Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 92

Thread: Equal Right Are Only For Equal People.

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    It depends on how much unrighteous dominion is being exercised.
    Aha! Very interesting.

    And what is "unrighteous dominion"?

    And then how much is too much?



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Aha! Very interesting.

    And what is "unrighteous dominion"?
    I use it in the sense expressed by Ezra Taft Benson here -

    "The powers the people granted to the three branches of government were specifically limited. The Founding Fathers well understood human nature and its tendency to exercise unrighteous dominion when given authority. A Constitution was therefore designed to limit government to certain enumerated functions, beyond which was tyranny."

    And then how much is too much?
    Any.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  4. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    Ezra Taft Benson
    Wait, wait, wait. Are you quoting Ezra Taft Benson because you're a big fan of his politics, or because you think I am?

  5. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Wait, wait, wait. Are you quoting Ezra Taft Benson because you're a big fan of his politics, or because you think I am?
    That's neither here nor there. I'm very comfortable sustaining him as a credible authority on the subject at hand. And you?
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018



  6. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  7. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Wait, wait, wait. Are you quoting Ezra Taft Benson because you're a big fan of his politics, or because you think I am?
    Maybe because the words are true?
    There is no spoon.

  8. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    That's neither here nor there.
    Funny, it seemed very relevant to me.

    So you're not going to tell me, I take it?

  9. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Funny, it seemed very relevant to me.

    So you're not going to tell me, I take it?
    The answer was obviously yes. You seem to be avoiding answering my question.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  10. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    The answer was obviously yes. You seem to be avoiding answering my question.
    Wait, I'm still hung up on my question. Are you quoting Ezra Taft Benson because you're a big fan of his politics, or because you think I am?

  11. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Wait, I'm still hung up on my question. Are you quoting Ezra Taft Benson because you're a big fan of his politics, or because you think I am?
    Yes is an appropriate answer to the question as asked. Otherwise you've presented a false alternative.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  12. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    Yes is an appropriate answer to the question as asked. Otherwise you've presented a false alternative.
    OK, so in plain-speak like us normal people use: Both. Right? So you are a big fan of Ezra's politics?

  13. #71
    Why wouldn't I be, h_h?
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  14. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    Why wouldn't I be, h_h?
    You just won't answer, will ya?



  15. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  16. #73
    I'm not trying to be difficult. While the answer doubtless is obvious to you (having convenient access to your own thoughts), it is anything but obvious to me and my little (and non-clairvoyant) brain. Otherwise I wouldn't have, you know, asked.

    So, could you clear up my curiosity and type the words "Yes, I am definitely a huge fan of Ezra Taft Benson's politics"?

  17. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    If you're willing to live and die like a pig then there are no important ways in which you are not a pig.

    Words in a tome tell you what things are worth dying for. If you aren't educated then you end like so many American soldiers, dying for something stupid to benefit those who do know how to use the words in the book to their own ends.

    Book of Eli was right about that.
    I think this is the most deeply insightful post I remember ever having read from you. Perhaps in your entire tenure here, Pierz.

    (No rated-R movies, though; stop that!)

  18. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    I'm not trying to be difficult. While the answer doubtless is obvious to you (having convenient access to your own thoughts), it is anything but obvious to me and my little (and non-clairvoyant) brain. Otherwise I wouldn't have, you know, asked.

    So, could you clear up my curiosity and type the words "Yes, I am definitely a huge fan of Ezra Taft Benson's politics"?
    But then I wouldn't be able to draw out your crude twist on Socratic inquiry to such absurd and amusing lengths. I am definitely a huge fan of the political thought of both Ezra Taft Benson and socialist George Orwell. How bout them apples? I repeat - And you?

    Generally speaking, people quote those they agree with. An exception would be to quote someone such as Karl Marx, who believed immigrants were less-equal, low-IQ riff-raff and should be turned away. The way he expresses himself is familiar to say the least.

