Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
Topics (22) All
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
32Opinion
If you know LGBTs who are scared share this with them
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK8XzRKOem8Um, explain our new vice president then
@thissiteisforpervs The VP is a sidekick with no actual power who is there as an appeal to the Republican base.
So make sure Trump doesn't die.
I'd rather have Trump, than Pence, of course, but, you realize Trump CHOSE pence as his vice president.. it's basically saying, I pretended to be pro gay, but really, I'm anti gay
@thissiteisforpervs: Pence is not going to start a witch hunt. However, he's not going to give gays carte blanche either. It's the homosexualist MILITANTS that he cares about, not the day-to-day joe or jane that struggles privately with accepting how they are made and what for.
He's not going to be running you out of town arbitrarily with torches and pitchforks. At the same time, if you go around trying to jail, sue, gag order, or bomb private business owners or county clerks that refuse to be made pawns for your political movements, he won't let that stand either.
By the way, he doesn't even have to advocate a new law for that. It's already criminal, under both RICO and the Hobbes Act - neither of which Obama was willing to enforce.
@thissiteisforpervs Trump has been very pro-LGBT throughout his campaign. Even telling Jenner to use whatever washroom she chooses at Trump tower.
As for Pence's bill to protect religious freedom I wrote an entire myTake on it 7 months ago.
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a26820-lgbt-extremism-the-right-to-private-property
@ObscuredBeyond Si kind of like the nazis at first. If you just keep your mouth shut and wear a Star of David on your shirt then we'll leave you alone. In case you weren't aware, the vast majority of our founding fathers were not deeply religious men. That's why they called for the separation of church and state. They didn't want people's religious beliefs to dictate government policy. The anti-gay people like Pence and his religious right friends base their rhetoric on some obscure references from the Old Testament.
@AverageJoe74 : You have it all backwards. It's the gay militants demanding everyone conform to them. You can turn a gal down for a date and cite gay. You can't go vandalizing churches that disagree with you. The Nazi party was founded in a gay bar, by the way. And Jefferson's separation was the other way around: to keep the state from harassing religious freedom.
@ObscuredBeyond Didn't know about the gay bar part but what you said is absolutely right.
@ObscuredBeyond the gay "militants " want you to conform to what? They just want you to let them live their lives without your insecure gay bashing. I have found the most anti-gay people are some of the most insecure people I've met. I'll let you in on a little secret. They don't want to rape you in the gym shower.
"The VP is a sidekick with no actual power who is there as an appeal to the Republican base.
So make sure Trump doesn't die."
Hahaha! Mike Pence is his "dead man" switch in case a democrat would want to assassinate him lol. If you kill me, Mike Pence will be president, so think about it carefully lol.
@JuicyBrain Yes I think you're right. Trump scares me more on immigration and foreign policy. Pence's Supreme Court nominees and social policies are what scare me about him the most.
@ObscuredBeyond Yes, those gay "militants" are so scary! Next thing you know they'll be forcing straight people to convert to gay/lesbian. You f'ing anti-gays are such a scared bunch of people. Your ancestors were probably in Salem burning witches too.
@AverageJoe74 : News flash: that's what they've been doing to children for the last two decades! You think I've never heard of a "confab"? You think I don't know about kids being REQUIRED to attend pride parades? Where porn is thrown in their faces and they are flashed? Where if anyone else did this to any child under any other circumstance, it'd lead to criminal charges?
@AverageJoe74 They're already confusing children at a young age in some schools by talking about sexuality and encouraging experimentation. Who do you think that benefits?
@ObscuredBeyond Your main problem is that you think that you can "make" kids become gay/lesbian somehow. If you would put down your selective reading of the Bible and stop listening to right-wing loons, then you MIGHT actually learn that extensive research has shown that people are either born straight or gay/lesbian. It is not a choice, you idiot.
@AverageJoe74
1. Never said being gay was a choice. It's a mild birth defect.
2. I'm an atheist.
3. Kids need to focus on maths and sciences not be exploited by people who want a larger sexual choice.
If someone is gay good for them but they don't need to push all this information on kids. The majority of people in this world are straight they don't need to question their sexuality.
I didn't address that post about gay being a choice or the Bible to you. That post was directed at Obscured. Unless you have two user names. As far as pushing all the "information" on kids about sexuality, I think kids of around 13+ should get some information about sexuality. That information should be to 1. help those teenagers that do feel like they may be gay to understand that they aren't freaks or something because they feel that way and 2. To try to provide some level of understanding to the straight ones in order to discourage them from harassing the ones that are gay.
If any teachers or counselors are going beyond that, then they should be reprimanded or worse.
@AverageJoe74 My bad, I got a notification and thought it was for me since you replied under my post.
Truth is teachers will go deeper, best example of this is the new Ontario Sex Ed curriculum.
In Grade 3 they're already talking about sexual orientation and gender identity.
globalnews.ca/.../
A lot of parents pulled their kids out of school for that reason.
Kids don't need to be confused about their gender and sexuality, they need to learn maths and sciences.
QuestionMan That is from a Canadian school, which is fine but just not an example from the US. And really, I'm ok with my children taking part in that type of program. I believe that children and adults make the best decisions when they have more information and listen to different perspectives I do believe that parents should be able to "opt out" of the program and have their kids play outside or something during that periodic class. Did you say something about encouraging experimentation? I did not see anything about that in your link.
@AverageJoe74 If it happens in Canada it will eventually happen in the US. I was very concerned for property rights and about anti-religious bigotry when gay marriage was legalized. People on the left would simply say that it's a slippery slope fallacy and that it's only about giving gays equal protections under the law and yet now we have gays suing bakers and photographers.
The curriculum may not include encouraging experimentation but by teaching students about sex this early what do you think they'll do? I had sex ed but it mostly focused on anatomy and puberty, only in grade 9 did we actually learn about condoms, the pill, and STDs. Those who found out about sex earlier were more likely to engage in sexual activity.
We live in an oversexualized world as it is. People are treating each other as sex objects and this only contributes more to it.
