Politics Hypocrisy of The Right.

[Gough]

So who are the Christians calling for something similar to the Taliban's approach?

If they don't exist, what is your argument? Is it based purely on your imagination? I mean, sure, those Christian fundamentalists who are as extreme as the Taliban would be pretty bad, if they existed. But do they? If they don't, what is your argument? Is it purely hypothetical?

Are we talking about Gilead from The Handmaid's Tale or something that actually exists?

Similarities include attempt to overturn democratic elections, Jan 6, strict control over women's rights, Texas abortion laws and bounty, suppression of the franchise for certain groups of people which we've seen all over America since the 2020 election, mass incarceration, male domination of the offices of state, intolerance of minorities all as as per their narrow interpretation of scriptures. The Christian right represent the socially acceptable version of the Taliban vision, the pain pill addict with a script compared to the junkie, two versions of the same thing.

 

[Present Not Past]

So who are the Christians calling for something similar to the Taliban's approach?

If they don't exist, what is your argument? Is it based purely on your imagination? I mean, sure, those Christian fundamentalists who are as extreme as the Taliban would be pretty bad, if they existed. But do they? If they don't, what is your argument? Is it purely hypothetical?

Are we talking about Gilead from The Handmaid's Tale or something that actually exists?

There isn't any yet, not because they don't exist, but because there are forces in society that keep them in check.

They are there though.

How Martin Luther Paved the Way for Donald Trump

To understand why evangelicals support the president, look to the first Protestant.

www.thenation.com

 

[Gethelred]

From the Right Wings favourite news source
View attachment 1248910

What's the hypocrisy here, specifically?

 

[bourbons]

Avi Yemini running around complaing about Police brutality while posting this just over a year a go...

View attachment 1247118

Not on his own there. Real Rukshan (the other main guy live streaming and supporting the protests last week) seems to have had a fairly severe change of heart since last year too.

 

[Gethelred]

Give me an example. Which Christians are we talking about? What do they preach that is equivalent to the Taliban's approach? Who are these Christians who want a medieval theocracy?

You guys seem to have bought into the misguided idea that all religious beliefs are equally regressive and any difference in outcome is simply a by-product of circumstances/environment.

The reality is that the beliefs of the Taliban are one of the reasons Afghanistan remains so backward. On the other hand, Western systems of government - more or less liberal, secular, democratic - emerged alongside Christianity. I don't mean to airbrush the struggle that was involved in that but the Taliban's belief system forbids this kind of secular, pluralistic civil society. They are incompatible in a way I don't think you could claim is true of modern Christianity, even in its most conservative expressions.

So this self-serving thought experiment of "imagine a fundamentalist Christian theorcracy" is simplistic and ahistorical. You guys want to pretend the belief systems are easily divisible from the nature of the societies they foster, allowing these belief systems to be assessed in isolation. That's a flawed approach that overlooks the way certain belief systems contribute to particular societal outcomes.

It's not an accident that the Taliban's belief system led to a medieval theocracy. Nor is it an accident that we don't have some equivalent Anglican theocracy somewhere else. The belief systems are a factor in the societies that have emerged around them.

I would argue the inverse - the belief systems emerge from the interactions within the society - but I agree.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Similarities include attempt to overturn democratic elections, Jan 6, strict control over women's rights, Texas abortion laws and bounty, suppression of the franchise for certain groups of people which we've seen all over America since the 2020 election, mass incarceration, male domination of the offices of state, intolerance of minorities all as as per their narrow interpretation of scriptures.

Even if we attribute these positions to the Christan right broadly, it's a long way short of equivalence to the Taliban. You're talking about suppressing voting rights? And you reckon that helps demonstrate equivalence with the Taliban?

Do you not understand how the Taliban governs?

The Taliban bans girls from attending school. They amputate people's limbs for petty crime. It's a medieval theocracy. And you're talking about voting rights?

Your little spiel above is not even close to demonstrating that the Christian right is equivalently extreme or regressive.

