Some say I'm interesting.
This is a Haiku.
I don’t tolerate that bullshit and I don’t respect you.
The “insult” part, I can understand. If you have a loved one serving, the military as a whole being insulted would hurt and be potentially triggering. However, to say that you don’t respect someone for having “a problem with the American military” is just simply ignorant. The American military has killed or otherwise ruined the lives of hundreds of thousands of people around the globe and if any of those individuals or their family members have a problem with our military as a result you don’t have respect for them? If you honestly believe that, then I’ll just say the following:
You have a closed-minded viewpoint that the American military is incapable of wrongdoing and that therefore anyone who has a problem with them must not be worthy of respect and must be putting forth bullshit. This viewpoint is inconsistent with reality and incredibly insulting. Our actions have resulted in horrifying consequences: Innocent people killed, families lost, children left with missing limbs, babies born deformed, hospitals left in ruin, schools ablaze, etc. Would you rather us just push all of that under the rug, call it collateral damage, and insist that the victims and the families of the victims stop complaining about our wrongdoings? Would you rather insist that these victims of our war machine are not worthy of respect? That their complaints, their lives, their children’s lives, are all worthless?
Maybe it’s you that’s undeserving of respect.
Well no shit. You don’t, either. We’re both white. The difference is that I’m willing to listen and attempt to educate myself on the subject while you’re happy to just sit in your own putrid ignorance and declare that people of colour are in fact more privileged than whites.
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? — James 2:14
Good question, James. I’m pretty confused:
- A man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ. — Galatians 2:16
- And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life. — John 5:29
It is not possible.
The answer inverts itself. If you say “no” then by definition you CAN answer with a “No”.
If you put it into a logical syllogism it would be formally fallacious in the same way as this statement:
1. 1 is incorrect.
If you change it around a bit it’s easier to understand.
1. Person a made statement b.
2. statement b claimed statement b to be false.
It breaks the logical rule of contradiction since in order for the statement to mean anything you would need to hold statement b as being both true and false, which is impossible.
So a while ago I asked someone how they could worship a God that sends most people, including many of their loved ones, to hell. She just recently came back with an answer from her Pastor or Priest (I forget which it was, hell maybe it was something else Idk, maybe she talks to the Pope on a regular basis, it really doesn’t fucking matter). The answer was that it saddens her that that happens and if she was God she would let them in, but she doesn’t expect God to do so for her or her loved ones benefit. The following is what I couldn’t find the nerve to say:
I have to say, that answer is a total piece of shit, and putting it any less vulgarly than that just doesn’t feel right to me.
The point of that question isn’t to ask if you are saddened by it happening or if you pity the people being sent to hell; No, the question is what is it, “how can you worship a God that does that to anyone you care about?” Sure, it’s nice to say that you would let your loved ones in if you had the choice, but that’s not the question. Why would you WORSHIP and PRAISE a God who hurts the people you care about? Are you really that entrenched in your beliefs that you are willing to accept your loved ones being tortured forever if it is being done by your “all-loving” deity? The only alternative I can see is even uglier, and that’s just that you don’t care about your loved ones all that much. I’ll tell you why I have such a hard time comprehending this: if I believed in the Christian God then I have to accept the notion that he’s burning and torturing my father in hell FOREVER and I’m not okay with that. I would have to accept that most of my friends will meet the same fate. That’s not okay by me either. I would not be willing to worship him, I’d call him a monster, I’d call him a tyrant, and I most certainly would NEVER willingly bow my head to him.
When I ask that question I’m not trying to change your mind, I’m not trying to make you become an atheist like me. I’m trying to understand how you could praise a being who feels the need to torture a good portion of your loved ones for all of eternity. I’m trying to understand why it is that you would love rather than hate such a being and most of all I’m trying to find an alternative to the two theories that I outlines above because quite frankly I don’t want to see you as either brainwashed and lacking in the questioning of your ideas or cold and callous.
So remember when that tea partier flew a plane into an IRS building in Houston Texas? There is a certain word that wasn’t used to describe him. Remember when those white christian terrorists in the Michigan Hutaree militia were arrested for stashing homemade bombs? That word again, wasn’t applied to them in the media. Yet not only are animal rights activists labeled terrorists by the media but they even get an Act named after them; It’s called the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act.
There’s a good example of real media bias. Pay attention and stop whining about it leaning slightly to one side of the spectrum that has been pre-defined as rational debate and start questioning the basis of the spectrum itself and what its very existence says about bias in the media.
One of the most common misconceptions about abuse out there is that the abuser simply “loses control”. Well let me ask you this, if the individual in question really loses control then why does he only attack people whom he can most likely get away with attacking? Perhaps he beats his wife. Maybe he beats his children. There’s a chance his abuse could be purely verbal and he just screams insults at his children or spouse. He destroys the property of those previously mentioned individuals. He deliberately attacks those weaker than him. If he truly loses control, why does he never physically assault his boss at work? Why does he never lose and strike a police officer like he might to his children? Why does he never destroy his own possessions? Because he doesn’t lose control; He knows well what he is doing and the “loss of control” is simply an excuse that is applied as to avoid dealing with the abuse at hand.