Advertisement
by Nanatsu no Tsuki » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:10 pm
Slava Ukraini
Also: THERNSY!!
Your story isn't over;֍Help save transgender people's lives֍Help for feral cats
Cat with internet access||Supposedly heartless, & a d*ck.||Is maith an t-earra an tsíocháin.||No TGsRIP: Dyakovo & Ashmoria
by Manokan Republic » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:16 pm
Lower Nubia wrote:Manokan Republic wrote:
I literally have already explained this, the point of these countries was it was too difficult to track the potential migrants. It's not to block all Asylum seekers, or a bulk of them, it's to block criminals. They happened to be largely Muslim-majority countries, but not all of them. Oh no? You have to assume that it's due to prejudice against muslims, which you can't prove and are just assuming, vs. the fact they are actually violent places. They happen to be the same 7 countries that Obama chose to put restrictions on, too. I guess Obama Chose these 7 countries and hates muslims too? The only difference is the level of which Trump went to, but it's not that these countries are muslim, but places where it's hard to vet refugees coming in. It *happens to be* the middle east has a lot of violence and wars going on right now with a break down of governments in several places, and so it happens to be most of the country on travel watch-dog lists are there. This isn't a slight against muslims, just right now the muslim-world, or the middle east, has a lot of violence. If this was a different time period, maybe it would be the other way around, but right now, the middle east is in a bad situation. The list of countries are chosen from those provided by political advisors, apparently the same advisors to Obama. It's the dangers reflected by these countries, not that they are muslim-majority countries.
So now you're suggesting the reason the ban happened is because the infrastructure in the countries listed couldn't provide an accurate assessment of who was arriving?
So here are primary refugees populations:
Are you suggesting that the nations which he didn't ban which represent enough administrative competency that they could provide enough info on their refugees compared to the nations Trump banned?
I'm sorry, that is bullshit.
Ethiopia. Dr Congo. Ivory Coast. South Sudan. Are not some bastions of administrative competence and certainly do not have a higher standard of checks on these groups.
So I'll ask again, why these nations? Why these asyslum seekers?
Additionally, I've already shown it did ban them in bulk, as the number of refugees went down from 1800 a week to 2. That's not stopping criminals that's stopping everyone.
by Lower Nubia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:27 pm
Manokan Republic wrote:Lower Nubia wrote:
So now you're suggesting the reason the ban happened is because the infrastructure in the countries listed couldn't provide an accurate assessment of who was arriving?
So here are primary refugees populations:
Are you suggesting that the nations which he didn't ban which represent enough administrative competency that they could provide enough info on their refugees compared to the nations Trump banned?
I'm sorry, that is bullshit.
Ethiopia. Dr Congo. Ivory Coast. South Sudan. Are not some bastions of administrative competence and certainly do not have a higher standard of checks on these groups.
So I'll ask again, why these nations? Why these asyslum seekers?
Additionally, I've already shown it did ban them in bulk, as the number of refugees went down from 1800 a week to 2. That's not stopping criminals that's stopping everyone.
Again, you are just dodging the point and trying to strawman me, I've explained this multiple times. These are places where WE could not vet the incoming waves of refugees. Crime rates went up in country's that did accept them without proper vetting, so it is a fact this would happen and did.
A country's government being intact does make it far easier for us to vet them; it's not about their own government being able to vet them, but us. North korea for example is also a banned country on the list, for this same reason. The fact it was predominately muslim countries is irrelevant, is my point, that's incidental to the fact they were the most concerning places. If they were predominately Christian nations, it wouldn't really matter either. Again, you can assume whatever intentions you want, but the facts are what it actually did, what it's stated objective was, and what the basis for the policy was. These are the same 7 countries, chosen by Obama for immigration restrictions. You can disagree with the level of harshness by Trump, but that's another issue entirely. Although there are exceptions for those with considerable hardships, and the strictness has decreased with some countries over time. The idea was to be extremely restrictive for a time period, then slowly reduce them as time went on, presuming we got a better handle on things. We also got refugees from these countries, however coming through other countries.
- Anglo-Catholic
Anglican- Socially Centre-Right
- Third Way Neoliberal
- Asperger
Syndrome- Graduated
in Biochemistry
"These are they who are made like to God as far as possible, of their own free will, and by God's indwelling, and by His abiding grace. They are truly called gods, not by nature, but by participation; just as red-hot iron is called fire, not by nature, but by participation in the fire's action."
