Rocag said:

---

My first instinct is to sympathize with the 14 year old Jewish kid trying to survive Nazi occupation rather than criticize him for not exposing himself as a Jew to the authorities, but I guess that's just me.

Criticize his later life all you want, but I'd leave that part alone.

---

Spare us the misplaced sympathy for a strawman. It was clearly so formative that he's financing campaigns for judges and AGs that operate the same way.

I already acknowledged Elon has used his influence over X to censor people who attack him personally, that does absolutely nothing to support your narrative the left wing voices are being explicitly targeted for their political views.

The Murdoch children, by all accounts, are leftwing, and, to their credit, have not forced Fox to promote their worldview. The entire premise of your argument is deeply flawed.

As of yet, you have provided insufficient evidence that my assertion that the left has plenty of ways of propagating their narrative is a flawed one.

One of the things that you guys need to prepare yourself is when we hit the friend/enemy paradigm singularity.

That's when it gets really ugly.

It's heading that way quickly

I know I haven't been back here and I certainly didn't mean to light a match and run away, but the weather has kept me....busy.

The latest part of this thread has a lot to do with what I was thinking when I wrote this. The problem we have is not a perspective problem, its a problem of Truth. The way we are presented information is no longer in pursuit of the Truth. It is meant to confuse and divide, which seems like something the devil, or whatever you personify evil as, would do. And yes, I'm saying it's highly tilted to one side. There is no way to get around that.

Lately in my prayers I have been praying for Truth. That we uncover our eyes and are able to see what is really happening. Without agenda, or politics, just what the actual real deal Truth is. Without Truthg you don't have justice.

I hope some of you will join me.

I assume everyone here has seen the video of Pretti spitting on the ICE SUV and kicking out its rear light before getting into a scuffle with border patrol 11 days before his death?

Quote:

---

Lately in my prayers I have been praying for Truth. That we uncover our eyes and are able to see what is really happening. Without agenda, or politics, just what the actual real deal Truth is. Without Truthg you don't have justice.

---

Truth and Justice are tricky. Both are trascendent qualities belonging only to God Himself. Humans are unable to fully comprehend Truth and fully enact Justice. We can only do our best when it comes to both. So while I certainly pray for Truth and Justice, those come only from God. For myself and others, I pray for compassion, mercy, and grace. Those are things in our power to give ourselves and each other.

Rocag said:

---

I'd say the wealthiest man in the world and future member of the Trump administration purchasing the world's largest social media network was a pretty significant event worth mentioning when talking about partisan ownership of the media. Crazy, huh?

Even going back to pre-Musk Twitter, the censorship was not as one-sided as you suggest. The first Trump administration and Republicans were making the same kind of requests for posts to be pulled or bans lifted that Republicans criticize the Biden administration for making. It's just hypocrisy. I disagree on the issue of the partisan nature of Twitter bans in this era and can point to studies which back my point of view up, but I doubt either of us will be swayed on that.

Musk has been shown to be perfectly willing to use his control over X against his perceived enemies including former ally Matt Taibbi and journalists who merely reported on his jet tracker bans and restrictions on accounts who use terms "cis" or "cisgender" as examples. His censorship at the request of foreign governments like India, Turkey, and China are pretty well known, too.

---

Still trying to figure out what I'm upset about. It's clearly not shadow banning, because that was rampant under Jack Dorsey (who's warranted zero mention) while owning Twitter and attempting to start blue sky.

So I think it's just down to the fact that a liberal no longer controls the dialogue. Is that the thing I need to be bothered by?

Rocag said:

---

I'd say the wealthiest man in the world and future member of the Trump administration purchasing the world's largest social media network was a pretty significant event worth mentioning when talking about partisan ownership of the media. Crazy, huh?

Even going back to pre-Musk Twitter, the censorship was not as one-sided as you suggest. The first Trump administration and Republicans were making the same kind of requests for posts to be pulled or bans lifted that Republicans criticize the Biden administration for making. It's just hypocrisy. I disagree on the issue of the partisan nature of Twitter bans in this era and can point to studies which back my point of view up, but I doubt either of us will be swayed on that.

Musk has been shown to be perfectly willing to use his control over X against his perceived enemies including former ally Matt Taibbi and journalists who merely reported on his jet tracker bans and restrictions on accounts who use terms "cis" or "cisgender" as examples. His censorship at the request of foreign governments like India, Turkey, and China are pretty well known, too.

