...almost as much as they hate and fear Trump? Do they think Trump is G0d?
Arrogance. Man is is arrogant. This is the prime failing of atheists. Thier inability to accept something larger than them. Because if there's something larger that created them then they erroneously THINK that they're not in control. They insult Christians for not being scientific and laugh that we believe in an invisible spirit while simultaneously ignoring the OVERWHELMING evidence of God's existence. What can be more scientific than that. It's thier arrogance that stops them. Thier mortal bias. Because if God exists then they no longer have control. Which simply isn't true. God gave us free will. But they cannot conceive of a being whose love has no limit. Who does not seek to subjugate lesser beings. Atheists are offended by the notion that Christians like to claim some knowledge they don't have. And before I was saved even right after I was saved I felt the same way. But that's just because much like then I used to be ruled by FEAR now I'm ruled by love. When they stop trying to block God out, stop fighting him, then a new world will open to them. And it's our jobs as Christians to help them when they ready. 🙂
Oh baby, me no understand why people hate and fear Christianity. Me just know that me like to hump and sometimes me say "Oh God!" when me feel really good. But me can tell you that people don't hate and fear Trump because he's God. Me no think he's God, me just think he's a big strong man who likes to grab things that belong to women, (though @bean2k21 think it's always his property). Maybe people hate and fear Christianity because they don't like rules and restrictions. Me no like rules or restrictions either, me just like to pound and stretch and make everything feel good. Maybe if Christians were more like me and focused on pleasure instead of rules, people would like them more. So let's forget about hate and fear and get back gyrating.
Seriously, I don't care whether you're christian or not. Often christianity is part of the problem. But so is any other religion, atheism is also a religion, scientism bowing down to institutions is a religion. Immoral money worshippers are also ironically often identifying as members of some sects of christianity.
Religion makes no fucking difference, the evil loominati trannies who want to insert their vaccine syringes into our pussies are the enemy, and I think at least there are more by proportions in christianity who refuse the chemical castration and chemicals in the water than there are of atheists for example who don't believe in conspiracies and gladly become gay frogs from chemicals in the water, but I could be wrong.
Opinion
9Opinion
They hate theirs a factual answer that God made men & women to pro create & no matter how hard they wanna defy science. A man will never be prego or have a period. Just like a women will never be able to have a real dick or a male body.
Because of Christianity teachings, they can't convince the world that their mentall illness is normal. So they hate it with a passion.
I don't hate Christianity. I fear Christians that want laws to force everyone to behave according to their beliefs, Christians who are unable to tolerated any public expression of doubt, Christians that want to proselytize in public schools.
Do they though? I live in an atheist country. We dont even think of religion unless someone reminds us that people in the world has some major "daddy" issues.
But I am the daddy in every sense of the word and I believe in God. Family, career success, financially more successful than the vast majority, tall, military trained and can take care of myself and those around me, always had a lady… daddy.
Sweden seems cut off from religious countries but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. If you get into NATO, you will find the most powerful country militarily and economically is religious… and you want them to protect your country as Sweden cannot protect itself in the modern world. I seriously doubt you could even defend Stockholm. When one believes in nothing it’s easy to become a country of cucks.
@Jersey2 Defend Stockholm from what exactly? I am against Sweden joining NATO because I do not see any threat. We are surrounded by NATO members and the only avenue of invasion is a naval invasion which is pretty much impossible. Why would we need a defensive alliance now?
Also you are vastly overestimating how religious Europe is.
I don’t think we need Sweden either. Even your logic of others will defend you is a weak man’s logic. You have 10 to 20 thousand military, you couldn’t defend against the New York police department much less the Russians. I don’t know what you mean about a naval invasion not being possible. You are lucky they selected Ukraine and not you. If you aren’t in NATO you won’t get troops just weapons and a hearty “good luck”. But you won’t fight like the Ukrainians. That is what Sweden woke up to when they saw what happened in Ukraine.
@Jersey2 You misunderstand me. I am not expecting outside support to protect Sweden. I honestly believe that Russia would be unable to launch a naval invasion of enough scale to overwhelm our tiny military. Russia is just that bad at naval invasions. We could fucking dumpster Russia if they ever tried and they would have to give up at some point once it becomes obvious that they can't touch us.
It is also worth pointing out that Swedens military is a lot more capable than Ukraine was at the start of the war. Numbers alone is not a very good statistic in a modern conflict as Russia has amply demonstrated. Likewise, Turkey is by no means as strong as their numbers would suggest as they focus a lot on basic grunts rather than advanced capability.
