lol, the same thing cannot by any stretch be said of westboro people. Try again. Also link me if any westboros have martyred themselves recently, interested to knowSame thing can be said of people from the westboro baptist church, are you anti christianity as well?
This is an issue the left lost handily. Clearly he didn’t do enough to address most voters concerns. So I’d rather double down. Not only did he do next to nothing, with passive enforcement, he undid almost all of the Trump administrations border policy as well as some of Obama’s. Maybe I’d buy an argument that his attempt was to handle the border in a more humane way, but you can’t defend the fact that his actions directly caused the immigration crisis and the debate surrounding it to take the stage during the election. The rest of his policy was a last ditch effort to reverse course when he could no longer ignore the overwhelming public sentiment.
cant judge a religion by crazy individuals, just like people who accept lgbt into church when it goes against its teachingslol, the same thing cannot by any stretch be said of westboro people. Try again. Also link me if any westboros have martyred themselves recently, interested to know
What’s race got to do with anything? I am firmly anti Islamist, which is a values system incompatible with modern civil life.
You're defining "next to nothing" to mean "didn't do enough to persuade voters". Again, changing the terms and declaring victory.
Maybe he could have done more to persuade voters, and again if you want to walk it back down to an easier claim go ahead. No hard feelings.
Things didn’t turn out too good for Hitler, Goebbels, Goring and Himmler in the end. I suspect they won’t turn out that well for Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich too.“
SAFETY/SECURITY
While the aid distribution was conducted safely and without incident, we understand that a number of civilians were injured after moving beyond the designated safe corridor and into a closed military zone. This was an area well beyond our secure distribution site. We recognize the tragic nature of the situation and remain committed to ensuring the safety of all civilians during humanitarian operations at all of our sites.”
-GHF
I believe the numbers, I don’t believe the implication that these are simply innocent bystanders just wandering around looking for the food sites which are well publicized.
Closed military zones are generally not great places for “civilians”.
“Civilians” take part in every part of Hamas operations as well. They harbor hostages, Hamas members, and participated in October 7.
Well now I’m saying he did worse than next to nothing, by reversing two administrations immigration polices, leading to a border crisis, which ended up being a major contributing factor in losing the election. Doing nothing might have been better.
I’m not judging a religion by crazy individuals. I’m judging the sect of the religion, which is substantial enough that it runs several countries with 10s of millions of people in them, that beheads people or blows themselves up with vehicles or planes or bombs.cant judge a religion by crazy individuals, just like people who accept lgbt into church when it goes against its teachings
Just yikes.Things didn’t turn out too good for Hitler, Goebbels, Goring and Himmler in the end. I suspect they won’t turn out that well for Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich too.
Wrong. Bin Laden was a terrorist. I was horrified by 9/11 and spoke out strongly about it at that time.Just yikes.
Let me guess, Bin Laden was just a freedom fighter and you were exhilarated by 9/11?
Comparing Netanyahu to Hitler… At so many levels, WOW.Things didn’t turn out too good for Hitler, Goebbels, Goring and Himmler in the end. I suspect they won’t turn out that well for Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich too.
Similar fundamentally psychopathic thinking.Comparing Netanyahu to Hitler… At so many levels, WOW.
🤦♂️Similar fundamental psychopathic thinking.
watch more tucker carlson, less fox news🤦♂️
I’m not judging a religion by crazy individuals. I’m judging the sect of the religion, which is substantial enough that it runs several countries with 10s of millions of people in them, that beheads people or blows themselves up with vehicles or planes or bombs.
To compare Islamists in the modern age with any other major sect of any other religion is completely insane. These people are the reason the Middle East is such a dump for the most part. They institute gender apartheid for a hundred million women.
Moral confusion in the left abounds to this day. Pathetic.
I'm an atheist without any interest in defending any religion over others. Sure, you can find some examples in many of them where members perpetrate violence, but none are anywhere close to the scale of that of Islam. Even in some more developed countries, the proportion who support things like death for homosexuals and apostates is staggering. Whereas in other religions, the atrocities may be carried out for reasons of religious nationalism or racism, Islam seems to provide more source material for its followers to point to to justify the atrocities. Mohammed was a warlike conqueror without the "turn the other cheek" type of Jesus teachings to cherry pick out.![]()
Rohingya genocide - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Buddhist nationalists committing genocide.