    "These Irishmen who migrate for fourpence to England, on the deck of a steamship on which they are often packed like cattle, insinuate themselves everywhere. The worst dwellings are good enough for them; their clothing causes them little trouble, so long as it holds together by a single thread; shoes they know not; their food consists of potatoes and potatoes only; whatever they earn beyond these needs they spend upon drink. What does such a race want with high wages?... With such a competitor the English working-man has to struggle, with a competitor upon the lowest plane possible in a civilised country, who for this very reason requires less wages than any other... For when, in almost every great city, a fifth or a quarter of the workers are Irish, or children of Irish parents, who have grown up among Irish filth, no one can wonder if the life, habits, intelligence, moral status -- in short, the whole character of the working-class assimilates a great part of the Irish characteristics. On the contrary, it is easy to understand how the degrading position of the English workers, engendered by our modern history, and its immediate consequences, has been still more degraded by the presence of Irish competition."

    When it seems like every third thread on RPF and rafts of opinion pieces on LRC, Infowars, Breitbart, Molyneux etc. consist largely of people quoting Marx in this vein almost word for word, is it any wonder a previous generation of "conservatives" were so enamored of Trotsky?
    Last edited by undergroundrr; 03-22-2017 at 10:04 AM.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  19. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    But then I wouldn't be able to draw out your crude twist on Socratic inquiry to such absurd and amusing lengths.
    Not Socratic. I was and am not trying to teach you anything (how presumptuous!) but truly trying to learn something myself.

    I am definitely a huge fan of the political thought of both Ezra Taft Benson and socialist George Orwell. How bout them apples?
    OK, good. I appreciate the honesty. I can tell from this you're saying "not that I agree with all of it!" Just as you are certainly not a socialist -- very far from it! -- so too you do not accept all of President Ezra Taft Benson's political views. Indeed, perhaps you are just as far away from and just as hostile toward his views as you are towards Orwell's.

    I was just sincerely interested, seeing as how it had seemed to me in the past like you are a quite left-leaning person. If you are instead reading and agreeing with The Red Carpet, if An Enemy Hath Done This holds an honored place on your bookshelf, then my understanding of you would have been quite wrong and I would need to change it, and, most importantly: it would be interesting!

    That would have been totally unpredictable! Out of left field! (Or right field, in this case.)

    We could have a further dialogue! I could ask "What in the world are you all about undergroundrr? Where is this wild pro-gay, pro-immigrant, anti-leftism coming from and how is it coherent?"

    I repeat - And you?
    But, no, alas you were just using the prophet as a cheap rhetorical device to try to persuade me of some XYZ, much as one Sr. Zippy Juan quotes Ron Paul at us as often as he can. Unfortunately, I'm lamentably unpersuadable, I'm afraid. On anything. At least by anyone using tools and arguments, shall we say, at a certain level. Now if Occam'sBanana wanted to try to persuade me, he might have better luck.

    Oh yeah, I almost forgot: to answer your original "And you?": Yes, I consider him a credible authority on, not only unrighteous dominion, but (a little different than you, perhaps) on all subjects generally, and furthermore not only consider him credible (to someone, somewhere... what a weaselly word) but do myself, personally, credit (archaic: believe) him and his words as true.

    To answer your second "And you?": No, not at all. I disagree very strongly and (unlike you; take no offense, but it's true) at a very deep, fundamental level with the views of George Orwell and think they are poisonous to Religion, to Country, to Family, to Civilization itself, and to all I hold dear.

    Generally speaking, people quote those they agree with. An exception would be to quote someone such as Karl Marx, who believed immigrants should be turned away.
    You are so enamored with your own cleverness in coming up with this, I dare say you shall be repeating it over and over here until the end of time. I will give you this: it was an original rhetorical angle, perhaps even unique and invented by you (was it?). Thus I appreciated it. The first time I heard it.

    When it seems like every third thread on RPF
    It is you who are preoccupied with immigration (that and perversion) and post only on that, relentlessly dropping it into every thread. An examination of my posting history will show contrariwise. In fact, even here. Is this post about immigration? No. Definitely not. I've not said one word about it. You try to bait and draw me in, but: sorry! I'm just not that interested.

    Why not come over and talk about founding a Free Town or County with me, eh?

  20. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    But, no, alas you were just using the prophet as a cheap rhetorical device
    Such venom. Alas, no. The prophet was better at answering the question than I will ever be.

    You try to bait and draw me in, but: sorry! I'm just not that interested.
    And I thought I had you this time, rascal.