Compared to that Sweden is developing its own top of the line multi role fighters, IFVs, submarines, stealth corvettes, self propelled artillery etc.. Many of which exceeds USA's counterparts. Many of the handheld anti tank weapons in Ukraine for example has its origins in Sweden such as the NLAW and AT4.
But yeah, we would not fight like the Ukrainians. We would not need to. Russia can't make landfall in Sweden with a sufficient force to be a threat.
I understand your points but I do think Russia could land and attack. They can throw hundreds of thousands against you. A few advanced jets won’t stop that. When Putin is gone perhaps the next dictator can get his army trained enough to take undefended cities. All they need is to take a port and they are in business. If they sailed right into Stockholm they would take losses but they might even be able to do that with some pre-planning.
@Jersey2 No they can't throw hundreds of thousands against us because they can't logistically support a naval invasion of that size. Maybe they could support like 20k at a time? If even that, and that is assuming our airforce and navy dont sink their logistics ships. Russia can't fight a war in a place where it does not have a railway connection.
@Jersey2 And then what? Even if they landed, they can't supply them with food, water and bullets. They would surrender to the local police in 3 days. But that is assuming they even get that far, Sweden has a lot of options on how to ruin a naval invasion ranging from the stealthiest submarines in the world to probably the most advanced single engine multirole fighter and stealth corvettes. Each able to destroy an amphibious landing attack pretty much by itself.
The soldiers would take what they want from the land, houses and throughout the cities, just like Ukraine. They have 150,000,000 people to your 10,000,000 people. That’s like a one story building next to a 15 story building. They have more ships than you have torpedos. They also have subs, planes and nukes, both tactical and strategic. You have far more land than you can possibly defend in a meaningful way. I am note even sure you could put up a meaning frontline. Even in the US the military will say planes and ships are fine but it’s boots on the ground that take land. But I wish you a hardy “good luck”, lol. Even if you push them back it will cost hundreds of thousand if not a million or two of people. Gotland would go first I would imagine. You had better hope the next dictator isn’t Stalin II.
@Jersey2 Oh really? Just like in Ukraine? Where the Russian army is suffering from severe supply shortages and basically can't do anything aside from sitting in a hole they dug with a piece of their own frozen poop? You are not making a good argument for yourself and foraging for supplies is not a modern solution that works anymore.
I must once again reiterate that Russia sucks at naval invasions. They do not have the logistics nor even the ships and trained troops for it. They are unable to put boots on the ground as you call it and Sweden has countless weapons that can strike anywhere inside the local sea meaning that unless they can protect their logistics and landing ships, which they can't, then they would never even reach shore.
While Gotland is a juicy target, it is also the most obvious target which means Swedish defenses are focused there so it would be suicide to invade.
I think you greatly overestimate your country’s capabilities and reach but at the same time ignore the havoc that the Russians can create. I served in the artillery in the US Army. Statistically speaking, I am guessing you never even spent a week in the field as a soldier, pilot or sailor. Your not understanding how much it takes to hold large swatch’s of land. The Russians can take what they want from you. Your towns and people will suffer as they won’t get much food either. I can’t believe you still ignore the calamity the Russians have caused in Ukraine. Again, you are lucky the selected Ukraine first as they were going to continue gathering conquests. Finland probably deterred them so you owe them thanks. I just don’t see Sweden in the same caliber as either Ukraine or Finland. More like a much larger Baltic state but with some first class weapons but reactively speaking, not much and it is spread to thin to be effective overall strategically, just tactically. Anyway, democratic nations are banding together for a better future, Sweden can hide in the corner and let others deter aggression but if you are wrong later… good luck.
@Jersey2 Since Sweden is using NATO standards and equipment you are basically just shittalking your own stuff. Either way, we have a significant range and capability advantage against Russia so any engagement would be very one sided, and again what makes you think we would even allow Russia to land in the first place? Destroying Russias obsolete landing crafts and logistics ships is like shooting fish in a barrel with modern weapons.
Without boots on the ground and supplies to support them, what exactly do you think Russia can do?
You have too few weapons, ammunition (most certainly) and troops. I have linked your assets from Wikipedia. 100 tanks, 50 self propelled artillery, 4 submarines… it’s laughable. You are delusional and again you have never been in the field, you just can’t comprehend the scale as the vast majority of your country will be completely undefended as you just don’t have the resources and haven’t planned like the Finns. If people in Sweden think as you do, NATO is truly better off without you. I would also like to withdraw from NATO as the Germans are a crappy Allie and we certainly don’t need more countries to guard while they fall asleep. No US blood for Ukraine and no blood for Sweden either. Soon you will hear people in the US saying no money for Ukraine either, meaning weapons too. Delusional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Armed_Forces
@Jersey2 We are only talking about Russia having a single port from which it can launch its naval assault from and a single viable airport in range. 4 submarines is plenty to dash any hopes and dreams Russia might have and our airforce can easily defend the entire coastline as a rapid response force. Why would we have any significant ground force?
