I am Groot Posted February 5 Author Report Posted February 5 (edited) 6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: They claim that neutrality is an illusion, and their cite is... Jesus. I think that small l liberalism is a stronger shaping force, and that religion is a brief 5,000 years long fad. Nations are fads. The more I learn about them, the more I realize they don't tend to last. We mostly think of nations as immutable. They've always been here and always will be. But history is absolutely stuffed full of mighty empires, kingdoms, and nations that lasted centuries and then were torn apart by war or internal strife or natural disaster or a combination of all of that, and no longer exist. I have little confidence that has changed and that nations of today will stay nations next year, or in ten years. It is clear the West is in a downfall that is accelerating, its people demoralized, lacking confidence, berated daily by their own elites about the shame and guilt they should feel for being descendants of the evil people who founded their evil nations and all the evil they did. Those elites pour money out like water, endebting future generations, and invite millions and millions of hostile, often violent and corrupt foreigners in to take over. Those newcomers are filled with confidence and certainty and hold their own contempt for the people in the West and their perverted values. Their own values lack support for the mainstays of Western culture, such as compromise, tolerance, and respect for others and the freedoms we take for granted. I do not think Canada, as we know it, is going to last even another fifty years. It may not even last twenty. Edited February 5 by I am Groot Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
I am Groot Posted February 5 Author Report Posted February 5 (edited) 5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. Sure but both of those frameworks can accommodate common values. Liberalism, famously, has 'the pursuit of happiness' 3. Ok, what's the unifying theme for Americans then ? I think I just said it, and I think it's the same for Canada though few of us would admit so. 4. Religion isn't a driving force in America anymore. 5. Religion isn't necessary to a healthy or unified community as far as I can see. It's interesting how some fairly famous atheists now identify with Christianity, even though they're still not very religious. But they now see the way Christian ideals are inextricably linked to Western culture and its liberal, secular toleration of individuality and freedoms. They see the need for people to embrace something bigger than themselves, and believe people are lost without something like that. The unifying them for Americans has always been the great conquest, exploration, and development of America. Which, btw, is something liberals have been frantically attacking for years now, cutting away at the cultural underpinnings that Americans' sense of pride and unity are based on. They are doing similar things here and in Europe, destroying the sense of shared history, vision, and unity of societies across the West. Canada no longer has any unifying theme. It used to be our historical British traditions and values, but those are gone now, hacked and slashed away by the left to create a state of people who essentially believe in nothing but the enjoyment of consumer spending. No pride in nation. No sense of tradition. No shared values or religious beliefs. Edited February 5 by I am Groot 1 Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
Michael Hardner Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 2 hours ago, User said: ... you also push leftist positions on such things as the trans issue. My positions align with Jim Flaherty's... Trump isn't conservative. Moving on... 2 hours ago, User said: 1. Huh? Most people in America still identify as having a religious belief, some 60% Christian and 10% other. 2. That depends on what you mean by healthy. I thought you also claimed to be a Christian, yet you say it is not necessary to be healthy? 1. Religion is on the decline, which translates naturally into less political capital. 2. A community needs a moral centre to thrive, IMO. That doesn't necessarily mean a 'religion'. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 59 minutes ago, I am Groot said: 1. Nations are fads. The more I learn about them, the more I realize they don't tend to last. We mostly think of nations as immutable. They've always been here and always will be. But history is absolutely stuffed full of mighty empires, kingdoms, and nations that lasted centuries and then were torn apart by war or internal strife or natural disaster or a combination of all of that, and no longer exist. I have little confidence that has changed and that nations of today will stay nations next year, or in ten years. 2. It is clear the West is in a downfall that is accelerating, its people demoralized, lacking confidence, berated daily by their own elites about the shame and guilt they should feel for being descendants of the evil people who founded their evil nations and all the evil they did. Those elites pour money out like water, endebting future generations, and invite millions and millions of hostile, often violent and corrupt foreigners in to take over. Those newcomers are filled with confidence and certainty and hold their own contempt for the people in the West and their perverted values. Their own values lack support for the mainstays of Western culture, such as compromise, tolerance, and respect for others and the freedoms we take for granted. 