QuestionMan. I think you are incredibly hyper sensitive to the LGBT thing. Do you know that some people used religion to justify denying service to black people? As far as "if it happens in Canada", well you can see that we haven't adopted Canada's socialized medicine. I just think if you look for examples of anything you can find it on the internet somewhere. What conservatives seem to do a lot of is look for some example of some rare individual or small group doing something extremely radical or leftist and then say "look at what the liberals want everyone to accommodate now". I mean that's what Sean Hannity bases his whole show on. It's the same as painting all conservatives as uncaring and bible thumpers.
@AverageJoe74 I have no issue with LGBTs doing their business in private, my issue is with them promoting their lifestyle. When I say lifestyle I am not implying that their sexuality is a choice but that there is a lifestyle associated with their sexuality. If someone denies service to gays, blacks or whomever, boycott them, protest them tell everyone you know to not shop there and the free market will take care of the rest. You are using the government as a bully to enforce your moral views. The radical leftists tend to be the loudest and the ones campaigning for change while normal people just live their lives and then are shocked when these people through their excessive lobbying actually achieve something. I'm no fan of social conservatism but those people usually don't force their views on anyone through legislation.
As for healthcare that's an economics question not a social one so that is a strawman argument.
First of all, healthcare is not purely an economic issue. The social aspect of it is how we as a society care for all citizens regardless of ability to pay. The idea of socialized medicine, which I support, is about human dignity. A big part of the problem with any form of healthcare system is an economic one though. You seem to have bought in to this outdated notion that we must have 100% pure capitalism to be prosperous and free. That argument has been promoted by industry and these so call "conservative think tanks" as a way to minimize regulation and maximize shareholder return and management's bonuses.
And by saying that there is a "lifestyle" associated with being gay is painting all LGBT people with a broad brush. You do understand that those flamboyant gay men that I think you may be referencing are a small percentage of gay men. They stand out in your mind because they are very hard to ignore and you seem to therefor label a whole group of people as being the same.
As far are your statement about boycotting businesses and such, I would be ashamed to live in a country that allowed a business owner to refuse service to someone based on race or any other factor that doesn't fit their "beliefs" or some other imagined reason. What if a black man was driving with his 6-year old daughter down an old country road in a rural area and his car broke down at night. There is only one small hotel they can walk to and the owner refuses to let the man and his daughter rent a room because they are black? Would that be acceptable to you?
@AverageJoe74 You liberals really love misrepresenting people's ideas.
I do not believe in 100% pure capitalism since I'm not an anarcho-capitalist.
Yes I agree that healthcare should be something everyone has access to which is why in Canada I strongly support the reform of our system to have both a private and a publicly funded option for healthcare. There is a candidate running for the Tory leadership with this as part of his platform and hopefully if he becomes the PM in 2019 more people will have access to healthcare. In the US the system is far more complex and calls for a 100% socialized system will fail. Obama tried to make a two tiered system like the one I support but it turned into a failure as premiums rose for the middle class forcing them to take on second and third jobs just to pay for them. It's good to have a heart but your plan must be economically feasible.
@AverageJoe74 I'm well aware that not all gays are flamboyant but the vocal minority is and they have a lot of power.
As for the random example you brought up, most people aren't racist. The only colour people care about is green. To tell a business owner that he/she must serve someone is a denial of that person's rights. The owner has worked hard to build that business and is not a slave to anyone.
Yes the owner has worked hard to build their business. But do you know what else has helped their business? Infrastructure, security and laws, employees, and regulations to prevent monopolies and other forces that can negatively impact businesses. Those things come from taxpayers/voters. There always has to be regulation to prevent/reduce bad behavior. And we as a society have a say in what we consider bad behavior. I think part of the problem may be that you live in Canada and probably have never lived in the southern US as I have for most of my life. . I think if you had seen and heard the actions and words that I have from my fellow anglos, you may have a different perspective on discrimination. As far as healthcare, I do support a private option for those that prefer it, but they still have to pay their share for the public option too. What most people that oppose socialized medicine fail to include in their financial calculations of the cost is the overall economic impact of
@AverageJoe74 Ah the classic Obama argument of
You didn't build that somebody else helped you.
All the public spending on roads and police is for everyone. The regulations are there to protect employees from being taken advantage of by employers. When it comes to purchasing a good or service you are putting the store owner at a disadvantage because by your logic the store owner must provide the service whether he/she likes it or not, so Wal-Mart denying the guy a Confederate flag cake was as much a violation of his rights as the Christian bakery not baking the gay cake for a gay couple. However, people on the left would NEVER defend the Confederate flag cake case and use the property rights argument of stores can sell whatever they want. It's pure hypocrisy on the left.
As for the racists down South, forcing them to cater to Blacks only reinforces their racism.
Of course the roads are for everyone. The point is that businesses rely on them to get their products to market in the manufacturing sector and others. The point is businesses draw a greater economic benefit from those types of government investment.
And you thinking you know more about racism than I do is like me saying I know more than you about ice hockey or something.
@AverageJoe74 Watch this video. This is a pizza shop owner who got attacked by the media simply because he said he wouldn't in a hypothetical situation cater to a gay wedding.
https://youtu.be/AURKZUaeEKk?t=5m33s
@AverageJoe74 It starts at 5:33
I know you wouldn't agree, but you are a walking contradiction. You say you are an atheist, as am I, but you support these people's "right" to refuse to serve someone on the basis of their ignorant religious beliefs. If you are an atheist then you know these religious types are delusional. Religion has held humankind back from achieving its full potential for thousands of years. I don't get it.
@AverageJoe74 I actually see no contradiction. Atheism is just not believing in God it is not an authoritarian belief that demands people reject religion.
I support people's property rights and that's exactly what this is about. The Indiana law is just a way of protecting those rights.
Religion is not a delusion but a set of beliefs, sure I may not believe in God, but I do believe in treating people with respect, to not steal or murder and in the importance of the nuclear family. These are Judeo-Christian values that have helped shape our society.
Is religion perfect, no, Radical Islam is a perfect example of that, but I don't see these people killing gays. They're just saying leave us alone and isn't that what atheists have been asking religious nuts for centuries?
You are not entitled to anyone's services.
