The Slow DeCentis

[Zapato]

Jesus was a leftist.

Back it up with scripture.

I guess you haven't read the Bible. The whole point is to help and loving the poor, hungry, disabled, and outcasts, and to not gather wealth for yourself but to redistribute it among the needy.

21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
22 Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”
24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is[b] to enter the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish.

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

These are all left wing philosophies and policies.

[Necroghastia]

Y'all keep saying offtopic, but is it, given that many Florida conservatives justify their bigotry Biblically?

[Senkaku]

Y'all keep saying offtopic, but is it, given that many Florida conservatives justify their bigotry Biblically?

Is arguing about Jesus’s political views and the nature of sin on topic for the thread about Governor Ron DeSantis’s national political ambitions? Ah, if only there were a thread for discussing Christianity… like… a… Christian Discussion Thread?

Back on topic…

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/06/us/p ... onsin.html

So he’s randomly showing up in WI and expected to announce within “the next few weeks,” but he’s also already being hammered by Trump & co. and making his own supporters and donors nervous— God willing, his primary campaign will be one of the greatest political self-immolations in history.

I hope so, he is a rather disgusting human being with truly disgusting policies.

I actually think your suggestion in the AmPol thread about him ending up as Trump’s VP would be even funnier tbh. They’d make each other SAUR miserable and also totally bungle the campaign lol, and even if they won the conflict between them would be an amusing diversion from the carnival of horrors they’d be unleashing on the country

[Necroghastia]

Y'all keep saying offtopic, but is it, given that many Florida conservatives justify their bigotry Biblically?

Is arguing about Jesus’s political views and the nature of sin on topic for the thread about Governor Ron DeSantis’s national political ambitions?

Given their relevance in informing the relevant politics and policies, very much so.

[Rusticus I Damianus]

The word you're looking for (if you're honest) is Libertarian. But wild guess you're among the group of people that thinks everyone is a Socialist or Fascist no matter what (even when people aren't Fascists), so as if you'd care about things such as honesty, so I'm not going to bother wasting my time or yours.

Libertarians, at least according to the name, want the government to restrict people as little as possible.

Based off your support of DeSantis's policies (which include banning the wearing of clothes that differ from "birth gender", for example) you accept the state forcing LGBTQ+ people to conform to a narrow worldview that happens to reflect your religious beliefs.

Which is it?

I accept the state doing it's job of enforcing Lord's will above all? Yes absolutely, because as I stated previously, Christianity supercedes everything else in life.

Your definition of "Love thy neighbor" is for Christians to keep their mouths shut so y'all can go do whatever you want without being reminded that what y'all are doing is wrong. Also how many fricken times do I need to repeat the fact that I'm against the sins they commit but not the people themselves? Or should I just stop bothering?

You should stop bothering because it's an obvious lie anyway.

The problem isn't whether or not it's a Lie or the Truth (which it is) but the fact that it doesn't go along with your stupid Leftism.

1 I'm anti Government since I'm part of the Anarchist section of Libertarianism

You also ally with fascists on this very site, lol.

Actual definition Fascists that I've avoided? Or everyone that's right of you/not Leftists?

Your definition of "Love thy neighbor" is for Christians to keep their mouths shut so y'all can go do whatever you want without being reminded that what y'all are doing is wrong.

So much for being pro-liberty, right?

Also how many fricken times do I need to repeat the fact that I'm against the sins they commit but not the people themselves? Or should I just stop bothering?

When they commit sins, then you might have a point.

And as for the the sin thing, there's this one verse in Leviticus all about homosexuality and it calls the act a straight up abomination, so yeah.

Yeah, yeah, there's also verses about mixed fabrics and eating shrimp and the like that I doubt you care nearly as much about.

1 You'd say I was anti-liberty if theft became the hip new thing with the Left and I said you couldn't do it.
2 New Testament.
3 There's a book that Marx wrote about Jews that looked like stuff ripped out of Mein Khamf, but I doubt you care about that.

Libertarians, at least according to the name, want the government to restrict people as little as possible.

Based off your support of DeSantis's policies (which include banning the wearing of clothes that differ from "birth gender", for example) you accept the state forcing LGBTQ+ people to conform to a narrow worldview that happens to reflect your religious beliefs.

Which is it?

Most libertarians are closet fascists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmT7nLDinhY

You guys call everyone Fascists to the point that word barely means anything anymore. Or we have very different definitions for what that word means.

[Rusticus I Damianus]

Back it up with scripture.

I guess you haven't read the Bible. The whole point is to help and loving the poor, hungry, disabled, and outcasts, and to not gather wealth for yourself but to redistribute it among the needy.

21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
22 Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”
24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is[b] to enter the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish.

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

These are all left wing philosophies and policies.

"Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On closer examination, however, little evidence can be found that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.
There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) versus forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). Loveless giving is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18) and to give out of love for God and neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government."