---

The same man who admitted he was considered a die hard lib 15 years ago, hasn't materially changed his positions on any issue, and is now consider some bastion of conservatism by those on the left that have moved so far left that they don't realize Musk hasn't changed much at all? Musk and Trump are both left of Clinton and Obama (during their adminstrations) on a number of issues. If that doesn't wake you up, I don't know what will.

Severian the Torturer said:

---

Aggrad08 said:

---

Pretty much the rest of the first world, the Middle East, affluent Asia. We are a pretty big outlier here.

---

I would bet if you remove the number of a very small minority that aren't prevalent in those societies the crime level is nearly the same.

---

And yet the policing is nowhere close. In face we've had those same minorities a very long time committing even more crime than today without militarized police.

The Banned said:

---

Rocag said:

---

I'd say the wealthiest man in the world and future member of the Trump administration purchasing the world's largest social media network was a pretty significant event worth mentioning when talking about partisan ownership of the media. Crazy, huh?

Even going back to pre-Musk Twitter, the censorship was not as one-sided as you suggest. The first Trump administration and Republicans were making the same kind of requests for posts to be pulled or bans lifted that Republicans criticize the Biden administration for making. It's just hypocrisy. I disagree on the issue of the partisan nature of Twitter bans in this era and can point to studies which back my point of view up, but I doubt either of us will be swayed on that.

Musk has been shown to be perfectly willing to use his control over X against his perceived enemies including former ally Matt Taibbi and journalists who merely reported on his jet tracker bans and restrictions on accounts who use terms "cis" or "cisgender" as examples. His censorship at the request of foreign governments like India, Turkey, and China are pretty well known, too.

---

The same man who admitted he was considered a die hard lib 15 years ago, hasn't materially changed his positions on any issue, and is now consider some bastion of conservatism by those on the left that have moved so far left that they don't realize Musk hasn't changed much at all? Musk and Trump are both left of Clinton and Obama (during their adminstrations) on a number of issues. If that doesn't wake you up, I don't know what will.

---

That's a good point and I was pondering posting something quite similar. Many of the "conservatives owning things" Rocag is freaking out about were Democrats five minutes ago.

TresPuertas said:

---

I wish it wasn't the case but every time i turn on the TV or open my phone I see instance after instance of the good people of this country being mocked and taken advantage of by fraudsters, politicians, and soulless demons. Our God and his followers are continually being mocked and assaulted and the situation in Minnesota with that streamer berating and threatening those who were in the house of the Lord who were there to praise Him sent me over the edge.

When is enough enough? I know Jesus told us to love our enemies but something has to be done. This can't continue. We are in a spiritual war with literal, and yes I mean literally, and nobody is defending us.

I keep going back to Roman's 13:1-7 but I'd like to ask you guys what else I should turn to to help me. I want bad things to happen to these people, and i know that's not very Christlike.

---

Who do you consider "the good people of this country"?

A "spiritual war with literal,"... literal what? Something important seems to be missing here.

Whenever you follow up a teaching of Jesus with "but", you've gone astray. All you're really saying is "I don't want to do what Jesus tells me I should do."

Here's a possibility to consider... perhaps the protestors are cleansing the temple of the wicked as Jesus did in Matthew 21:1213. Maybe a pastor working for ICE is tantamount to money-changers in the Temple. Perhaps if Jesus were alive today he'd be leading the protestors into the church. How quickly did you dismiss this idea out-of-hand? Did you even consider it at all?

It seems to me, most of Jesus' teachings implore us to act in the opposite of human nature...

• Do not strike back when struck.
• Care for the poor and persecuted.
• Pay your taxes.
• Love your enemy.

These are also ideas most people dismiss out-of-hand.

You're acting like Twitter/X is a politically neutral platform, but that's demonstrably not the case. Twitter has previously admitted that their algorithm favors right wing content and several studies have shown that it actively directs people towards right wing political content (HERE and HERE for example). It's a private platform and they're free to do that, but let's not pretend they're neutral.

I can't say whether Musk's actual beliefs have changed over the years, but he has in the last several openly embraced just about every core Republican political belief there is. Having a trans child that wants nothing to do with him seems to have broken his brain on anything LGBT related. He parrots whatever Trump's line on immigration is for the most part (with a small cut out for anything that might directly affect his wealth). Unsurprisingly he's always been anti-labor rights. He pretty famously supported the idea that Jews were promoting hatred against whites. At this point the better question is what liberal beliefs does he still espouse?

Who do you consider "the good people of this country"? - Those who do the right thing. Work hard, don't take advantage of people or the system. Get married, go to Church,are honest in their affairs, take care of their neighbors, etc.