Well you may be right about me not being entitled to someone's service or product, but I am a white male. If I were a black man then there are laws that would prevent someone from denying me service on the basis of my race. These laws were passed because ignorant, racist southerners (mostly) wanted to keep blacks segregated and not allowing them to eat in their diner was an extension of that segregation. I am proud to live in a country that FINALLY passed civil rights legislation 50 years ago to help offset hundreds of years of legally sanctioned slavery and segregation. I still think that you don't really understand the south's history of racism and the incredible damage that did to a whole race of American citizens. That history STILL lingers down here. LGBT people are just another group of people that these closed minded religious types find offensive. And propert rights are not without limitations in any modern society. The government can take/buy your property to build roads (ex)
@AverageJoe74 The only colour a business person really cares about is green (the colour of money) because discrimination is not profitable. If there really is someone living in the South that really hates Black people, do you think forcing him to serve Blacks is a good idea? I'd rather he be exposed as a racist and have his shop go out of business then have the government bully him into not being a racist since all that does is make him hate Black people more.
When it comes to LGBTs it's only been about catering to weddings.
You can clearly see from this video that Milo a gay conservative was able to get a pizza just fine, the store owner simply didn't want to be involved with gay weddings.
Starts at 9:33
https://youtu.be/AURKZUaeEKk?t=9m33s
Most people aren't racist or hateful. If there truly is a bad person who is denying service to gays, Black, Jews whomever on the basis of their identity then I will stand with you in protest but that is not the case here.
It's a democracy. People have the right to protest as much as they want. I think it shows a lot of strength to go out there and stand up for what you believe in.
We aren't a democracy, we are a republic. Also they are breaking the law by blocking streets and committing other crimes.
I still think people should be able to protest however they want, unless there is violence inflicted upon another person.
There is already violence. And blocking the streets is illegal because it prevents emergency crews from responding to calls.
Please PM me with your address so I can protest Trump's election by burning down your house and car - because that's how I like to protest. I promise: I won't harm any people - I'll just destroy all of the property you and your family have worked so hard for. That's not too much to ask, is it?
Your analogy doesn't make sense. I personally haven't done anything to hurt you, so why would you decide to burn down my property?
"I still think people should be able to protest however they want, unless there is violence inflicted upon another person."
Burning down your house, smashing your windows, and otherwise destroying your property is how I want to protest. You just said you support me being able to protest any way I want to.
How is what I want to do any different than other people "protesting" by smashing windows, looting stores and shops, flipping over cars, etc., with much of that property owned by people who voted the same way the protesters did (not that that should really matter)? If that's okay, then why isn't it just as okay for me to trash YOUR stuff?
But their rioting and assaulting people who voted for trump and people in general? That's not protesting that's a criminal act made worse because its by people who have claimed for so long that they are "tolerant" and "open minded". Further more yes protesting is a right but this is how our system works and these same protestors where also the group accusing trump supporters of being violent racists who would lash out if trump didn't win. Its hypocrisy and violence and while being a hypocrite is legal (though not socially acceptable) violence is not.
@hellionthesagereborn You say that liberals claim to be tolerant and opened minded, which the vast majority are. What liberals are protesting against is the fact that trump and his butt buddy Bannon are NOT tolerant of others. They are protesting against racism and hate!
@Pinkbeauty I can't "handle" what you believe in? I guess if you mean I can't handle ignorance rooted in selective reading of the Bible then maybe you are correct. I believe in facts and science and treating all of my fellow man with decency and respect. And most people that were homeschooled, in my experience, have a hard time accepting people' that are different than them because they didn't spend much time around minorities and those with different beliefs. And you must have blocked me from responding because I was causing you to feel uncomfortable in your imaginary little world.
@AverageJoe74 You miss the irony of your statement. First the term "buttbuddy" is insulting towards gays as it implies that homosexuality is wrong since your using it as an insult. In your liberal parlance that would be considered a "homophobic" statement. Which is ironic that you stated that as Trump very specifically and bluntly stated that he would do everything in his power to protect the rights of the LGBTQ community from both foreign and domestic powers. Then its actually ironic that you claim that its liberals that are predominantly peaceful and open minded despite the fact that the rioters are almost all liberals, the assaults are almost all liberals attacking conservative and peaceful trump supporters (and innocent business owners property as well as public property while spraying painting such things as "die whites die" and such.
@AverageJoe74 Then of course the fact that you refuse to accept a persons difference of opinion which is by defininition closed minded not open minded as you make blanket judgments about a group of people like say home schooled people being ignorant and intolerant which itself is an ignorant and intolerant thing to say. You are really your worse enemy in arguing your point. Its also ironic that you talk about feeling uncomfortable because when trump won it was the liberals that created "safe" spaces for people (i. e. spaces where no one would have a difference of opinion then them) where they could play with playdoe and coloring books, even having therapy dogs all of this for grown adults in college campuses so a liberal insulting some one for blocking them is again, rather ironic.
@hellionthesagereborn You miss the point entirely. In this situation It's only an insult to those people who a are homophobes. I have several gay friends/family that make the same type of jokes to people who are homophobic. Maybe if you actually bothered to engage in conversation with people in the LGBT community you would get it. And I notice that you didn't even try to defend Bannon and his racist opinions. As usual, conservatives only focus on a smaller point to hide the fact that they have no defense for the larger.
@hellionthesagereborn If you actually read that post you would see that a referenced my personal experience and not all homeschooled people actross the board. Have you been out to these protests going on now and seen that it's people that supported Hillary that are the violent ones? Of course not. You just ASSume they are because Rush tells you so. Those people may just be everyday criminals that are using these protests as cover for their criminal behavior.
@AverageJoe74 Funny because we both know you wouldn't tolerate that if any one else said it. As for talking to gay people, which ones should I start with? Does my brother and his husband not count? I didn't defend any one, I stated facts I have no idea what his stance is but to be honest I don't care. I'm not conservative but I do like the fact that if some one doesn't agree with you you assume that they must be. Your worse insult is to accuse some one of having a difference of opinion then you which is very telling of what kind of person you are. Also why have you supported Hillary considering she considered Robert byrd a friend and mentor. Robert byrd was a democrat with the longetst filibuster in history when he protested the 1964 civil rights act. He was also a KKK recruiter. So I noticed you ignored all of that, just like a liberal to point out one non detail and try and justify their argument with that.
