Progress! i would like to congratulate liberals the victory they gained with a activist judge

[Red]

The United States is very different where cultural assimilation is concerned. By at least the grandchild generation of an immigrant generation, assimilation into American culture is quite evident. The difference in Europe seems to be immigrants from non Western cultures form enclaves and there is less assimilation overall.

Here in the United States, I have no problem at all with immigrants from any part of the world maintaining aspects of their home culture. Some people do. I have seen people attacked for simply speaking Spanish in a restaurant. Part of the reason is that we have a president who is a demagogue, and he has created a series of "others", to facilitate an "us vs them" mind set among those Americans who do not realize Trump is playing them, utilizing their fear and anger to cement his political power. Hence we have a rise of far right violence in the United States. The stats are there for anyone to confirm this trend. Among the "others" that Trump would have his base resent are Muslims, Hispanics, and blacks.

Nonetheless, assimilation is simply easier here in the states, and smother then it has been in Europe. We will not see Sharia law replace our Constitution. Trump is doing far more damage to our democratic institutions at the moment, or at least he is putting in every effort in that respect, particularly in his attacks on the judiciary, on our free press, and in his insistance that the Justice Department is his personal police force and legal team.

And I repeat the observation made earlier. By virtue of both the title of his thread, and the first posting in this thread, Dutch is saying that liberals and progressives are surely pleased with FGM. This strikes me as a ridiculous thing to say, without basis in fact at all. But, this particular poster has made rage his calling card, so, of course, there is that. 24/7 anger's not good for one's health.

 

[Alfalfa]

The United States is very different where cultural assimilation is concerned. By at least the grandchild generation of an immigrant generation, assimilation into American culture is quite evident. The difference in Europe seems to be immigrants from non Western cultures form enclaves and there is less assimilation overall.

Here in the United States, I have no problem at all with immigrants from any part of the world maintaining aspects of their home culture. Some people do. I have seen people attacked for simply speaking Spanish in a restaurant. Part of the reason is that we have a president who is a demagogue, and he has created a series of "others", to facilitate an "us vs them" mind set among those Americans who do not realize Trump is playing them, utilizing their fear and anger to cement his political power. Hence we have a rise of far right violence in the United States. The stats are there for anyone to confirm this trend. Among the "others" that Trump would have his base resent are Muslims, Hispanics, and blacks.

Nonetheless, assimilation is simply easier here in the states, and smother then it has been in Europe. We will not see Sharia law replace our Constitution. Trump is doing far more damage to our democratic institutions at the moment, or at least he is putting in every effort in that respect, particularly in his attacks on the judiciary, on our free press, and in his insistance that the Justice Department is his personal police force and legal team.

And I repeat the observation made earlier. By virtue of both the title of his thread, and the first posting in this thread, Dutch is saying that liberals and progressives are surely pleased with FGM. This strikes me as a ridiculous thing to say, without basis in fact at all. But, this particular poster has made rage his calling card, so, of course, there is that. 24/7 anger's not good for one's health.

Trump is an opportunist, not a demagogue, I don't think. The problem is that people are awful.

 

[One Brow]

I’ll let you form your own conclusion.

Good decision on your part.

It’s barbaric and for anyone that supposedly champions women’s rights to not condemn it is telling.

http://www.endfgm.eu/female-genital-mutilation/what-is-fgm/

What makes you think I don't condemn it? I condemn even the Type IV version, which is basically the same as the most common form of MGM. MGM is also barbaric, and anyone who believes in men's rights should condemn it.

 

[One Brow]

lol there are tons of studies of ACTUAL SCIENTIST and DOCTORS. whos ays their are medical benefits.

There are actual scientists who believe in creationism, as well. They are equally wrong.

i have yet to see 1! i repeat ! western study showing any benefit for woman genital mutilation!

There are no moneyed western groups interested in supporting FGM. If there were.such studies would exist.

 

[One Brow]

Is onebrow for real in this thread?

Is there a reason to suspect I am not? I am serious, but I am also choosing my position carefully.

 

[One Brow]

I think mistreatment of women matters much more than your stupid political battle.

I agree. However, I think you also think the judge was correct in his decision here.

 

[One Brow]

And I do not equate female and male mutilation as men can still enjoy sexual feelings after a circumcision. But I am getting less convinced that circumcision should be performed on babies who get no say in the matter.

