(03-14-2015, 11:22 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I got just what I expected from all the liberal hens.

I'm not Liberal. I lean more to the right than to the left and I'm a registered Independent.

Pfft. Name calling. That's all you've got when you can't debate your point successfully.

Those of you who toss out "liberal" -- in attempt to mock or insult those who provide facts and opinions that conflict with your beliefs -- look really ignorant, MS.

First off, by definition, "liberal" is only a negative descriptor to close-minded, intolerant people. Do you even know what liberal means? I don't think you do, seriously. Look it up.

Secondly, aside from a couple who don't live in the US, I can't off the top of my head think of any regs posting here who would even qualify as straight-up "liberal" in terms of political jargon, based on everyone's posts.

Lastly,

(03-14-2015, 11:37 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Look it up.

No one who uses Liberal as an insult will do that. It will force them to be confronted with their wrongness.

Hehehe

Ladies I can't talk about any of this with you.

To me, ignorance is when an American citizen tries to claim that Islam, as we currently know it, is the same as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and any other religion.

I may seem off my rocker to you, but I believe Islam would love to continue to spread around the world, and in particular, take over the West.

It's gaining massive strongholds in Europe and they're making their move here.

So, go ahead and criticize me for thinking the way I do. You folks keep your heads in the sand and keep telling yourselves the crazy right-wingers are just hateful.

I really believe there'll be an "I told you so" moment sooner than you think.

You're talking about extremism not Islam!

MS -- I don't think you are generally hateful; I think you are ignorant and extremely fragile when it comes to some topics.

You generalize and criticize everything that conflicts with your ideology, and then whine or clam up when you get challenged or criticized on it.

It makes you look like more of a hen than a cock yourself, to me.

(03-14-2015, 12:08 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: MS -- I don't think you are generally hateful; I think you are ignorant and extremely fragile when it comes to some topics.

You generalize and criticize everything that conflicts with your ideology, and then whine or clam up when you get challenged or criticized on it.

It makes you look like more of a hen than a cock yourself, to me.

This thread is about Iran, Israel and what's being done to ensure that Iran doesn't make good on their desire to create a nuclear weapon.

It has gone in a few different directions as some of us express their reservations about dealing with the Ayatollah, our President's feebleness/convictions, the Constitutiion and Islam versus all other religions.

Tell me again how I've clammed up?

I believe you know exactly where I stand:

A. I'd take the people of Israel over the people of Iran any day (and I say that knowing that the majority of Iranians are moderate, but when there's an Ayatollah to answer to, forget it).

B. I agree with what the 47 senators did in principle. A message sent that first and foremost most Americans don't trust Iran, and dealing in Good Faith with them is a joke.

C. Many in our Mock Forum believe in unicorns, fuzzy bunnies and yellow brick roads when it comes the seriousness of this particular issue.

D. The United States today is much weaker than it was just 30 years ago. Our nation's makeup has changed so much. A belief that our country is the best (see: morally and economically superior to others) is gone.

I don't feel an attitude that Americans would fight for what they believe in. I'm not talking about our young people that are in the Armed Forces, I'm talking about those that are fat & happy & content and just don't want anybody to bother them.

HotD I know you'll come back at me with some sort of admonishment. Go ahead.

I know where I stand.

I won't admonish you for reiterating your positions. I'd be interested in hearing your answers to specific questions posed to you in response to your comments about those positions upthread, but you're not obligated to answer them and that's not a problem.

"Tell me again how I've clammed up", you say -- Jesus, MS. You told us yourself you were clamming up, just this morning. Remember when you said you weren't gonna answer questions (you labeled them as "silly"; they weren't) and that you couldn't talk to us liberal hen ladies about this issue? I'm glad you seem to have changed your mind.

You say: "Many in our Mock Forum believe in unicorns, fuzzy bunnies and yellow brick roads when it comes the seriousness of this particular issue." I suspect this might be one of those questions that you elect not to answer, but if you're up for it, I'd like to know who you're talking about? I've read every post related to this issue here and seen some seriously interesting comments and viewpoints from both sides, some of them even backed up with fact and rationale. Somehow I missed the unicorns, fuzzy bunnies, and yellow brick roads to which you refer.

^ I was searching for a vehicle in which to insert 'fuzzy bunnies' and found it.

Back to the question: "who are those folks that search for the Emerald City?"

I think they know who they are.

Anytime I name names around here it goes over like a fart in church (another great line I've been waiting to use). Remember when I used Shawshank's "why are you so obtuse?" last year?

HotD, I don't enjoy debating as much as you. You are very well prepared, and are very good at citing facts and figures to support your stances.

This is strictly ideology for me. We see things differently, and that's just fine.

(03-14-2015, 01:41 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Back to the question: "who are those folks that search for the Emerald City?"

I think they know who they are.

I know you think I'm one of them and that's okay, you're entitled to your opinion. I say that sincerely. The fact is it's as wrong as when you say I don't like white men. I still can't get over that one.

The only reason I can see for a bunny NOT to be fuzzy is if it's for dinner.

I like fuzzy bunnies.

(03-14-2015, 02:00 PM)username Wrote: I like fuzzy bunnies.