@AverageJoe74 As for trump supporters beign responsible for the violence, here is the proof:
www.bing.com/.../search
www.bing.com/.../search
www.bing.com/.../search
www.bing.com/.../search
www.bing.com/.../search
Also Donald Turump is racist, thats why Ben Carson has been his advisor (a black man) as many others who have helped him have been black, because he is racist. Its almost as if your just regurgitating what liberal media sites have told you and you haven't actually done any research of your own. But then thats what makes liberals so dangerous, they don't think they just do what they have been told.
@hellionthesagereborn Oh please don't tell me you bought that Robert Byrd crap that trump was spewing. Byrd was a klansman until the 1960's or something and by the 1970's admitted how wrong his beliefs were and went on to support civil rights legislation. I actually do believe people can change and his actions showed that his change was genuine. AND, unlike Trump, Hillary isn't the one relying on the opinions and recommendations of an unrepentant racist and fear monger. When you come up with these false equivalencias you lose all credibility. And I'm glad you have some sympathy for the LGBT community and apologize for my assumption. I think anyone that talks about how some group of people are damaging our country should have to actually spend time with people from those groups. I've seen so many posts from people that live in some lily-white little town in the middle of nowhere complaining about how Muslims or some other group are ruining our country.
@hellionthesagereborn First of all, the clips you posted are very sad. But as conservatives often do, you take a few examples of bad people and try to label that as a bunch or the majority of liberals. Have you actually read some of headlines and stories that Bannon (as editor of Breitbart) has approved as being acceptable? Clearly racist comments about Jews, Muslims, and Mexican immigrants. This man is going to be advising the president of the United States!! The only way anyone could support his selection is if they have racist tendencies themselves.
LOL are u serious? Donald Trump deserves to have his property burnt down. I don't. See the difference? If I were a sexist, racist pig who wanted to build a wall, I would deserve to have my property burnt to the ground. But I'm not. See what I mean?
How is he racist or sexist?
you've got to be kidding me...
Nope, no one has told me an example of him being sexist or racist.
He said he "grabs women by the pussy" and has called women pigs, fat, and ugly. He also said that it's the "woman's job" to raise the children and that he wants nothing to do with it.
As for being racist, just type it into google and you'll get a long list.
When did he call women pigs? Also how is him saying he likes to "grabs women by the pussy" sexist?
"LOL are u serious? Donald Trump deserves to have his property burnt down. I don't. See the difference?"
There are tons of protesters who are destroying the property of people OTHER THAN Donald Trump - in many cases the property of people who voted for Clinton themselves. Yet, you think they "should be able to protest however they want." If you're okay with protesters destroying the property of completely innocent and unrelated third parties, why isn't it okay if they destroy YOUR property?
@Thisperson98 Wow! You are absolutely blind. Those people that can't see his misogyny, racism, and sexism then it must be because they share those traits with Trump. It's the only explanation I can think of.
@AverageJoe74 no one has yet showed me a legit racist or sexist thing that Trump said.
@Thisperson98 As I said, those that can't see it must share the same perspective. I'm not going to waste my time sending you links so you can just deny that's what Trump meant. Good luck with that hate filled life.
@AverageJoe74 so, because someone disagrees with you, you call them racist and sexist. This is the reason Trump won.
@AverageJoe74 Its not false equivalency, I stated exactly as so many liberals stated, that guilt by association (as you started complaining about with pence) and heresay is a valid argument. I was merely showing that by that reasoning it goes both ways. And no I didn't "buy it" didn't even know trump said it, I was just applying your reasoning to your argument. As for the clips, no I was just proving that liberals are being violent which your denying, in fact yet again you are accusing others of what you yourself are doing (I'm not conservative I just hate hypocrits). As for fear mongering its liberals who have made baseless accusations against trump, its you and liberals screaming about how trump is sexist and racist (because liberals said so, you know unbiased sources and all) how he is going to destroy everything and he is evil etc. etc. etc.. That's sounds an awful lot like fear mongering to me how about you?
That is the stupidest argument I have ever heard. Because he wants to deal with an illegal immigrant problem and police our countries borders like literally every other nation that ever has or ever will exist including mexico itself, your saying he deserves to be vandalized? I think any one who says that its okay to burn destroy loot and assault others are the ones who should be arrested and punished, especially when they say its okay because the person believes differently then them. That is a sick ideology you have their, that's why you can never trust a self righteous person, they are the least righteous people out their.
@hellionthesagereborn Your comment that starts with "It's not false equivalency" was meant for me? I have mentioned Pence's name anywhere on this site. In terms of guilt by association, well it's not just "association" because he hired the guy (Bannon) to be his campaign CEO and chief strategist to the president. That's a bit more than association. As usual however, conservatives have their own set of "facts" and anything that contradicts that is just liberal bias. You people are liking talking to a brick wall sometimes. Tell me, do you believe climate change and that it's being at least partially caused by man? And do you believe in evolution? If not, then talking to you is a waste of my time.
@Thisperson98 No. ignorant people like yourself are the reason Trump won. Along with the white supremacist that aren't felons coming out in droves. I have a feeling that people like you will defend him all the way to the end of the next four miserable four years.
@AverageJoe74 You are everything you claim others to be. That's the saddest part about this situation. I have no idea what evolution or climate change has to do with that. Climate change, or rather the details of it are questionable hence scientist like Freeman dyson and others doing just that. That's an opinion and it really doesn't matter as it pertains to the running of the state that is individual choices. And again evolution? irrelevant to the running of the state. So again, you claim guilt by association but only so long as its the person who has a difference of opinion then you insult a person based upon the fact that they disagree with you and are not a liberal like you. This is by definition close minded and bigoted. Congratulations you are the reason trump one, you and every liberal like you. The saddest part is you are so self absorbed you will never realize it.
@hellionthesagereborn The reason Trump won is due to the democrats running a highly flawed, boring candidate. That along with sexism against a female candidate and racism in favor of Trump. And you just denied climate change so you fit my description perfectly. Also, if someone doesn't believe in evolution then they cannot be relied on to make decisions based on facts. Instead they make decisions based on some book that was partly written thousands of years ago when people still thought the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth. Do you still believe in those things too? Maybe it's a NASA lie that the earth is round! It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with people that denie scientific facts. So long.
