Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Pope ManiaFollow

#27 Sep 23 2015 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Samira wrote:
But how is Obama going to convert the Pope to Islam in a week?
Jophiel wrote:
With gay people, naturally.
He can use those gay people who weren't allowed to have a pride parade in the Muslim neighborhood. Bet they have nothing to do right now.
#28 Sep 23 2015 at 2:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Call the Muslim Pope!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#29 Sep 23 2015 at 4:43 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Let gbaji do his own homework, Jophiel!!Smiley: mad


My source was the same WSJ article Joph mentioned (referenced in numerous other locations as well). I'm not sure why that's suddenly not sufficient, given the nature of the invites themselves, but absence of follow up from the Vatican is interpreted as a refutation, rather than the far more probable "don't get into a pissing match with someone looking hard to get into a pissing match" explanation.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#30 Sep 23 2015 at 4:45 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I actually had no idea who was going to be among the 15,000 attendees before the right wing started collectively losing their shit over 0.008% of them.


I always find it amusing when the first I hear about something is tons of liberals talking about what a big deal something is to conservatives. As I said earlier, fabricated.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#31 Sep 23 2015 at 4:49 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Yodabunny wrote:
I always love the phrase "in the eyes of God", you know, because an omniscient omnipotent being would have a use for eyes.


We've anthropomorphized God so much that we now claim he created *us* in his image. Can you imagine that? I'm like 2500 years too late on that joke, aren't I?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#32 Sep 23 2015 at 5:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
I always find it amusing when the first I hear about something is tons of liberals talking about what a big deal something is to conservatives. As I said earlier, fabricated.

You're always amused to be a week behind in the news? Well, whatever makes you giggle, I guess.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#33 Sep 23 2015 at 5:22 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
I always find it amusing when the first I hear about something is tons of liberals talking about what a big deal something is to conservatives. As I said earlier, fabricated.

You're always amused to be a week behind in the news? Well, whatever makes you giggle, I guess.


Weren't Huckabee's tweets on the 21st? Maybe my math is wrong, but that's just two days ago, not a week. And conservatives more or less ignored it (don't recall a single mention on Fox News, but it's not like I sit there with it on all day or anything). Liberals, on the other hand, jumped at the chance to make this into yet another "big deal". I happen to think that Huckabee isn't the correct person to tell us what offends Catholics, but he actually did have a point. Obama would never have paraded a bunch of LGBT activists to greet a Muslim spiritual leader. A huge part of that speaks to how much more tolerant Christianity (and specifically Catholicism) is, but some of that does speak to Obama's willingness to put social agenda and narrative ahead of propriety.

Given the comment made earlier in the thread about how liberals have attempted to paint this Pope as a reformer who would accept homosexuality, extra marital sex, female priests, and however many other things that the US left would love for a religious leader to do, it's not a stretch to argue that putting such people in proximity to the Pope might be motivated by a desire to encourage such thinking. It certainly does scream of "red meat for the base". Which yeah, is kinda classless. Again, I don't think the Pope himself cares one way or the other. But the message wasn't for the Pope, but for throngs of liberals at home waiting with baited breath to see the Pope shake hands with member of the LGBT community, so they can all run off, squealing like little girls at how this Pope is so liberal, and using it to make fun of all their religious friends. "Oh. You oppose gay marriage, but the Pope shook hands with a gay married couple. So take that!".

Your "side" lives on this kind of stuff Joph.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#34 Sep 23 2015 at 5:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You think Huckabee is the only source of news? The WSJ story was six days ago and I could probably find people huffing and whining before that.

Seriously, I know that coming up with cereal box sociology about "The Left" is your bread & butter, but try to get informed once in a while.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2015 6:28pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#35 Sep 23 2015 at 5:49 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
You think Huckabee is the only source of news? The WSJ story was six days ago and I could probably find people huffing and whining before that.


What people huffing and whining? One WSJ article, where most people on the right just said "Yeah, that's typical of this president". And then what? Most of the "news" on this has been left wing sources making a big deal about how supposedly upset the right is over this. When, in actual fact, most on the right didn't notice. Yeah, upon it being pointed out, it does seem like a classless thing to do, but as I just mentioned, this is like a drop of water in the sea of Obama classlessness that we've grown accustomed to.