    I'll check out your Town & Country thread sometime. I suspect it entails keeping the Irish out.

    Even my tiny level of posting takes up way too much of my time and I try to stick to the things that tickle my interest most right now. Chief among those are racism/collectivism (I consider it antithetical to a libertarian mindset), freedom of movement (as you spotted) and people giving trump a pass on feeding the MIC with the blood of babies and doing his best to inspire historically unprecedented blowback. If all that means I'm left-leaning, great!

    EDIT:
    Indeed, perhaps you are just as far away from and just as hostile toward his views as you are towards Orwell's.
    Not at all. They both effectively exposed and battled tyranny, just like those two guys in my avatar. If I were to appeal to authority, Ron Paul has referenced Pres. Benson (and Cleon Skousen) and Orwell in the same spirit that I do. Pres. Benson and Ron Paul share my temporal worldview, Orwell's socialism obviously limits his appeal mostly to matters outside of economics.
    Last edited by undergroundrr; 03-22-2017 at 01:37 PM.
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  21. #78
    Rights which do not apply to everyone are not rights- they are privileges.

  22. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Rights which do not apply to everyone are not rights- they are privileges.
    Everyone where?

    This country, all countries?

    People in other countries?

    Only US citizens?

    Be more specific.......

    Once you iron that out are these "rights" theoretical or demonstrative?

  23. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post

    "The powers the people granted to the three branches of government were specifically limited. The Founding Fathers well understood human nature and its tendency to exercise unrighteous dominion when given authority. A Constitution was therefore designed to limit government to certain enumerated functions, beyond which was tyranny."
    The effort has proven woefully inadequate.

    Generally speaking, humanity has proven the same.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.



  24. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  25. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by undergroundrr View Post
    Such venom. Alas, no. The prophet was better at answering the question than I will ever be.
    Enh. My comment was probably un-called-for actually. Looking back I don't think you were trying to convince me of anything in particular with that quote (that was later -- my mistake). But it didn't really answer the question, either, of what is unrighteous dominion.


    I'll check out your Town & Country thread sometime. I suspect it entails keeping the Irish out.
    Wouldn't it be funny if I turned out to be Irish? You have read so much into the things I've written over the years. Things which I didn't write, but which you thought were there. Just because the Irish have certain distinctive characteristics (less outbred, more clannish, Catholic) vs. other ethnicities does not mean I want to "keep them out," nor that I even consider the Irish inferior (I don't), nor that those particular characteristics are unambiguously negative (they aren't).

    Chief among those [interests] are racism/collectivism
    And one of your techniques in carrying out this discourse you wish to take place is that of "calling out" alleged offenders. One of which happens to be me. Now, you don't even like to be "called out" as possibly left-leaning, which is a perfectly acceptable thing to be and an identity with which you are probably perfectly comfortable in your off-line non-RPF life. Why, I myself am naturally inclined to be even more left-aligned than you are, probably! And yet you don't like it. So just how effective do you think it is to "call out" your fellow RPFers as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., etc.?

    I personally find it tiresome. Tedious. Boring. Useless. It's a technique the left uses to try to shut down discourse (like, the actual kind) and shut down thought. You think I'm a horrible, hateful racist homophobe: fine. Great. Who cares! Move on!


    Not at all. They both effectively exposed and battled tyranny, just like those two guys in my avatar.
    One of whom was a serial adulterer, pushed tyranny forward, not backward, and was really not an admirable person at all.

    If I were to appeal to authority, Ron Paul has referenced Pres. Benson (and Cleon Skousen) and Orwell in the same spirit that I do. Pres. Benson and Ron Paul share my temporal worldview, Orwell's socialism obviously limits his appeal mostly to matters outside of economics.
    Temporal and spiritual are not as far apart as you think. The two are linked. Bound up in each other.
    Last edited by helmuth_hubener; 03-22-2017 at 05:16 PM.

