Ethnic diversity harms a country's social cohesion

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Yes, so do I.  That's no real recommendation though, as to some degree,  I've liked pretty much everyone I've ever met.

Still, such relationships do not prevent me arguing about the stunningly barbaric, (my interpretation) abhorrent and utterly reprehensible behaviour some of them indulge in in the name of their God, and also arguing against the mindmeltingly ridiculous notion that somehow, a frequent difference in pigmentation means there is a motive other than revulsion at behaviour.

Well, under my Canadian passport I find you to be typically Victorian Briton with the Missionary Impulse, par for the course in the Empire.

Under I my American passport, I find you to be filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, of course.

[Guest]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Well, under my Canadian passport I find you to be typically Victorian Briton with the Missionary Impulse, par for the course in the Empire.

Under I my American passport, I find you to be filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, of course.

And I support your right to state both.  If I was offended by either, I would argue that no-one has a right not to be offended.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

And I support your right to state both.  If I was offended by either, I would argue that no-one has a right not to be offended.

I am not offended by you apparently being a filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, the dishonor is your own.

No doubt God fearing Alabama wears your barbs as a badge of honor as well.

Land of the free.  Home of the brave.

Go Bama.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

I am not offended by you apparently being a filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, the dishonor is your own.

No doubt God fearing Alabama wears your barbs as a badge of honor as well.

Land of the free.  Home of the brave.

Go Bama.

 

Well, good. That makes two of us not offended.  And Alabama as well!  The lack of offense is certainly gratifying.

If only we could get it to extend to hippies and their mindless outrage over criticism of Islam.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If only we could get it to extend to hippies and their mindless outrage over criticism of Islam.

I'm not outraged unless and until you cross the threshold of Brandenburg V. Ohio.

Otherwise you can hate on Mooslambs to your hearts content so far as I am concerned.

[jacee]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Well, good. That makes two of us not offended.  And Alabama as well!  The lack of offense is certainly gratifying.

If only we could get it to extend to hippies and their mindless outrage over criticism of Islam.

Obviously there's no point in trying to explain to you how dumb that analogy is. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, jacee said:

Obviously there's no point in trying to explain to you how dumb that analogy is. 

What analogy?  Is it my generic use of the term "hippies"? 

It can't be anything to do with the outrage part.

There's always a point in trying once.

Edited September 15, 2019 by bcsapper

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I'm not outraged unless and until you cross the threshold of Brandenburg V. Ohio.

Otherwise you can hate on Mooslambs to your hearts content so far as I am concerned.

Well, just the bad ones, of course.

I couldn't care less about the rest.

Edited September 15, 2019 by bcsapper

[Dougie93]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Well, just the bad ones, of course.

I can't mind read like you can, I can't glean by telepathy what is in any mans heart nor mind.

I don't find Mooslambs as a creed to be particularly  bad people as my experienced reality.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I can't mind read like you can, I can't glean by telepathy what is in any mans heart nor mind.

I don't find Mooslambs as a creed to be particularly  bad people as my experienced reality.

Like I said, me neither.  Regarding either of your points.

I just don't have any qualms about saying whatever I want about the rest.

Edited September 15, 2019 by bcsapper

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Like I said, me neither.  Regarding either of your points.

I just don't have any qualms about saying whatever I want about all the rest.

But you spoke in contravention of my testimony as an assertion.

I am simply following the logical steps to debunk your irrational fear of religion as not being cogent in opposition to what I said, since you piped up and presented it such, Limey.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

But you spoke in contravention of my testimony as an assertion.

I am simply following the logical steps to debunk your irrational fear of religion as not being cogent in opposition to what I said, since you piped up and presented it such, Limey.

 I probably didn't.  I'm not absolutely sure what you mean in your first sentence there.

But it might be an indication of the big problem with these discussions.  Disgust at those who see their religion as good reason to oppress, torture and kill is seen as an indictment of all adherents.

I don't have any fear of religion.  I have contempt and revulsion for any adherents of any religion who feel it is their right to expect anyone else to behave the way they want them to.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 I probably didn't.  I'm not absolutely sure what you mean in your first sentence there.

I was testifying to Yzermandias19 and you quoted my testimony in opposition, asserting that a faith in of itself is "filthy, disgusting & barbaric"

I asked you to underpin you assertion with logic, you declined to, thus I stand by my original post as a result, and find you, by logical extrapolation, to be full of shit.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I was testifying to Yzermandias19 and you quoted my testimony in opposition, asserting that a faith in of itself is "filthy, disgusting & barbaric"

I asked you to underpin you assertion with logic, you declined to, thus I stand by my original post as a result, and find you, by logical extrapolation, to be full of shit.

