Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
haresfur wrote:
Ok, I had totally blanked on the statement that you started this last circle with. So I went back and retraced.
haresfur wrote: I said these fundamentalists, not all. You went and made a giant leap to change that statement to mean all fundamentalists.
Who these fundamentalists are is quite clear. The Iranian Theocracy. Your deliberate conflation of my statement to mean every kind of fundamentalists under the sun really confused me and I stopped thinking about what I actually said.
I then replied ...
kurtster wrote:
Missing the direction you were trying to take my statement towards.
You threw me a head fake and I bit forgetting my own context.
haresfur wrote:
And then you revealed where you were trying to take this "discussion".
haresfur wrote:
And then it went south into further confusion on my part, which I admitted.
kurtster wrote:
And then the rest of the "discussion".
The context of my original remark which you misrepresented stands. It was about Trump's threat to blow the Iranians to kingdom come, literally, that had everyone in a tizzy. It was a negotiating tactic that finally worked and got the attention of the IRGC or who ever is in charge of Iran and got us to this so called cease fire which ain't working too good.
You baited me with your deliberate misinterpretation of my original statement and I took the bait hook, line and sinker and set me up for a purity test. I have to be so careful to take the arguments that you throw at me literally because all that you are playing for is a gotcha and sometimes I get lost in the sauce. Like this time.
You win.
So why don't you tell me which fundamentalist supporters of your political leaders that you personally support that you have disavowed. Or is your support of your leaders a blank check as you accuse me of the same ?
.
Or not. This whole exchange with you has been a complete waste of my time since it was disingenuous on your part from the beginning.
I will have to be more careful with you going forward, that is if I even bother to consider anything that you direct at me to be sincere and honest on your part to begin with.
Fool me once, shame on you ...
Later, much.
Todays award for the swift and complete backpedal goes to: kurtster.
Also a supporting effort award to "using my own words against me".
So you are talking about religious fundamentalists. We have a beginning.
Pence did not declare himself a fundamentalist, you did when you simply made a value judgment based on your own beliefs.
I have no idea how old you are or what country you actually are from originally but the US went through the argument you are trying to present with JFK. I am old enough to remember that having lived through it. The claims made against JFK being subservient to the Vatican, et al. definitely did not pan out. Just fear mongering partisanship is all it was.
One can be a fundamentalist and that is ok as long as you do not impose your beliefs on others. People are gonna think what they think and feel what they feel.
It is when one aggressively proselytizes and forces their beliefs into actions against others by force I personally have a problem.
Taking it one step further, I am not aware of any Catholics walking around saying convert or die.
Edit : I guess that you would never vote for a Jew either. Joe Lieberman when running for POTUS said that, I'll be your President 24 / 6.
JFK? Wut? You are the one that said fundamentalists need to be stopped. I pointed out that there are plenty of fundamentalists that trump supports. Fundamentalism is believing the religious texts of your choice are the literal truth. So yeah, we should be talking fundamentalism not fundamentalists. There are fundamentalists I respect, except for their fundamentalism. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to find the abundant statements by fundamentalist supporters of trump including those in his government that attack the freedoms of people who don't agree with them. You say you are against people who aggressively proselytize and force their beliefs into actions against others, yet support a president who is more than willing to look away when his supporters do that. More than look away, he actively advances their agendas. You are trying to split hairs but only being a hypocrite, yet again.
Ok, I had totally blanked on the statement that you started this last circle with. So I went back and retraced.
haresfur wrote:
kurtster wrote:
. Most people only have one Congressman. How many places are you registered to vote ? . But seriously, the threats you mentioned are more than likely what brought this deal to happen. The thing that you and likely most everyone else here do not understand is that power is the only thing people like these fundamentalists understand and take seriously.
. And the TACO was so predictable, dave. I would have been very disappointed in you if you hadn't. . Now we see if the ceasefire is real and get the 800 trapped ships in the Gulf out. After that, its anybody's guess what happens next.
So we agree fundamentalists are bad
I said these fundamentalists, not all. You went and made a giant leap to change that statement to mean all fundamentalists.
