Right Wing Discussion Thread XI: It's Okay To Be Right

[Salus Maior]

Gotta love Protestants. Orthodox and Catholic Christians have a more hopeful view of the afterlife, imo. If one dies, you can still pray for their soul and hope they find peace.

Then ya got Judaism who’s like well it exists, kinda. But enough about that!!

Do Jews have prayers for the dead? Or at least your sort of Jews (reformed, right?).

I know ancient Jews did.

[Mujahidah]

Then why dont you define "last resort?"

I thought that was self-explanatory. At least for you.

The fact that I'm bothering to ask kind of shows that it isn't self-explanatory. All I'm asking for is for you to clarify you're position, and define, for me, so that I can better understand your stance, what you mean by "last resort." Its a phrase that can mean lots of things. Basically, where is the line?

[Sovaal]

There’s a reason why they are called catholic-lite.

Some of them are literally just Catholicism without the Pope.

Well that’s effecitvly the port of the Church. Replace the Pope with the King.

[Questers]

Calvinism is the best form of Christianity honestly.

It paints God as a monster who predestines people to be tormented for eternity. Not sure how that's remotely good. Probably the reason I've met so many “X-point” Calvinists.

sry what is x-point?

[Thermodolia]

Then ya got Judaism who’s like well it exists, kinda. But enough about that!!

Do Jews have prayers for the dead? Or at least your sort of Jews (reformed, right?).

I know ancient Jews did.

We have prayers for the dead. All sects do. It’s a running joke that we kinda don’t talk about the afterlife as much as the Christians do. Y’all had to get the prayers for the dead from someone.

[Salus Maior]

It paints God as a monster who predestines people to be tormented for eternity. Not sure how that's remotely good. Probably the reason I've met so many “X-point” Calvinists.

sry what is x-point?

There are a couple different versions of Calvinism. One of them is called '5 point' Calvinism, which are the basic foundational theological principals of Calvinism.

[Questers]

I see. Theology is acutally kind of interesting

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I thought that was self-explanatory. At least for you.

The fact that I'm bothering to ask kind of shows that it isn't self-explanatory. All I'm asking for is for you to clarify you're position, and define, for me, so that I can better understand your stance, what you mean by "last resort." Its a phrase that can mean lots of things. Basically, where is the line?

That's something that you'd have to look up, my apologies that I can't give a definitive answer. But imo, "last resort" is that you've tried talking and all that, but the wife still being bad. Again, look up the Islamic answer to this.

[Mujahidah]

The fact that I'm bothering to ask kind of shows that it isn't self-explanatory. All I'm asking for is for you to clarify you're position, and define, for me, so that I can better understand your stance, what you mean by "last resort." Its a phrase that can mean lots of things. Basically, where is the line?

That's something that you'd have to look up, my apologies that I can't give a definitive answer. But imo, "last resort" is that you've tried talking and all that, but the wife still being bad. Again, look up the Islamic answer to this.

You're the one making an assertion that there is a line that, when crossed, justifies physical violence (slight, but still physical). I shouldn't have to put in my work to understand your assertion. I'm asking you to clarify that position. You said that there is a line, I want you to define it. And now, I'd also like to know what you define as "being bad" in the bolded context.

[Salus Maior]

I see. Theology is acutally kind of interesting

Well, if you're interested in Catholic/Orthodox stuff feel free to talk to me about it, or Biblical questions in general. I'm not an incredibly educated guy but I can answer some questions.

[Old Tyrannia]

Some of them are literally just Catholicism without the Pope.

Well that’s effecitvly the port of the Church. Replace the Pope with the King.

That's an oversimplified view of the Anglican Church. Henry VIII's desire to break away from Rome in order to divorce Catherine of Aragon provided the catalyst for the Church of England to break with the papacy, but the Anglican Church that has been passed down through the generations is based upon a genuine religious reformation carried out in England in the 16th century, with a distinct doctrine finalised in the form of the Thirty-Nine Articles. The most "Catholic-lite" strand of Anglicanism extant in the church today actually grew out of the Oxford Movement in the 19th century, which was met with distrust by traditionalist Anglicans including many who viewed themselves as "High Church."

There's more to Anglicanism that securing a divorce for a stubborn king.

EDIT: Incidentally, whilst I am also unashamedly guilty of this perhaps if people wish to continue discussing religion and theology they should take it to one of NSG's religious discussion threads rather than continuing with this threadjack.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

That's something that you'd have to look up, my apologies that I can't give a definitive answer. But imo, "last resort" is that you've tried talking and all that, but the wife still being bad. Again, look up the Islamic answer to this.

You're the one making an assertion that there is a line that, when crossed, justifies physical violence (slight, but still physical). I shouldn't have to put in my work to understand your assertion. I'm asking you to clarify that position. You said that there is a line, I want you to define it. And now, I'd also like to know what you define as "being bad" in the bolded context.

It's not my assertion, it's an Islamic ruling. If you want to know what that line is, and what it means when the wife has crossed a line, you'll have to find the Islamic answer to that as I do not know the line.
As for "being bad" I meant "disobedience".