I rescued one last year that had fallen into one of our window wells. Just a baby. I think it had lost its mother. We also have a fox in the neighborhood.

I wasn't too optimistic about its future.

You still haven't answered the question as to why the president should defend or address Christianity when separation of church and state is an absolute, MS. Calling us liberal hens wasn't an answer. Do you think if Obama openly embraced Christianity that would be a better deterrent to those pesky muslims taking over?

Also I don't watch the news often so I don't know every damn thing the man says. If you have examples of him embracing Islam I'll believe it if I see it.

(03-14-2015, 03:02 PM)sally Wrote: You still haven't answered the question as to why the president should defend or address Christianity when separation of church and state is an absolute, MS. Calling us liberal hens wasn't an answer. Do you think if Obama openly embraced Christianity that would be a better deterrent to those pesky muslims taking over?

I think if he took a stronger public stance when it comes to Islam it would be helpful, yes.

He won't address any of the groups of thugs (boko haram, ISIS, al-shabaab) as Islamic terrorists, because he doesn't want to offend anyone. And yet, the Koran has nearly 100 verses that promote violence against non-believers.

What do we believe this religion really stands for?

And when the three Muslim students were murdered in North Carolina, he was quick to label them as Muslim victims instead of just victims at the hand of a self-pronounced atheist.

(03-14-2015, 01:41 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: ^ I was searching for a vehicle in which to insert 'fuzzy bunnies' and found it.

Back to the question: "who are those folks that search for the Emerald City?"

I think they know who they are.

Anytime I name names around here it goes over like a fart in church (another great line I've been waiting to use). Remember when I used Shawshank's "why are you so obtuse?" last year?

HotD, I don't enjoy debating as much as you. You are very well prepared, and are very good at citing facts and figures to support your stances.

This is strictly ideology for me. We see things differently, and that's just fine.

I don't know if I enjoy debating any more than you or most others. But, for me, discussion and debate sure beats the hell outta "this is the way it is...because this is the way it was... and I don't wanna consider any truths, facts, or alternate viewpoints that require me to venture outta my cast-in-stone internal comfort zone...I know where I stand, period".

I do agree with you that members of the community having different viewpoints on the same topics is fine (healthy, even). So, it's ironic to me that you characterize people in favor of peace on earth, where possible (with no reward other than minimizing pain and unnatural death to other human beings) as fantastical seekers of a fictional Emerald City.

I find it ironic because you, MS, are one who asks for guidance from a supreme entity, one you cannot see, to help you conduct yourself on this earth in a manner which will ensure your place in Heaven after you die. Heaven - described in Revelations as a place where the walls will be made of pure diamond and the city of pure gold. A place where the foundation will be filled with precious stones. A place where God dwells and the light from His glory will shine through the stones producing a brilliant rainbow of colors.

People seeking an Emerald City on earth vs. people seeking a Precious Diamond-Walled Golden City in the afterlife? I don't see where the latter is less fantastical and hopeful than the former, myself. Anyway, the Bible doesn't say anything about fuzzy bunnies, as far as I know, but heaven sounds like a very liberal place and I bet the angels will let you hold on to yours, MS.

People sometimes have to fight for what they believe in HotD. Seekers of peace are noble, yes, but do not be gullible enough to be led to slaughter. Know what you're dealing with.

For me that's what this issue is about.

Iran has long proclaimed 'Death to America' 'Death to Israel'. We want to enter into some sort of good faith agreement with these people?

That really has been my point throughout all of this.

As for Revelation, it can be a disturbing Book to read.

If most people just tried to emulate Christ's life, even if you don't believe he's the Son Of God, the world be 1000x better than it is.

'Love your neighbor', 'help the poor' 'feed the hungry'.

It's all so basic, and yet is met with such skepticism.

(03-14-2015, 03:25 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote:

(03-14-2015, 03:02 PM)sally Wrote: You still haven't answered the question as to why the president should defend or address Christianity when separation of church and state is an absolute, MS. Calling us liberal hens wasn't an answer. Do you think if Obama openly embraced Christianity that would be a better deterrent to those pesky muslims taking over?

I think if he took a stronger public stance when it comes to Islam it would be helpful, yes.

He won't address any of the groups of thugs (boko haram, ISIS, al-shabaab) as Islamic terrorists, because he doesn't want to offend anyone. And yet, the Koran has nearly 100 verses that promote violence against non-believers.

What do we believe this religion really stands for?

And when the three Muslim students were murdered in North Carolina, he was quick to label them as Muslim victims instead of just victims at the hand of a self-pronounced atheist.

What the fuck are you talking about, I just found 100 videos where he addresses them as terrorists. Here is just one of the many I clicked on. It's like you people watch the news and go insane or something and just make up ridiculous shit in your feeble little minds. Which reminds me, where is Cars? He must have been stricken with ebola by now.

And you still haven't even answered my question.

(03-14-2015, 12:46 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: This thread is about Iran, Israel and what's being done to ensure that Iran doesn't make good on their desire to create a nuclear weapon.

Why are Israelis so much more deserving than Palestinians when it comes to the land and freedoms?