A "spiritual war with literal,"... literal what? Something important seems to be missing here. - Demons or demon possessed people. Those who kill their offspring, those who kill offspring. Evil doers, grifters, anyone who misrepresents the Gospels and God's word, anyone who confuses and separates Christians from God (I'm looking at you LGBTQ affirming 'pastors) I didn't really believe in demonic possession until I saw that video of the abortion doctor outside the hospital conversing with the pro-life activist and I realized something very evil and not human was controlling that Dr.

Whenever you follow up a teaching of Jesus with "but", you've gone astray. All you're really saying is "I don't want to do what Jesus tells me I should do." - I understand this, which is why I'm struggling. I'm not perfect. As I said, I'm angry and I'm having trouble finding sympathy for any of these people. I've gone to God about it, asked for his forgiveness and strength.

Here's a possibility to consider... perhaps the protestors are cleansing the temple of the wicked as Jesus did in Matthew 21:1213. Maybe a pastor working for ICE is tantamount to money-changers in the Temple. Perhaps if Jesus were alive today he'd be leading the protestors into the church. How quickly did you dismiss this idea out-of-hand? Did you even consider it at all? - ICE is not evil. People who work for ICE are not evil. Jesus didn't hate the Roman soldier. I sincerely believe that if Jesus were alive today, he would remind us to care for these people who have come here illegally and treat them like they are family, but he would also say that we need to send them back. The Bible has this thing for laws and following them. Its kind of the whole thing. And loving our fellow brothers and sisters doesn't mean we need to allow them to break laws at their discretion (See aforementioned Romans 13: 1-7)

It seems to me, most of Jesus' teachings implore us to act in the opposite of human nature...

• Do not strike back when struck.
• Care for the poor and persecuted.
• Pay your taxes.
• Love your enemy.

These are also ideas most people dismiss out-of-hand. - all of these are kind of the basis of my original post.

TresPuertas said:

---

Who do you consider "the good people of this country"? - Those who do the right thing. Work hard, don't take advantage of people or the system. Get married, go to Church,are honest in their affairs, take care of their neighbors, etc.

A "spiritual war with literal,"... literal what? Something important seems to be missing here. - Demons or demon possessed people. Those who kill their offspring, those who kill offspring. Evil doers, grifters, anyone who misrepresents the Gospels and God's word, anyone who confuses and separates Christians from God (I'm looking at you LGBTQ affirming 'pastors) I didn't really believe in demonic possession until I saw that video of the abortion doctor outside the hospital conversing with the pro-life activist and I realized something very evil and not human was controlling that Dr.

Whenever you follow up a teaching of Jesus with "but", you've gone astray. All you're really saying is "I don't want to do what Jesus tells me I should do." - I understand this, which is why I'm struggling. I'm not perfect. As I said, I'm angry and I'm having trouble finding sympathy for any of these people. I've gone to God about it, asked for his forgiveness and strength.

Here's a possibility to consider... perhaps the protestors are cleansing the temple of the wicked as Jesus did in Matthew 21:1213. Maybe a pastor working for ICE is tantamount to money-changers in the Temple. Perhaps if Jesus were alive today he'd be leading the protestors into the church. How quickly did you dismiss this idea out-of-hand? Did you even consider it at all? - ICE is not evil. People who work for ICE are not evil. Jesus didn't hate the Roman soldier. I sincerely believe that if Jesus were alive today, he would remind us to care for these people who have come here illegally and treat them like they are family, but he would also say that we need to send them back. The Bible has this thing for laws and following them. Its kind of the whole thing. And loving our fellow brothers and sisters doesn't mean we need to allow them to break laws at their discretion (See aforementioned Romans 13: 1-7)

It seems to me, most of Jesus' teachings implore us to act in the opposite of human nature...

• Do not strike back when struck.
• Care for the poor and persecuted.
• Pay your taxes.
• Love your enemy.

These are also ideas most people dismiss out-of-hand. - all of these are kind of the basis of my original post.

---

Thank you for replying.

Regarding good people: Is it possible to be a good person but not be a Christian?

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: Are all governments established by God?

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings?

"make your own platform"

am I doing this right?

I'm honestly not sure what you think you're doing.

I think there's a good argument to be made that the government should step in to stop everything being owned by an increasingly small number of companies, but it's not illegal for Musk to turn X into an explicitly right wing platform and I'm not suggesting it should be.

Thank you for replying.

Regarding good people: Is it possible to be a good person but not be a Christian? - ABSOLUTELY...can they get into heaven without accepting Jesus? Sadly, no (John 14:6)

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: Are all governments established by God? - I'm working to sort this out. Like all scripture it isn't as simple as it seems on the surface. At the moment, I'd say goverments that are inspired by God, like ours, are likely blessed by God. Those that aren't are not.