Signature Updated: 15th April, 2022
by Merrill » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:11 pm
Ricksolot wrote:For the past few elections I’ve seen it as a choice between two evils, and that Donald Trump is the lesser.
Here’s what I think is positive for him. The order of the list means nothing.
1. He been great for the black community and the poor.
2. He’s good for the economy and not entirely responsible for how the Corona Virus impacted us.
3. He promotes religious freedom.
4. He’s not going to defund or dismantle the police.
5. He protects the 2nd Amendment.
6. He’s against erasing history.
7. I’m glad he increased the Child Care fund in 2018 to help low income family’s.
8. He increased funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities by 13% setting the Highest record. Providing more than 500,000,000$ in loans.
9. He’s not for the idea of taking away the electoral college.
10. He’s pro voter ID, meaning he supports the idea of people being required to show photo identification in order to vote.
11.Hes against the Green New Deal.
12. Anti Obamacare.
13. He’s physically and mentally capable of performing as President.
14. He’s Pro Life.
Negative and Anti Christian things.
1. I don’t see the point in the Wall. I don’t think Heavenly Father supports that, Heavenly Father wants us to be good Samaritans and help those in need. As far as I’m concerned this is his policy to ALL of his children regardless of what country they come from. So there needs to be immigration reform. If something is anti nuclear Family then it’s against God. Compassion is needed. However at the same time I do not support foolishness such as allowing anyone into the country, we need to come up with more effective ways of vetting out criminals and terrorists while at the same time not separating families.
2. As a person he is imperfect, as am I. So while God does not Condone adultery and all Sin he at the same time commands us to refrain from unrighteousness judgement. Jesus Christ said “He that is without sin among you, Let him first cast a stone at her”. How can I judge others when I walk so imperfectly? “Ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin”. So I pay more attention to how he runs the country rather than how he carries him self in his personal life.
3. I like Joe Biden’s voice more. But that’s not going to impact my voting.
4. Should have put more effort in fighting Corona. But also a lot of people use the fear of it to control people and further there agenda.
Lastly these lists do NOT contain everything so yeah.
Also if you argue with hatred, pride or contention or hypocrisy then you’ve lost favor with God. That’s happened to me and this applies to everyone. I could argue against abortion or using curse words or anything and yet if I start to be contentions or hateful then Im not really on His side anymore. Additionally I could always pretend to be nice and fake love, and others may very well believe it. But God is omnipotent and know my heart so I’d still be wrong. So as you carry on today in your lives please remember to treat each other courteously and be loving in practice. And forgive people who aren’t doing so.
by Ricksolot » Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:33 pm
Merrill wrote:Ricksolot wrote:For the past few elections I’ve seen it as a choice between two evils, and that Donald Trump is the lesser.
Here’s what I think is positive for him. The order of the list means nothing.
1. He been great for the black community and the poor.
2. He’s good for the economy and not entirely responsible for how the Corona Virus impacted us.
3. He promotes religious freedom.
4. He’s not going to defund or dismantle the police.
5. He protects the 2nd Amendment.
6. He’s against erasing history.
7. I’m glad he increased the Child Care fund in 2018 to help low income family’s.
8. He increased funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities by 13% setting the Highest record. Providing more than 500,000,000$ in loans.
9. He’s not for the idea of taking away the electoral college.
10. He’s pro voter ID, meaning he supports the idea of people being required to show photo identification in order to vote.
11.Hes against the Green New Deal.
12. Anti Obamacare.
13. He’s physically and mentally capable of performing as President.
14. He’s Pro Life.
Negative and Anti Christian things.
1. I don’t see the point in the Wall. I don’t think Heavenly Father supports that, Heavenly Father wants us to be good Samaritans and help those in need. As far as I’m concerned this is his policy to ALL of his children regardless of what country they come from. So there needs to be immigration reform. If something is anti nuclear Family then it’s against God. Compassion is needed. However at the same time I do not support foolishness such as allowing anyone into the country, we need to come up with more effective ways of vetting out criminals and terrorists while at the same time not separating families.
2. As a person he is imperfect, as am I. So while God does not Condone adultery and all Sin he at the same time commands us to refrain from unrighteousness judgement. Jesus Christ said “He that is without sin among you, Let him first cast a stone at her”. How can I judge others when I walk so imperfectly? “Ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin”. So I pay more attention to how he runs the country rather than how he carries him self in his personal life.