Using religion as a tool/excuse for committing crimes and oppression is not unique to Islam. Christianity/Catholicism has done its share over the centuries. They have just graduated to using politics and the legal system to do their dirty work
A significant portion of people who post in this thread are Republicans first and physicians second. When the Republican party mandates that a narrative be true and accepted they will warp or forget their training in order to fall in line with the uneducated members who don't know better. We have seen this ad nauseum since C19 broke people's minds.I would hope a physician trained to evaluate studies critically would be able to consider some other explanations for that data than "liberal women are more mentally diseased and unfit to make sound decisions." If you expect other physicians to jump to that conclusion based on a graph on a Twitter post, then yikes.
I'm an atheist without any interest in defending any religion over others. Sure, you can find some examples in many of them where members perpetrate violence, but none are anywhere close to the scale of that of Islam. Even in some more developed countries, the proportion who support things like death for homosexuals and apostates is staggering. Whereas in other religions, the atrocities may be carried out for reasons of religious nationalism or racism, Islam seems to provide more source material for its followers to point to to justify the atrocities. Mohammed was a warlike conqueror without the "turn the other cheek" type of Jesus teachings to cherry pick out.
I'm going to pause here and note that, fortunately, many Muslims worldwide are indeed able to interpret the religion in a way that inspires them to do good unto others, and I've met many Muslims who are as genuinely nice of people as you could ever meet. You can almost never make sweeping judgements about an individual based on their religious beliefs or lack of. That said, it's not wrong to realize that Islam has a violence problem in large proportion beyond the scale of other modern-day religions. If rational people like us don't discuss it and look for solutions, then racists and bigots will... kind of similar to how an imbecile like Donald Trump got elected because Democrats were too late addressing many important issues seriously and competently.
He was, but the atrocities he committed weren't motivated by Christian ideology but by racial and nationalist ideology. Contrast that with fundamentalist Islamists, who are motivated by a reading based on Muhammad's own teachings and actions (which are much more violent than say, Jesus's) to a degree other modern religions are not.AFAIK Adolf Hitler was a Christian, not a Muslim. To this day Nazis claim a Christian identity.
He was, but the atrocities he committed weren't motivated by Christian ideology but by racial and nationalist ideology. Contrast that with fundamentalist Islamists, who are motivated by a reading based on Muhammad's own teachings and actions (which are much more violent than say, Jesus's) to a degree other modern religions are not.
The Bible certainly contains its share of atrocities such as stoning people, sacrificing people for military victory, dashing the heads of conquered peoples' babies on rocks, drowning everybody on Earth except one family, etc, but most are Old Testament and most modern Christians tend to point to Jesus's teachings of love and peace instead. Regardless of whether it makes sense theologically, that's what people do, and radical Christians trying to kill infidels in large numbers isn't a problem today as it is with Islam.
There could be all kinds of explanations. Regardless, you don’t find it “interesting” that young “liberal” women report having mental illness at TWO AND A HALF TIMES (50% vs. 20%) the rate of “conservative” women?? Is that “statistically significant”?? That doesn’t peak your curiosity, at all?? You’re just going to try and explain it away? Mmmmkay….I would hope a physician trained to evaluate studies critically would be able to consider some other explanations for that data than "liberal women are more mentally diseased and unfit to make sound decisions." If you expect other physicians to jump to that conclusion based on a graph on a Twitter post, then yikes.
Christian doctrine wasn't the motivating factor as was competition with other religions to reclaim territories via military conquest, a practice of the medieval times. Religion was more of a motivating factor than for Hitler's holocaust, but it still wasn't really based on the doctrine itself in the way that Muhammad's teachings are construed by a large number of modern Islamists.
The more important difference is simply that Christianity seems to have widely evolved past that. Spreading the religion by violence on any wide scale in modern times is a problem more unique to Islam, perhaps in part due to the fundamental differences in the teachings of Jesus, the peaceful martyr, and Mohammad, the military leader.
