Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei must go gaolang > your fav is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
H
Of course. Pretend Hamas is all good and Israel is the big villain when it is exactly the opposite. No wonder Wokeness is falling apart all over the world.
Only the left is capable of defending someone who is public against everything they believe. Saw at US a city that elected a bunch of muslims and now they are forbidden Pride Flags on pride days.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...higan-muslim-council-lgbtq-pride-flags-banned
Post automatically merged:
Only the left is capable of defending someone who is public against everything they believe. Saw at US a city that elected a bunch of muslims and now they are forbidden Pride Flags on pride days.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...higan-muslim-council-lgbtq-pride-flags-banned
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh my... I don't know much about american history, but your assertion smell a lot like straight up revisitation of history. It has all the red flags.
Do you have historians researches to prove those claims ?
Indeed. You just touch the hearth of the subject. It specifies how language is used today. And today - spoiler - society is highly queerphobe and in deny of the reality of Queers identities.
You can define gender however you want. You can speak the way you want. But in this case, it will make you problematic. Again, its not because the dictionnary is noting the usage (things that it usually doesn't do well) that this usage is not problematic or scientificially false in front of reality.
So you do what you want, but be aware of the consequences of denying the identities of a queer person.
Again, its not because it is in the dictionnary that it is "fine". Dictionnaries are sometimes quite problematic in their definitions.
Well you can make that statement about sex yes. Even if its not really true, its not problematic to say that there are just two sex, but that can't be applied to gender.
You put them here yourself mate.
What is nasty ?
Very interesting. But bring the sources instead of simple articles of newspaper next time.
Where did I say "militant" here ? I said "someone from this community".
Wait..
Do you believe that all LGBTQ+ people are militants ?
"related to the moral dimension of purity" Not "nasty stuff"
Its better to read the actual study mate:
https://minddevlab.yale.edu/sites/d...usted than liberals_ disgust_conservatism.pdf
Last page.
First:
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
When religion takes power, we must fight the religion. Its that simple. The reason we are defending muslim is that 1. they are not in power and 2. they are systematically oppressed by the power in places, mostly in Europe.
If you don't understand that the purpose of the left is to defend those who are oppressed, even if they can lead to conservatist policies once in power, then you are - again - lost. Very very lost.
Do you have historians researches to prove those claims ?
Indeed. You just touch the hearth of the subject. It specifies how language is used today. And today - spoiler - society is highly queerphobe and in deny of the reality of Queers identities.
You can define gender however you want. You can speak the way you want. But in this case, it will make you problematic. Again, its not because the dictionnary is noting the usage (things that it usually doesn't do well) that this usage is not problematic or scientificially false in front of reality.
So you do what you want, but be aware of the consequences of denying the identities of a queer person.
Again, its not because it is in the dictionnary that it is "fine". Dictionnaries are sometimes quite problematic in their definitions.
Well you can make that statement about sex yes. Even if its not really true, its not problematic to say that there are just two sex, but that can't be applied to gender.
You put them here yourself mate.
What is nasty ?
Very interesting. But bring the sources instead of simple articles of newspaper next time.
Where did I say "militant" here ? I said "someone from this community".
Wait..
Do you believe that all LGBTQ+ people are militants ?
"related to the moral dimension of purity" Not "nasty stuff"
Its better to read the actual study mate:
https://minddevlab.yale.edu/sites/d...usted than liberals_ disgust_conservatism.pdf
Last page.
First:
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
When religion takes power, we must fight the religion. Its that simple. The reason we are defending muslim is that 1. they are not in power and 2. they are systematically oppressed by the power in places, mostly in Europe.
If you don't understand that the purpose of the left is to defend those who are oppressed, even if they can lead to conservatist policies once in power, then you are - again - lost. Very very lost.
Both sides are wrong.There is no good guy or bad guy,fanatic.
I wasn't talking to you.Google shit and educate yourself.
Post automatically merged:
Oh my... I don't know much about american history, but your assertion smell a lot like straight up revisitation of history. It has all the red flags.
Do you have historians researches to prove those claims ?