3. I do not think Canada, as we know it, is going to last even another fifty years. It may not even last twenty. 51 minutes ago, I am Groot said: 4. It's interesting how some fairly famous atheists now identify with Christianity, even though they're still not very religious. But they now see the way Christian ideals are inextricably linked to Western culture and its liberal, secular toleration of individuality and freedoms. They see the need for people to embrace something bigger than themselves, and believe people are lost without something like that. 5. The unifying them for Americans has always been the great conquest, exploration, and development of America. Which, btw, is something liberals have been frantically attacking for years now, cutting away at the cultural underpinnings that Americans' sense of pride and unity are based on. They are doing similar things here and in Europe, destroying the sense of shared history, vision, and unity of societies across the West. 6. Canada no longer has any unifying theme. It used to be our historical British traditions and values, but those are gone now, hacked and slashed away by the left to create a state of people who essentially believe in nothing but the enjoyment of consumer spending. No pride in nation. No sense of tradition. No shared values or religious beliefs. You gave some long responses here.... I have a bit of time, let's see if I can give a good enough response... 1. Yes, that's true. The liberal democracy is our current model and as Bush_Cheney points out America even thrived after a civil war. So ... maybe their flexibility will give them more longevity - history will tell. 2. Yeah,well... you have claimed we are on a CLEAR spiral to the bottom and given reasons. No point in going into the reasons as this whole board is already about that. As for the 'spiral to the bottom', I will concur that things seem bad but as someone who lived through the 60s and 70s there were times when people thought it was as bad as today. And then the 80s came. 3. It would be difficult to break it apart, but maybe... 4. I agree with this. I think Christianity as a philosophy works well with liberalism. I think Jared Diamond outlined that in one of his books... Guns, Germs and Steel. Structurally, it provided multi-polar leadership as well as defined freedoms and responsibilities, a framework for prosperity and so on. (Multi-polar leadership, I mean, in that you had a pope and a king both) 5. Except for 'development' which is vague to me, I think exploration and conquest ended with the Manifest Destiny idea... which successfully completed in the 19th century. Not saying you're wrong, and maybe that's why they're so lost and looking for more countries to take. 6. Individuals take pride in lots of things - community, nation, ethnicity, religion and so on. Like I said, I agree that things seem bad right now but everybody has their own reasons for the spiral, even 'the left'. That's why we're on these boards. As you point out, I'm a secular Christian but my conservatism says that the traditions 'the west' built were organizational institutions and common values - above particular religions - that haven't been maintained. And I can't give hard evidence to prove my point of view any more than you can. That said, I don't blame you for coming up with these reasons and even though I don't agree, I do believe we're largely on the same page with our views. Cheers, Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: My positions align with Jim Flaherty's... Trump isn't conservative. Moving on... 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. 31 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Religion is on the decline, which translates naturally into less political capital. 2. A community needs a moral centre to thrive, IMO. That doesn't necessarily mean a 'religion'. 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? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 Just now, User said: 1. He has been dead for over 10 years. 2. And I have my doubts that if we went issue by issue you really allign with him... 3. 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. 4. Religion on the decline doesn't mean it is no longer a driving force. Your claim was not less political capital. 5. Without religion, what is that moral center? 1. So has Jesus. 2. Maybe not. On the trans thing though, which you're always bringing up as proof of my non-conservativism. 3. He loves debt, Nationalizing industry, centralizing power.... those are big things for him. Not me. 4. Well, we're quibbling here. I tried to be a little more specific last time, so I'll retract my statement that it's not a "driving force" and say its influence will decline as religiosity declines. 5. Age-old question. We had laws and morality prior to the Abrahamic gods and it worked... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. So has Jesus. Jesus is still relevant to Christianity... no one can say what Jim's views are on today's political issues. 3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. Maybe not. On the trans thing though, which you're always bringing up as proof of my non-conservativism. 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. 5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 3. He loves debt, Nationalizing industry, centralizing power.... those are big things for him. Not me. 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. 