[Farnhamia]

I guess you haven't read the Bible. The whole point is to help and loving the poor, hungry, disabled, and outcasts, and to not gather wealth for yourself but to redistribute it among the needy.

21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
22 Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”
24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish.

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

These are all left wing philosophies and policies.

"Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On closer examination, however, little evidence can be found that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.
There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) versus forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). Loveless giving is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18) and to give out of love for God and neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government."

[b]*looms ominously and points to the Christian Discussion thread ...* viewtopic.php?f=20&t=523262

Weird formatting ...

[Aggicificicerous]

1 I'm anti Government since I'm part of the Anarchist section of Libertarianism

What authoritarians?

I accept the state doing it's job of enforcing Lord's will above all? Yes absolutely, because as I stated previously, Christianity supercedes everything else in life.

You are remarkably bad at keeping it under wraps. There's a particular brand of Christian authoritarianism that Desantis appeals to, and it's more than apparent that you're into that.

[Drongonia]

You guys call everyone Fascists to the point that word barely means anything anymore. Or we have very different definitions for what that word means.

Exactly. I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

Democracy is when the 'good guy' is winning, fascism is when the 'bad guy' is winning - that's basically how it goes

[Dimetrodon Empire]

1 I'm anti Government since I'm part of the Anarchist section of Libertarianism

What authoritarians?

I accept the state doing it's job of enforcing Lord's will above all? Yes absolutely, because as I stated previously, Christianity supercedes everything else in life.

You are remarkably bad at keeping it under wraps. There's a particular brand of Christian authoritarianism that Desantis appeals to, and it's more than apparent that you're into that.

It's fascism. Let's call a spade a spade.

[Zapato]

I guess you haven't read the Bible. The whole point is to help and loving the poor, hungry, disabled, and outcasts, and to not gather wealth for yourself but to redistribute it among the needy.

21 And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
22 Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!”
24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is[b] to enter the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.

19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish.

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

These are all left wing philosophies and policies.

"Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On closer examination, however, little evidence can be found that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.
There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) versus forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). Loveless giving is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18) and to give out of love for God and neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government."

You seem to think that leftism = communism. That's false. Since your premise is false, the rest can be dismissed. In addition, your copy/paste paragraph also fails to actually adress the points I made.

But I will highlight this:

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase.

Capitalism is the most unchristian economic system we have. It increases individual wealth by decreasing the wealth of others and causes poverty. Jesus frequently says that the rich (capitalists) cannot enter the kingdom of God.

But one thing is fun: People who ignore the words of Jesus in a discussion about what he was for and against.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

You guys call everyone Fascists to the point that word barely means anything anymore. Or we have very different definitions for what that word means.

Exactly. I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

Democracy is when the 'good guy' is winning, fascism is when the 'bad guy' is winning - that's basically how it goes

Worst gotcha ever.

[Drongonia]

Exactly. I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

Democracy is when the 'good guy' is winning, fascism is when the 'bad guy' is winning - that's basically how it goes

Worst gotcha ever.

How is it a gotcha? No fascist thinks Ron DeSantis is 'our guy' lmao
Also: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-e ... -rcna81799

[Rusticus I Damianus]

You guys call everyone Fascists to the point that word barely means anything anymore. Or we have very different definitions for what that word means.

Exactly. I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

Democracy is when the 'good guy' is winning, fascism is when the 'bad guy' is winning - that's basically how it goes

People support democracy until democracy doesn't support them.

[Farnhamia]

"Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On closer examination, however, little evidence can be found that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.
There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.

In the Acts 2 church, the people were giving to each other out of their own good will to those who had a need, and they were giving freely, without regulation of how much they were to give. In other words, they shared what they had out of a shared love for one another and a common goal—living for Christ and glorifying God. In a communist society, people give because a system of government forces them to give. They don’t have a choice in the matter as to how much they give or to whom they give. This, therefore, does not reflect on who they are; it says nothing about their identity or character. Under communism, the cheerful, generous giver and the stingy man are both required to give exactly the same amount – namely, everything they earn.

The issue is one of cheerful giving (which the Bible supports) versus forced giving. Second Corinthians 9:7 says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” After all, the Bible contains a great number of references to helping the poor, being generous with what we have, and looking out for those who are less fortunate. When we obey in this area with cheerful hearts with the proper motivation, our giving is pleasing to God. What is not pleasing to God is giving out of compulsion, because forced giving is not giving out of love and therefore profits nothing in the spiritual sense. Paul tells the Corinthians, “If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:3). Loveless giving is the inevitable result of communism.

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase. Communism has proven to simply make all its citizens poor, except the very few in power who decide where the wealth goes. But even capitalism won’t work, by itself, as a system for aiding the poor. It depends on its citizens to be diligent (Proverbs 10:4) and generous with the fruits of their labor (1 Timothy 6:18) and to give out of love for God and neighbor. Thus, we see that God has designed for the physical and financial needs of the poor to be met by Christian individuals, rather than by any system of government."

