User

5 plead guilty to terrorism-related charges tied to antifa after Texas shooting https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/5-plead-guilty-to-terrorism-related-charges-tied-to-antifa-after-texas-shooting "DALLAS (AP) — Five people pleaded guilty Wednesday to terrorism-related charges after they were accused of supporting antifa in a July shooting that wounded a police officer outside a Texas immigration detention center."

More spam. Come back with an original thought of your own to share.

That was the point. You claim these things just happen with no explanation. So, by what standards are you saying something is wrong with me?

Let me know when you link to something besides Facebook and/or want to provide the actual substance to back up the assertion here in writing.

Let me know when you link to something besides Facebook and/or want to provide the actual substance to back up the assertion here in writing.

Renee Good was not executed. This stupid, lazy spambot trolling thread falls apart in the first sentence.

Why wouldn't you be investing for your own retirement instead of hoping your kids or the government will take care of you?

You mean, you're being a coward list?

File this under: no shit. We all on the right tried to tell you this last year, but the usual leftist trans defenders have to deny reality. They have to lie, obfuscate, deny reality. All because they want to insist men who claim to be women actually are treated like they are real women and get to beat up girls and women in physical competition unfairly. It should be interesting to see what the Olympics Committee will do now, to facilitate a test that will rule "her" out because she is really a biological male, or if they still let "her" compete. Imane Khelif opens up on ‘natural’ male gene while agreeing to undergo testing for 2028 Olympics " Polarizing boxer Imane Khelif provided context on her biological makeup after becoming the central figure in a debate about transgender athletes during the 2024 Olympics. Khelif, an Algerian who won a boxing gold medal, confirmed to French outlet L’Équipe that she has a female phenotype but also the SRY gene, which is correlated with males."

Once again, this is still you playing the subjective "strong" game. I will call you out in the next thread. You were the one complaining about this, not me. I was just pointing out that you are not keeping them to yourself (your own as you were using it here) when you are on a public forum. It doesn't appear that way, because you refused to acknowledge Him earlier, this appears to be your usual games, where you are defining "belief" a different way. No, I just call out BS when I see it.

1. No, you engage in numerous current event threads on trans issues and push/defend/obfuscate for your modern positions on these that exceed those of over 10 years ago. 2. No, you have not. I asked you a specific question to start and specifically said do not just respond with the same vague you support the institutions response... and that is what you did anyway. 3. Yes, almost everything you do here is a game. You are on a public forum, if you want your positions to be your own, go write in a journal and don't push them here. 4. Very correct. In fact, I will call you out on it moving forward to make the point. 5. Sure thing Mr "Conservative" "Christian" who doesn't believe in Christ or support most Conservative positions...

Even now, this is not about the subjective strength of your opinion, but that you do in fact have one, you do in fact find yourself in most, if not all, of the discussions on modern trans issues, pushing your positions and obfuscating to defend them. Yes, you are balking. You just got done refusing to respond to my points and questions by declaring them to be irrelevant and refusing to talk about current events So... what is the point of responding to a question about your positions by saying your position is that you support these institutions? Just to turn around and when challenged on what those institutions support to say you don't support that and just live with it.... The entire point was me asking you for your positions, and this is why your responding to that with this vague nonsense is just more of your playing games. On here you certainly do agree mostly with leftists, their posts, and their positions on things being discussed. You are the one who claims to be things you are clearly not on a public forum. Why you act surprised or perplexed about this is just more of how you play these games.

1. You brought him up to say your positions today are in line with his then, and you continue to say your positions today are in line with his then, but now that I challenge you on that... as usual, you balk. The fact that you try to conceal, obfuscate, and be obtuse about many of your positions on here is already known. That is the tactic you use because you are unable to defend them, but you still want to push them. 2. Well, the point, which you avoided, is that you claim to believe in all these institutions, but they may go against your positions. Like discrimination. So... if you support all these institutions, surely you supported discrimination when it was legal? Right? 3. Of course. You are an alleged "conservative" who doesn't really believe much of what a conservative would believe, while you support and agree with mostly leftists and leftist positions on here and you are a so-called Christian who doesn't even believe in the most foundational belief that makes someone a CHRISTian.

Once again, possessing a firearm is a right, and I bet you insist people have to have an ID to buy one of those?

1/2: To my point about him being dead for over 10 years, the legislation he voted on back then was not dealing with any of the major issues we are today, it was more narrowly focused on basic human rights concepts such as discrimination. These are not the trans issues you have positions on and defend today and push today. 3: Yes, I am well aware of your general vague notions here, but you have yet to respond to how those things can also be against the things you support... and what then? Were you for those legal frameworks, institutions, etc... before Jim voted on trans discrimination? Did you support discrimination before that? 4. You are conflating broad political policy with individual business acumen. 5. Trump is and still has been the most consequential president in our lifetimes for moving the pro-life movement forward from a policy perspective. You are the one who tries to tell this forum over and over again you are a Conservative and you were the one who tried to compare yourself to Trump, but now that I challenge that, you balk and don't want to play anymore. As usual. When you are put to the test you have to play these games. 6. OK 7. You are a "fan" and you don't think it is the be-all and end-all? Oh man, not much of an evangelist for your faith... I mean, you claim to be Christian, you do really believe that Christ is Lord and faith in him alone is required for salvation? Right?

Sure... what do you define as good and moral though and what do you base that on? I never said you needed a priest to tell you to be good. However, what do you base "good" on? Define "natural moral compass?" and what are those "natural" morals?

LOL, you are here caring an awful lot. Must. Hate. Trump. AAHHHHHHHHHH

What is a woman? Also, the unborn child is not her body.

A complete flop compared to what? As was pointed out, for a documentary, which it was, it did quite well.

It was so vague it could apply to any political party, except substitute out the right wanting to protect our nation's borders with the left-wing folks like you wanting to see the country overrun with lawlessness and open borders madness.

Jesus is still relevant to Christianity... no one can say what Jim's views are on today's political issues. I bring that up for many reasons, but yes, one is to highlight that you hold leftist positions on political issues. But seriously, though, will you actually share the top 5 political views you hold that you think make you a Conservative? Beyond the vagueness of supporting the system, which even falls apart under scrutiny. Well, the average leftist hates debt when it is politically convenient for them, only criticizing those on the right when they are in power. Trump is not about nationalizing industry in general, maybe a handful of examples, same with centralizing power. Where are you on Pro-Life? Where are you on Gun rights? Where are you on freedom of speech and other individual liberties? Where are you on Immigration and borders? The list is longer than the few things you called out and Trump falls on the Conservative side of them. Not quibbling at all, the point is that Religion is still a major factor in American politics today. You are conflating religion with Abrahamic gods as there were more before, and you claim to be Christian, so why are you diminishing your God to "god" like this?

No, there is zero evidence he is a pedophile. That sexual assault case was a sham... The problem is that folks like you are spending an awful lot of time trying to butcher and drug children into being something they are not, want to put men dressed like cheap whores into kindergarten to read to them, and take kids to grown ass men dancing around like cheap whore strippers in front of them... that is kind of creepy. Don't you think?

Jim Flaherty? He has been dead for over 10 years. And I have my doubts that if we went issue by issue you really allign with him... As it stands now, Trump seems more Conservative than you are, I mean, using the term as it is supposed to be used in the context of this discussion, not how you obtusely try to define it. Religion on the decline doesn't mean it is no longer a driving force. Your claim was not less political capital. Without religion, what is that moral center?

No, you are blind and a liar.

How are they emulating either Hitler or Mussolini? You can never actually articulate a real argument, just make these petty absurd claims and then run away.