POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

[Master Matthew²]

you are literally the first person to do this

no he's not, people just dismiss it because it's old testament and reformation and western civilization or w/e there is to wave it away with

people who are biased against anything most likely aren't looking for people to change their minds regardless so it's a moot point

I think you're all missing the point, its not the book that is evil or even relevant as a use for or against an arguement, but rather for reference.

Christians commonly no longer follow the bible to a T, but muslims commonly do, and the ideas in both vary from good to evil, sonce christians take only or mostly good values, then the book's reference becomes unreliable. But, since muslims follow all of their book's values, good or bad, their book is a reliable reference for predicting their actions and arguements against them.

But above all else, their actions must be compared to their source ideology, and if they match a specific pattern, such as lying to a large sector of people to lull them into a false sense of security so they can slowly gain power and slowly clench the iron fist, then action needs to be taken to prevent this.

[Ad Bot]

[Alteration]

"anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them. Whether foreigner or native-born, when they blaspheme the Name they are to be put to death." Leviticus 24:16

"If a man or woman living among you ... contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky ... take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death." Deuteronomy 17:2-5

Religious purity comes at the cost of the death of heretics. If sin is allowed to continue unchecked it leads to widespread religious apostasy (see: the reign of King Ahab, the reign of King Manasseh, the reign of pretty much any king that was not David, Solomon, Josiah, or Hezekiah...). It's the parable of the leaven: a little leaven (sin) changes the entire loaf of bread.

"If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin...
If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death." Deuteronomy 22:13-21

Proverbs 6:17 says that a lying tongue and hands that shed innocent blood are an abomination to the Lord. If that man were to lie about it, he would be in just as much hot water (at least with God). If she truly is guilty, then she would be put to death righteously. It is definitely extreme, but like I said, religious purity requires purging sin.

no he's not, people just dismiss it because it's old testament and reformation and western civilization or w/e there is to wave it away with

The reason modern Christians dismiss old testament law is because Jesus came to "fulfill the law" by shedding his blood for the forgiveness of our sin. Sin's ultimate punishment is death, God would just have that death come sooner in the OT. When Jesus died on the cross, however, he took the punishment of death and the full wrath of God in our place so we no longer have to be put to death if we sin. There is a reason Paul had to write an entire New Testament after Jesus died, after all: we needed a new lawbook.

Sorry if this is weirdly worded, I just kinda typed and typed with little rewording.

[otto-san]

I think you're all missing the point, its not the book that is evil or even relevant as a use for or against an arguement, but rather for reference.

i agree with this part, and this is important because it means that even though we both understand the book isn't necessarily relevant to an individual's eventual beliefs and actions, it can be used as a moral base and reference.

Christians commonly no longer follow the bible to a T, but muslims commonly do, and the ideas in both vary from good to evil, sonce christians take only or mostly good values, then the book's reference becomes unreliable. But, since muslims follow all of their book's values, good or bad, their book is a reliable reference for predicting their actions and arguements against them.

this, however, is a bold claim. you're asserting that muslims, as a whole, are more inclined to stick to their book's literal text than christians, regardless of how countercultural or questionable they are, and this is a claim i'm skeptical of. what makes a muslim human more likely than a christian human to do this? you would need to provide specific figures that prove this phenomenon

But above all else, their actions must be compared to their source ideology, and if they match a specific pattern, such as lying to a large sector of people to lull them into a false sense of security so they can slowly gain power and slowly clench the iron fist, then action needs to be taken to prevent this.

but however, here, you're saying that individual actions and the base book are intimately related, and this seems to be in conflict with what you opened up with. the rest of the quote is pure politics and has very little to do with religion, so i don't think it's highly relevant here

regardless though, again, even talking about books isn't very worthwhile. the fundamental issue is that people who are prejudiced have developed their prejudices by absorbing information that confirms their biases and rejecting information that challenges them, by no choice or effort of their own, and no matter how irrational it is, it's a psychological gymnastics to maintain that these patterns do in fact exist in reality, even if they don't.