@AverageJoe74 Told you liberals are bigots. Racism? The democratic candidate is a white woman and these same "racists" as you call them voted for Obama twice for the most part so thats completely inaccurate from an objective standpoint as well as just showing how bigoted liberals truly are. As for sexism, again how does that factor in? These people didn't like Clinton thats completely different then not liking clinton because she was a woman. It at no point in time occured to you that they didn't like her because she was a career politician, was corrupt and wrapped in scandal and her platform of essentially more of the same didn't appeal to the populace? Again, just proving that liberals are hateful bigots who cannot handle others having a diffrence of opinion. Which is why trump won. As for climate change at no point did I deny it so wrong again. I said its a complicated issue and many want to simplify it.
@AverageJoe74 No one believed the earth was flat, at least not past the 6th century in the west as ancient greek philosophers proved that point with how things disappear on the horizon bottom first as well as changes in positions of stars depending on location. As for global warming, I never denied it I said their are plenty of people scientist included that are uncertain of it. The fact is their have been seven ice ages, seven global warmings all of which occured before humans and the last global warming event is believed to be responsible for the rise of bipedalism in our ancestors and thus is responsible for our increased intelligence as it allowed us to use our hands to manipulate our enviroments thus acting as a catalyst for intellect. (guess I just disproved your claim that I don't believe in evolution (which again is irrelevent and nothing more then an ad hominid attack).
@AverageJoe74 Then we have had a mini Ice age that occured in the 1600s and a mini global warming that happened in the 1400s and then with data that spans a hundred years and with tools that actually make that data matter for less then fifty, people want to claim that global warming is happening, that its a true global warming, its completely destroying the world (despite the fact that Co2 increase plant growth and thus the conversion of co2 into oxygen (our planet has not been greener in a long time)) and its all humanities fault is premature at best. Thats a far cry different then saying its not happening. Again your over simplifying it and making a big deal about something that is unrelated to public policy for the most part and using that difference of opinion as an insult as well as justification to be a bigot.
@hellionthesagereborn Most people believed it was flat well into the 15th century. Just because there were some ancient astronomers that believed the earth was round doesn't mean the "everyone" did. And no legitimate scientist believes that climate change can ONLY be caused be human created environmental pollution. Of course there have been ice ages and warming periods that had nothing to do with man made pollution. To deny that this current climate change is st least partially, if not largely, due to man made factors is absolutely ridiculous. Just because there are a FEW deniers doesn't mean anything. You've just made an completely empty argument. The point of my bringing up evolution and climate change is to point out the ridiculousness of most conservatives mind set. If you acknowledge evolution then you are at least halfway to being an informed human being.
@hellionthesagereborn Unrelated to public policy for the most part? Are you kidding me? I am not a big tree huger or anything, but to deny that climate change is being largely caused by human behavior is just burying your head in the sand. The scientific knowledge and tools available today are 1000 times more accurate than anything that scientists had in the 1400's. Deny deny deny.
@AverageJoe74 there is some scientists who believe it is mostly nature. The concept that global warming is caused by mainly humans is a theory not a law. I suggest you learn a difference between a theory and a law. You are claiming a theory to be a law.
@Thisperson98 So you are really going to hold on to that 3% of climate scientists that disagree with the 97%? There were probably a handful of astronomers that believed the world was flat well into the 17th century too. Then you must think we should do nothing about climate change because a few scientists don't think it's caused by man made factors. That sounds like a sound decision. LOL
@AverageJoe74 basing your argument on a logical fallacy sounds like a sound argument.
@Thisperson98 That is a lazy response.
@AverageJoe74 No they didn't. Here is a list of scientist that question it: en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
Here is the explanation as to why the claim that so many scientist believe climate change is happening and its caused by humans and it will be damaging here:
www.politifact.com/.../
So, no its not an empty argument but yours was as per your usual response. Claiming something to be true and it actually being true are two very different things. Your argument consists of basically claiming that I and others are wrong because we disagree with you and then thats about it, no data, no facts, no logical conclusion. So again your argument is not particularly sound. Its actually ironic you talk about me being uninformed as it would seem between the two of us I am the most informed. But again ad hominid attacks and straw man arguments do not alter the truth.
@hellionthesagereborn You are incredibly small minded. So your rebuttal is that it may not quite be 97%? That it may be only 90%? Really? And I know about that misrepresentation of it being 97% of CLIMATE SCIENTIST. I never said 97% of all scientist. This is from the conclusions for your politifact link.
"The studies Beyer and others cite do not reflect the Scientific community at large. They are surveys that focus on the conclusions of climatologists, earth scientists and meteorologists. The studies found that overwhelming majorities of these experts - sometimes, but not always as high as 97 percent - say humans are contributing to global warming."
You are arguing semantics and not facts. Please learn the difference.
@AverageJoe74 the fact that 97% agree is not enough to dismiss the other 3%.
@Thisperson98 Did you actually just argue that I'm the one making a mistake by dismissing the 3%? Well you are dismissing 97% aren't you? I mean if you are not in favor of environmental reform then you are dismissing the 90-97% of climate scientist. The people I am disgusted with are the climate change deniers. Especially those in positions of power or of influencing public opinion. Reasonable people can disagree about how much humans are contributing to the change and the most prudent steps to take. By bringing up the 3% your purpose can only be to sew seeds of doubt about whether climate change is real and we are contributing to that change. I hope 100% of climate scientists continue to do further research. But you will NEVER get 100% of any group of people to agree on anything.
@AverageJoe74 I am just saying you can never dismiss the other 3%. Dismissing the other 3% just because the other 97% said otherwise is a logical fallacy. I never said I dismissed the other 97% percent.
@hellionthesagereborn It's not about disagreeing with me. I am not a climate scientist. I'm asking you to believe the overwhelming majority of those people that specialize in climate science. If you got 1000 opinions about the cause of a serious illness you might have, would you choose to believe the 3-8% that said you would be fine without any treatment whatsoever? Or the ones that told you that you might die if you didn't get treated immediately? Which would be the more logical decision?