Who these fundamentalists are is quite clear. The Iranian Theocracy. Your deliberate conflation of my statement to mean every kind of fundamentalists under the sun really confused me and I stopped thinking about what I actually said.
I then replied ...
kurtster wrote:
haresfur wrote:
So we agree fundamentalists are bad
Duh. Unless I'm missing something you might be inferring.
Missing the direction you were trying to take my statement towards.
You threw me a head fake and I bit forgetting my own context.
haresfur wrote:
kurtster wrote:
Duh. Unless I'm missing something you might be inferring.
all fundamentalists
And then you revealed where you were trying to take this "discussion".
haresfur wrote:
kurtster wrote:
Keep going. I'm getting the impression that you think that I am giving some fundamentalists a pass.
Good we are in agreement. But it seems to me like you support trump giving his fundamentalist supporters a pass
And then it went south into further confusion on my part, which I admitted.
kurtster wrote:
haresfur wrote:
Good we are in agreement. But it seems to me like you support trump giving his fundamentalist supporters a pass
Please name these fundamentalists you speak of.
I am seriously in the dark about just exactly who or what you are referring to. I really would like to know what I am apparently missing.
And then the rest of the "discussion".
The context of my original remark which you misrepresented stands. It was about Trump's threat to blow the Iranians to kingdom come, literally, that had everyone in a tizzy. It was a negotiating tactic that finally worked and got the attention of the IRGC or who ever is in charge of Iran and got us to this so called cease fire which ain't working too good.
You baited me with your deliberate misinterpretation of my original statement and I took the bait hook, line and sinker and set me up for a purity test. I have to be so careful to take the arguments that you throw at me literally because all that you are playing for is a gotcha and sometimes I get lost in the sauce. Like this time.
You win.
So why don't you tell me which fundamentalist supporters of your political leaders that you personally support that you have disavowed. Or is your support of your leaders a blank check as you accuse me of the same ? . Or not. This whole exchange with you has been a complete waste of my time since it was disingenuous on your part from the beginning.
I will have to be more careful with you going forward, that is if I even bother to consider anything that you direct at me to be sincere and honest on your part to begin with.
So you are talking about religious fundamentalists. We have a beginning.
Pence did not declare himself a fundamentalist, you did when you simply made a value judgment based on your own beliefs.
I have no idea how old you are or what country you actually are from originally but the US went through the argument you are trying to present with JFK. I am old enough to remember that having lived through it. The claims made against JFK being subservient to the Vatican, et al. definitely did not pan out. Just fear mongering partisanship is all it was.
One can be a fundamentalist and that is ok as long as you do not impose your beliefs on others. People are gonna think what they think and feel what they feel.
It is when one aggressively proselytizes and forces their beliefs into actions against others by force I personally have a problem.
Taking it one step further, I am not aware of any Catholics walking around saying convert or die.
Edit : I guess that you would never vote for a Jew either. Joe Lieberman when running for POTUS said that, I'll be your President 24 / 6.
JFK? Wut? You are the one that said fundamentalists need to be stopped. I pointed out that there are plenty of fundamentalists that trump supports. Fundamentalism is believing the religious texts of your choice are the literal truth. So yeah, we should be talking fundamentalism not fundamentalists. There are fundamentalists I respect, except for their fundamentalism. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to find the abundant statements by fundamentalist supporters of trump including those in his government that attack the freedoms of people who don't agree with them. You say you are against people who aggressively proselytize and force their beliefs into actions against others, yet support a president who is more than willing to look away when his supporters do that. More than look away, he actively advances their agendas. You are trying to split hairs but only being a hypocrite, yet again.
I said having an immigration law with caps was better than having no law with no caps. You preferred open borders I guess.
We're talking about fundamentalists imposing their beliefs on a population... and the overturning of Roe v. Wade was a religiously driven campaign to remove a Constitutional right against the will of two-thirds of the country... which you support.
That makes you in support of (and I quote:) - "a fundamentalist and that is ok as long as you do not impose your beliefs on others."
You refuse to accept that it's impossible not to be hypocritical when supporting everything Trump does. He stands for everything...and nothing...so long as he makes money doing it.
And the TACO was so predictable, dave. I would have been very disappointed in you if you hadn't.