Quote:
Seriously, I know that coming up with cereal box sociology about "The Left" is your bread & butter, but try to get informed once in a while.


I post regularly on a forum full of liberals who actually do this constantly? The whole "look at this silly/crazy thing conservatives are doing/saying" does seem to be a pretty common topic. Jade Helm thread? Entirely about how outraged conservatives were supposed to be over military operations, when in fact the number of liberals outraged over this supposed conservative outrage outnumbered the actual outrage (which I wouldn't even label conservative) by like 100 to 1. Same deal here.

As I said, you guys live off this stuff. It's how you communicate politically. You support your positions, rarely by saying why they are good, but usually by saying how bad the conservative position is. I'm sorry, but I'm going to point this out when I see it. And this is yet another example of it. Maybe you're blind to the methodology, but it's pretty freaking prevalent. Support SSM because hating gay people because of your religion is wrong. Support socialized medicine/food/housing/etc because making poor people suffer because you believe in free markets is wrong. Support "Hands up don't shoot" because accepting a disparate impact because you actually believe in equality under the law is wrong. Support Global Warming agenda because balancing the cost of the agenda against the likelihood of actual global environmental impact is wrong.

The Left is entirely about creating a "us vs them" conflict, working hard to make the "them" side look as bad as possible to get blind support for "us", and then going forward with whatever agenda they want once they have enough "us" on their side. In many cases, the "us" side doesn't even start with an openly stated set of objectives. Just opposition to the status quo. The first thing they do is build support. Then they generate solutions. But, of course, since they got that support by demonizing the other side, once they get around to actually doing things, most of their support is afraid to question the actions that arise for fear of being demonized themselves. It's a very dangerous political methodology, but it's one the Left engages in constantly. And heaven help anyone who's a member of certain identity groups if they happen to disagree with any thing the left is doing. Again, because they build support on agreement of opposition, not agreement of action. The methodology relies on people getting so caught up in what they oppose, that they don't stop to think about what they are supporting.

So yeah. As I said, I'll point this out when I see it.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2015 4:50pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#36 Sep 23 2015 at 5:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
What people huffing and whining?

As I said, congratulations on being a week behind on the news but somehow turning it into an ego stroke for yourself Smiley: laugh

I'll skip on reading the political commentary of a guy who was completely ignorant of what was happening in conservative spheres a week ago on the topic.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#37 Sep 23 2015 at 6:04 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
So why is he addressing congress? I get that he's technically a head of state, but isn't this skirting a little close to the promotion of a religion?
#38 Sep 23 2015 at 6:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
He addressed Congress because the Speaker of the House (Boehner) invited him to address Congress. I don't say that to be flip but that's pretty much the reason. Supposedly Boehner, a Catholic, has wanted to get a pope to address Congress for years. There's no rules against it but Pope Francis is the first religious dignitary to address a joint session of Congress.

Here's a copy of Boehner's statement on his invitiation:
Quote:
“It is with reverence and admiration that I have invited Pope Francis, as head of state of the Holy See and the first Pope to hail from the Americas, to address a joint meeting of the United States Congress.

“Pope Francis has inspired millions of Americans with his pastoral manner and servant leadership, challenging all people to lead lives of mercy, forgiveness, solidarity, and humble service.

“His tireless call for the protection of the most vulnerable among us—the ailing, the disadvantaged, the unemployed, the impoverished, the unborn—has awakened hearts on every continent.

“His social teachings, rooted in ‘the joy of the gospel,’ have prompted careful reflection and vigorous dialogue among people of all ideologies and religious views in the United States and throughout a rapidly changing world, particularly among those who champion human dignity, freedom, and social justice.

"These principles are among the fundamentals of the American Idea. And though our nation sometimes fails to live up to these principles, at our best we give them new life as we seek the common good. Many in the United States believe these principles are undermined by ‘crony capitalism’ and the ongoing centralization of political power in the institutions of our federal government, which threaten to disrupt the delicate balance between the twin virtues of subsidiarity and solidarity. They have embraced Pope Francis’ reminder that we cannot meet our responsibility to the poor with a welfare mentality based on business calculations. We can meet it only with personal charity on the one hand and sound, inclusive policies on the other.