3. I like Joe Biden’s voice more. But that’s not going to impact my voting.
4. Should have put more effort in fighting Corona. But also a lot of people use the fear of it to control people and further there agenda.
Lastly these lists do NOT contain everything so yeah.
Also if you argue with hatred, pride or contention or hypocrisy then you’ve lost favor with God. That’s happened to me and this applies to everyone. I could argue against abortion or using curse words or anything and yet if I start to be contentions or hateful then Im not really on His side anymore. Additionally I could always pretend to be nice and fake love, and others may very well believe it. But God is omnipotent and know my heart so I’d still be wrong. So as you carry on today in your lives please remember to treat each other courteously and be loving in practice. And forgive people who aren’t doing so.
To be a Good Samaritan is to help someone personally. This is not done by inviting the world’s poor to come to the US illegally and then force your neighbors to pay to support them.
by The Sovereign Realist State » Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:13 pm
Geneviev wrote:1. He called it a hoax and mocked Biden for wearing a mask.
2. Over 220,000 American lives lost.
3. That doesn't help if no one else does.
4. That lockdown didn't work. Americans could come in from China still, people from China could come in if they had layovers in another country... It was the least secure lockdown and it was too late. Yes. It was racist.
5. Over 220,000 American lives lost. That number can double just this year. How is that not deadly?
6. But if no one else does, it's useless. You think I want to see even one more person die? I do not. But the president can prevent it and I can't. His refusal to do so is murder to me.
by Punished UMN » Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:23 pm
The Sovereign Realist State wrote:Geneviev wrote:1. He called it a hoax and mocked Biden for wearing a mask.
2. Over 220,000 American lives lost.
3. That doesn't help if no one else does.
4. That lockdown didn't work. Americans could come in from China still, people from China could come in if they had layovers in another country... It was the least secure lockdown and it was too late. Yes. It was racist.
5. Over 220,000 American lives lost. That number can double just this year. How is that not deadly?
6. But if no one else does, it's useless. You think I want to see even one more person die? I do not. But the president can prevent it and I can't. His refusal to do so is murder to me.
1. He called what a hoax?...
He was giving daily press conferences with medical experts so no idea what kind of leftist propaganda you're referring to.
2. Sure, viruses kill. The cold also kills a lot ... what should he have done differently exactly?
Far more negligent was Pennsylvania and NY forcefully mixing elderly people with the virus carriers, don't you think?
3. Well, it already does little to help. The virus kept spreading in all the countries tat adopted masks..
4. Lockdown was imposed in 2020 after virus was active since 2019. But we did not know so... Thanks China.
I am very confused: so you were in favour of preventing americans in China from returning to the US? Because the DNC sure as hell wasn't
Oh it was racist?! so we should not have had a lockdown at all?!!..............
Sorry I can't quite keep up with you
5. because that number speaks of deaths WITH covid, not of COVID. We have to wait until mortality rates come out to compare them with previous years but it is not a calamity.
by Odreria » Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:30 pm
Valrifell wrote:
Disregard whatever this poster says
by Narland » Wed Oct 28, 2020 5:08 pm
Glen Ellyn wrote:Ok, since the election is now a week away, I have a burning question for Pro Trump Christians: Why do you support him? What is Christian about him? I don’t mean to be rude, it’s just that this dilemma has frustrated me for four years, and I need some answers. I would like to hear why Pro Trump Christians support him / believe he is a man of God
by Glen Ellyn » Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:14 pm
by Geneviev » Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:15 pm
Glen Ellyn wrote:Ok, so a lot has happened since I last checked the conversation, and never have I made a thread with so many replies, so thank you. At first it seemed that we all agreed Pro Trump Christians are missing something pretty obvious: Trump is Pro Life, but that is the only Christian thing about him. However since then, some Pro Trump Christians have responded by saying that nobody is perfect, as long as he is repentant, he is a good man. The problem is, Trump is not repentant. He has said that he “doesn’t do many bad things” and he doesn’t understand “why I need forgiveness, why do I need to repent” (put in his own words). It says in the Bible that if we say we don’t need God “we make him out to be a liar, and thus he has no place in our hearts.” Trump is sinful and unrepentant, he is not a Christian. Still it was intriguing to see your input, even if it doesn’t make sense.
by Ricksolot » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:00 pm
by Czechostan » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:09 pm
by Deacarsia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:09 pm
by Deacarsia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:20 pm
by Albrenia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:27 pm
Deacarsia wrote:Why is it that some people, usually non-Christians, automatically assume that they have an absolutely perfect understanding and knowledge of Christian teaching and how it should guide Christians in their participation in politics?