This is why I conclude that you guys have lost perspective. Even the most RW Texan congressman who endorsed the abortion laws is not remotely comparable to the Taliban. You guys have become addled by ideology if you think that comparison is tenable.

The Christian right represent the socially acceptable version of the Taliban vision, the pain pill addict with a script compared to the junkie, two versions of the same thing.

WTF are you talking about?

You haven't demonstrated the equivalence at all.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

There isn't any yet, not because they don't exist

Huh?

They don't exist but that doesn't mean they don't exist?

WTF are you talking about?

Who are these Christians who are equivalently regressive or extreme as the Taliban?

If they don't exist, what is your argument? It's purely hypothetical?

Like, imagine Gilead was real. Wouldn't that be bad?

Yeah, it would be bad. But it's not real. So what are you talking about?

They are there though.

How Martin Luther Paved the Way for Donald Trump

To understand why evangelicals support the president, look to the first Protestant.

www.thenation.com

Is this meant to make an argument?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Like, imagine Gilead was real. Wouldn't that be bad?

Yeah, it would be bad. But it's not real. So what are you talking about?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I would argue the inverse - the belief systems emerge from the interactions within the society - but I agree.

There's an element of chicken and egg. Orthodoxies shape societies, which in turn buttress those orthodoxies, or reshape them.

But these confused liberals are carrying on like a medieval theocracy such as Afghanistan could be produced just as easily by post-Englightenment Christianity as by the Taliban's beliefs, even though post-Enlightenment Christianity has allowed space for liberal, pluralistic, secular societies to emerge while the Taliban's beliefs demand medieval theocracy.

These divergent outcomes are not random. These outcomes can't be neatly separated from the attendant belief systems and attributed instead to circumstances or environment.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

View attachment 1249043

You're addled by ideology if you reckon ScoMo is on par with the Taliban.

 

[Father Jack]

There are Christian groups out there now who treat homosexuals and apostates as if they were dead, and also treat women as second class citizens. Fortunately Christianity mainly exists in countries where secular government is the norm, or you'd have the Old Testament in living colour once again.

The religious wars of Europe weren't all that long ago, so it's no wonder Western countries thought that decoupling religion from government was a good idea. Everyone would've been dead if they didn't. Of course they then simply found other ideologies to fight over, but they seem to have largely sorted that out for now.

All the major religions tend to differ merely around the margins, but fundamentally are the same thing.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

There are Christian groups out there now who treat homosexuals and apostates as if they were dead, and also treat women as second class citizens. Fortunately Christianity mainly exists in countries where secular government is the norm, or you'd have the Old Testament in living colour once again.

Who are we talking about? Who is the "Christian right" that is equally extreme and regressive as the Taliban?

Or do you accept that this equivalence is untenable?

You can't actually point to examples of the "Christian right" in 2021 that are on par with the Taliban. That should be obvious, and it's crazy to claim otherwise.

The religious wars of Europe weren't all that long ago, so it's no wonder Western countries thought that decoupling religion from government was a good idea. Everyone would've been dead if they didn't. Of course they then simply found other ideologies to fight over, but they seem to have largely sorted that out for now.

What's your point here?

How does this support the equivalence between the Taliban and the "Christian right" in 2021?

All the major religions tend to differ merely around the margins, but fundamentally are the same thing.

This is an obvious oversimplification. And it's demonstrably nonsense.

There are doctrinal differences, as well as differences in the way these doctrines are taught, practised and expressed.

But you simply assert these differences don't exist or don't matter. Why? Based on what?

This is pure ideology. You despise the Christian right, and that has made you susceptible to the irrational and unsustainable idea that they are "fundamentally the same" as the Taliban. That's nonsense. You want to condemn the religious right but, in making this critique, you ignore the differences. Or maybe you object to specific criticisms of Islam that don't equally admonish Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism. Either way, it's liberal confusion and misguided relativism.

If you need a more striking example, the Anglican church is not "fundamentally the same" as Islamic State or the Taliban. The differences are not "merely around the margins". Do you disagree?