10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 4. Well, we're quibbling here. I tried to be a little more specific last time, so I'll retract my statement that it's not a "driving force" and say its influence will decline as religiosity declines. Not quibbling at all, the point is that Religion is still a major factor in American politics today. 11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 5. Age-old question. We had laws and morality prior to the Abrahamic gods and it worked... 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? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 5 Report Posted February 5 33 minutes ago, User said: 1. Jesus is still relevant to Christianity... no one can say what Jim's views are on today's political issues. 2. I bring that up for many reasons, but yes, one is to highlight that you hold leftist positions on political issues. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. Not quibbling at all, the point is that Religion is still a major factor in American politics today. 7. 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? 1. Jesus didn't talk about trans specifically. Jim voted on it, and his stance is with mine. You don't like that a conservative agrees with me so you're saying "he died". I don't get it. 2. The trans one. Which I agree with Flaherty on. 3. I feel like I did this: I support the legal frameworks, institutions of science, institutions of education, economic frameworks, democratic frameworks that support our western traditions. 4. I don't hate debt across the board, I should have said that. But he's bad at math and has short-term thinking. He bankrupted casinos that way. Argus, another conservative, once posted an informative story of his Eastern Airlines debacle. 5. Trump was pro-life until he sold himself to Republican donors. I'm left of centre on some of those but I'm not going to subject myself to your purity test... go interrogate your cat. 6. Maybe but it's declining. I already retracted "driving force" so i can't really contest your use of "major" 7. I don't now - we're talking about religion as a force and although I'm a fan of mine, I don't think it's the be-all and end-all of moral frameworks either. Morality is a separate thing. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
eyeball Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 (edited) 10 hours ago, I am Groot said: Nations are fads. The more I learn about them, the more I realize they don't tend to last. We mostly think of nations as immutable. They've always been here and always will be. But history is absolutely stuffed full of mighty empires, kingdoms, and nations that lasted centuries and then were torn apart by war or internal strife or natural disaster or a combination of all of that, and no longer exist. The more I learn about the 1% and wealth protection the more I view countries as a convenient shell game used to protect their wealth. Especially the offshore tax haven nations. Ordinary governments are more like the hapless famous people who's names are popping up in the Epstein files. They probably know more than they should and wish they didn't. Adding insult to injury is how countries are played off against one another in the race to the bottom that fuels the ever widening income and wealth gap. 10 hours ago, I am Groot said: It is clear the West is in a downfall that is accelerating, its people demoralized, lacking confidence, berated daily by their own elites about the shame and guilt they should feel for being descendants of the evil people who founded their evil nations and all the evil they did. Nonsense, this is all a distraction. It's in a downfall because of what I said. 10 hours ago, I am Groot said: Those elites pour money out like water, endebting future generations, and invite millions and millions of hostile, often violent and corrupt foreigners in to take over. Those newcomers are filled with confidence and certainty and hold their own contempt for the people in the West and their perverted values. Their own values lack support for the mainstays of Western culture, such as compromise, tolerance, and respect for others and the freedoms we take for granted. No man, you're just steeped deep in misinformed hooey. 10 hours ago, I am Groot said: I do not think Canada, as we know it, is going to last even another fifty years. It may not even last twenty. Well, judging by the records Canada is setting at widening the income / wealth gap we're not going anywhere soon. Don't be surprised if they rename us Elysium one day. Personally, I've never been wealthier since I started catering to affluence. I'm admitting that as dyed in the wool lefty and I often burn 300 litres of fuel a day at work too! I bet you think the concept of a pragmatic lefty is downright alien. But if the end of the world really is nigh Canada will be one of the better places to see it from. Edited February 6 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Barquentine Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 19 hours ago, I am Groot said: No pride in nation. No sense of tradition. No shared values or religious beliefs. You're just pissed off because the vast majority of Canadians don't share your racist, hate-filled opininions, scared little white boy. Quote
Barquentine Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 18 hours ago, User said: Without religion, what is that moral center? Almost everyone I know is not religious, but they are good moral people. And a lot of so-called religious people are bigoted, greedy hypocrites. Why do you need a priest to tell you to be good? Why don't you have a natural moral compass? Quote