  26. #82
    Back to the topic of equality more directly (though this is all related, I'm going to tie it all back in (if I get time)):

    The equality idea basically comes from Christianity. I can't think of any other religions nor ancient civilizations that had it. Your modern-day leftists are effectively Christians without Christ. You can draw a direct line from some of the egalitarian-sounding teachings of Christ ("If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all." Mark 9:35) and the Apostles ("Who will render to every man according to his deeds [both Jew and Gentile, bond and free]... For there is no respect of persons with God." Romans 2:6-11) to Bentham's Utilitarianism (who looked to "the greatest good of the greatest number" as his moral yardstick) and from there to the radical leveling of society promoted by Marx. It’s a strong line -- Murray Rothbard has a whole fascinating (and hilarious!) lecture on communism's explicitly Christian genealogy. It's also a line or connection that the left relies upon a lot these days, for propaganda/persuasion purposes. "Don't you claim to be Christian? Real Christianity™ is about brotherhood and equality and giving free rapes to a hundred million rapeugees!" Of course this is just for the plebes, for propaganda -- the modern left, as directed by Bentham and Marx, completely denies the spiritual aspects of Christianity.

    For a Christian, we are not equal on Earth, and the idea of equality comes in as we are all to be judged at the Last Day with equal justice by our Lord God. The leftist, however, denies the existence of God, and instead takes the Christian idea of spiritual equality and attempts to apply it to this earthly world, where people are actually highly unequal, and then he proceeds to enforce it with worldly means.

    Lastly, without God or the Devil waiting for us when we die, many leftists aren’t too concerned about ethics, at least certainly not in the strict sense. All that strictness is so old, so tired, so worn-out, so lame. Get into the '90s! (or whenever) We've moved so beyond that old-fashioned White Man Morality, a morality that only ever served the White Man. Stop being so narrow-minded. A little robbery? A little murder? Ahh well, we're correcting past wrongs or "institutional biases". Our Holy End, Equality, justifies any means. Justice is defined by outcomes, equal outcomes, not by, well, what the word traditionally actually means.

    Social Justice is the opposite of Actual Justice.
    Last edited by helmuth_hubener; 03-23-2017 at 09:31 AM.

  27. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    Granted, tomes have their place but trying to discuss philosophical differences with government agents pointing automatic weapons at you doesn't make sense....

    One must know what or who he is willing to die for before he must decide....

    Which can only be accomplished through books.

    It was the one thing the Progressives got right and how they gained power. They took over the schools.

  28. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Which can only be accomplished through books.

    It was the one thing the Progressives got right and how they gained power. They took over the schools.
    Exactly. Anti-intellectualism is what turned conservatism into the principle-free mess it is today. As a result, the arts, the sciences, the humanities, and academia are almost entirely progressive, blissfully free of any challenge from conservatives. Conservatives think Milo is the answer to that problem. Sheesh
    Partisan politics, misleading or emotional bill titles, and 4D chess theories are manifestations of the same lie—that the text of the Constitution, the text of legislation, and plain facts do not matter; what matters is what you want to believe. From this comes hypocrisy. And where hypocrisy thrives, virtue recedes. Without virtue, liberty dies. - Justin Amash, March 2018

  29. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    Back to the topic of equality more directly (though this is all related, I'm going to tie it all back in (if I get time))

    For a Christian, we are not equal on Earth, and the idea of equality comes in as we are all to be judged at the Last Day with equal justice by our Lord God. The leftist, however, denies the existence of God, and instead takes the Christian idea of spiritual equality and attempts to apply it to this earthly world, where people are actually highly unequal, and then he proceeds to enforce it with worldly means.

    Lastly, without God or the Devil waiting for us when we die, many leftists aren’t too concerned about ethics, at least certainly not in the strict sense. All that strictness is so old, so tired, so worn-out, so lame. Get into the '90s! (or whenever) We've moved so beyond that old-fashioned White Man Morality, a morality that only ever served the White Man. Stop being so narrow-minded. A little robbery? A little murder? Ahh well, we're correcting past wrongs or "institutional biases". Our Holy End, Equality, justifies any means. Justice is defined by outcomes, equal outcomes, not by, well, what the word traditionally actually means.

    Social Justice is the opposite of Actual Justice.
    I am going to have to disagree with you there. Christianity teaches that all people may not be equal in ability -we are all given varying amounts of talents- but that we are equal in person. We are all children of God, spiritually His sons and daughters. We all belong to the same bloodline, that of Adam. We all exist in the same state, fallen and mortal, but with eternal potential. Christian Love is then designed to promote charity so that those who have more will relieve those who have less.

