• Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 03:28 PM
    I didn't trash him. I criticized his position. And in criticizing it, at no point did I defend mask wearing. As for the scripture I quoted in post 20, I didn't defend mask wearing there either. But if you disagree with what that passage says, your quarrel isn't with me. It's possible to disagree with something and also not support punishing people for doing it. If a pastor kicked someone out of church for smoking cigarettes and I criticized the pastor for doing that, would you say that I was "defending the stupidity of smoking cigarettes"?
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 03:24 PM
    Remember 5 months ago when you had the opinion you expressed in this post? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?552854-Effeminacy-Is-Not-Working-for-the-Christian-Church&p=7025899&viewfull=1#post7025899 When I look at passages about excommunicating people, like Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5, I don't see how they jive with the idea that this is to be done single-handedly by the fiat of a pastor or any other individual. I also don't see how this is protecting anyone from anything. If someone wears a mask in your presence, that doesn't harm you. And it doesn't harm the congregation of a church in any physical, mental, or spiritual way, just to have someone in their presence wearing a mask. Kicking a person out of church for that doesn't protect anyone from anything.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 03:11 PM
    Please give the quote of where you think I did that.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 02:54 PM
    If you think that seeing a difference between someone wearing a mask in your presence and someone trying to sodomize you is hair splitting, then we're just talking past each other.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 10:56 AM
    I can't answer for why unbelievers may think that, nor do I need to concern myself with that. I just need to concern myself with how I respond to them when they do. I hope that I and my brothers and sisters in Christ will speak and act in such a way that God may use us to bring about a result like what 1 Corinthians 14:23-25 encourages: But this kind of thing would be disallowed if we started off with a policy that the enemies of Christ weren't welcome in our presence when we assembled.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 10:40 AM
    No they shouldn't, and that has to do with more than just respect vs. disrespect. But the question isn't whether they should or not, but how Christians should respond when they do.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 10:21 AM
    I suppose not. That seems like a weird reason to think someone wouldn't fit in at a church though. That kind of need for everyone to parrot the pastor's opinions about everything is the sort of problem I was getting at in my earlier post. If someone comes to my church and has an opinion the rest of us disagree with about how we're supposed to respond to actions we find disrespectful, that's ok, we can handle that kind of thing without kicking them out. And it's worth pointing out that the verses I quoted aren't just my opinion about how Christians are supposed to respond to actions they find disrespectful. Along with many other passages that give similar instructions, they're inspired Scripture.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 10:10 AM
    That seems like an ungracious way to view mask wearing. I think we should assume that people who choose to wear masks simply believe what they've been told by the CDC and others about it. Even if that's born out of misinformation, or even loyalty to the principalities and powers of this dark world, their choice to wear it is harmless. And even if they are trying to make a deliberate statement, like athletes kneeling for the national anthem, that's still harmless. And even if they're making a statement, and positively intend to be disrespectful about it, Christians should take their cue in such a situation from 1 Peter 3:14-15, which tells them:
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Today, 09:33 AM
    I wouldn't want to see someone kicked out of my church for making an open display of lack of faith. Nor do I think the decision to kick someone out of church for more appropriate reasons than that is a decision to be made unilaterally and on the spot by a single authoritarian pastor without the involvement of the whole body in the decision. I think the pastor saying something like this publicly says a lot not just about his views on mask wearing, but also about the kind of church this is and the role he plays in dictating things to the members. There are a lot of churches out there that have pastors like that. And its problematic for reasons that go beyond how they deal with COVID.
    46 replies | 670 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:08 PM
    This shows the problem with putting crimes in special categories based on the motivation of the criminal. You can have two identical crimes that are equal in severity and equal in heinousness and born out of equally vile motivations, but if the motivation for one of those crimes falls under the category of terrorism, or if it falls under the category of a hate crime, then all of a sudden that makes it worse in the eyes of the law than the other crime that it's really no worse than. You can have petty crimes like this treated like something much worse than they are. There shouldn't be any such thing as "terrorism" or "hate crimes." Charge the crime for what it actually is, and not for what the alleged motive was.
    55 replies | 1016 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:44 AM
    Who said anything about defending an existing private market? The status quo not being right is no reason not to defend what actually is right.
    51 replies | 705 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:16 AM
    That's the dichotomy that you yourself set up in the post I replied to when you said: If you're talking about infringements of people's rights that private companies commit in partnership with the state, then you're still talking about infringements committed by the state itself. There are some here who are not content with just saying that the state should refrain from cooperating with private companies in mandating vaccines for those they hire, do business with, or welcome onto their property, but they positively want the state to ban private companies from doing that.
    51 replies | 705 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:41 AM