@Thisperson98 So you do believe that we should be taking real steps to reduce our environmental footprint?
@AverageJoe74 why does that matter? I was making a different claim, I was making that you cannot dismiss theories just because it is not popular. Using a red hearing is also logical fallacy. Now you have used two logical fallacies.
@Thisperson98 Yes, any question you don't want to answer or point you don't want to address is a "logical fallacy". LOL. Did you learn that term in freshman English class and now try to squeeze it in to any discussion you have? And E=MC2 ? Hahaha! You can't even write the equation correctly! Talk to me again after you get an actual education. So long kiddo
@AverageJoe74 I fixed that in the update. Lmao, now I don't debate with people who keep using logical fallacies.
@Thisperson98 Whatever you need to make yourself feel better kid
@AverageJoe74 Which I pointed out is not the overwhelming majority. You forgot that minor detail.
@hellionthesagereborn 90+% IS an overwhelming majority. Now YOU are grasping at straws.
@AverageJoe74 have you heard of something called a logical fallacy? You say I am uneducated at least I know what logical fallacies are.
@hellionthesagereborn Trump said he wants to kill the families of terrorist if they are in the way. Ten women came forward and stated that they had been sexually harassed (at minimum) by Trump. And don't give me that liberal conspiracy crap which you know is bullshit. Might there have been one or two that made shit up or exaggerated? Possibly. Most men that voted for Trump because they couldn't accept the idea of a woman being commander and chief. And ALL of that BS about Obama being a Muslim or not being born in the US is entirely about race. But you'll just keep believing your narrow minded narrative and discard anything that doesn't fit that narrative.
@Thisperson98 Yes I have. It is a common error that people make when debating or making an argument. What you have failed to do the MANY times you have accused me of using a logical fallacy is point out exactly where that logical fallacy is in my argument. Don't worry though, that's a common error that freshman students make.
@hellionthesagereborn I don't accept anyone's opinion. I accept facts.
@AverageJoe74 "I'm asking you to believe the overwhelming majority of those people that specialize in climate science." www.logicallyfallacious.com/.../Appeal-to-Popularity
@AverageJoe74 Well for starters its not 90% as I pointed out, its considerablly less then that. As for you accepting facts, no no you do not this discussion and all your other ones are proof of that. You cannot handle facts so you stick to propaganda, slander and insults because you have no argument.
@hellionthesagereborn Please point out the propaganda that you are referring to which I have used. And I mean specifically. You are very good about making vague references but have provided very few actual facts. That is what conservatives often do because the usually don't have facts to back up their arguements. But please show me that you don't fit that description.
@Thisperson98 Well thank you for the link, but as often happens on sites like this one, your link is actually contrary to your point. The examples of logical fallacies given on that webpage are all referring to things such as opinion poles of average people. I am actually given you the opinions of an overwhelming majority of specialists in the field of climate change. I am not going to provide links to thousands of articles that prove my point when you can do that yourself. If your argument for my point being a logical fallacy is that it is NOT the opinion of an overwhelming majority of climate scientists that humans are contributing to climate change, then
@Thisperson98 please tell me where I can find THAT information. And please don't waste my time with articles from Fox News and right-wing websites.
@AverageJoe74 it doesn't apply just regular people. It can apply to any group. I find it funny that you don't even know you are using a logical fallacy and you claim I am not educated.
@Thisperson98 The examples provided in your link did not mention anything about referencing a group of experts in their field as being a logical fallacy. You actually have to READ the whole article to understand the point of the article. Conservatives regularly try to quote some headline or portion of an article to make their point and I catch them every time. Nice try though. Look again.
@hellionthesagereborn Please show me a legitimate news or scientific source that says that less than 90% of climate/earth scientists do not believe that humans are contributing to climate change. I just used your own link earlier to show you that you're wrong about that.
@AverageJoe74 Well, I can't provide you with something you consider legitamate because if its not going to agree with you then your not going to accept it, just as you didn't accept the video of trump denouncing the riots after you specified that he had to say it on camera (because you would accept nothing else, then didn't even accept that) but here are sources: www.forbes.com/.../#3233160d5909
www.americanthinker.com/.../...global_warming.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrWznOFq38s
Of course these will be unacceptable to you because, again, they prove you wrong which you cannot accept as I have already pointed out.
@AverageJoe74 does it have to give an exact example? Or can't you read it? It said that it is a logical fallacy to say that something is a fact because it is popular. And in this case it is popular amoung climate scientists.
@hellionthesagereborn Three points:
1. Those were actually legitimate sources which you provided in that neither is a right-wing rag like Breitbart or something.
2. Your main point was that it was not 90% of climate scientist that believed climate change is partially caused by humans. I never quoted the Cook study because I knew that his statement about 97% of scientists was misleading.
3. This is from the Forbes article:
"The question is meaningless regarding the global warming debate because most skeptics as well as most alarmists believe humans have caused some global warming".
I have stated on here previously that reasonable people can disagree about HOW MUCH humans are contributing to climate change. But to deny that we are is ludicrous. The conservatives that argue that there is no or little evidence of human's contributing to climate change are the ones that I detest. Research some of the more prominent deniers and see how they are being compensated.
@Thisperson98 Ok. Please try to understand your own link that you provided. It is referring to people's opinions that are based on no research or evidence whatsoever. For example, if you poll 1000 random people and ask them what their favorite sport is, and the majority say baseball, that does not mean that baseball is the best sport in the world. It simply means that more people enjoy watching baseball than any other sport. There was no scientific data collected or research done, so to state that baseball is the best sport in the world would be a fallacy. But it might SEEM logical to say that it was.
Liberals: "Be tolerant of others! OMG THINGS DIDN'T GO MY WAY! OUTRAGE! PROTEST!"
Riots!
I agree the Democrats needed a wake up call but would have preferred if it wasn't a nightmare in the form of Donald Trump maybe an internal revolution like Bernie Sanders.
Democrats only have themselves to blame for that.
They should not have conspired against Bernie to steal the nomination from him - they are stupid.
How do you know Trump not great? He hasn't even started yet give the man a chance
"Trump could be extremely problematic. He could, on the other hand, fix a lot of things."
