Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:07 pmJoohan wrote:As a whole or at current?
Gimme a quick one for both, if you would be so kind.
Gimme a quick one for both, if you would be so kind.
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again
Page 9 of 500
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:07 pmGimme a quick one for both, if you would be so kind.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:08 pmConserative Morality wrote:Bienenhalde wrote:And the laws regarding executions in the Old Testament were meant to apply to the ancient Israelite state. Mainstream Christian theologians do not believe that gentile Christian governments are bound to implement such laws.
Funny how recently that consensus came about; just about around the time when secular governments started gaining power. Funny also how in many third world countries without strong traditions of secularism such thought still predominates, even amongst the well-educated clergy.
It's almost like the current consensus is the result of liberalism and modernism instead of a simple universal religious principle.
It actually happened a couple thousand years ago.
Christians haven't been bound to Levitical law pretty much ever.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:08 pmThe most intrinsic and constant virtues of the United States have always been independence ( for any and every man to be able to carve for themselves a living regardless of their background; from the colonials who settled the 13 colonies to the modern entrepreneur ), and the freedom of expression ( most specifically, the freedom to express dissenting and or unpopular ideas ).
@ me.
@ me.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:08 pmNapkizemlja wrote:CM if we get you going on Ilhan Omar you could be Greg Gutfield's replacement.
Ah, Greg Gutfeld. The only living conservative comedian I'm actually fond of. (Well, there's another one, but Titania McGrath ain't exactly a living person.)
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:08 pmThe amount of paint brushing going on is hilarious. Despite huge swaths of America's Christian population being in support of same-sex marriage legalization it's still getting tarnished with the same brush with extremists that even conservative churches denounce. Magically this doesn't apply to white people in regards to racialists (hmmm I wonder why) or, at least for the liberal crowd, for Muslims in regards to jihadists (and trust me I think painting every Muslim as potential suicide bomber is fucking retarded as well). Is this what Peak Tolerance looks like?
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:09 pmProctopeo wrote:Torrocca wrote:
TIL'd opposing homophobia = hating on every single person of a specific religious belief
Wow, I've been saved from homophobia! Thanks RWDT!
First step to combat homophobia: disavow anyone who's statistically likely to be a homophobe
Really I'm just copping a tactic I've seen from the left: assume anyone who's Christian is a homophobe from the outset. I just changed it from the religion backed by Jesus to the religion backed by Mohammed.
I see you're still salty about how Torra pussywhipped you in the Discord.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:09 pm... because I don't regard the destruction of what I regard as founding principles of the nation simply because it was done through democratic means to be something to shrug at and regard as acceptable...?
I mean, if we're defining liberal politics by 18th or 19th century standards, then yes, I suppose, this is absolutely about me adhering to liberal politics, but I'm not sure that's what you meant.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:09 pmNot sure why you being unabashedly shitty toward an entire group of people is deserving of a winky face.
Really I'm just copping a tactic I've seen from the left: assume anyone who's Christian is a homophobe from the outset.
Funny how I've never seen that before, especially considering a metric fuckton of leftists are Christians.
Also, 10/10 job proving yourself the better man than your enemies lmao.
I just changed it from the religion backed by Jesus to the religion backed by Mohammed.
Islam's also got Jesus' backing, chief.
But, besides that, you're not making your argument look any nicer by insinuating all Muslims are homophobes.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:11 pmNapkizemlja wrote:The amount of paint brushing going on is hilarious. Despite huge swaths of America's Christian population being in support of same-sex marriage legalization it's still getting tarnished with the same brush with extremists that even conservative churches denounce. Magically this doesn't apply to white people in regards to racialists (hmmm I wonder why) or, at least for the liberal crowd, for Muslims in regards to jihadists (and trust me I think painting every Muslim as potential suicide bomber is fucking retarded as well). Is this what Peak Tolerance looks like?
ikr
I mean, I used these very same arguments another lifetime ago back when I was fresh off parting ways with Roman Catholicism so I can't exactly push back, but good Lord, CM.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:12 pmSalus Maior wrote:It actually happened a couple thousand years ago.
Christians haven't been bound to Levitical law pretty much ever.
