationalize the gun industry and the ammo industry. Every human within the borders of the United States of American will be armed with 3 guns: Rifle, Shotgun, Handgun. All cars will come with a Browning M2HB mounted turret. M249 available for compacts. All gas stations and post offices will be converted to facilitate necessary ammunition resupplies. Mandatory Open and Concealed carry. The only law is the gun and your will. We have made our choice and will leave the question of the soundness of commercial public armament to whatever creature manages to crawl its way out of our corpse encrusted land. Load your weapons, Train your children. Dehumanize yourself, and face unto bloodshed.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:There's a difference between 'Criticism' and 'Let's round them up, put them in camps, and deport them' Okay then. How does one criticize the homophobic, patriarchal, anti-individual-rights parts of Islamic scripture (and there are very many of these) without "painting all muslims with broad strokes"? Does all criticism of the actual religion itself (which is a collection of words and ideas, not an actual person or people) necessarily equate to painting all Muslims with broad strokes? Is the only permissible criticism of regressive, patriarchal Islamic doctrine to point out OTHER selections of Islamic doctrine that could theoretically be construed as possibly contradicting the patriarchal parts? Because that is literally the only form of criticism of Islamic doctrine that I've seen the religious apologists on this forum be willing to get behind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Guns kill thousands of people a year and free speech or the lack of quartered soldiers don't do that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
zoux posted:Houston Chronicle has a slideshow of 50 front pages and how they chose to frame the issue, very interesting. This is a cool link, unfortunately it keeps crashing my browser around the 10th cover 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Okay then. How does one criticize the homophobic, patriarchal, anti-individual-rights parts of Islamic scripture (and there are very many of these) without "painting all muslims with broad strokes"? Does all criticism of the actual religion itself (which is a collection of words and ideas, not an actual person or people) necessarily equate to painting all Muslims with broad strokes? Is the only permissible criticism of regressive, patriarchal Islamic doctrine to point out OTHER selections of Islamic doctrine that could theoretically be construed as possibly contradicting the patriarchal parts? Because that is literally the only form of criticism of Islamic doctrine that I've seen the religious apologists on this forum be willing to get behind. By focusing only islam or trying to make this issue about islam you're missing the larger point. Like, hate and bigotry is hardly unique to Islam or even Religion. You also should take a wider view that many people are adherents of religions with bad histories w/r/t LGBT people do not hold to those beliefs. Pretending that only Islam has a problem with LGBT or that it's problems are more serious than others is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Okay then. How does one criticize the homophobic, patriarchal, anti-individual-rights parts of Islamic scripture (and there are very many of these) without "painting all muslims with broad strokes"? Does all criticism of the actual religion itself (which is a collection of words and ideas, not an actual person or people) necessarily equate to painting all Muslims with broad strokes? Is the only permissible criticism of regressive, patriarchal Islamic doctrine to point out OTHER selections of Islamic doctrine that could theoretically be construed as possibly contradicting the patriarchal parts? Because that is literally the only form of criticism of Islamic doctrine that I've seen the religious apologists on this forum be willing to get behind. has anyone actually tried to shut down criticism on the basis that it is criticism rather than the basis that it is at least potentially incorrect like can you provide an example of this (pretending there's something special about islam that makes it more prone to cause incidents like this than any number of other things including American macho culture, Christianity, etc. falls under "incorrect") Like, this guy had shittons of problems; domestic violence, steroid abuse, etc. but you want to drag Islam into the public square and shame it more than any of the other potential culprits here. Why do you think that is? emdash fucked around with this message at 19:07 on Jun 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
emdash posted:has anyone actually tried to shut down criticism on the basis that it is criticism rather than the basis that it is at least potentially incorrect nobody who complains about this ever can, because whining about censorship and groupthink is just a way of making the people who are pointing out your bigotry into the real villans. it's just a lazy rhetorical crutch, nothing more
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
Wakko posted:B-b-b-but we all know democrats don't want to ban guns... they want common sense gun control! queer people who defend themselves from homophobic attackers are sent to prison for not letting themselves get murdered
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Wakko posted:B-b-b-but we all know democrats don't want to ban guns... they want common sense gun control!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Guns kill thousands of people a year and free speech or the lack of quartered soldiers don't do that. This is debatable. Free speech sacrifices the common good for civil liberties (to be clear, I'm not saying it shouldn't). See: Right-wing talk Radio; it's a cesspool of hate, designed to sell dick pills, gold bonds and guns. It has the nasty effect of turning generations of Americans into slavering lunatics who hate "the other".