Why do these same people assume that Christians who disagree with their often uninformed understanding of Christianity must be disingenuous in their faith?
Christians generally have a better understanding of Christian teaching than non-Christians, and very often their political choices do in fact reflect their religious values and morality.
Indeed, it almost always is the small minority of self-proclaimed “Christians” who actually do agree with the politics of these same non-Christians who are well outside the mainstream of Christian thought and allow their politics to determine their religious thinking, rather than those who are criticized.
Most Christians in the United States support President Trump, precisely because he governs in accordance with their religious values and not the different values of the non-Christians who criticize them for that support.
by Deacarsia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:42 pm
Albrenia wrote:Deacarsia wrote:Why is it that some people, usually non-Christians, automatically assume that they have an absolutely perfect understanding and knowledge of Christian teaching and how it should guide Christians in their participation in politics?
Why do these same people assume that Christians who disagree with their often uninformed understanding of Christianity must be disingenuous in their faith?
Christians generally have a better understanding of Christian teaching than non-Christians, and very often their political choices do in fact reflect their religious values and morality.
Indeed, it almost always is the small minority of self-proclaimed “Christians” who actually do agree with the politics of these same non-Christians who are well outside the mainstream of Christian thought and allow their politics to determine their religious thinking, rather than those who are criticized.
Most Christians in the United States support President Trump, precisely because he governs in accordance with their religious values and not the different values of the non-Christians who criticize them for that support.
So basically that's a yes to the whole 'hypocrisy' explanation, then? As in you're willing to support a corrupt, narcissistic and unrepentant sinner as long as he passes laws which you favour morally?
I can't knock it as an effective tactic I guess, although it seems a little light on integrity.
by Albrenia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:47 pm
Deacarsia wrote:Albrenia wrote:
So basically that's a yes to the whole 'hypocrisy' explanation, then? As in you're willing to support a corrupt, narcissistic and unrepentant sinner as long as he passes laws which you favour morally?
I can't knock it as an effective tactic I guess, although it seems a little light on integrity.
Actually, your answer is more of a confirmation of everthing upon which I just elaborated. I am willing to support a man with a morally questionable past but who supports traditional Christian values and the preservation of what remains of Christendom over an overtly anti-Christian and proudly sinful heretic who support their outright destruction.
Again, as I predicted and described, you attack my character with an obviously poor and limited understanding of how Christianity actually works and what it teaches.
Any person who honestly read and understood what I had written would understand the point I was making about the ridiculousness of allowing non-Christians to dictate Christian doctrine based on their flawed and uninformed understanding of Christianity, of which you then immediately provided quite an excellent example.
Whether this so-called “tactic” works or not is irrelevant to the fact that it operates in accordance with Christian teaching and moral reasoning in the context a fallen world. Quite the contrary to this being light on integrity, it is your ignorant and conceited response that demonstrates the very arrogance I was describing.
by Joohan » Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:53 pm
by Necroghastia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:05 pm
Deacarsia wrote:Albrenia wrote:
So basically that's a yes to the whole 'hypocrisy' explanation, then? As in you're willing to support a corrupt, narcissistic and unrepentant sinner as long as he passes laws which you favour morally?
I can't knock it as an effective tactic I guess, although it seems a little light on integrity.
Actually, your answer is more of a confirmation of everthing upon which I just elaborated. I am willing to support a man with a morally questionable past but who supports traditional Christian values and the preservation of what remains of Christendom over an overtly anti-Christian and proudly sinful heretic who support their outright destruction.
by Albrenia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:05 pm
Joohan wrote:I acknowledge that Trump isn't a perfect vessel, and yeah a lot of his personal life seems unsavory to me - but his policies as a leader are very appealing to me. He's by no means a warmonger, something which has been a refreshing change from the last two presidents; he's increased federal spending towards supporting special needs education and combating the opioid crisis; I appreciate there being a president who actually wants to enforce our immigration laws; i've mixed feelings on his expansion of fracking across the United States, i'm personally for nuclear energy myself, but if we are going to get our oil from somewhere I would prefer it be here as opposed to Russia or Saudi Arabia.
He's done some stuff that I don't like, don't get me wrong, but he represents the better of two options. Looking at it from a Christian perspective, the DNC is practically anathema to Christianity on most social subjects: abortion, sexuality, secularism, chumming it up with consumerism and the worst of corporate America - and recently, i'd put war mongering up there too. There are some things I like about the DNC, like their environmentalism, and occasionally they've got the right idea about economics ( like a minimum wage to match inflation ) but they have so much baggage.