    The problem is that the Left does not promote equality. It promotes servility sold as equality, "Serve the State and Granny Goodness will take care of you. Obey and perish not."

  30. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    My egalitarian version of Christianity teaches that all people may not be equal in ability -we are all given varying amounts of talents- but that we are equal in person.
    "Equal in person." What does that mean?

    promote charity so that those who have more will relieve those who have less.
    Scriptural charity =/= anything about giving stuff to people who have less, or indeed to anyone.

    Relieving those who have less is, in fact, a very bad idea. If you relieve them, they never get out of the gene pool. Bad for humanity. Instead, those who have less quality should be shunned and disassociated from us. They should never get a chance to reproduce.

    "but whoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath." Mt. 13:12

  31. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    "Equal in person." What does that mean?

    Scriptural charity =/= anything about giving stuff to people who have less, or indeed to anyone.

    Relieving those who have less is, in fact, a very bad idea. If you relieve them, they never get out of the gene pool. Bad for humanity. Instead, those who have less quality should be shunned and disassociated from us. They should never get a chance to reproduce.

    "but whoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath." Mt. 13:12
    Should be clear if you read anything past the line you quoted.

    There is no such things as "spiritual charity." Indeed the Parable of the ten Virgins is exactly about how spiritual charity doesn't exist. Charity is the act of giving of what you have to others who have less.

    "
    Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you." -James 1:27

    "31When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

    34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal." -Matthew 25
    And ye will not suffer your children that they go hungry, or naked; neither will ye suffer that they transgress the laws of God, and fight and quarrel one with another, and serve the devil, who is the master of sin, or who is the evil spirit which hath been spoken of by our fathers, he being an enemy to all righteousness.

    15 But ye will teach them to walk in the ways of truth and soberness; ye will teach them to love one another, and to serve one another.

    16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.

    17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—

    18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.

    19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?

    20 And behold, even at this time, ye have been calling on his name, and begging for a remission of your sins. And has he suffered that ye have begged in vain? Nay; he has poured out his Spirit upon you, and has caused that your hearts should be filled with joy, and has caused that your mouths should be stopped that ye could not find utterance, so exceedingly great was your joy.

    21 And now, if God, who has created you, on whom you are dependent for your lives and for all that ye have and are, doth grant unto you whatsoever ye ask that is right, in faith, believing that ye shall receive, O then, how ye ought to impart of the substance that ye have one to another. -Mosiah 4
    46 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, if ye have not charity, ye are nothing, for charity never faileth. Wherefore, cleave unto charity, which is the greatest of all, for all things must fail—

    47 But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him. -Moroni 7

    It is ironic that you accuse Leftists of politicizing Christianity while denying its essence and then turn around and do the exact same. You even spout the same ideology of Progressives past.

    “I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feebleminded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them… The emphasis should be laid on getting desirable people to breed…”- Theodore Roosevelt

  32. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
    Should be clear if you read anything past the line you quoted.
    And yet: it isn't!

    "Equal in person" is just a baffling phrase to me.

    I guess my little brain just can't deal with it.

    Maybe you could even just tell me what you mean by "in person." Break it down for my little brain.

    We're all created by God? OK, fine. We're all related? Again, got it. But how do either of these propositions add up to being "equal in person"? I am related to my brother, and yet I am not equal to him. I am allegedly (according to the theory of evolution) related to Smilodon Fatalis, but I'm not equal to him, either (leastwise not in coolness of name). And this hammer in front of me was created by God, but is also not "equal" to me in any meaningful sense that I can muster.

    Can you? Can you muster the muster to muster it?

    There is no such things as "spiritual charity." Indeed the Parable of the ten Virgins is exactly about how spiritual charity doesn't exist. Charity is the act of giving of what you have to others who have less.


    A. Reading error. Try again.

    B. Anacronism error. Applying a modern, very much new (last couple hundred years) definition for a word you found in a much older text (1600s).

    It is ironic that you accuse Leftists of politicizing Christianity while denying its essence and then turn around and do the exact same.
    My dear Pierz, where here have a politicized Christianity? Can you find it? I may have! But if so, I have forgotten. Could you help us out?