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/burgessev/status/742413950151708672
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Stereotype posted:Guns kill thousands of people a year Guns are sometimes used to murder people, yes. Far less often than for any lawful purpose, but counter to your claim guns do not rise up and take lives of their own volition. Stereotype posted:free speech or the lack of quartered soldiers don't do that. I think that it could be argued that free expression - like religious fanaticism for example, is in fact responsible for driving people to violence. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
2016 and LeJackal is literally still peddling "guns don't kill people, people kill people" nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
friendly reminder that on the same day as the Orlando attack a white non-Muslim dude was arrested with guns and explosives planning to attack the LA Pride parade "radical Islamism" is part of the equation but there are much deeper and wide-spread problems in American society that enable these attacks
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Gay people shooting people that threaten them with protection under stand your ground laws would lead to some interesting outcomes to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Guns are sometimes used to murder people, yes. Far less often than for any lawful purpose, but counter to your claim guns do not rise up and take lives of their own volition. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
emdash posted:Like, this guy had shittons of problems; domestic violence, steroid abuse, etc. but you want to drag Islam into the public square and shame it more than any of the other potential culprits here. Why do you think that is? It's really just the man's pledging himself to ISIS that is bringing all this out of the woodwork. I mean sure, Fox would blame Islam regardless even if he didn't, but you wouldn't have the average person declaring it a Muslim problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:It's really just the man's pledging himself to ISIS that is bringing all this out of the woodwork. I mean sure, Fox would blame Islam regardless even if he didn't, but you wouldn't have the average person declaring it a Muslim problem. they absolutely would
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Those of you who are actually interested in reading about Arab and Islamic attitudes towards homosexuality should read 'Desiring Arabs' by Joseph Massad, part of what he discusses is how western colonialism instilled the modern, codified and criminalized aspects of homophobia into the modern day middle east. https://www.amazon.com/Desiring-Arabs-Joseph-Massad/dp/0226509591 Don't be like a certain racist poster, who actually advocated mass murder, in this thread, take the time to read and educate yourselves on the topic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
lol, if you REALLY want strict gun laws and you want them tomorrow, just encourage minorities to express their 2nd amendment rights via a charity that will ship them guns and ammo. Funding and logistics isn't an issue because there'd be massive crackdowns as soon as you announced it so the org never actually has to exist
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:By focusing only islam or trying to make this issue about islam you're missing the larger point. Like, hate and bigotry is hardly unique to Islam or even Religion. You also should take a wider view that many people are adherents of religions with bad histories w/r/t LGBT people do not hold to those beliefs. You're not exactly wrong, but the other half of the equation that causes widespread violent hatred of LGBT persons (and it is beyond debate that violent hatred of LGBT persons is endemic to the majority of Muslim-majority nations and communities around the world, being a matter of fact) is adherence to anti-individualist cultures that define themselves in ethnic, tribal, patriarchal terms. It is all but unavoidable that such cultures will be anti-gay, since LGBT lifestyles are fundamentally incompatible with a patriarchal clan-based social structure. There are thousands, perhaps millions, of little tyrants in charge of these communities who routinely engage in acts of oppression worse than any government ever could, which only go unremarked upon due to their limited scope. I could start focusing my criticism on these specific cultures and leave all mention of Islam out of it (I think there's a pretty strong argument to be made that the cultural values of rural Afghanistan and Pakistan in particular are the worst sets of values that have ever existed in human history); but I think that would just result in even more vehement accusations of racism coming my way. So I focus on criticizing the religious belief that binds people to those insular cultures by blackmailing them with the threat of social persecution (or death) in this world and eternal torment afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Guns are sometimes used to murder people, yes. Far less often than for any lawful purpose, but counter to your claim guns do not rise up and take lives of their own volition. The vast majority of mortar launches are done for practice, but that doesn't mean I want it to be easy for any citizen to get one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:lol, if you REALLY want strict gun laws and you want them tomorrow, just encourage minorities to express their 2nd amendment rights via a charity that will ship them guns and ammo. Funding and logistics isn't an issue because there'd be massive crackdowns as soon as you announced it so the org never actually has to exist Nah, Democrats have already proven that they are prepared to strip rights from minorities only. They support profiling Muslims and taking their rights away, and leaving everyone else's intact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:16
|
|
LeJackal posted:Guns are sometimes used to murder people, yes. Far less often than for any lawful purpose, but counter to your claim guns do not rise up and take lives of their own volition. Spoons help make people fat, yes. Far less often than for any legitimate purposes. And yes, I would totally want to take the spoon from a fat person even though they can eat with their hands.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
TBeats posted:Spoons help make people fat, yes. Far less often than for any legitimate purposes. And yes, I would totally want to take the spoon from a fat person even though they can eat with their hands. You're an authoritarian, we get it. You can stop now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
just remember re: gun control that firearm owners kill themselves more often than other people so really it's technically correct to say that firearms are responsibly used more often than not
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:they absolutely would I don't think so. The people who knew him, talk about how he was a rabid racist and homophobe, not how devout and looney he was for Islam. Again, Fox & Co. would only shriek "Muslim!" for three months, but normal people would likely just look firmly at the floor and declare it "nothing we can do to prevent it, move along."