John Stone Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 Christianity was the cornerstone of western civilization - far beyond simply faith it's contributions were far reaching - education, law, social welfare and science. The decline of Western Faith (Christianity) can likely be attributed to Woke, Cancel Culture and Liberal ideology. just say'n Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 51 minutes ago, John Stone said: The decline of Western Faith (Christianity) can likely be attributed to Woke, Cancel Culture and Liberal ideology. "Woke" in the public sphere came in around 12 years ago... BLM. So, no. The Decline was already described in Eisenhower's post-presidency book (which I read) in 1959. Decline, decline.... always in decline... Entropy is a thing. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 1 hour ago, John Stone said: The decline of Western Faith (Christianity) can likely be attributed to ... In my lifetime: Nietzsche, Derrida, Lacan, Marx, Abstract Art, Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, Feminism, Rock n Roll, Television, Comic Books, Violence in films, Violence on TV, Dungeons and Dragons, Death Metal, Hip Hop, Gangsta Rap, Video Games, The Internet, Facebook, TikTok... From the top of my head. 1 Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 2 hours ago, Barquentine said: Almost everyone I know is not religious, but they are good moral people. And a lot of so-called religious people are bigoted, greedy hypocrites. Why do you need a priest to tell you to be good? Why don't you have a natural moral compass? 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? Quote
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 19 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Jesus didn't talk about trans specifically. Jim voted on it, and his stance is with mine. You don't like that a conservative agrees with me so you're saying "he died". I don't get it. 2. The trans one. Which I agree with Flaherty on. 3. I feel like I did this: I support the legal frameworks, institutions of science, institutions of education, economic frameworks, democratic frameworks that support our western traditions. 4. I don't hate debt across the board, I should have said that. But he's bad at math and has short-term thinking. He bankrupted casinos that way. Argus, another conservative, once posted an informative story of his Eastern Airlines debacle. 5. Trump was pro-life until he sold himself to Republican donors. I'm left of centre on some of those but I'm not going to subject myself to your purity test... go interrogate your cat. 6. Maybe but it's declining. I already retracted "driving force" so i can't really contest your use of "major" 7. I don't now - we're talking about religion as a force and although I'm a fan of mine, I don't think it's the be-all and end-all of moral frameworks either. Morality is a separate thing. 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? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 34 minutes ago, User said: 1. 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. 2: 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? 3. ... you claim to be Christian, you do really believe that Christ is Lord and faith in him alone is required for salvation? Right? 1. That's irrelevant. The discussion around rights is/was necessarily a first step and that discussion wouldn't have changed in light of current discussions. You want to talk about current events - feel free. I've explained that I don't have strong opinions on most of the ones that are discussed on here. I may have agree with him if he were alive, or maybe not. We were on the same page on the rights question and that's always been my stance. You have said that I must be 'left' because of my stance on it but my stance isn't much different from Flaherty's I think. 2. Did I support discrimination ? I don't think I would say that but there was no legal basis to act on discrimination. 3. No and I can accept why people wouldn't consider me Christian on that point. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. That's irrelevant. The discussion around rights is/was necessarily a first step and that discussion wouldn't have changed in light of current discussions. You want to talk about current events - feel free. I've explained that I don't have strong opinions on most of the ones that are discussed on here. I may have agree with him if he were alive, or maybe not. We were on the same page on the rights question and that's always been my stance. You have said that I must be 'left' because of my stance on it but my stance isn't much different from Flaherty's I think. 2. Did I support discrimination ? I don't think I would say that but there was no legal basis to act on discrimination. 3. No and I can accept why people wouldn't consider me Christian on that point. 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. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 3 minutes ago, User said: 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. 1. I'm not balking, or concealing or obfuscating.... You want me to take a stand on myriad implementations of 'trans rights'... and I don't have a strong opinion on... a trans girl playing in a softball league.. bathroom laws... there's no one answer to all these things and that's not obfuscation. It's not a tactic, it's an honest response. 2. I do believe in them. If they go against my positions then I have to live with that. I didn't 'support' discrimination but I accepted that there was no legal framework on that,. The law doesn't change my moral positions. 