It’s not that docs believe the trump administration on Harvard. It’s that Harvard believes DEI and affirmative action help. It doesn’t help. I certainly don’t believe trump on this national security issue but he’s saying it’s as an excuse. It’s blatantly obvious. He’s trolling Harvard. Just like Harvard trolls everyone they will do what they want to do. Bullies don’t like to get bullied and Harvard is a bully.What a crock of ****. lol can’t believe some doctors on this forum actually support this administration.
Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University
There could be all kinds of explanations. Regardless, you don’t find it “interesting” that young “liberal” women report having mental illness at TWO AND A HALF TIMES (50% vs. 20%) the rate of “conservative” women?? Is that “statistically significant”?? That doesn’t peak your curiosity, at all?? You’re just going to try and explain it away? Mmmmkay….
They just don’t get it.
View attachment 404532
![]()
Vast majority of Americans don’t see Dems as a party with strong leaders that get stuff done: CNN poll
Fewer than a fifth of Americans view Democrats as a party with strong leadership that is able to get things done, with Republicans scoring roughly double on both of those metrics, a new poll has fo…nypost.com
Christians were also responsible for the Crusades which lasted 3-4 centuries. They had a religiously motivated violence problem. Like you I’m an atheist. I’d be happy to throw out the babies with the bath water. But people love religion 🤷🏻♂️
Not particularly, no. Liberal women predominantly live in cities. They predominantly have more money. They’re predominantly more educated, and perhaps all those things make them more introspective into their internal state, and more likely seek out and are able to afford therapy and healthcare. Whether this is more more likely than your apparent interpretation that liberal women are messed up in the head is impossible to know. You have your interpretation, and I have mine, and neither one is more likely to be correct based on the evidence you presented. You know this already, though. Because you understand science and math, right?There could be all kinds of explanations. Regardless, you don’t find it “interesting” that young “liberal” women report having mental illness at TWO AND A HALF TIMES (50% vs. 20%) the rate of “conservative” women?? Is that “statistically significant”?? That doesn’t peak your curiosity, at all?? You’re just going to try and explain it away? Mmmmkay….
Many Americans want to see the people they disagree with suffer, even if that makes them materially worse off.
Trump and Republicans "get stuff done". That translates to gulags in El Salvador, gutting international aid (death toll projected to be millions), deep medicaid cuts and work requirements, etc...
No doubt Dems have a messaging problem as well. They absolutely need to be more aggressive. Watching the latest judiciary hearings has been depressing, they're bringing decorum to what should be a gun fight.
Christians enacted the Crusades. Islam was responsible for their occurrence in the first place. To disregard such a commonly misunderstood topic in history shows a blatant atheistic tone towards this topic which is inherently anti-Western.
Well I agree with the last part, but I don’t understand the “wanting to see people suffer”. I don’t understand the “owning the libs” rhetoric honestly.
It feels more like so many people where so incredibly unhappy with the trajectory of the country that they are willing to accept Trumps bulldozer and haphazard way of addressing the issues. Because at least it’s moving the needle somewhere (as long as he doesn’t torch the economy) even if its like watching a cluster fk itself in slow motion. Especially when that “get stuff done” translates to record polling numbers for Trump.
From the outside looking in, it’s like the left wants to alienate anybody that isn’t in lockstep with their platform, but they don’t even know what their platform is!
I think they are losing the moderates and the time to right the ship gets shorter and shorter by the day.
‘Cause them dirt poor conservative “rural” women don’t get no doctorin’ or “edumucation”….Not particularly, no. Liberal women predominantly live in cities. They predominantly have more money. They’re predominantly more educated, and perhaps all those things make them more introspective into their internal state, and more likely seek out and are able to afford therapy and healthcare. Whether this is more more likely than your apparent interpretation that liberal women are messed up in the head is impossible to know. You have your interpretation, and I have mine, and neither one is more likely to be correct based on the evidence you presented. You know this already, though. Because you understand science and math, right?
If that’s what you want to believe, sure, but I said predominantly. Again, you already know this. Because you understand science and math. You’re just being deliberately obstinate.‘Cause them dirt poor conservative “rural” women don’t get no doctorin’ or “edumucation”….