Yet they've seemed happy enough to enforce it all the same.
Joohan wrote:The most intrinsic and constant virtues of the United States have always been independence ( for any and every man to be able to carve for themselves a living regardless of their background; from the colonials who settled the 13 colonies to the modern entrepreneur ), and the freedom of expression ( most specifically, the freedom to express dissenting and or unpopular ideas ).
@ me.
I think that's a fair estimation. So how is my ideology at odds, rather than an addendum, to that?
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:12 pmThere's enough blood to go around, CM. You are perfectly aware that "countless innocents" were killed by Republican movements throughout history as well.
Of course the difference between you and me is that I don't justify the Church's past violence or say that the punished always deserved it.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:12 pmConserative Morality wrote:Salus Maior wrote:1. Yes I'm aware of your horseshit view of history.
Calling it horseshit won't bring back the countless innocents who were murdered at the Church's exhortation.2. And you could say that of every group I mentioned. "Black people obey the law, when it suits them...".
I would regard anyone who regards their race above their nation the same way, tbqh.
You make it seem as if one should have loyalty to the nation above all. That seems a rather jingoistic sentiment in my opinion.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:14 pmNot Levitical law. But laws of their own creation that applied secular capital punishment to the violation of Christian moral laws.
If we were enforcing Levitical law, we would literally be Jews.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:14 pmConserative Morality wrote:Jack Thomas Lang wrote:Council of Jerusalem meant that Christians aren't required to follow Judaic Civil Law, likewise Christ opposed execution and violent punishment of sinners. If you're going to rant about how bigoted Christianity is, start with educating yourself on it.
The Council Of Jerusalem did not abolish the moral law, only ritual law, and in addition contradicts Christ's own words; furthermore, even if your interpretation of it was correct, clearly, it has not historically been adhered to by Christians.
And the civil or criminal law in the law of Moses does not really fit into either category, so I suppose the Council of Jerusalem, of at least the summary given in the book of Acts, was unclear on that point. But Christian rulers of the Roman Empire like Constantine and Justinian used a modified form of Roman law, not the law of Moses.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:14 pmAs a whole, America has been defined by it's adherence to the ideals of personal independence, in that any individual can live comfortably by their own work and merit regardless of background; and freedom of expression, in that anyone may express any opinion and or idea freely without state repression. People may argue that there are other virtues - but these I think have been constants with contest, from independence to modern times.
The contempary United States is more generally catagorized by it's globalized commercial/political affairs, in that we've taken upon ourselves to be the world police and leader of the free world; and consumerism, in that an excess of disposable material ( this including media, entertainment services, etc ) is equitable to a desirable state of living.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:15 pmThe Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Conserative Morality wrote:Calling it horseshit won't bring back the countless innocents who were murdered at the Church's exhortation.
I would regard anyone who regards their race above their nation the same way, tbqh.
You make it seem as if one should have loyalty to the nation above all. That seems a rather jingoistic sentiment in my opinion.
You’re talking to a man who, iirc, went on a tirade about his civic religion, or something about America being his one-above-all. It was quite spectacular.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:15 pmConserative Morality wrote:I think that's a fair estimation. So how is my ideology at odds, rather than an addendum, to that?
Seeing from your recent posts? I mean, there's suspicion based on recent precedents, and then there's paranoia.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:15 pmThe Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Conserative Morality wrote:Calling it horseshit won't bring back the countless innocents who were murdered at the Church's exhortation.
I would regard anyone who regards their race above their nation the same way, tbqh.
You make it seem as if one should have loyalty to the nation above all. That seems a rather jingoistic sentiment in my opinion.
It's complete nonsense which would absolutely destroy morality. Sophie Scholl would be labeled a traitor by German CM because of her liberal ideology.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:17 pmHanafuridake wrote:The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:You make it seem as if one should have loyalty to the nation above all. That seems a rather jingoistic sentiment in my opinion.
It's complete nonsense which would absolutely destroy morality. Sophie Scholl would be labeled a traitor by German CM because of her liberal ideology.