[The Liberated Territories]

Don't worry, I'm not exclusively anti-islam. Just anti-religion in general

[Mujahidah]

You're the one making an assertion that there is a line that, when crossed, justifies physical violence (slight, but still physical). I shouldn't have to put in my work to understand your assertion. I'm asking you to clarify that position. You said that there is a line, I want you to define it. And now, I'd also like to know what you define as "being bad" in the bolded context.

It's not my assertion, it's an Islamic ruling. If you want to know what that line is, and what it means when the wife has crossed a line, you'll have to find the Islamic answer to that as I do not know the line.

Except it is your assertion, because condoning physical violence against one's spouse is not something that is in any way supported by the entire Ummah. You are making the assertion that physical violence against one's wife is acceptable. I doubt my father - who has never, ever, EVER, put a hand on my mother - would agree with you. You are the one that said that there is, in fact, the line. You say you don't know what it is, but you assert that it exists. Since you are the one who believes in such a line, perhaps you should at the very least attempt to determine what you believe it to be, or at least find information to your satifaction regarding it, then get back to me. It isn't my job to define your assertions. Thats yours.

As for "being bad" I meant "disobedience".

What classifies as disobedience?

[Genivaria]

You're the one making an assertion that there is a line that, when crossed, justifies physical violence (slight, but still physical). I shouldn't have to put in my work to understand your assertion. I'm asking you to clarify that position. You said that there is a line, I want you to define it. And now, I'd also like to know what you define as "being bad" in the bolded context.

It's not my assertion, it's an Islamic ruling. If you want to know what that line is, and what it means when the wife has crossed a line, you'll have to find the Islamic answer to that as I do not know the line.
As for "being bad" I meant "disobedience".

You actually are capable of giving your own view on this, you know that right?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

It's not my assertion, it's an Islamic ruling. If you want to know what that line is, and what it means when the wife has crossed a line, you'll have to find the Islamic answer to that as I do not know the line.

Except it is your assertion, because condoning physical violence against one's spouse is not something that is in any way supported by the entire Ummah. You are making the assertion that physical violence against one's wife is acceptable. I doubt my father - who has never, ever, EVER, put a hand on my mother - would agree with you. You are the one that said that there is, in fact, the line. You say you don't know what it is, but you assert that it exists. Since you are the one who believes in such a line, perhaps you should at the very least attempt to determine what you believe it to be, or at least find information to your satifaction regarding it, then get back to me. It isn't my job to define your assertions. Thats yours.

As for "being bad" I meant "disobedience".

What classifies as disobedience?

I never condoned physical violence, or any violence between spouses. Not do I know the line, not what 'disobedience' means to the point of light tapping.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

It's not my assertion, it's an Islamic ruling. If you want to know what that line is, and what it means when the wife has crossed a line, you'll have to find the Islamic answer to that as I do not know the line.
As for "being bad" I meant "disobedience".

You actually are capable of giving your own view on this, you know that right?

Islamic rulings made by scholars who have studied Al-Islam since it's finalization > my opinion

[Mujahidah]

Except it is your assertion, because condoning physical violence against one's spouse is not something that is in any way supported by the entire Ummah. You are making the assertion that physical violence against one's wife is acceptable. I doubt my father - who has never, ever, EVER, put a hand on my mother - would agree with you. You are the one that said that there is, in fact, the line. You say you don't know what it is, but you assert that it exists. Since you are the one who believes in such a line, perhaps you should at the very least attempt to determine what you believe it to be, or at least find information to your satifaction regarding it, then get back to me. It isn't my job to define your assertions. Thats yours.



What classifies as disobedience?

I never condoned physical violence, or any violence between spouses.

Light violence still classifies as violence, even if its "toothbrush level" as your chosen ruling asserts.

And you didn't answer my question. What, in your view, classifies as disobedience?

[Mujahidah]

You actually are capable of giving your own view on this, you know that right?

Islamic rulings made by scholars who have studied Al-Islam since it's finalization > my opinion

You cited literally one Salafi scholar.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Islamic rulings made by scholars who have studied Al-Islam since it's finalization > my opinion

You cited literally one Salafi scholar.

I cited more than that.

[The Parkus Empire]

The "illustrious Count de Maistre" argued that the more extensive a constution, the weaker it becomes. With that in mind, how can we USians trim the fat?

Here are my suggestions for repeal

Commerce clause
12th Amendment. Also 14th, 16th, 17th, 23rd, 24th and 26th

[Mujahidah]

You cited literally one Salafi scholar.

I cited more than that.

And you still haven't addressed either my other point and question which I will repost here:

I never condoned physical violence, or any violence between spouses.

Light violence still classifies as violence, even if its "toothbrush level" as your chosen ruling asserts.

And you didn't answer my question. What, in your view, classifies as disobedience?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Mao could win a GOP primary, prove me wrong.

[Mujahidah]

Mao could win a GOP primary, prove me wrong.

Evangelicals wouldn't vote for him

[El-Amin Caliphate]

I never condoned physical violence, or any violence between spouses.

Light violence still classifies as violence, even if its "toothbrush level" as your chosen ruling asserts.

1: It's not my ruling.
2:: It's not violence.

And you didn't answer my question. What, in your view, classifies as disobedience?

I know I didn't answer the question: idk the ruling.