de officiis wrote:Another Obama appointee babbling about a coup. Fuck all.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... anti-trum/
Of course she is a female.
Probably has zero idea of what she actually advocates. It won't be her dying.
de officiis wrote:Another Obama appointee babbling about a coup. Fuck all.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... anti-trum/
That analogy falls apart. Jews didn't use planes as missiles into the towers for one example.Speaker to Animals wrote:de officiis wrote:I think it would have been better had he left out the part in § 5 about religious minorities (read: Christians) getting a break. Including this opened a due process avenue of attack under 8 U.S.C. §1152 (a) (1) (A) (“no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”). People shooting their mouths off about the XO being a veiled effort to exclude Muslims didn't help, either. It would have been better had he just made it a blanket ban as to the 7 countries for 90 days, and had people at the operational level make individual exceptions based on whatever vetting procedures they've developed. I think ultimately we'll seen the whole thing refined to avoid the objections that have been thrown up. The real challenge is, how do you not discriminate based on religion when you're fighting to keep out a radicalized religious group?
So, it should have been like America in the 1930s saying nobody from Nazi Germany should ever come here, including all the Jews the Nazis were trying to exterminate?
You still don't see how odious all this sounds to at least half of the American people do you?
In that analogy, the democrats are fighting tooth and nail to get as many Germans, including Nazis, to move to America, but they don't like the idea of bringing over any of the people the Nazis are trying to genocide.
skankhunt42 wrote:That analogy falls apart. Jews didn't use planes as missiles into the towers for one example.Speaker to Animals wrote:de officiis wrote:I think it would have been better had he left out the part in § 5 about religious minorities (read: Christians) getting a break. Including this opened a due process avenue of attack under 8 U.S.C. §1152 (a) (1) (A) (“no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”). People shooting their mouths off about the XO being a veiled effort to exclude Muslims didn't help, either. It would have been better had he just made it a blanket ban as to the 7 countries for 90 days, and had people at the operational level make individual exceptions based on whatever vetting procedures they've developed. I think ultimately we'll seen the whole thing refined to avoid the objections that have been thrown up. The real challenge is, how do you not discriminate based on religion when you're fighting to keep out a radicalized religious group?
So, it should have been like America in the 1930s saying nobody from Nazi Germany should ever come here, including all the Jews the Nazis were trying to exterminate?
You still don't see how odious all this sounds to at least half of the American people do you?
In that analogy, the democrats are fighting tooth and nail to get as many Germans, including Nazis, to move to America, but they don't like the idea of bringing over any of the people the Nazis are trying to genocide.
http://www.breitbart.com/national-secur ... hristians/In an interview with the online journal Crux, Archbishop Bashar Warda said that from his perspective in Iraq, he couldn’t help but ask “why all of these protesters were not protesting in the streets when ISIS came to kill Christians and Yazidis and other minority groups.”
Warda also criticized the policies of the Obama administration, which offered no financial assistance to displaced Christians in Islamic State territory and instead favored Syrian Muslims when it came to accepting refugees into the United States.
“They were not protesting when the tens of thousands of displaced Christians my archdiocese has cared for since 2014 received no financial assistance from the U.S. government or the U.N.,” he said. “There were no protests when Syrian Christians were only let in at a rate that was 20 times less than the percentage of their population in Syria.”
“I do not understand why some Americans are now upset that the many minority communities that faced a horrible genocide will finally get a degree of priority in some manner,” Warda added.
The archbishop also suggested that the inconvenience posed by a three-month moratorium on visas is nothing compared to the suffering of minorities in Iraq and Syria during the past several years, and yet no one seemed to think that was worthy of a protest.
“Most Americans have no concept of what it was like to live as a Yazidi or Christian or other minority as ISIS invaded,” he said. “Our people had the option to flee, to convert, or to be killed, and many were killed in the most brutal ways imaginable.”
“But there were none of these protests then of ISIS’s religious test,” he said.
In his lengthy interview, Warda underscored the hypocrisy of protesters who are willing to side with Muslims but won’t lift a finger to aid Christians facing genocide in the Middle East.
“Our people lost everything because of their faith—they were targeted for their faith, just like the Yazidis and others too,” he said. “Now these protesters are saying that religion should not matter at all, even though someone was persecuted for their faith, even though persecution based on religion is one of the grounds for refugee status in the UN treaty on refugees.”
“From here I have to say, it is really unbelievable,” he said.
As a whole, I don't think the left gives a rat's ass about Christians. IMO, they feel it is passe to be a Christian or to care about what happens to them. Ironically, it is the Judeo-Christian culture upon which the U.S. was built that gives them the freedom to think that way, but I think that particular irony is lost on them or conveniently ignored for the most part. Radical secularization is what they are mainly interested in, at least as to Christianity. I have no idea what they think of Muslims, but if they had any common sense they would realize that secular culture and Islam don't mix too good. Strange indeed to see them wrap themselves in the cloak of religious freedom when for the most part they are interested in marginalizing religious faith in the domestic sphere.Speaker to Animals wrote:THAT ^^^ is what I mean by odious, deo. Because it absolutely is. The behavior of leftists right now can only be described as thoroughly and disgustingly odious.