    You even spout the same ideology of Progressives past.

    “I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feebleminded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them… The emphasis should be laid on getting desirable people to breed…”- Theodore Roosevelt
    Oh dear, oh dear. I do not want to have anything in common with Progressives of the Past! Eek! I need to re-examine and "consider my ways." Do some deep introspection.

    Here's some other quotes from these dastardly Progressives of the Past:

    "A society, if it is to thrive and succeed, must have as its foundation the virtuous and industrious character of its people. We must never allow indolence to be rewarded, lest an underclass grow up which shall... infest and corrupt our cities." -- Robert La Follette

    "A civilization which would passively allow itself to be overrun by barbarians is not fit to exist." -- Upton Sinclair

    "Chastity is among the noblest of virtues. Promiscuity is is a poison to the very soul of a nation." -- Theodore Roosevelt

    "Disciplining one's children is a prime duty of every parent." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

    "Men ought to get married to women, not to men." -- Karl Marx

    "You shouldn't get married to trees, either, nor to wildlife. They're just nice for looking at." -- John Muir

    "Different people are different." -- Proggy McProgenstein

    You see, there are many, many, many universally accepted truths which were just obvious common sense to every single person on planet Earth prior to about five seconds ago. It is just obvious that a country should try to let in high-merit people and keep out the bad. It is just obvious that if low-quality people have more children than high-quality people, the quality of the next generation will suffer.

    These are not distinctive ideas that the "progressives" invented. They are obviousisms, and if Marx or Teddy or whoever had said the opposite, it would have just been stupid and crazy and had no appeal whatsoever to anyone, including themselves.



  33. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  34. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    This'll be interesting....

    Globalists-vs-Domestic protectionists

    Productive-vs-nonproductive

    Citizen-vs-foreigner

    Men-vs-women-vs-transwhatevers

    Property owners-vs-vagrants

    Nawth-vs-South

    City-vs-Country
    And, a quite explosive one we had not perhaps anticipated:

    Mormon vs. Mormon!


  35. #90
    Quote Originally Posted by helmuth_hubener View Post
    "Equal in person." What does that mean?

    Scriptural charity =/= anything about giving stuff to people who have less, or indeed to anyone.

    Relieving those who have less is, in fact, a very bad idea. If you relieve them, they never get out of the gene pool. Bad for humanity. Instead, those who have less quality should be shunned and disassociated from us. They should never get a chance to reproduce.

    "but whoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath." Mt. 13:12
    That is about the sickest thing I have ever heard any Christian say, uh...ever.

    I'll just repeat @PierzStyx here:

    And ye will not suffer your children that they go hungry, or naked; neither will ye suffer that they transgress the laws of God, and fight and quarrel one with another, and serve the devil, who is the master of sin, or who is the evil spirit which hath been spoken of by our fathers, he being an enemy to all righteousness.

    15 But ye will teach them to walk in the ways of truth and soberness; ye will teach them to love one another, and to serve one another.

    16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor; ye will administer of your substance unto him that standeth in need; and ye will not suffer that the beggar putteth up his petition to you in vain, and turn him out to perish.

    17 Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—

    18 But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.

    19 For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?

    20 And behold, even at this time, ye have been calling on his name, and begging for a remission of your sins. And has he suffered that ye have begged in vain? Nay; he has poured out his Spirit upon you, and has caused that your hearts should be filled with joy, and has caused that your mouths should be stopped that ye could not find utterance, so exceedingly great was your joy.

    21 And now, if God, who has created you, on whom you are dependent for your lives and for all that ye have and are, doth grant unto you whatsoever ye ask that is right, in faith, believing that ye shall receive, O then, how ye ought to impart of the substance that ye have one to another. -Mosiah 4
    There is no spoon.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-09-2014, 10:46 AM
  2. Why do people seem to think that men and women are equal?
    By FSU63 in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 01-09-2014, 09:52 AM
  3. Are retarded people equal?
    By Josh_LA in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 03-19-2009, 11:38 AM
  4. Obama Signs Equal Pay for Equal Work Bill
    By danberkeley in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-31-2009, 11:46 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •