Jump to content

Mass absences break out at London schools as Pride flag flies


Recommended Posts

Just now, OftenWrong said:

Fine. Not a tolerant progressive then I guess.

But then you were raised in GB

Plus the fact I hold all religious people who try to impose their will on others in equal contempt, graded only by the effect it actually has on said others.  The Muslim would probably get the worst of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Plus the fact I hold all religious people who try to impose their will on others in equal contempt, graded only by the effect it actually has on said others.  The Muslim would probably get the worst of it.

Then at least you get bonus marks for consistency

in imposing your will upon others.

;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

Then at least you get bonus marks for consistency

in imposing your will upon others.

;) 

Sure, in the same way stopping someone poking me in the eye is imposing my will on them.  Guilty of that, I guess.  I only have two, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Sure, in the same way stopping someone poking me in the eye is imposing my will on them.  Guilty of that, I guess.  I only have two, after all.

You ask to simply be left alone and not poked in the eye. Sensible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Contrarian said:

1. While reaching a supermajority indicates significant support for value changes and policy shifts, it's crucial to consider the implications of such changes and the rate of speed at which are done at. Merely relying on the level of support does not guarantee the fairness of proposed solutions.

 

2. My argument is that by dismissing and ignoring reactionary forces, one inadvertently contributes to the market of emotions.  

1. You seem to be changing your tack.  You WERE talking about taking the influence of the narcissistic populist into consideration as part of a strategy to engage with the public, I thought.  Now you are talking about fairness and rights.

  Well the status quo, followed honestly and with transparency, will give people who want change a voice and will also bring the issues to a close one way or another.

I don't care about the latest stunt, designed to play with people who have never been politically active or aware.

Last week they were all on Twitter cutting and pasting a post that demands Trudeau resign.  

2. If I tell them to frame their arguments properly, to provide evidence of their claims, and behave like any normal non-orangutan in the public forum am I dismissing them? Do they get a special pass to show up at Canadian Tire parking lot with a bull horn and have me somehow listen to them?  No.

The basis of their arguments is they don't understand the world, they hate Trudeau's face, and they think that electing quality ever will make to the right thing is that he will probably change nothing for them either way. 

The basis for this body of political thought is that the rhetoric made by the person of the top is the sum total of what politics is. Economic policy, taxation, environmental policy absolutely do not matter. It's how they look and how they talk that matters.

I happen to know that although the world is complicated, what people do and say matters especially with the government does and says.  The most important policies are the ones that have large-scale impacts such as economic trade, and environment.  All this pissant complaining about the w e f, or trans this or that is infantile and the best response I can come up with is to point that out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, blackbird said:

Absolutely.  What you don't seem to understand is society often goes in evil or harmful directions because well-meaning people said nothing.  The loud mouths get their way, often with evil consequences.

You still don't seem to understand that you're the loudmouth.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Yes, the penalty several thousand years ago was death for some things.  That applied to Israel at that time.  God also destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the same thing.  The flood in Noah's time destroyed the whole population on earth except for Noah and his family who were saved in the ark.  God can do as he pleases because he is God.  Man thinks he can do as he pleases but will find out that he is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Plus the fact I hold all religious people who try to impose their will on others in equal contempt

Why do religious people's beliefs bother you so much while non religious people don't?  If it bothers you so much maybe your conscience is trying to tell you something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, blackbird said:

Why do religious people's beliefs bother you so much while non religious people don't?  If it bothers you so much maybe your conscience is trying to tell you something.

You still don't understand.  The problem is you, not religious people's beliefs.  If you weren't so lacking in perspective, you'd realize that it's your ignorance, your hypocrisy and your clueless, obnoxious judgments that earn you mockery.  

An incurious one-track mind like yours, however, wards off this sort of helpful self-reflection by waving the Bible around and deluding yourself into thinking everyone else is the problem.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Why do religious people's beliefs bother you so much while non religious people don't?  If it bothers you so much maybe your conscience is trying to tell you something.

They don't bother me in the slightest.  Believe what you will.

The moment you try and make others act on those beliefs, however...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

The moment you try and make others act on those beliefs, however...

Wondering what you mean by "make others act on those beliefs". Discussing or even attempting to persuade is not "making" in my opinion. Does discussing or attempting to persuade offend you as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

Wondering what you mean by "make others act on those beliefs". Discussing or even attempting to persuade is not "making" in my opinion. Does discussing or attempting to persuade offend you as well?

Ha, if it did I'd have half as many posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

The most important policies are the ones that have large-scale impacts such as economic trade, and environment.  All this pissant complaining about the w e f, or trans this or that is infantile and the best response I can come up with is to point that out.

But this thread is about the mass absences in schools where families, especially muslim ones, kept their kids at home on Pride Flag Day. Has nothing to do with economic trade or the environment. This strikes the home culture and the family unit, taking place at a local and personal level. It's about the culture. They have the right to choose not to expose their children to what they perceive as degenerate culture.

Meanwhile the shenanigans at the top level of politics are inflaming the problem. Trudeau does not believe in multiculturalism, since he and his woke-bent colleagues cannot and will not acknowledge that there are millions of Canadian immigrants who come from conservative parts of the world, and they will never accept open gay culture. It seriously offends their personal beliefs.

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

they hate Trudeau's BLACK face

Fixed for you. Sorry I just had to do that. I do not hate his face, but I do hate his blackface.

Get it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, I am Groot said:

Virtue signaling support for it IS an ideological stance.

Opposing people who want other people to behave according to their religion is neither virtue signalling nor an ideological stance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I've noticed a recurring tendency in your arguments to zero in on religious dogmatics, using it to validate your points.  I can't help but question why you consistently avoid discussing the realities of everyday life for certain groups.

Consider a Ukrainian family fleeing a war-torn country or a Muslim family escaping the dire circumstances in Syria. Their primary concern is not engaging in the ongoing political noise over "sex". In my opinion, they will want their kids to focus on subjects like mathematics and education, which can provide them with the skills and opportunities for a better future. Same with a traditionalist local family that put emphasis on religion. Is just the reality. 

While you emphasize economic trade, environmental policies, and other large-scale issues, it's important to acknowledge that these families have immediate and pressing concerns that may take precedence over broader political debates. By disregarding their realities and insisting on a singular focus, you risk dismissing their lived experiences and the challenges they face.

Specific needs and priorities of different communities. By understanding their circumstances and engaging in productive dialogue, one can work towards finding solutions that consider different perspectives. 

Do you think I like coming here and listening to sermons daily? However, this tradition is real and you ignoring, it won't go away, hence why cheap populists keep appearing south of the border. Is all about the cultural war + economics in my view. 

I almost never think in terms of religious minorities, and didn't once mention religion in the post you replied to so I don't know what you are talking about.

Immigrant families and refugees have concerns, and there's a system in place for letting them voice them.  

I'm aware of their concerns and the impact of alienation from the public sphere.  What specifically do you want me to do about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

1.  Has nothing to do with economic trade or the environment.

2. This strikes the home culture and the family unit, taking place at a local and personal level. It's about the culture. They have the right to choose not to expose their children to what they perceive as degenerate culture.

3. Meanwhile the shenanigans at the top level of politics are inflaming the problem. Trudeau does not believe in multiculturalism, since he and his woke-bent colleagues cannot and will not acknowledge that there are millions of Canadian immigrants who come from conservative parts of the world, and they will never accept open gay culture. It seriously offends their personal beliefs.

4. Fixed for you. Sorry I just had to do that. I do not hate his face, but I do hate his blackface.Get it?

1. There's only so much bandwidth for discussion.  Certainly issues won't be discussed if we focus on issues like the rainbow flag.

2. That's elementary.  

3. This isn't really a problem.  Immigration hasn't changed much of anything about our social policies other than with regards to immigration itself.

4. Not that hard to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You still don't understand.  The problem is you, not religious people's beliefs.  If you weren't so lacking in perspective, you'd realize that it's your ignorance, your hypocrisy and your clueless, obnoxious judgments that earn you mockery.  

An incurious one-track mind like yours, however, wards off this sort of helpful self-reflection by waving the Bible around and deluding yourself into thinking everyone else is the problem.  

Sorry, I have to disagree.  I don't see it as all those things you claim.  I try to be respectful and don't make false allegations. I simply state my beliefs as I see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

 

1. That does not work, hence why even the Conservative party in this country made a shift from O'Toole to PP. Are all tactics based on the realities of a market that keeps growing while some ignore it.

3. This narrative with Christian men waiting with the cross against drag queens, or protesting against a flag, will change very fast as immigration increases. Once a few immigrant groups will start increasing the tension, then it will become sensitive, and even you will try coming up with some practical solutions then the usual let's move on. 

1. Well it's a good thing I'm not a paid political strategist I guess.  Does the market keep growing really? Are we going to be at 60% support for bringing down the rainbow flag? Are we going to be canceling drag queens in canada? 

I guess I can't say for sure it's going to happen but my guess is that people may realize that generally other problems are far more important right now.

3. I would say that a good economy solves a lot of these problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, blackbird said:

How do I make others act on those beliefs?  I didn't know I had so much power.

I'm arguing against the idea.  You keep quoting the Bible as if it is an authority on how people other than those who want to use it as a guide should act. 

I don't see you out on the street with a bat enforcing the issues.

You don't, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

Yes, the penalty several thousand years ago was death for some things.  That applied to Israel at that time.  God also destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for the same thing.  The flood in Noah's time destroyed the whole population on earth except for Noah and his family who were saved in the ark.  God can do as he pleases because he is God.  Man thinks he can do as he pleases but will find out that he is wrong.

I agree….  these happened in the bible.  But, God changed his mind on the punishment for being a gay man.  Plus, he stopped sending angels and destroying entire civilizations too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Sorry, I have to disagree.  I don't see it as all those things you claim. 

Of course you don't.  That was my point.  You lack perspective and self-awareness.

13 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I try to be respectful and don't make false allegations.

There is little about your hellfire preaching that could be considered respectful.  For someone of such strong faith, the humility and the "good news" parts seem to have been lost on you.  All you're offering to us here is clueless proclamations of your supposed moral superiority.  

13 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I simply state my beliefs as I see it. 

So do I, and believe you are obnoxious and profoundly ignorant.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,741
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    timwilson
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • User earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Videospirit went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...