Consider how far your thinking has been warped by ideology for you to promote this obviously bullshit claim. You assert it like it's self-evidently true even though it's obviously nonsense. Why? What confusion has led you to take a position that is so obviously untenable?

 

[Father Jack]

Who are we talking about? Who is the "Christian right" that is equally extreme and regressive as the Taliban?

Or do you accept that this equivalence is untenable?

You can't actually point to examples of the "Christian right" in 2021 that are on par with the Taliban. That should be obvious, and it's crazy to claim otherwise.

What's your point here?

How does this support the equivalence between the Taliban and the "Christian right" in 2021?

This is an obvious oversimplification. And it's demonstrably nonsense.

There are doctrinal differences, as well as differences in the way these doctrines are taught, practised and expressed.

But you simply assert these differences don't exist or don't matter. Why? Based on what?

This is pure ideology. You despise the Christian right, and that has made you susceptible to the irrational and unsustainable idea that they are "fundamentally the same" as the Taliban. That's nonsense. You want to condemn the religious right but, in making this critique, you ignore the differences. Or maybe you object to specific criticisms of Islam that don't equally admonish Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism. Either way, it's liberal confusion and misguided relativism.

If you need a more striking example, the Anglican church is not "fundamentally the same" as Islamic State or the Taliban. The differences are not "merely around the margins". Do you disagree?

Consider how far your thinking has been warped by ideology for you to promote this obviously bullshit claim. You assert it like it's self-evidently true even though it's obviously nonsense. Why? What confusion has led you to take a position that is so obviously untenable?

You assume far, far too much.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

You assume far, far too much.

So answer my question or concede the point.

Who are the members of the "Christian right" that are equivalently extreme and regressive to the Taliban.

If there are no examples, acknowledge as much and stop claiming there's an equivalence.

 

[Father Jack]

So answer my question or concede the point.

Who are the members of the "Christian right" that are equivalently extreme and regressive to the Taliban.

If there are no examples, acknowledge as much and stop claiming there's an equivalence.

I've already answered it, and you've already ignored that answer in favour of a chance to go on a rant that barely even engaged with anything I'd said, so if you want to count that as 'conceding the point' then fine. I mean, if you have no idea that fundamentalist Christianity is every bit as homophobic (amongst other things) as the Taliban, then I'm afraid there's not much I can do to rectify that.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I've already answered it, and you've already ignored that answer in favour of a chance to go on a rant that barely even engaged with anything I'd said, so if you want to count that as 'conceding the point' then fine. I mean, if you have no idea that fundamentalist Christianity is every bit as homophobic (amongst other things) as the Taliban, then I'm afraid there's not much I can do to rectify that.

Give me an example of the "Christian right" that is equivalently extreme and regressive as the Taliban.

Do you have an example or don't you?

As if being homophobic is the only metric. Don't give me that. If you want to slice it like that, I guess Margaret Court is as bad as the Taliban? Is that where we're going?

Who are these "Christian right" that are as bad as the Taliban? Do they ban girls from going to school? Do they cut off people's hands for stealing?

Show me this example that demonstrates the equivalence. If you can't, be honest enough to say so, and stop pretending you've made the case when you haven't.

You guys can be as evasive and dishonest as the dumbest Trump fans when you try. They at least have bottomless stupidity as an excuse. You guys aren't as dumb but I suspect you're ideologically captured and confused in your own way.

 

[Number37]

WHich one is worse...flying planes into a building or invading a country and overthrowing a govt?
Or what about invading another country, overthrowing a govt then 20 years later leaving it in ruins....because some terrorists might have trained there.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

WHich one is worse...flying planes into a building or invading a country and overthrowing a govt?
Or what about invading another country, overthrowing a govt then 20 years later leaving it in ruins....because some terrorists might have trained there.

So your new argument is that the US government is "worse" than Al-Qaeda?

Why stop there?

Would you say the US government is also worse than ISIS? I mean, it's definitely worse than the Chinese Communist Party, right? Even the Kim regime in NK. And Boko Haram. They didn't invade Iraq/Afghanistan so I guess they're also preferable to the US government?