3. I don't mostly agree with leftists, that's your characterization.... You want to draw the lines but I don't accept it. Once again, there doesn't seem to be much to talk about here. But if refuse to submit to your interrogations and say that I don't want to dance you come back with your accusations.... It's a boring cycle, User. I don't even know why you care .... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. I'm not balking, or concealing or obfuscating.... You want me to take a stand on myriad implementations of 'trans rights'... and I don't have a strong opinion on... a trans girl playing in a softball league.. bathroom laws... there's no one answer to all these things and that's not obfuscation. It's not a tactic, it's an honest response. 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 6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. I do believe in them. If they go against my positions then I have to live with that. I didn't 'support' discrimination but I accepted that there was no legal framework on that,. The law doesn't change my moral positions. 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. 7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 3. I don't mostly agree with leftists, that's your characterization.... You want to draw the lines but I don't accept it. Once again, there doesn't seem to be much to talk about here. But if refuse to submit to your interrogations and say that I don't want to dance you come back with your accusations.... It's a boring cycle, User. I don't even know why you care .... 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. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 9 minutes ago, User said: 1. 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. 2. 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 3. ... just more of your playing games. 4. On here you certainly do agree mostly with leftists, their posts, and their positions on things being discussed. 5. 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. But the position I post is chiefly that the rights have been granted, that it's not a left/right thing on that point, and also criticism of bad arguments made on either side of the argument. I'm not an SFW on those term. 2. I have answered your points. I don't know what more you want from me. Try asking a specific question. 3. Not a game. My positions are my own. Not my fault you don't like them. 4. Incorrect. 5. Not a game. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. But the position I post is chiefly that the rights have been granted, that it's not a left/right thing on that point, and also criticism of bad arguments made on either side of the argument. I'm not an SFW on those term. 2. I have answered your points. I don't know what more you want from me. Try asking a specific question. 3. Not a game. My positions are my own. Not my fault you don't like them. 4. Incorrect. 5. Not a game. 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... Quote
Michael Hardner Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 48 minutes ago, User said: 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. 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. 3. Very correct. In fact, I will call you out on it moving forward to make the point. 4. Sure thing Mr "Conservative" "Christian" who doesn't believe in Christ or support most Conservative positions... 1. Give an example. If I have taken a strong modern position I will clarify or retract or maybe better yet declare myself offside with the typical conservative. 2. 🤔 How can my positions NOT be my own ? 3. Yes please do. 4. Of course I believe in Christ. What a thing to say My observation is that when I agree with you, you seem to be very offended. The idea of someone being independently minded vs out-of-the-box politically branded seems to make you uncomfortable. My advice to you is: live a little. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted February 6 Report Posted February 6 17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Give an example. If I have taken a strong modern position I will clarify or retract or maybe better yet declare myself offside with the typical conservative. Once again, this is still you playing the subjective "strong" game. I will call you out in the next thread. 17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. 🤔 How can my positions NOT be my own ? 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. 18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 4. Of course I believe in Christ. What a thing to say 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. 19 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: My observation is that when I agree with you, you seem to be very offended. The idea of someone being independently minded vs out-of-the-box politically branded seems to make you uncomfortable. My advice to you is: live a little. No, I just call out BS when I see it. Quote
I am Groot Posted February 6 Author Report Posted February 6 10 hours ago, Barquentine said: You're just pissed off because the vast majority of Canadians don't share your racist, hate-filled opininions, scared little white boy. When you challenge the poorly held preconceptions that the liberal left hold, they always react with fury and insults. They don't have the intellectual capability to argue their case, nor the emotional capacity to discuss things like adults. There's a reason this is the symbol of the Left. Quote "A civilization is not destroyed by wicked men; it is destroyed by weak men who cannot defend what is good.” — G. K. Chesterton
Recommended Posts
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.