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings?- My belief on what Jesus would "side" with here are based on my personal convictions which are supported by my understanding of scripture. So, as someone who models my thoughts and actions off of my understanding of Christ, I pray for these folks who come here for a better life, but also understand you can't break the law to do so. I know one day I'll meet my maker, and I'm sure that even if I'm wrong on this, I will be forgiven.

Also, I refuse to call what a lot of what is happening as 'protests" Thats a dirty little trick that is being used to confuse the issue. A lot of these things aren't protests, so much as vandalism and assault. This is why Truth is so important. Protesting is fine. Jesus would have absolutely no problem with legitimate protest. Would he be ok with people assaulting ICE officers? Spitting at vehicles and kicking out tail lights? If you answer yes to any of that, I can't help you.

TresPuertas said:

---

Thank you for replying.

Regarding good people: Is it possible to be a good person but not be a Christian? - ABSOLUTELY...can they get into heaven without accepting Jesus? Sadly, no (John 14:6)

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: Are all governments established by God? - I'm working to sort this out. Like all scripture it isn't as simple as it seems on the surface. At the moment, I'd say goverments that are inspired by God, like ours, are likely blessed by God. Those that aren't are not.

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings?- My belief on what Jesus would "side" with here are based on my personal convictions which are supported by my understanding of scripture. So, as someone who models my thoughts and actions off of my understanding of Christ, I pray for these folks who come here for a better life, but also understand you can't break the law to do so. I know one day I'll meet my maker, and I'm sure that even if I'm wrong on this, I will be forgiven.

Also, I refuse to call what a lot of what is happening as 'protests" Thats a dirty little trick that is being used to confuse the issue. A lot of these things aren't protests, so much as vandalism and assault. This is why Truth is so important. Protesting is fine. Jesus would have absolutely no problem with legitimate protest. Would he be ok with people assaulting ICE officers? Spitting at vehicles and kicking out tail lights? If you answer yes to any of that, I can't help you.

---

Thank you for your reply.

Regarding good people: You listed going to church as a sign of a good person. Were you referring only to Christian church?

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: England in the 18th Century was unequivocally a Christian nation. Was the American Revolution a sinful act as it is directly contradictory to scripture (Romans 13:1-7)?

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings? I'm not asking if you believe Jesus would side with the protestors. I'm asking you if you think it's even possible that he would.

Regarding good people: You listed going to church as a sign of a good person. Were you referring only to Christian church? I listed it as one of the things. not the only thing. I ve been about as clear about this as i can

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: England in the 18th Century was unequivocally a Christian nation. Was the American Revolution a sinful act as it is directly contradictory to scripture (Romans 13:1-7)? God establishes nations and blesses them as he sees fit. is everything done to his liking? of course not. I already said I didn't have all the answers on this one. why do you keep asking?

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings? I'm not asking if you believe Jesus would side with the protestors. I'm asking you if you think it's even possible that he would. Possible? Sure. Would he side with Alex Pretti when he was spitting and destroying the ICE car? I'm pretty confident when i say no, that's not possible

TresPuertas said:

---

Regarding good people: You listed going to church as a sign of a good person. Were you referring only to Christian church? I listed it as one of the things. not the only thing. I ve been about as clear about this as i can

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: England in the 18th Century was unequivocally a Christian nation. Was the American Revolution a sinful act as it is directly contradictory to scripture (Romans 13:1-7)? God establishes nations and blesses them as he sees fit. is everything done to his liking? of course not. I already said I didn't have all the answers on this one. why do you keep asking?

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: Is it possible that Jesus would side with the protestors and view the Pastor's actions as being in defiance of his teachings? I'm not asking if you believe Jesus would side with the protestors. I'm asking you if you think it's even possible that he would. Possible? Sure. Would he side with Alex Pretti when he was spitting and destroying the ICE car? I'm pretty confident when i say no, that's not possible

---

Thank you for responding.

Regarding good people: I'm trying to understand why you listed going to church and being married as indicators of being a good person. These two seem to be unreliable indicators whereas taking care of a neighbor and not taking advantage of others are much better signposts of good personage. I take note of this because by saying good people go to church, it invites the belief that people who don't go to church are bad (or at least more likely to be bad). I'm trying to figure out why you listed those as things good people do when there are plenty of married bad people who go to church regularly. So I'll ask it as straightforward as I can... Why do you believe being married and going to church are signs of being a good person?