Definitely Types I, II, or III FGM are much worse than circumcision, even more barbaric.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

One could also look at it this way.

Could? Dutch is always saying gotcha. Everybody knows it and most complain about it relentlessly.

I'm not sure why or how Reagan's name appeared in bold type from the

Uh huh. Nobody's buying that ******** excuse but was it fun coming up with a long winded lawyered up reason? Did you enjoy it?

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

[QUOTE="One Brow, post: 1674032,

Only a culturally blind or uninformed person sees a difference.[/QUOTE]

LOL. I'm waiting with baited breath to here someone explain how cutting off a little bit of unimportant skin is akin to genital mutation of women. A procedure that is done on baby girls out of self-rligious indignation.

So, the mental thought factory of the religious indoctrination haters have them irrationally hating something religion-based, foreskin cutting off, that they simply cant handle because it is based entirely out of their hate for a religious indoctrination practice. Can you explain yourselves in a way they can understand you are important to? Or we can continue on hating each other and fighting over perceived individuals injustices.

 

[DutchJazzer]

There are actual scientists who believe in creationism, as well. They are equally wrong.

maybe you should delve into it and read about it. then you miught be more informedi myself believe in both. as well explained and thought out in the book genesis and the big bang. how creationism and the big bang are the same. do i have unrefutable Proof? no i do not! do you no you do not

There are no moneyed western groups interested in supporting FGM. If there were.such studies would exist.

tell me your position on global cooling ooh wait global warming ooh no climate chance again. a psuedo science. that is alarmist about a 0.03% ris ein temperature in 100 years which is within the margin of erorr. and extremly stbale even though we went from a billion to 7 billion people. and we built way more cities. yet we are supposed do give the government power because of this junk science!\

gopod to know you finally a gree that scientific studies dont mean anything!


fact is fgm is wrong and not comparable to male circumcisionand ha sonly negative effects not one nuetral or health benefit

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

maybe you should delve into it and read about it. then you miught be more informedi myself believe in both. as well explained and thought out in the book genesis and the big bang. how creationism and the big bang are the same. do i have unrefutable Proof?

The antis have never been able to explain to me how the Genesis story follows the evolution theory 100 percent. Whales firsish, the entire timeline... it follows identically the creation story and/or evolution. It's a flawed book 5000 years or so old, give or take, that still somehow managed to nail down to a tee the evolutionary process in the timeline tale. That day frame of evolution is identical to what scientists have discovered. How is that possible from a flawed book 5000 years in the making, back in the time when recorded history was flawed, verbal transmitting error problems and what not? And yet Genesis, key in on the word meaning of genesis, somehow managed to explain creation 5000 years in advance. At a time when there were translation and verbal problems and what have you. The first very book in the Bible still got the evolutionary aspects 100 correct. 5000 years before modern science was adapted enough to figure things out.q

Explain to me religious people like @colton @jazzspazz or whatever your name is now, @LogGrad98 @TroutBum or anyone else religious if that is a reasonable possibility. I've asked people from UTC but they are hyper religious and dont think evolution exists so cant relate to the question at all.

 

[Red]

I'm not sure why or how Reagan's name appeared in bold type from the quote I pasted from the first of the two links I posted

Uh huh. Nobody's buying that ******** excuse but was it fun coming up with a long winded lawyered up reason? Did you enjoy it?

I've always made my positions clear, but I am not in the habit of developing bald face lies.
I meant exactly what I said.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

I've always made my positions clear, but I am not in the habit of developing bald face lies.
I meant exactly what I said.

Tell ya what, though. Ever since I read the entire exchange between you and babe in this old thread, and found myself wondering as I did, "God, idestroyedthetoilet sounds and writes exactly like babe, and that ain't at all easy, is it babe?", I've wondered about you and your motives as well. Then, there was your last statement in comment #58 in that old thread, and everything made sense. Heck, I even left a "like" for your admission, lol...

https://jazzfanz.com/threads/jfc-cult-deprogramming-help-thread.91790/page-3

Ah, the old search to figure out who was Ain'tnuthin continues.

 

[Red]

Ah, the old search to figure out who was Ain'tnuthin continues.