You seem to think that leftism = communism. That's false. Since your premise is false, the rest can be dismissed. In addition, your copy/paste paragraph also fails to actually adress the points I made.

But I will highlight this:

Capitalism is actually a better system when it comes to giving because it has proven to increase individual wealth, which allows its citizens to give out of their increase.

Capitalism is the most unchristian economic system we have. It increases individual wealth by decreasing the wealth of others and causes poverty. Jesus frequently says that the rich (capitalists) cannot enter the kingdom of God.

But one thing is fun: People who ignore the words of Jesus in a discussion about what he was for and against.

Spoilering a thread-jack doesn't make any less a thread-jack.

[Ryemarch]

I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

All Nazis are fascists; not all fascists are Nazis.

[Rusticus I Damianus]

Worst gotcha ever.

How is it a gotcha? No fascist thinks Ron DeSantis is 'our guy' lmao

The ones that I've talked to hate guys like that. Call them "Neoconservatives" and crap. Got into a lot of arguments with a couple of them over stuff.

Idk why, but their arguing style seems similar to some of the Socialists that I've come across.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

Exactly. I don't know any fascists who would visit the Western Wall to try and pray a hurricane away or give a speech at the 'Museum of Tolerance' in Israel.

Democracy is when the 'good guy' is winning, fascism is when the 'bad guy' is winning - that's basically how it goes

People support democracy until democracy doesn't support them.

Fucking lol.

Your politics are the minority nationwide. Hence why your party gerrymanders so badly. My state isn't even considered a democracy anymore by international observers due to your party.

Shed your fake tears about democracy somewhere else.

[Drongonia]

All Nazis are fascists; not all fascists are Nazis.

I suppose that's true, but I have still yet to find a fascist who supports cracking down on 'hate crime' (anti-Semitism in particular)

[Zapato]

All Nazis are fascists; not all fascists are Nazis.

I suppose that's true, but I have still yet to find a fascist who supports cracking down on 'hate crime' (anti-Semitism in particular)

Your article quotes one. Netanyahu.

[Dimetrodon Empire]

All Nazis are fascists; not all fascists are Nazis.

I suppose that's true, but I have still yet to find a fascist who supports cracking down on 'hate crime' (anti-Semitism in particular)

American Blackshirts (an Italian style fascist party) was in favor of cracking down on hate crime. The idea that is incompatible with fascism is laughable.

And yes, some fascists do like DeSantis.

[Drongonia]

And yes, some fascists do like DeSantis.

Who exactly? I certainly don't.

[Valles Marineris Mining co]

The laws it doesn’t REQUIRE staff to use the preferred pronouns, so if a teacher wants to call them by their assigned sex at birth then so be it, like honestly cope and Seth like imagine having a mental breakdown and protesting over freaking pronouns. I do not like desantis but like some of these people in lgbt community need to stop being such crybabies.

[Senkaku]

Worst gotcha ever.

How is it a gotcha? No fascist thinks Ron DeSantis is 'our guy' lmao

America doesn’t really have that many old-fashioned early-mid 20th century European fascists though, we have a bunch of people living in a schizophrenic media ecosystem creating their own personal ideological dreamworlds, and then labeling themselves as this or that— psychologically and aesthetically, it seems very similar to left-wing idpol tbh. “I’m a right-wing evangelical” who fucks around and does coke, “I’m a paleoconservative” who eats tacos and is in an interracial relationship, “I’m a fascist” who also believes the government should leave me and my money alone under absolutely all circumstances, etc. ad nauseum. A lot of people who I’d describe as our version of fascists do think DeSantis might be their guy. Fascism, both in general through history and specifically in the US in this moment, is so ideologically slippery, and its adherents so ideologically incoherent, that it’s often only once a regime consolidates and carries out large-scale atrocities that people realize they’d been talking about it and laying the groundwork for years.

Also, can’t believe I didn’t catch this earlier, but there are a shitload of fascists who would do silly stunts like trying to pray a hurricane away! This is America honey!

The laws it doesn’t REQUIRE staff to use the preferred pronouns, so if a teacher wants to call them by their assigned sex at birth then so be it, like honestly cope and Seth like imagine having a mental breakdown and protesting over freaking pronouns. I do not like desantis but like some of these people in lgbt community need to stop being such crybabies.

Set pronouns to stun

[Dimetrodon Empire]

And yes, some fascists do like DeSantis.

Who exactly? I certainly don't.

You may not, but most would prefer him over a democrat. It's also a unique American flavor of fascism.

Also kind of funny how you lectured us about democracy, when you just admitted that you're a fascist and thus, and enemy of democracy.