It will be completely different because her ideology was liberal and therefore this standard will not magically apply.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:19 pmConserative Morality wrote:Salus Maior wrote:It actually happened a couple thousand years ago.
Christians haven't been bound to Levitical law pretty much ever.
Yet they've seemed happy enough to enforce it all the same.Joohan wrote:The most intrinsic and constant virtues of the United States have always been independence ( for any and every man to be able to carve for themselves a living regardless of their background; from the colonials who settled the 13 colonies to the modern entrepreneur ), and the freedom of expression ( most specifically, the freedom to express dissenting and or unpopular ideas ).
@ me.
I think that's a fair estimation. So how is my ideology at odds, rather than an addendum, to that?
In acknowledging the founding and constant virtues of the United States, you often despair the history and traditions with which prior generations of American viewed these virtues - which in turn would come to influence how modern generations view them.
The idea of personal independence and freedom of expression are, in it of themselves, not unique to the United States. Other states across the world also uphold these values. What makes them unique to America, is how we ( as a nation ) have interperated these virtues throughout our history.
Upholding virtues alone is ideology. Upholding your nation's interpratations of these virtues is patriotism.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:21 pmConserative Morality wrote:Camelone wrote:Yeah that still doesn't fly. If Rome actually wanted the Christian community to show their loyalty instead of a sacrifice, which Christians do not offer for any reason, they should have told the Christians to pray to God for the protection and guidance of the Emperor instead of using it as a reason to crackdown on a community they did not like nor desire within their dominion. It was specifically against the faith and the Roman government could have easily accommodated them but decided not to.
I doubt Decian considered Christianity even for a moment when issuing the edict. Christianity was a minor mystery cult at that point in time.
He probably didn't but the local magistrates most likely considered them dangerous and were more than happy to have an excuse to crack down on any of these Christians who had abandoned customary religious practices and were evangelizing. Regardless it was the way the edict was written which caused the persecution because while Christians would have been more than happy to pray for the Emperor and the security of the Empire instead of offering sacrifices, which in of itself runs so contrary to the faith it is at the very least near apostasy.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:21 pmSalus Maior wrote:
There's enough blood to go around, CM. You are perfectly aware that "countless innocents" were killed by Republican movements throughout history as well.
Of course the difference between you and me is that I don't justify the Church's past violence or say that the punished always deserved it.
Well, they didn't *always* deserve it. =^)
But you're right. Perhaps my blood is a bit hot on the subject of historical murders.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:22 pmThe Xenopolis Confederation wrote:
You make it seem as if one should have loyalty to the nation above all. That seems a rather jingoistic sentiment in my opinion.
We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do,
We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too!
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:23 pmJoohan wrote:
As a whole, America has been defined by it's adherence to the ideals of personal independence, in that any individual can live comfortably by their own work and merit regardless of background; and freedom of expression, in that anyone may express any opinion and or idea freely without state repression. People may argue that there are other virtues - but these I think have been constants with contest, from independence to modern times.
The contempary United States is more generally catagorized by it's globalized commercial/political affairs, in that we've taken upon ourselves to be the world police and leader of the free world; and consumerism, in that an excess of disposable material ( this including media, entertainment services, etc ) is equitable to a desirable state of living.
Well, as a wise man once said, "The business of the American people is business." I think we've always had a very strong mercantile strain.
Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 6:23 pmCamelone wrote:Conserative Morality wrote:I doubt Decian considered Christianity even for a moment when issuing the edict. Christianity was a minor mystery cult at that point in time.
He probably didn't but the local magistrates most likely considered them dangerous and were more than happy to have an excuse to crack down on any of these Christians who had abandoned customary religious practices and were evangelizing. Regardless it was the way the edict was written which caused the persecution because while Christians would have been more than happy to pray for the Emperor and the security of the Empire instead of offering sacrifices, which in of itself runs so contrary to the faith it is at the very least near apostasy.
Bonus points in Jewish people were exempted from it as well. It's not hard to admit that maybe, just maybe, the persecutions were not just and were wrong.
I know, it's a shuddering thought for some people ITT *cough* wont say who, to admit that Progressive Rome did a baddy on occasion but it's true they weren't always doing the right thing.