Try actually reading the piece.
Way too long-winded I have things to do
As an American citizen I don't have to give him a chance... isn't that great!
Just stop. You know if Clinton won there would be riots and shit on your part too. Every group of people has crazy people that take it too far. Don't act like you guys are innocent too.
media.advance.net/.../...njpg-4686e1a95903233f.jpg
You do realize that the people who say "Make America white again" are anti-Trump right?
@Thisperson98 actually it was Trump supporters so check your facts.
www.newyorkupstate.com/.../..._again_swastika.html
micahjmurray.com/.../
Never heard of that website. Thus, I don't trust it. Anti-Trump protesters use "Make America white again" to mock Trump.
@Thisperson98 Well you're refusing to listen to facts because IT WAS TRUMP SUPPORTERS.
I don't listen to non creditable sources.
@Thisperson98 I linked you to a creditable source. You just don't wanna listen because you believe everything he says.
@Thisperson98 It's a dugout in Syracuse, and they wrote that on it after his win and it was a bunch of white teenagers neo nazis.
None of those sites are creditable, I have never heard of them before and how they were writing, it showed that they aren't creditable.
@Thisperson98 and then you try to tell me it was some anti-trump shit like you know we're it actually came from.
@Thisperson98 Here since you can't believe that Trump supporters can't be racist.
globalnews.ca/.../
It's a known fact that anti Trump people use "Make America White Again" as a condescending remark. They're calling him and his supporters racist. That's what it means
@rjroy3 exactly
@Thisperson98 Yeah. Don't believe anything that doesn't suit your narrative. Keep on sucking Trump's cock. 🙄
@rjroy3 it EVEN says in the article that it was TRUMP SUPPORTERS.
An article that is written by a Canadian news outlet. Canadian news is a lot more bias than our news outlets. Also "Make America white again" is a slogan for the anti-Trump protesters.
@Thisperson98 stating facts=bias
Anything to make him look good right? Go away.
Those aren't facts. The fact is that "Make America white again" is a slogan of anti-Trump protesters.
@Thisperson98 no. You just refuse to believe that Trump supporters can be as hateful as these SJWs you despise. You're probably just like them but refuse to admit it.
And you know for a fact that if Clinton won you would be protesting and saying that the election was rigged because it doesn't suit your argument. So stop being hypocritical and accept the facts or just go away because there is no point in arguing with you.
Lmao, this whole election the slogan "Make America white again" was used by SJWs. Ffs, learn a little about the groups first. At least I know the slogans. Also give me a reliable source instead of liberal media.
@Thisperson98 It's not liberal media. I gave you three sources and you then up your nose at facts because you CAN'T ACCEPT THEM. Stop kissing Trump's ass ffs.
And Trump supporters have done some shady shit too but it's only when it's liberals is when it matters. Stop acting like you're some angel because you like Trump. He's back peddling on all the shit he promised you because he said all that shit to GET YOUR VOTE.
But you know you're gonna bring up some irrelevant thing to throw off what I am saying to you.
@Thisperson98 Ohhhh and here's an ACTUAL NEWS OUTLET since you can't fathom the fact that Trump supporters can be racist bigots.
www.wusa9.com/.../3ehpoCsLdKAsc4aas4GGi6
I am not saying Trump supporters can't be racist. I am just saying that this was not done by Trump supporters.
media.advance.net/.../...njpg-4686e1a95903233f.jpg
That last link was for something for veteran's day.
@Thisperson98 I linked you to a news article. Ffs.
It was for a fact done by Trump supporters. Go do something productive instead of denying facts.
From news organizations that I never heard of before, there is a lot of take news going around.
So why would Trump supporters write something that is anti-Trump?
@Thisperson98 Lol where are you sources that confirm
This was done by anti Trump people? Oh wait it's just a gut feeling that you can't prove to be true. :) But you know I linked you to like 3 or 4 articles stating that this came from
Neo nazis but you don't believe it because "Trump is your daddy".
Lmao, look this is a liberal news outlet that makes fun of Trump. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8546894 see how it says "Make America white again"?
@Thisperson98 sorry that's not a reliable source hun. I asked you where this exact thing came from. Can't find it can you? ;)
I don't trust liberal news outlets. ;D
I was proving that liberals use the slogan "Make America white again" to insult Trump. My point stands, I proved that liberals use this slogan.
@Thisperson98 but so do neo nazi trump supporters. And you can't even find where this came from so therefore you can't prove it was done by libs lmao.
And how do they know they were Trump supporters?
They dont even know if it was Trump supporters or not, they even said, they said that they think it was. But they have no proof.
@rjroy3 because it says so in the 4 or 5 articles I linked that you refuse to believe because "Liberal bias lololol"
The articles show no proof. They just saying their opinions. All articles that worth anything would show the evidence.
@Thisperson98 backwards image search then since you don't believe me.
You do realize that just because it's in articles that doesn't make it true right? I asked how do the writers know?
Like I said none of the articles you linked present evidence, it is just what they think happened. When you get into college, you will learn how to separate the facts and the opinions. You will also learn to tell if a source is reliable or not.
@rjroy3 because they live around where this was done. In New York but you know "Libtards lol"
@Thisperson98 Backwards image search. Oh wait you can't find anything.
I live in Virginia. If some graffiti was put on a wall near I lived I couldn't write an article saying it was Clinton supporters. There's no evidence.
How do they KNOW it was Trump supporters?
@rjroy3 Why was it done right after the election. 🤔 To gloat about their win correct? Yep. Probably.
Clinton lost lol. Anyways, I'm done. Too immature for my taste
@Thisperson98 Há Há! That's very funny from a right-wing racism denier that probably gets his "news" from Hannity and Rush.
@AverageJoe74 I don't really get my news from news outlets, I research for my self.
Yeah they like to deny facts. Then they talk about liberals denying facts.