Who would you prefer to be governed by?

The Australian government was also part of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan so I guess it's also "worse" than Al-Qaeda?

What's the over/under on how many posts before you go to pieces? I reckon 2.5?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Father Jack why don't you make the case for Westboro Baptist Church, for example?

Would you say they're as bad as the Taliban?

By all means, let me know if you have a better example. Although I can only assume that if you did have one, you'd have presented it by now. You haven't, because you don't.

Present Not Past do you want another little nibble or have you been cowed into simp likes only?

I assume Ghost Patrol is trapped in a bathtub somewhere, unable to find a way out.

 

[Number37]

So your new argument is that the US government is "worse" than Al-Qaeda?

Why stop there?

Would you say the US government is also worse than ISIS? I mean, it's definitely worse than the Chinese Communist Party, right? Even the Kim regime in NK. And Boko Haram. They didn't invade Iraq/Afghanistan so I guess they're also preferable to the US government?

Who would you prefer to be governed by?

The Australian government was also part of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan so I guess it's also "worse" than Al-Qaeda?

What's the over/under on how many posts before you go to pieces? I reckon 2.5?

Oh Winnie the poo, why do you always smear things in dogshit?

It isn't nothing or extreme fundamentalism, whichever side you want to look at.

Any argument that attempts to advance the idea that one side didn't do this one really shitty thing and therefore is totes different to other side who did do that one really shitty thing, is utter crap.

The s**t that we see at the pointy end of extremism is always the result of a million smaller shitty things that have happened.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Oh Winnie the poo, why do you always smear things in dogshit?

It isn't nothing or extreme fundamentalism, whichever side you want to look at.

Any argument that attempts to advance the idea that one side didn't do this one really shitty thing and therefore is totes different to other side who did do that one really shitty thing, is utter crap.

The sh*t that we see at the pointy end of extremism is always the result of a million smaller shitty things that have happened.

But you posed the question, asking "who's worse" out of Al-Qaeda and the US government. So answer your own question.

Tell everyone, who's "worse": Al-Qaeda or the US government?

Now we can watch you dodge your own rhetorical question. It doesn't get much dumber than that.

Is Number37 a reference to your IQ? I must say, I had it pegged at closer to 70.

 

[iBeng]

What's the hypocrisy here, specifically?

Using very poorly designed graphs to over inflate their pearl clutching news stories in what is quite clearly fake news.

If, say, a news station did this type of thing for Covid deaths and make it look far worse than it was that would be called out immediately.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Using very poorly designed graphs to over inflate their pearl clutching news stories in what is quite clearly fake news.

If, say, a news station did this type of thing for Covid deaths and make it look far worse than it was that would be called out immediately.

Are there levels?

 

[Gethelred]

Using very poorly designed graphs to over inflate their pearl clutching news stories in what is quite clearly fake news.

If, say, a news station did this type of thing for Covid deaths and make it look far worse than it was that would be called out immediately.

Is that hypocrisy, though?

Misleading, sure. But this thread is about hypocrisy.

 

[Number37]

But you posed the question, asking "who's worse" out of Al-Qaeda and the US government. So answer your own question.

Tell everyone, who's "worse": Al-Qaeda or the US government?

Now we can watch you dodge your own rhetorical question. It doesn't get much dumber than that.

Is Number37 a reference to your IQ? I must say, I had it pegged at closer to 70.

I'm shocked you haven't declared victory Winnie the Poo.

Stop smearing your dogshit everywhere.

If AQ is the worst that doesn't absolve the US govt of all the shitty things it does.
If the US Govt is the worst that doesn't absolve AQ of all the shitty things they do.

All of the shitty things that both sides do don't magically disappear because the other side is worse. All of those shitty things still exist, regardless of how the other side is judged.


Which one is worse
(A) Stopping girls from getting educated or
(B) overturning Roe v Wade

Both of them are shitty.
That one may be shittier than the other, depending on who is judging, doesn't change the fact the other is shitty.


FYI, my IQ is 24.96.