SuperJerk

I fail to see what one has to do with the other.

Well, at least now he's offending EVERYBODY.

It's not anti-gay sentiment. It's just random people being evil. You can't blame homophobia. -=Mike ...Man, the justifications for the cult of Death work on EVERYTHING... Homophobia has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Islam does. There's the difference. Homophobia kills a shitload fewer people. So, it's actually less harmful than Islam. Wow. -=Mike This is ridiculously flawed logic, I hope you're just saying this to try to sound clever and you don't honestly believe this to be a legitimate way of thinking? To recap, Mike's central thesis lately has been that Islam is a "death cult" and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Read more about it here.

Actually, we decided we were arguing over semanitics, rather than substance. And it was on a completely different thread. No, you're not, because he's actually reasonable.

Were they the only two, you might be correct. However, the Reagan era is hottly debated amongst historians, and there really is no overwelming consensus of opinion on what role Reagan played. That is not to invalidate your belief, excpet (as you yet) you have not shared what your belief is. I'm willing to look past the fact that I hate you and recognize you are an intelligent person who may have an insightful point of view on the topic. I'm simply asking you to expand on what you believe about Reagan's Cold War policies, in an attempt to more clearly define why you think he deserve the credit you give him.

Do you realize that Slapnuts and I already settled that argument...almost an hour ago...on a completely different thread?

I'm with you on that one.

Rather than criticize Mike's opinions, I simply ask that he explain, step-by-step, how he believes that Reagan and Bush accomplished this. I feel that by doing so, we can move beyond generalizations and establish how the facts of the Reagan and Bush presidencies conform with Mike's interpretation of their results. Why not, you know, read a history book? -=Mike Speaking as someone who actually does read history books, allow me to inform you many historians disagree on how much Reagan's policies impacted the decline of the Soviet Union. Some even give credit to other people. It is difficult to confirm your claims without establishing some basic facts. It isn't logical to assume every history book will validate your opinion.

Except they released the girl to her mother. Quit being a dick.

It's not anti-gay sentiment. It's just random people being evil. You can't blame homophobia. -=Mike ...Man, the justifications for the cult of Death work on EVERYTHING... Homophobia has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Islam does. There's the difference.

Well, when he wasn't advocating killing all infidels. I find it endlessly hilarious that you find the treatment of homosexuals in the US to be "reminiscent" of the Nuremberg laws --- but defend Islam in spite of its massive and repeated excesses. Actually, there are things about every religion I deplore, but I understand them well enough to know not to dismiss everything about them as being bad.

I'm sure you'll have no problems applying that rationale to other things which occur less than 300 times a year, but still seem to cause quite an uproar from folks on your side of the spectrum.

Kind of sad that Christians are so quick to condemn Islam, since Mohammed only had nice things to say about Christians.

It seems as though there's a consensus of opinion amongst conservatives that gays haven't quite suffered enough yet. I'd like for one of you to explain what you consider an acceptable level of bigotry.

Rather than criticize Mike's opinions, I simply ask that he explain, step-by-step, how he believes that Reagan and Bush accomplished this. I feel that by doing so, we can move beyond generalizations and establish how the facts of the Reagan and Bush presidencies conform with Mike's interpretation of their results.

Sometimes someone posts a set-up line so good, its difficult to decide which insulting reply to post...or perhaps to not even post one at all and just let the comment sit like a pie on the proverbial window-sill where everyone can smell and enjoy it.

This, unfortunately, has ALWAYS been word games. Then again, if you guys had been attacking me for what I actually meant, rather than what you collectively thought I meant, then the board would've been denied the shining moment where it united to oppose me. So this is what it feels like to be Trent Lott...

Acknowledging such a connection would require them to actually know something about Islam, which they clearly do not.

At least nobody mentioned Nazis or death cults. edit: D'Oh!

Except in my metaphor, the concepts were actually related by a common theme (discrimination and bigotry), whereas your false comparison relies purely on wording for similarities.

Just for the record, here's the comparison I did make to the Nuremberg Laws, back on page 1: Note the words "beginning to resemble". I never said "exactly like". Again, let me point out my use of the words "conditions surrounding", and AGAIN not the words "exactly like". This entire thread has been an exercise in setting up straw men to attack. (Please note that I mean metaphorical "straw men", and not actual men who are made out of straw.)

I love all this holier than thou "Its an insult to Jews" crap you guys are throwing at me, since none of you fuckers ever seemed to care about Jews before. I also don't care for your insistence that any time someone wants to use the Nazis as part of a metaphor, every part of the comparison needs to line up perfectly with everything the Nazis ever did. (I fear for anyone who dares compare the highway systems of the US and Germany for fear that someone point out that Eisenhower didn't exterminate 6 million Jews.) Until I replied to you, I hadn't posted on this thread in 3 days. You guys insisted on bringing it up over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over because you never understood that I wasn't trying to make a literal comparison. I was generalizing. I'm not apologizing for the metaphor, or anything else I've said in this thread, because its obvious to me that you have no clue how hated and mistreated gays are in this country. Gay bashing has become a national pass-time. No, we're not to the point that Nazis treated the Jews after the Nuremberg Laws were passed, but when I see a political party making an anti-gay Constitutional Amendment a major part of the President's reelection campaign, I wonder how many years it will be before we are to that point. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

I just realized Triple H can claim he main-evented three of the 4 highest selling PPVs (including WM21). Fuckity fuck fuck fuck. We're never going to see the end of him.

double post (damn server)

I'm not actually arguing that gays are in exactly the same positions the Jews were in. I'm saying there's glaring SIMILARITIES. Gays are denied the right to marry, and can loose their job for being gay in many states. True. Homosexual acts are still a crime in many states. The Texas delegation at the 2000 Republican Convention tried to get a gay politician barred from addressing the Convention, simply for being gay. Gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military. In many school districts, parents have pressured school boards to ban gays from teaching. You're the one trying to paint my argument as being something it isn't. I'm saying there's SIMILARITIES. I'm not actually arguing that gays are in exactly the same positions the Jews were in. Nice cheap shot. For your information, I've already been teaching for several years, which is why I'm able to open my eyes to how bigotted this country is. Every time a politician uses anti-gay rhetoric and legislation to win popular support, I can't help but draw parrallels to another time this happened.