Regarding Romans 13:1-7: I keep asking because I've long been curious about the intersection of religion and politics. This particular Bible passage is very clear. It says to submit to governing authority. It says "The authorities that exist have been established by God." Nowhere does it say some authorities were not established by God. Claiming a distinction that does not exist in the text is a misrepresentation of the gospels. To some, misrepresentation of the Gospels is an indicator of Demonic activity ;-) .

Quote:

---

Demons or demon possessed people. Those who kill their offspring, those who kill offspring. Evil doers, grifters, anyone who misrepresents the Gospels and God's word, anyone who confuses and separates Christians from God (I'm looking at you LGBTQ affirming 'pastors)

---

Something to keep in mind, Paul wrote the letters to the church leaders in Rome. The government at the time was the Roman Empire... which was in the process of using Christians as fodder in the gladiator pits. So Paul was urging the Christians to obey a government intent on killing them. Hard for me to see how a revolution over taxes would be OK when Paul says a government actively pursuing the torture and death of Christians should be obeyed. Based on Romans 13:1-7, the American Revolution was a sinful act.

Regarding your sincere belief on how Jesus would respond to the protest at church: I asked this question again because it went unanswered the first two times. I'm encouraged by your agreement that it was possible Jesus would agree with the protestors. It shows a willingness to see from another perspective. I believe it's possible Jesus would disagree with the protestors. However, based on my understanding of Jesus, he was far more interested in the people than he was in the government. Additionally, as he was willing to interrupt worship to drive money changers from the Temple, I find it hard to reconcile him being against such an activity today... but again, I recognize it's possible (though I will likely never know).

Again, thank you for engaging in this discussion with me. Though it will not change either your stance or mine, I'm encouraged by the civility of the exchange.

Quote:

---

Regarding good people: I'm trying to understand why you listed going to church and being married as indicators of being a good person.

---

People who attend church regularly are less likely to develope severe mental illness.

People who stay married tend be much happier.

Most importantly with marriage, children who grow up with both parents are much, MUCH more likely to have success in life.

Sure, its not a silver bullet. But it makes a massive, empirically significant, difference.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Quote:

---

Regarding good people: I'm trying to understand why you listed going to church and being married as indicators of being a good person.

---

People who attend church regularly are less likely to develope severe mental illness.

People who stay married tend be much happier.

Most importantly with marriage, children who grow up with both parents are much, MUCH more likely to have success in life.

Sure, its not a silver bullet. But it makes a massive, empirically significant, difference.

---

Why does regular church attendance help prevent mental illness?

If marriage is linked to increased happiness, why is divorce so prevalent?

Are the benefits of being raised by both parents contingent on the parents being married?

Quote:

---

Why does regular church attendance help prevent mental illness?

---

Purpose? Community? Fellowship? Accountability? Maybe God actually exists?

Quote:

---

If marriage is linked to increased happiness, why is divorce so prevalent?

---

I mean, um...People are short sited, selfish, and dumb?

Quote:

---

Are the benefits of being raised by both parents contingent on the parents being married?

---

Its the ideal that yields the best results, yes.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Quote:

---

Why does regular church attendance help prevent mental illness?

---

Purpose? Community? Fellowship? Accountability? Maybe God actually exists?

Quote:

---

If marriage is linked to increased happiness, why is divorce so prevalent?

---

I mean, um...People are short sited, selfish, and dumb?

Quote:

---

Are the benefits of being raised by both parents contingent on the parents being married?

---

Its the ideal that yields the best results, yes.

---

So any religion that offers purpose, fellowship, accountability, and a deity will help prevent mental illness. Or does it only work if it's the deity you worship?

Are you saying the vast majority of divorcees are short-sighted, selfish, and unintelligent?

Let's say a man and woman are in a committed relationship but aren't married. They have children and together they raise them to be well-adjusted adults who contribute to the betterment of society. How does a marriage license improve this scenario?

Most religions are probably better then no religion at all.

Yes (mostly the selfish part)

Sure. Sounds realistic. I'm sure that happens all the time.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Most religions are probably better then no religion at all.

Yes (mostly the selfish part)

Sure. Sounds realistic. I'm sure that happens all the time.

---

What evs.

Translation: I know I'm wrong, but I'm going to stubbornly respond with indifference instead of humble acceptance.

Silent For Too Long said:

---

Translation: I know I'm wrong, but I'm going to stubbornly respond with indifference instead of humble acceptance.

---

Your translation skills are weaker than Joseph Smith's.

The actual translation: I find it pointless to engage with you because you wouldn't even answer the last question.

Sigh. I've answered every question you have asked. Even the ridiculous ones.