[Tactical Nuke]

I was considering whether or not to make this point, but whatever

like alteration and matthew said, I think it's less important to look at the books and instead more important to look at the respective prophets of each religion

you have Jesus, who he himself widely rejected what the Old Testament taught, which was why he was originally so provocative and frowned upon
he mostly taught from a position of acceptance and peace, he only got violent once as far as I can tell, and everything in the bible afterwards mostly concerns itself with Jesus's teachings, which heavily contradict the Old Testament, which when you think about it really is the Jewish holy book, and the Christians co-opted it for some stupid loving reason because of the whole "Abrahamic tree" thing

meanwhile you have Muhammad who overall was just a bad dude
guy had a child wife, constantly advocated wars, and proposed less rights for those who weren't Muslim (yeah the Christians kinda did this too but this is how Islam started)

Christianity was spread throughout the Middle East and Europe through word of mouth while Islam required muscle and a forgetton of force

basically
IDK

[otto-san]

no living person today is muhammad, and no living person today is jesus. i think what the religions mean to people in the context of modern times is much more pertinent than what it meant to people and what it was thousands of years ago

[Wesley Williams]

The existence of rules in the Old Testament serve to show us that on our own we can't live up to God's standards. It is only by accepting Jesus' sacrifice that God will absolve us of our own wrongdoings and allow us to speak with Him openly. People that use the laws of the Old Testament to prove a point against Christianity don't realize this.

[Master Matthew²]

i agree with this part, and this is important because it means that even though we both understand the book isn't necessarily relevant to an individual's eventual beliefs and actions, it can be used as a moral base and reference.
this, however, is a bold claim. you're asserting that muslims, as a whole, are more inclined to stick to their book's literal text than christians, regardless of how countercultural or questionable they are, and this is a claim i'm skeptical of. what makes a muslim human more likely than a christian human to do this? you would need to provide specific figures that prove this phenomenon
but however, here, you're saying that individual actions and the base book are intimately related, and this seems to be in conflict with what you opened up with. the rest of the quote is pure politics and has very little to do with religion, so i don't think it's highly relevant here

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/the-countries-where-a-majority-of-muslims-want-to-live-under-sharia-law-a6773666.html

And, the wording on the last part was kind of poor, what I meant is that using the source book along with historicak patterns as reference, you can predict and halt regressive actions.

[otto-san]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/the-countries-where-a-majority-of-muslims-want-to-live-under-sharia-law-a6773666.html

And, the wording on the last part was kind of poor, what I meant is that using the source book along with historicak patterns as reference, you can predict and halt regressive actions.

we've touched on the sharia law figures, that oftentimes muslims agree that they should be the only ones subject to it, and that what "sharia law" means to a muslim is probably different from what you think of when you hear it. regardless, it doesn't prove the phenomenon you seem to be proposing since it doesn't say anything about how people interact with their religious text, it only talks about how people interact with their governments.

And, the wording on the last part was kind of poor, what I meant is that using the source book along with historicak patterns as reference, you can predict and halt regressive actions.

eh, that's tricky. history is decided by much more than religious texts. it's all politics and can be explained and understood without the need for them specifically

[SeventhSandwich]

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/raul-labrador-town-hall-nobody-dies-access-to-healthcare-obamacare

imagine being this rich and disconnected from the lives of people you represent in congress

[Darryl McKoy]

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/raul-labrador-town-hall-nobody-dies-access-to-healthcare-obamacare

imagine being this rich and disconnected from the lives of people you represent in congress

What a dog

[Corderlain]

Best of luck to our long time ally France. Le Pen will usher you into a new age of prosperity.

[Red Spy]

>France
>Prosperity

[SeventhSandwich]

Best of luck to our long time ally France. Le Pen will usher you into a new age of prosperity.

Not unless she manages to win over an entire fifth of the country in the remaining weeks of the election lol. People were overly confident about Hillary's 3-5 point lead, but LePen is behind literally 24 points in most polls. Unless Macron dies or is caught diddling kids - he's going to win.

[Master Matthew²]

Not unless she manages to win over an entire fifth of the country in the remaining weeks of the election lol. People were overly confident about Hillary's 3-5 point lead, but LePen is behind literally 24 points in most polls. Unless Macron dies or is caught diddling kids - he's going to win.

The european union still has control over france, so their influence is far stronger, and I think we are going to see very similar results to the Annoying Orange and brexit election, but multiplied by 10 considering how the Antifa/AnarchoCommunists/GeneralRioters have been acting in France and the rest of europe, how """"""""""""Privacy"""""""""""" is protected in europe and how wrong think can warrant you getting beat the stuff out of, chances are even in anonymous polls, people may be reluctant to say one way or the other, or may even say they're voting for the opposition.

[Alternat¡ve]

Not unless she manages to win over an entire fifth of the country in the remaining weeks of the election lol. People were overly confident about Hillary's 3-5 point lead, but LePen is behind literally 24 points in most polls. Unless Macron dies or is caught diddling kids - he's going to win.

Remaining weeks? The vote is tomorrow!