You are still denying that the image you provided was done by anti-Trump protesters. The phrase "Make America white again" is from anti-Trump protesters.
yeah form a non American we are beginning to think you are all going bat shit insane if we being honest
especially how most of your "liberal" ( is that what you call it?) news medias kept on hyping up up Clinton and crapping all over the voters who voted for trump and trump from what i have observed so far that seems to have cause some what of a back lash
its pretty interesting
Agree with everything you said. This should be nominated for Take of the Year! :D
I think everyone has shown hypocrisy in this election. The republicans have shown just how divided we really are as a country and the democrats think the republicans are idiots.
Liberals are hateful, bigoted, intolerant people! Without a doubt. They are scary.
One woman, before all this madness started, was crippled due to bullies in school. She became an advocate for programs to end bullying. She was an inspiration to many, even almost found her way onto American Idol.
Fast-forward to today's election cycle. She is so beside herself that Trump won, that she picks a fight with an elderly man on the street at random over the results. When the man has an answer for every accusation she makes, and she starts looking like a fool, she lashes out and brutally beats the man until his forehead is beating and he's lying on the ground. He was too old and weak to fight back.
Of everyone at that "protest," she was the only one police explicitly arrested.
The supernatural hatred of Trump has now turned anti-bullying activists into violent assailants.
Yes, the party that includes 90 percent of the minorities in this country and most LGBT people is bigoted and intolerant". Try again. It's funny how most bigots don't even now the meaning of that word.
@AverageJoe74 lol, how is it that minorities and LGBT can't be bigoted? Here is your definition, look it up:
"big·ot·ed
ˈbiɡədəd/
adjective
having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.
He's using the Trotsky dictionary, where the word refers to any WASP conservative male that still believes he has a right to have any kind of voice at all. Which is basically using bigotry itself to redefine the word into attacking that which is its opposite. Textbook Derrida.
So you are actually saying that LGBT people and minorities are more bigoted than the average white conservative? Could there be a handful of examples of those people that are bigoted? Sure. But nothing like the number of bigoted conservatives. You are the same type of people that owned slaves and justified by using quotes from the Bible regarding slavery. People like you are beyond redemption.
@ObscuredBeyond and of course you just showed your bigotry by referencing Trotsky as if to say anyone that's not a concervative must be a. communist. Typical close minded right-wing loon.
@AverageJoe74 Joe, I am actually saying that you are a bigot from your comments. You are obviously being quite shallow and superficial in you sterotypical view of people who have different views from you. And people like me would own a slave? lol, I can afford a maid but still do not have one.
@ObscuredBeyond Do you have a link to that?
Please provide a quote from me that you consider bigoted. And telling someone they are wrong is not bigotry. tTy your intellectually-dishonest debate tactics on someone else.
@AverageJoe74 Hillary said Trump voters were a basket of deplorables. She just painted millions of people with a differing opinion with a long list of of disparraging labels, you know the ones I am talking about. That is the tip of the iceberg. People are shouted down and silenced by the Left everyday but it does not change anything.
I said a quote from me. You said MY comments were bigoted.
@AverageJoe74 : You are grasping at straws. Trotsky originated the idea that "bigotry" is literally any position that the party with the plan deems inconvenient. The left wholesale adopted this redefinition, urged on by Derrida. That so many plagiarize those two subconsciously has nothing to do with my personal character. But how typical you change the subject from etymology to your projections of my character, just as soon as you run into a factoid you cannot dispute.
The simplest definition of liberalism as defined by today: it is for everything which is immoral, illegal, unsustainable, and unnatural.
@ObscuredBeyond Well you just showed your personal character again. And what a sad character it is. You must go through your life being afraid of anything that doesn't agree with your little book that was written by some old Jewish guys, and then the Romans added to as a means of controlling the slaves and the poor. It eventually became a means for all of Europe to control the peasants. Well sir, we don't live in that time of absolute ignorance anymore. An ignorance, by the way, that was extended probably 1000 years by edict of the Catholic Church because they were afraid of people acquiring scientific knowledge. Yet here you are, still buying into that doctrine which continues to control you.
You made your "character" abundantly clear with your supposed definition of liberalism as immoral. Since when to a group of people that represent less and less of the American population (bible thumpers) get to decide what is moral. And give me your lame ass gods will crap. Not buying crazy toda
I'm against the two party system. I feel like I'm the only one who doesn't believe the campaign riffraff in the slightest. Politicians say whatever they think is going to get them elected. I'll believe it when I see it
Take the fight to the voting booths, that's how you win. This movement would require 41 Faithless electors - which is a pipe dream at this point
As long as the Democrats continue to ignore blue-collar workers and their families living in the Midwest and Ohio Valley on a national level, they will not win another presidential election in the foreseeable future.
Lets see basically the dumb thirsty idiots voted for his dumb ass. Oh and lets not forget the thirsty idiot women that would suck his dick for cash lmfao sad world isn't it they love being called hoes.
I share the much of the same thoughts and sentiments of this well written piece. Good job
Ditto
Thank you for your candid and non-biased article. You hit the nail on the head as to what happened in the election.
welcome
I agree. I didn't vote for either of them, either. Both parties have been showing their true colors for a while now. Not everyone has been seeing that.
This election has shown ugliness from every direction.
I'm not giving Trump any credit.
Which fool would give credit to someone who had four bankruptcies?
You know dumb pathetic women have voted for that piece of shit makes them more of a dumb piece of shit. They love sucking trumps dick for cash. Basically whomever did vote for him are thirsty idiots
Abraham Lincoln had 11 bankruptcies, and was a great president
@Rachelrosee so voting for Hilary who laughed st a rape victim was should have been president? Knowing the rapist was guilty.
@Triedtrustedknight That's a mostly false legend, not fact:
www.snopes.com/.../
@Triedtrustedknight Read about Lincoln, but read all of it: https://www.snopes.com/glurge/lincoln.asp
@Triedtrustedknight Yes. Nice try though Tried. You need to try Facebook and see if anyone will buy your made up "facts".
If you voted for Trump because he’s ‘anti-establishment,’ guess what: You got conned!
sandiegofreepress.org/.../
www.washingtonpost.com/.../
I didn't I didn't want either of them to win cause they are both terrible and I felt trump been the better since I didn't vote for him. Clinton just don't trust.
Like Republicans did not moan and whine and block Obama before. .. yeah right
That was good, Don't ever compromise the truth as you see it plainly.
But, The Donald is great! :P