    The real reason for telling people to wear masks is as a club to motivate people to get vaccinated. As Kamala Harris says here: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administration-recommend-vaccinated-wear-masks-areas-low-vaccination-rates-n1275012 They have found that statements like this don't have much potency among the people who still resist both vaccination and masks. So now they're telling this to the vaccinated people. Those people are a receptive audience to this messaging. And the hope is that they can create peer pressure for those who aren't. They hope this will make vaccinated people say to their unvaccinated friends and family members, "You guys are the reason I still have to wear a mask even though I'm vaccinated! You're being selfish! If you won't get the vaccine for yourself, then do it for the rest of us!" And they suppose that maybe, like a brow beaten husband, the vaccine resisters will only endure that nagging for so long before they buckle just to get these people to quit nagging them. It may not work, but it's the tactic of the day, since other things they've tried haven't worked.
    37 replies | 632 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:53 AM
    I agree with you about the need for consistency. But that goes both ways. If it has to be all or nothing, then which side of the all or nothing are you on? Are you on the side that says that an employer does have the right to hire, fire or serve whomever they want, for any reason or no reason at all, including the reason of that person not being vaccinated, or are you on the side that says they don't have that right?
    51 replies | 705 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:42 AM
    Outside of the ways that private companies entangle themselves with the government, what are some examples of the kinds of things that you consider to be private companies infringing on the rights of people?
    51 replies | 705 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:38 AM
    I'm struggling to understand how you can reconcile simultaneously holding both of the following beliefs: 1. The government should not prohibit you from restricting your hiring to whites only. 2. The government should prohibit you from restricting your hiring to vaccinated people only.
    51 replies | 705 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 03:58 PM
    As a general rule I agree. But when it's crying about how much you love cops, then the balance of likelihood swings back over to the R side.
    7 replies | 278 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 03:32 PM
    Must be after. I didn't remember him having it. But he said back in October of 2020 that he had tested positive for antibodies back in July, meaning that he had to have had COVID some time before that. The fines began to be imposed in January of this 2021.
    12 replies | 143 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 03:18 PM
    A display like this doesn't make Kinzinger a Republican in name only. It makes him a tried and true Republican who exemplifies the very essence of the party.
    7 replies | 278 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 11:36 AM
    This article gives some details. https://news.yahoo.com/house-mask-fines-put-place-161300858.html The suit is based on the 27th Amendment, which says:
    12 replies | 143 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 11:20 AM
    H. Res. 38, which was passed by the House on Jan. 12, included the following: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolution/38 I'm not sure what the details of Massie's suit are. But it may be that he argues that the fine was not imposed in accordance with that rule. Edit: The suit is based on the 27th amendment. See my post below.
    12 replies | 143 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-27-2021, 07:02 AM
    I'm not sure what he said. I doubt that was it though. Being told that's what he said before seeing the video did make it sound right. But too many of the sounds were slurred to be sure. Here's the clip in context: https://twitter.com/MollyNagle3/status/1419386522747510785 When he says the indecipherable part, he has a grin like he thinks he was being funny, and someone off camera laughs. But right before that he got asked a policy question, and then right after saying whatever he said, he gets right to answering that question. It's not a perfectly worded answer--it seems like he slips up and says "immigration" where he meant to say "reconciliation" or something else. But it's not gibberish or sheer senility. He's at least with it enough here to understand the question and give an unscripted answer that basically fits the question. It seems like he thought he was being funny. Maybe that was by saying a totally non sequitur crass remark like that. But I really don't think it's clear, and seeing it in context makes me think that's not what he said, if he said anything at all at that point.
    21 replies | 511 view(s)
  • Invisible Man's Avatar
    07-26-2021, 07:22 PM
    Great news. But please don't think this is more than a bandaid. Now that this action is acknowledged, the question has to be asked, what are the perverse incentives that would even make a cop want to do this in the first place. Those need to be identified and removed. Because we're not talking about something that only happened to 119 people by the hands of only one cop.
    6 replies | 793 view(s)
More Activity
About Invisible Man

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
11
Activist Reputation (Staff Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)
Political Campaign Skills
Computer and Technical:
Scientists and Engineer

Signature


There is nothing to fear from globalism, free trade and a single worldwide currency, but a globalism where free trade is competitively subsidized by each nation, a continuous trade war is dictated by the WTO, and the single currency is pure fiat, fear is justified. That type of globalism is destined to collapse into economic despair, inflationism and protectionism and managed by resurgent militant nationalism.
Ron Paul
Congressional Record (March 13, 2001)

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,492
Posts Per Day
2.49
General Information
Last Activity
Today 05:20 PM
Join Date
12-09-2019
Referrals
0

1 Friend

  1. tfurrh tfurrh is offline

    Member

    tfurrh
Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

05-18-2021


05-14-2021


04-29-2021


02-28-2021


02-20-2021


02-10-2021


01-11-2021


12-27-2020


No results to display...
Page 1 of 58 1231151 ... LastLast

07-29-2021


07-28-2021


07-27-2021


07-26-2021

  • 04:10 PM - Hidden


Page 1 of 58 1231151 ... LastLast