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:just remember re: gun control that firearm owners kill themselves more often than other people so really it's technically correct to say that firearms are responsibly used more often than not It's kind of interesting that I've never seen a libertarian argue that gun ownership shouldn't be restricted because it would also remove people's right to commit suicide on their terms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:You're not exactly wrong, but the other half of the equation that causes widespread violent hatred of LGBT persons (and it is beyond debate that violent hatred of LGBT persons is endemic to the majority of Muslim-majority nations and communities around the world, being a matter of fact) is adherence to anti-individualist cultures that define themselves in ethnic, tribal, patriarchal terms. It is all but unavoidable that such cultures will be anti-gay, since LGBT lifestyles are fundamentally incompatible with a patriarchal clan-based social structure. There are thousands, perhaps millions, of little tyrants in charge of these communities who routinely engage in acts of oppression worse than any government ever could, which only go unremarked upon due to their limited scope. My point is that focusing on those issues in regards to what happened in Orlando is misguided.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
emdash posted:Like, this guy had shittons of problems; domestic violence, steroid abuse, etc. but you want to drag Islam into the public square and shame it more than any of the other potential culprits here. Why do you think that is? Because Islam is the only one of those contributing factors for which criticism is declared to be out of bounds. I don't see any self-appointed defenders of wife-beating or steroid abuse sticking up for their pet cause in the media discussion of this attack. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Because Islam is the only one of those contributing factors for which criticism is declared to be out of bounds. I don't see any self-appointed defenders of wife-beating or steroid abuse sticking up for their pet cause in the media discussion of this attack. where is it declared to be out of bounds? please provide specific examples and remember, "criticism is out of bounds" is different than "your specific criticism is incorrect" you have the 1a right to criticize Islam all you want, everyone else has the same right to tell you your concerns are hosed up/misplaced/incorrect
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Because Islam is the only one of those contributing factors for which criticism is declared to be out of bounds. I don't see any self-appointed defenders of wife-beating or steroid abuse sticking up for their pet cause in the media discussion of this attack. Because you're singling out Islam as having some sort of special place in being a catalyst for violence again LGBT people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Because Islam is the only one of those contributing factors for which criticism is declared to be out of bounds. I don't see any self-appointed defenders of wife-beating or steroid abuse sticking up for their pet cause in the media discussion of this attack. so you're admitting that you're concern trolling and playing devil's advocate by taking the stance which you know the highest number of people are going to disagree with well at least you're honest about being a lovely troll
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Because Islam is the only one of those contributing factors for which criticism is declared to be out of bounds. I don't see any self-appointed defenders of wife-beating or steroid abuse sticking up for their pet cause in the media discussion of this attack. one of these things is not like the other
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Has there been much more information on the person arrested in California? Somebody earlier in the thread seemed to suggest that he might not have been planning to murder anyone, but obviously Orlando is eating up all the media oxygen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Those of you who are actually interested in reading about Arab and Islamic attitudes towards homosexuality should read 'Desiring Arabs' by Joseph Massad, part of what he discusses is how western colonialism instilled the modern, codified and criminalized aspects of homophobia into the modern day middle east. Ah yes, I forgot; Western Imperial powers once cut a deal with (pre-existing local groups of) Islamic fundamentalists a century ago. Every act of oppression that any Arab and/or Muslim has engaged in since then is wholly the fault of westerners, since any nation where a white dude has ever set foot is immediately and permanently stripped of all ethical agency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:It's kind of interesting that I've never seen a libertarian argue that gun ownership shouldn't be restricted because it would also remove people's right to commit suicide on their terms. not a libertarian, but realtalk the right to self-termination should be a thing and is functionally part of the trifecta of rights along with self-defense and the defense of democracy that the 2nd amendment protects.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:You're an authoritarian, we get it. You can stop now. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:Ah yes, I forgot; Western Imperial powers once cut a deal with (pre-existing local groups of) Islamic fundamentalists a century ago. Every act of oppression that any Arab and/or Muslim has engaged in since then is wholly the fault of westerners, since any nation where a white dude has ever set foot is immediately and permanently stripped of all ethical agency. while most people are posting "I stand with Orlando", you opted for "I'm with stupid"
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so you're admitting that you're concern trolling and playing devil's advocate by taking the stance which you know the highest number of people are going to disagree with wouldn't it be better if nobody ever did those things and the difficult, contentious questions about current events were perpetually sidelined in favor of an echo chamber of feel-good ideas we can all get behind? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 19:28
|
|