You keep going on about scale but that is just my point. Russia can't attack Sweden at any meaningful scale and since our equipment is literally generations ahead of the Russians our quality will triumph against any attempt they could make. It is also silly to assume that Sweden has not "planned like the Finns". Of course we have. Just last year I got a pamphlet from my military with instructions on what to do for example and most of our population lives in buildings with bomb shelters and our military has fortified our coastline, especially around Gotland which is why Putin can only fucking dream of having that island.
You keep going on about how you have been in the military but you clearly know less about how wars are fought than me. In fact, I would even go as far as to point out that your assumption that Sweden which practices ARMED NEUTRALITY does not "PREPARE LIKE THE FINNS". Truly ludicrous.
I also need to point out that NATO is a foundation for USA as a super power. It is instrumental in how you spread your influence around the world. I am perfectly happy with USA leaving NATO and I think the world would be better for it with a bit less American influence. But I am also not American so I dont care that USA leaving NATO would be the worst thing that has happened to your country in living memory. I bet you dont even understand why it would be so bad and I dont feel like explaining it to you.
Without the US, Ukraine would have fallen and then the Baltics and more. But as I said, I would prefer the US leave NATO. I don’t care about Europe, only the US. We will be more than fine if we concentrate in ourselves instead of subsidizing Europe. Let them fight each others as they always have done. Russia would just keep going and that’s okay with me. We would just put in place trade agreements with the Russians. If they took Sweden I wouldn’t care. The US too was once a neutral country. There isn’t any reason we shouldn’t be again. We tried to remain neutral in WWII but that didn’t work out. Let China and Russia bully the world and we will be fine with our nukes and technology. Everyone that joins nato just stops investing in defense and leaves us with the bill like Germany and even Canada. We should be more like Sweden and just sit back and to your point, the world would be a better place… perhaps… perhaps not, but that isn’t our concern. Trump wanted that but he isn’t the only one. Maybe we will both get our wish and let the Ukrainians and other European countries fend for themselves.
@Jersey2 Why would Ukraine have fallen if not for USA? Russia lost the war in the first week or so of the war, long before USA started handing over all its old hand-me-downs. Once again you show that you know nothing about war. Russia, with its army of 200k tried to militarily conquer a nation of 41 million and size of around 603k km squared.
In other words, Putin put a drop of water into a hot pan and expected it to cool down. It was "optimistic" at best but technically he had a chance if the people accepted him as liberators rather than conquerors and he could capture the capital city in a matter of days. Neither of these things happened so his fate was sealed from the very start.
The reason USA is no longer a neutral country is because you are now a super power. Super powers can't be neutral parties by the very definition of what they are. You do not appear to grasp this very simple concept. A super power is not a super power because it itself is strong or wealthy, a super power is a super power because of the influence it has no other countries. Wealth and power is a result of being a super power, not a requirement.
In other words, if USA becomes isolationist and loses its super power status, you are fucked. Sweden can afford to sit back because it is not a major country and as such never had that benefit of influence in the first place. USA can't, or at least not without devolving to becoming a backwaters country no one cares about again.
They hate Christianity because they hate their own fathers. So it’s a rejection of all fathers. Plus, they know Christians won’t behead them for their hate, and there’s no negative societal consequence for their hate so the do it with impunity
Because like other religions and groups there will always be extremists who cause violence or are bad examples of the whole. Those extremists often cause others to judge an entire group of people based on their bad behavior.
Rebellious nature... the absolute vitriolic hatred for someone who dares to call someone out for being a degenerate and despicable and abusive Individual is abhorrent to them.
People don't hate or fear Christianity. People hate the hipocracy of the actions of people who profess to be Christians, but who act in very un-Christlike ways.
I don't get the connection. Trump and god beyond memes? Also I gives zero fucks about religion besides typing that I couldn't care less. I baahh in my own lane, no traffic :)
Liberals will tell you all about how much they HATE organized religion...
... but oddly they ONLY ever go after the Christians.
Not the Muslims. And definitely not the Jews.
The only religion they believe in is LGBTQRS
You can also add your opinion below!
Holidays 
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 