Of course you do.  It's easier than having to justify the nastiness that takes place in the  name of Allah.  You're certainly not alone.

[Dougie93]

Now, as to your fear & loathing of God fearing Alabama?

Since you are apparently a filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, those feelings are plausibly quite rational.

Because we are coming to overthrow you,  along with all the tyrants.

American Information Age Revolution.

De Oppresso Liber to the Sea of Tranquility and Beyond.

Go Bama.  Roll Tide.

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by Dougie93

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

Now, as to your fear & loathing of God fearing Alabama?

Since you are apparently a filthy disgusting atheist communist Limey, those feelings are plausibly quite rational.

Because we are coming to overthrow you,  along with all the tyrants.

American Information Age Revolution.

De Oppresso Liber to the Sea of Tranquility and Beyond.

Go Bama.  Roll Tide.

 

Loathing.  No fear.  And only for those Alabamians who would force a woman to bring an unwanted foetus to term, or jail someone who wanted to help her not to.

The rest I couldn't care less about.

[Dougie93]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Loathing.  No fear.  And only for those Alabamians who would force a woman to bring an unwanted foetus to term, or jail someone who wanted to help her not to.

The rest I couldn't care less about.

Abortion law is not federal jurisdiction.

Alabama has the states right to adjudicate that issue for itself.

Roe v. Wade was an error of law.

That's not a problem though.

America has a mechanism to deal with that. 

Elected officials to select Justices to the Supreme Court.

6 to 3 coming right up.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

Abortion law is not federal jurisdiction.

Alabama has the states right to adjudicate that issue for itself.

Roe v. Wade was an error of law.

That's not a problem though.

America has a mechanism to deal with that. 

Elected officials to select Justices to the Supreme Court.

6 to 3 coming right up.

 

Yeah, well, that ended that argument.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, well, that ended that argument.

It will when Donald Trump appoints Amy Coney Barret to the SCOTUS to impose of a Supermajority of the American Conservatives

For the first time since FDR loaded the bench with communist sympathizing New Dealers at least.

States Rights FTW.

Yeehaw.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

It will when Donald Trump appoints Amy Coney Barret to the SCOTUS to impose of a Supermajority of the American Conservatives

For the first time since FDR loaded the bench with communist sympathizing New Dealers at least.

States Rights FTW.

Yeehaw.

 

No, I meant the argument between you and me.

I don't care what kind of slack jawed yokels you can get onto your supreme court bench.  I care about whether or not the laws are right.  I don't care if the supreme court of Pakistan finds the death penalty blasphemy law to be reasonable.  It's still primitive barbaric tripe.

Same with the Alabama abortion law.

[Dougie93]

Just now, bcsapper said:

No, I meant the argument between you and me.

I don't care what kind of slack jawed yokels you can get onto your supreme court bench.  I care about whether or not the laws are right.  I don't care if the supreme court of Pakistan finds the death penalty blasphemy law to be reasonable.  It's still primitive barbaric tripe.

Same with the Alabama abortion law.

Oh well la dee da, but as a conservative, I am only concerned with the political power to effect changes to my preference.

Others are of course at liberty to moan about their lot in life.

I simply fight the Information War.  Marshall Mcluhan was right about everything.  American Information Age Revolution.

States Rights FTW

Six Two Three : Go Bama.

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Oh well la dee da, but as a conservative, I am only concerned with the political power to effect changes to my preference.

 

Well sure, that much is obvious.  It doesn't mean your preferences aren't crap.

Edit> And with any luck, Kavanaugh might be toast soon.  I just read that. 

Edited September 15, 2019 by bcsapper

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Well sure, that much is obvious.  It doesn't mean your preferences aren't crap.

Says who?  Not my people. 

 I am in good company. 

Limeys may disagree, but that's why we overthrew them.

Yankees may disagree, but that's what Amy Vivian Coney Barrett's are for.

Patriot.

Southron.

States rights freedom lover.

My kind of Papist.

Deo Vindice.

 

[Guest]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Says who?  Not my people. 

 I am in good company. 

Limeys may disagree, but that's why we overthrew them.

Yankees may disagree, but that's what Amy Vivian Coney Barrett's are for.

Patriot.

Southron.

States rights freedom lover.

My kind of Papist.

Deo Vindice.

 

Again, sure.  Crap is a matter of opinion. 

[Dougie93]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Again, sure.  Crap is a matter of opinion. 

As always, I wear the barbs of mine adversaries as a badge of honor, and barbed thus take their opinions under advisement as hostile witness.