Indeed. You just touch the hearth of the subject. It specifies how language is used today. And today - spoiler - society is highly queerphobe and in deny of the reality of Queers identities.
You can define gender however you want. You can speak the way you want. But in this case, it will make you problematic. Again, its not because the dictionnary is noting the usage (things that it usually doesn't do well) that this usage is not problematic or scientificially false in front of reality.
So you do what you want, but be aware of the consequences of denying the identities of a queer person.
Again, its not because it is in the dictionnary that it is "fine". Dictionnaries are sometimes quite problematic in their definitions.
Well you can make that statement about sex yes. Even if its not really true, its not problematic to say that there are just two sex, but that can't be applied to gender.
You put them here yourself mate.
What is nasty ?
Very interesting. But bring the sources instead of simple articles of newspaper next time.
Where did I say "militant" here ? I said "someone from this community".
Wait..
Do you believe that all LGBTQ+ people are militants ?
"related to the moral dimension of purity" Not "nasty stuff"
Its better to read the actual study mate:
https://minddevlab.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals_ disgust_conservatism.pdf
Last page.
First:
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
When religion takes power, we must fight the religion. Its that simple. The reason we are defending muslim is that 1. they are not in power and 2. they are systematically oppressed by the power in places, mostly in Europe.
If you don't understand that the purpose of the left is to defend those who are oppressed, even if they can lead to conservatist policies once in power, then you are - again - lost. Very very lost.
Do you have historians researches to prove those claims ?
Indeed. You just touch the hearth of the subject. It specifies how language is used today. And today - spoiler - society is highly queerphobe and in deny of the reality of Queers identities.
You can define gender however you want. You can speak the way you want. But in this case, it will make you problematic. Again, its not because the dictionnary is noting the usage (things that it usually doesn't do well) that this usage is not problematic or scientificially false in front of reality.
So you do what you want, but be aware of the consequences of denying the identities of a queer person.
Again, its not because it is in the dictionnary that it is "fine". Dictionnaries are sometimes quite problematic in their definitions.
Well you can make that statement about sex yes. Even if its not really true, its not problematic to say that there are just two sex, but that can't be applied to gender.
You put them here yourself mate.
What is nasty ?
Very interesting. But bring the sources instead of simple articles of newspaper next time.
Where did I say "militant" here ? I said "someone from this community".
Wait..
Do you believe that all LGBTQ+ people are militants ?
"related to the moral dimension of purity" Not "nasty stuff"
Its better to read the actual study mate:
https://minddevlab.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Conservatives are more easily disgusted than liberals_ disgust_conservatism.pdf
Last page.
First:
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
When religion takes power, we must fight the religion. Its that simple. The reason we are defending muslim is that 1. they are not in power and 2. they are systematically oppressed by the power in places, mostly in Europe.
If you don't understand that the purpose of the left is to defend those who are oppressed, even if they can lead to conservatist policies once in power, then you are - again - lost. Very very lost.
H
There is the agressor and the victim. Israel was victim of the agressor Hamas.
First we are finally improving. Already able to admit Hamas did a war crime. Next step admit it is a terrorist group.
The colonizer was England not Israel.
And what will be your argument next? Natives should take over the whole America? Let's start to find out the original tribe of each place and give it back to them? The past is past we can't do nothing about it. Israel is the country in that place now. Stop bombimg them and move on your lifes.
But no they are incapable of that. So the best option would be for Israel to take over the rest since Muslims can live inside Israel without a problem but the opposite is not truth.
Post automatically merged:
First:
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
I'm sorry.. Maybe I was mistaken. I thought you were able to read correctly simple words.
Did I not say that Hamas did a war crime ?
Second:
When you are a colonizer for decades and you oppresses a nation, then yes, you are a big villain. If you are defending that, then you are a villain too
The colonizer was England not Israel.
And what will be your argument next? Natives should take over the whole America? Let's start to find out the original tribe of each place and give it back to them? The past is past we can't do nothing about it. Israel is the country in that place now. Stop bombimg them and move on your lifes.
But no they are incapable of that. So the best option would be for Israel to take over the rest since Muslims can live inside Israel without a problem but the opposite is not truth.