“The Holy Father’s pastoral message challenges people of all faiths, ideologies and political parties. His address as a visiting head of state before a joint meeting of the House and Senate would honor our nation in keeping with the best traditions of our democratic institutions. It would also offer an excellent opportunity for the American people as well as the nations of the world to hear his message in full.

“It is with deep gratitude that I have asked Pope Francis to consider this open invitation on behalf of the Congress and the millions of citizens of the United States we serve.”


Edited, Sep 23rd 2015 7:23pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#39 Sep 23 2015 at 6:19 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Because the constitution is like a seat belt that gently restrains various groups from going hog wild with their various retarded ideas and agendas.

It won't stop them from trying, but will hopefully prevent resultant carnage by limited the extent that they can push it.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#40 Sep 23 2015 at 6:20 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Hold on a ******* second here! Back this the **** up.

Since when did Catholicism and tolerant work in the same sentence?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#41 Sep 23 2015 at 6:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Inviting the Pope to speak at Congress is not passing a law.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#42 Sep 23 2015 at 6:35 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
What people huffing and whining?

As I said, congratulations on being a week behind on the news but somehow turning it into an ego stroke for yourself Smiley: laugh

I'll skip on reading the political commentary of a guy who was completely ignorant of what was happening in conservative spheres a week ago on the topic.


Ah. But the liberal is completely in tune with what is happening "in conservative spheres". Got it!

You get that just because someone mentioned it on a blog, or wrote an article about it somewhere, doesn't mean that this is something that buzzing among conservatives, right? OMG! Rush Limbaugh spent 30 seconds talking about this on one show. It must be a "big thing" for conservatives. Lol!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#43 Sep 23 2015 at 6:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Ah. But the liberal is completely in tune with what is happening "in conservative spheres". Got it!

More than you? Well, I'll let the above posts speak for themselves since you seem sincerely dumbfounded at the notion that people were talking about this a week ago but you somehow only found out yesterday.
Quote:
You get that just because someone mentioned it on a blog, or wrote an article about it somewhere, doesn't mean that this is something that buzzing among conservatives, right?

Well, I found six someones with zero effort and restricting my search to only Sept 17th. But I suppose we can play No True Scotsman with your definition of "buzzing" if that's what you need to save face.
Quote:
OMG! Rush Limbaugh spent 30 seconds talking about this on one show

Be honest, now. Do you have some sort of real learning disability? You think because I linked one segment that means no other segments exist?

Edited, Sep 23rd 2015 7:44pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#44 Sep 23 2015 at 6:41 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
Support SSM because hating *** people because of your religion is wrong.
Any religion worth anything will tell you that hating people is wrong.


gbaji wrote:
Support socialized medicine/food/housing/etc because making poor people suffer because you believe in free markets is wrong.
If you value money above people, you are wrong.


What sort of evil monster are you, anyway?
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#45 Sep 23 2015 at 6:42 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Inviting the Pope to speak at Congress is not passing a law.


One could actually argue that if Congress prohibited religious leaders from addressing congress (for the sole reason that they are religious), that *would* be a violation of the 1st amendment. So yeah, they're free to invite a religious person to speak to exactly the degree that they might invite any non-religious person to speak. To make a specific restriction on the basis of religion would be "prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Lots of people get this wrong.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#46 Sep 23 2015 at 6:45 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Am I the only one that just scrolls past most Joph v. Gbaji exchanges? Reading them feels like watching endless reruns of the same tired sitcom.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#47 Sep 23 2015 at 6:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Demea wrote:
Am I the only one that just scrolls past most Joph v. Gbaji exchanges?

So you only read Lolgaxe posts?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#48 Sep 23 2015 at 6:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Hey!

Ugly's here too, you know.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#49 Sep 23 2015 at 7:00 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Something, something, chopped liver Smiley: mad
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#50 Sep 23 2015 at 7:01 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
It's good to be the king.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#51 Sep 23 2015 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Support SSM because hating *** people because of your religion is wrong.
Any religion worth anything will tell you that hating people is wrong.


Wow did you miss the point.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
Support socialized medicine/food/housing/etc because making poor people suffer because you believe in free markets is wrong.
If you value money above people, you are wrong.


And did it again.

Quote:
What sort of evil monster are you, anyway?


Liberal methodology is working as intended I see.

I seriously hope you were being sarcastic.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2015 6:04pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 428 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (428)