I wanted a Teddy Roosevelt, but all I got is a Trump, so i'll make do.
by Deacarsia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:16 pm
Albrenia wrote:Deacarsia wrote:Actually, your answer is more of a confirmation of everthing upon which I just elaborated. I am willing to support a man with a morally questionable past but who supports traditional Christian values and the preservation of what remains of Christendom over an overtly anti-Christian and proudly sinful heretic who support their outright destruction.
Again, as I predicted and described, you attack my character with an obviously poor and limited understanding of how Christianity actually works and what it teaches.
Any person who honestly read and understood what I had written would understand the point I was making about the ridiculousness of allowing non-Christians to dictate Christian doctrine based on their flawed and uninformed understanding of Christianity, of which you then immediately provided quite an excellent example.
Whether this so-called “tactic” works or not is irrelevant to the fact that it operates in accordance with Christian teaching and moral reasoning in the context a fallen world. Quite the contrary to this being light on integrity, it is your ignorant and conceited response that demonstrates the very arrogance I was describing.
Cool. It's not just his past which is morally repugnant though, just so you know. The present apathy towards hundreds of thousands of innocent lives is pretty bad too.
Also, Biden's not a heretic. He's Catholic. He also has nothing to do with destroying Christianity, that's just inane hysteria. Proudly sinful applies to both candidates, but yeah, that's not wrong about Biden either since he's not rabidly anti-rights on abortion.
A heretic is one who, after having been baptized, and still claiming to be a Christian, denies or doubts pertinaciously a truth that must be believed by Divine and Catholic Faith.
It has always been the custom of heretics and schismatics to call themselves Catholics and to proclaim their many excellences in order to lead peoples and princes into error.
by Kowani » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:17 pm
This was a lie, by the way.Joohan wrote:I acknowledge that Trump isn't a perfect vessel, and yeah a lot of his personal life seems unsavory to me - but his policies as a leader are very appealing to me. He's by no means a warmonger, something which has been a refreshing change from the last two presidents;
He cut $20 million in spending for blind and deaf students, cutting funding for the Special Olympics.he's increased federal spending towards supporting special needs education
This was actually good.and combating the opioid crisis;
That’d be why he keeps getting his immigration policies smacked down in court, right?appreciate there being a president who actually wants to enforce our immigration laws;
Ignore the fact that both Russia and Saudi Arabia are the 4th and 3rd largest oil import sources to the US.i've mixed feelings on his expansion of fracking across the United States, i'm personally for nuclear energy myself, but if we are going to get our oil from somewhere I would prefer it be here as opposed to Russia or Saudi Arabia.
We’re never gonna agree here, so I’ll ignore this.He's done some stuff that I don't like, don't get me wrong, but he represents the better of two options. Looking at it from a Christian perspective, the DNC is practically anathema to Christianity on most social subjects: abortion, sexuality, secularism,
chumming it up with consumerism and the worst of corporate America
Well, we already debunked this.and recently, i'd put war mongering up there too.
by Odreria » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:22 pm
Kowani wrote:Ignore the fact that both Russia and Saudi Arabia are the 4th and 3rd largest oil import sources to the US.Joohan wrote:i've mixed feelings on his expansion of fracking across the United States, i'm personally for nuclear energy myself, but if we are going to get our oil from somewhere I would prefer it be here as opposed to Russia or Saudi Arabia.
Valrifell wrote:
Disregard whatever this poster says
by Necroghastia » Wed Oct 28, 2020 11:23 pm
Deacarsia wrote:Albrenia wrote:
Cool. It's not just his past which is morally repugnant though, just so you know. The present apathy towards hundreds of thousands of innocent lives is pretty bad too.
Also, Biden's not a heretic. He's Catholic. He also has nothing to do with destroying Christianity, that's just inane hysteria. Proudly sinful applies to both candidates, but yeah, that's not wrong about Biden either since he's not rabidly anti-rights on abortion.
I find little in President Trump’s present public behavior to be morally repugnant, and I see none of this alleged “apathy” for “thousands of innocent lives,” which of course is code for supporting policies that you do not like.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, El Rio De Juan, Hidrandia, Hurdergaryp, Ifreann, Maximum Imperium Rex, Sarolandia, Statesburg
Advertisement