This is exactly like wanting to allow an unlimited number of German Nazis to immigrate to America while denying refuge to Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals.
It's EXACTLY the same thing.
Fox Super Bowl Interview wrote:"But, [Putin] is a killer," O'Reilly said.
"There are a lot of killers," Trump responded, "We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?"
de officiis wrote:As a whole, I don't think the left gives a rat's ass about Christians. IMO, they feel it is passe to be a Christian or to care about what happens to them. Ironically, it is the Judeo-Christian culture upon which the U.S. was built that gives them the freedom to think that way, but I think that particular irony is lost on them or conveniently ignored for the most part. Radical secularization is what they are mainly interested in, at least as to Christianity. I have no idea what they think of Muslims, but if they had any common sense they would realize that secular culture and Islam don't mix too good. Strange indeed to see them wrap themselves in the cloak of religious freedom when for the most part they are interested in marginalizing religious faith in the domestic sphere.Speaker to Animals wrote:THAT ^^^ is what I mean by odious, deo. Because it absolutely is. The behavior of leftists right now can only be described as thoroughly and disgustingly odious.
This is exactly like wanting to allow an unlimited number of German Nazis to immigrate to America while denying refuge to Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals.
It's EXACTLY the same thing.
TLDR version. Don't make the bad people angry.Penner wrote:de officiis wrote:As a whole, I don't think the left gives a rat's ass about Christians. IMO, they feel it is passe to be a Christian or to care about what happens to them. Ironically, it is the Judeo-Christian culture upon which the U.S. was built that gives them the freedom to think that way, but I think that particular irony is lost on them or conveniently ignored for the most part. Radical secularization is what they are mainly interested in, at least as to Christianity. I have no idea what they think of Muslims, but if they had any common sense they would realize that secular culture and Islam don't mix too good. Strange indeed to see them wrap themselves in the cloak of religious freedom when for the most part they are interested in marginalizing religious faith in the domestic sphere.Speaker to Animals wrote:THAT ^^^ is what I mean by odious, deo. Because it absolutely is. The behavior of leftists right now can only be described as thoroughly and disgustingly odious.
This is exactly like wanting to allow an unlimited number of German Nazis to immigrate to America while denying refuge to Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals.
It's EXACTLY the same thing.
I feel of those Christians who were miss treated/prosecuted (and yeah, I have been watching the news for awhile and I know people who are Maronite Christians, whose families are from Lebanon- so I am a bit aware of what it might feel to be a Christian in the Middle East but this ban is probably going to fuck them over as well since a lot of Muslims do see Christianity as a religion of the West. So, when they are mad at the West, it sometimes gets backlashes to them as well... Unless Trump allows the Christians in and bans Muslims, but then again....?
Again, though, I do believe that the major legal leg word is the green cards/visas and the fact that these are legal residents, who were granted legal permission by our own State Department, being denied entry/reentry. Plus, the groups of people (like what jbird said above- children, old men and woman, woman, some men, etc...)
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
viewtopic.php?p=60751#p60751
Sorry to say this but that was how Christians survived under Islam for hundreds of years.Okeefenokee wrote:TLDR version. Don't make the bad people angry.Penner wrote:de officiis wrote:
As a whole, I don't think the left gives a rat's ass about Christians. IMO, they feel it is passe to be a Christian or to care about what happens to them. Ironically, it is the Judeo-Christian culture upon which the U.S. was built that gives them the freedom to think that way, but I think that particular irony is lost on them or conveniently ignored for the most part. Radical secularization is what they are mainly interested in, at least as to Christianity. I have no idea what they think of Muslims, but if they had any common sense they would realize that secular culture and Islam don't mix too good. Strange indeed to see them wrap themselves in the cloak of religious freedom when for the most part they are interested in marginalizing religious faith in the domestic sphere.
I feel of those Christians who were miss treated/prosecuted (and yeah, I have been watching the news for awhile and I know people who are Maronite Christians, whose families are from Lebanon- so I am a bit aware of what it might feel to be a Christian in the Middle East but this ban is probably going to fuck them over as well since a lot of Muslims do see Christianity as a religion of the West. So, when they are mad at the West, it sometimes gets backlashes to them as well... Unless Trump allows the Christians in and bans Muslims, but then again....?
Again, though, I do believe that the major legal leg word is the green cards/visas and the fact that these are legal residents, who were granted legal permission by our own State Department, being denied entry/reentry. Plus, the groups of people (like what jbird said above- children, old men and woman, woman, some men, etc...)