Indeed, curiouser and curiouser, as Alice might say. Couldn't help it. You did a remarkably good job of mimicking in that thread. I mean, bravo and all, a masterful job. You convinced me entirely, and then came that "admission", and of course I laughed and said "aha!" Impossible to read that long exchange without wondering, you have to admit that much, and lol and behold, you did admit that much.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

Indeed, curiouser and curiouser, as Alice might say. Couldn't help it. You did a remarkably good job of mimicking in that thread. I mean, bravo and all, a masterful job. You convinced me entirely, and then came that "admission", and of course I laughed and said "aha!" Impossible to read that long exchange without wondering, you have to admit that much, and lol and behold, you did admit that much.

Huh?

 

[Red]

Huh?

Lol, forget it. I think, you, babe, and myself were the only ones reading your exchange with babe. The two of you did a remarkable job of sounding like babe is all. You had to be there, but wait, you were, lol.

But, as for Reagan's name appearing in bold type in my quote from that link, well, I'm gonna say may God strike me dead if I'm lying, I swear on my mother's grave, I did not use bold type. I tried yesterday to figure out how that happened, but had to give up. When I started to think only a paranormal explanation would work, I gave up, lol.

Following Dutch's post, the next logical thing to do was look up the judge in question. Not as a " gotcha", although of course it is difficult to visualize a judge appointed by Reagan as matching Dutch's description. But that's not my fault.

I'm deleting the link to that old thread I referenced. That was petty of me to post that.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

Lol, forget it. I think, you, babe, and myself were the only ones reading your exchange with babe. The two of you did a remarkable job of sounding like babe is all. You had to be there, but wait, you were, lol.

But, as for Reagan's name appearing in bold type in my quote from that link, well, I'm gonna say may God strike me dead if I'm lying, I swear on my mother's grave, I did not use bold type. I tried yesterday to figure out how that happened, but had to give up. When I started to think only a paranormal explanation would work, I gave up, lol.

Following Dutch's post, the next logical thing to do was look up the judge in question. Not as a " gotcha", although of course it is difficult to visualize a judge appointed by Reagan as matching Dutch's description. But that's not my fault.

I'm deleting the link to that old thread I referenced. That was petty of me to post that.

My apology. I've been on a rant for a week and stepping out of line. Your response was fine and I am sorry for a mistreated response.

If you want the history of me for some reason being accused of being some of the several certified geniuses on the board like NAOS, babe, hopper, OB, etc. then I'll get into it. You are a genius too so I guess you are next in line for me being thought is you having a conversation with myself.

 

[One Brow]

do i have unrefutable Proof? no i do not! do you no you do not

Proof is for mathematics and alcohol. Science has evidence, and all the reliable evidence points away from creationism (which has nothing to do with the Big Bang).

gopod to know you finally a gree that scientific studies dont mean anything!

In small numbers, scientific studies are prone to statistical errors and various interpretation biases.

fact is fgm is wrong and not comparable to male circumcision

Your definition of "fact" is as wrong-headed as every other part of your argument. FGM Type IV is a very close comparison to male circumcision.

 

[One Brow]

LOL. I'm waiting with baited breath to here someone explain how cutting off a little bit of unimportant skin is akin to genital mutation of women.

FGM Type IV is often the nicking of the ****oris, it often does not even involve skin removal. So, I'm waiting with baited breath for someone to explain how a procedure that removes skin is less bad than one that does not.

A procedure that is done on baby girls out of self-rligious indignation.

MGM is done to baby boys out of self-religious indignation. Is that acceptable because they are boys?

So, the mental thought factory of the religious indoctrination haters have them irrationally hating something religion-based, foreskin cutting off, that they simply cant handle because it is based entirely out of their hate for a religious indoctrination practice. Can you explain yourselves in a way they can understand you are important to? Or we can continue on hating each other and fighting over perceived individuals injustices.

Why do you think this is something I can or can not "handle", whatever that is supposed to mean?

 

[Red]

My apology. I've been on a rant for a week and stepping out of line. Your response was fine and I am sorry for a mistreated response.

If you want the history of me for some reason being accused of being some of the several certified geniuses on the board like NAOS, babe, hopper, OB, etc. then I'll get into it. You are a genius too so I guess you are next in line for me being thought is you having a conversation with myself.

Really, no apology necessary. I get out of line at times myself, take things personally, or too seriously. It's the internet. A convenient means of communication, but far from perfect, that's for sure. And I do value your point of view. All is good.

Woops. Forgot to add. I am no genius!