Got it….
That's... Republican rhetoric. That's often their stated and explicit goal.
You're saying people want spectacle? Sure. That translates to a lot of violence being done in practice. How many people will end up dying just because of PEPFAR cuts? How many Republican (or Democratic) voters even know what PEPFAR is?
IMO, this is more a problem of left leaning media personalities than Democratic politicians. To be sure, there are some Dems who alienate voters (Menendez). But if you look at the actions of even the people in the party who ARE on the far left (AOC and Bernie) they're actively campaigning in red states to persuade voters.
Republicans purity test on voting at this point. If you aren't in line with Trump, you're out of the party apparatus.
Democrats (or Democratic influencers generally) purity test on things that are unrelated to actual voting. Examples: Are you supporting Palestine enough? Are you for a specific wealth tax? Are you supportive enough of LGBTQ issues?
Which I believe is a mistake politically, but not necessarily wrong morally.
Historically, the national Dems made an awful lot of compromises for political power by making common cause with the southern state Dems in the FDR era. They pushed through some pretty odious **** to keep them in the tent.
I don't think Dems need to dump trans people or immigrant rights en mass to win votes now or not, but if they do need to it's a bad sign for the country
"Righting the ship" can mean a lot of things.
Aggressive rhetoric and political messaging is one thing. Abandoning principles is another.
There was polling that suggested Trump was underwater on immigration RECENTLY. Those polls have since showed him improving on that metric IMO because Abrego Garcia and the El Salvadorian gulag is out of the news cycle now. If people aren't hearing about it constantly, it doesn't maintain traction.
Kind of nit picking here, but just because the court rules against something doesn't make it worse for society. SCOTUS gets societal level things wrong not infrequently.It’s not that docs believe the trump administration on Harvard. It’s that Harvard believes DEI and affirmative action help. It doesn’t help. I certainly don’t believe trump on this national security issue but he’s saying it’s as an excuse. It’s blatantly obvious. He’s trolling Harvard. Just like Harvard trolls everyone they will do what they want to do. Bullies don’t like to get bullied and Harvard is a bully.
Just as Harvard is saying DEI and affirmative action is better for society. (And Harvard was proven wrong by the united state Supreme Court in 2023) getting called out on it and they are still trying to circumvent it).
So Harvard makes up a load of crap left leaning docs believe in. Just your bias in believing what you want to believe and even “studies” are very bias that are produced and written on this ideology. The left is so clueless in their diversity agenda and use double speak. If diversity was so important in life say in competitive sports (hiring management etc) why are they more diverse in hiring more diverse athletes? But continue to select the very best athletes to their program and ignore diversity in competitive sports. I can reason the left way of thinking the extra scholarship (not a walk on) guy on the bench who’s a short Asian guy adds more to team building than 12 African American guys on the team.
They both (trump and Harvard) are at odds with ideology.
Harvard does not need to disclose its hiring process or admissions process. Harvard is a private institution.Kind of nit picking here, but just because the court rules against something doesn't make it worse for society. SCOTUS gets societal level things wrong not infrequently.
‘Cause them dirt poor conservative “rural” women don’t get no doctorin’ or “edumucation”….
Got it….
your analysis is completely wrong. I have studied comparative religions, your take is 1000% wrong. You're speaking from a personal bias. If you take any religious text, the Talmud is the most violent text, this has been verified by gronk and other religious historiansChristian doctrine wasn't the motivating factor as was competition with other religions to reclaim territories via military conquest, a practice of the medieval times. Religion was more of a motivating factor than for Hitler's holocaust, but it still wasn't really based on the doctrine itself in the way that Muhammad's teachings are construed by a large number of modern Islamists.
The more important difference is simply that Christianity seems to have widely evolved past that. Spreading the religion by violence on any wide scale in modern times is a problem more unique to Islam, perhaps in part due to the fundamental differences in the teachings of Jesus, the peaceful martyr, and Mohammad, the military leader.
More republicans are obese than democrat voters.While we’re trying to insult people’s health as it relates to their political party affiliation, should we do obesity rates and voters for Donald Trump? That might be fun.