The "Righteous" Left....

[amicus]

I read the post that brought forth the anger, properly so.

There is, I know from experience, a means to deal with that kind of hurtful and malicious post.

But the quick call and rush to request censorship is another matter. Note the identity of the thread starter on both.

There exists a diverse culture on this forum that has sufficient common grounds to attempt to control and manipulate the content here, but that does not surprise me, it is a culture that infests education and the arts from top to bottom.

There was a time, in the not so distant past, when Christian ethics and morality occupied the high ground and dictated, even enforced their morality on others.

Over time, that moral majority has been reduced to a minority and the new majority can only be accurately described as 'Liberal Fascism.'

In this new environment, one can be accused of a 'hate crime', for a variety of statements, beliefs or opinions. You can be accused of being a 'racist', if you even question the legality of using tax funds to provide, 'affirmative action', for a minority; a system of quota's and preferential treatment designed to equalize treatment and opportunity.

If you even dare whisper that 'Homosexuality' was treated as a psychological malady just 35 years ago, in 1973, and that 'abortion', was illegal in that same year, then you can and will be accused of a 'hate crime', a racist and a homophobe.

When it comes to opinions on economics, be ready to be called a greedy Capitalist Pig, if you dare support a free market place.

This 'liberal fascist' mentality is also very much 'anti American', in all things and Patriotism has become a dirty word.

In the five plus years I have visited this forum, only a sparse handful have dared confront the entrenched liberal fascist majority.

Those that do, if they are writers, will find their stories subject to their favorite attack, 'one bombing', voting a 'one' on all of your submissions without ever reading a single one.

They also 'gang up' on any new poster that dares buck the trend, see the thread 'Atheist', when wmrs2 dared defend Christianity in the open forum. By admission, they 'private message' each other to launch the attacks.

This is an open, unregulated, unmoderated forum and it is rough and tumble. I understand that and would never suggest censorship to control the piggishness of the liberal fascists, they are what they are, here and elsewhere.

My thought is...that the times are changing and all the lack of moral and ethical behavior of the liberal fascists is now being closely examined and they feel the pressure.

They are desperately attempting to cling to control on this forum and will stoop to any tactic to do so. It is not civil discussion, a polite exchange of opinions they wish, it is total control to further the spread of the liberal fascism they preach and practice. They hope to achieve that by picking a moderator of their choice that will reinforce their dominance. Note carefully those most rabid in desiring a Moderator and compare the direction of their posts.

I wrote this up and let it simmer for a bit; went back and read more of, 'that' thread, the one that started the rush to censorship and noted that it still continues and even worsens. I sense there is something deep and sinister perpetrated by those who hold little value in human life, and expressing hatred of those who worship it.

That, if so, is an even deeper evil than I thought possible.

I think I will post this, if for nothing else than to deter the anger and redirect it.


Amicus...

 

[sr71plt]

Hey, go back to the other thread and answer my challenge about lumping everyone you don't like together as a same-same liberal--or shut the fuck up about that.

 

[Xelebes]

And how about the "Righteous" Right! Boy, oh boy, do they like to harp on the "Righteous" Left! It's like they don't know what their complimentary is doing!

 

[amicus]

Xelebes...that you acknowledge the 'left' is faith based, as the 'right' usually admits, I find heartening.

Amicus...

 

[Xelebes]

Why would you find it heartening thet I say it - or in your terms, admit it? Are you making quick assumptions again, colouring everyone with a large brush?

 

[amicus]

Because, and you know this full well, the, 'usual suspects', deny that they have faith and not formal reason or rationality as a basis for their beliefs. They seem to prefer to remain free of any considered system of ethics or morals so they cannot be addressed as holding a philosophy of any kind.

It is a simple opposition to everything except individual issues that suit them.

Amicus...

 

[sr71plt]

Xelebes...that you acknowledge the 'left' is faith based, as the 'right' usually admits, I find heartening.

Amicus...

Hey, go back there and answer my challenge--or shut the fuck up about it.

It's not like it's slipped your mind (such as it is).

 

[Xelebes]

Because, and you know this full well, the, 'usual suspects', deny that they have faith and not formal reason or rationality as a basis for their beliefs. They seem to prefer to remain free of any considered system of ethics or morals so they cannot be addressed as holding a philosophy of any kind.

It is a simple opposition to everything except individual issues that suit them.

Amicus...

I think you might be missing the mark. Some of the "usual suspects", as per the term you used, may be putting rigid philosophy aside and seeing whether or not the ideas being brought forward may work or not. Now, some of them may not meet specified targets but it is often not worth it to simply disregard them, merely because of principle. I think it is important to look at your ideas and how you present them. Do you get defensive about your ideas and then disregard any which deviates from what is prescribed by your philosophy? Do you see a problem in implementation when it comes to those who oppose? Are the ones who oppose your ideas somebody to simply remove from your implementation altogether?

 

[wmrs2]

This is a very good post Amicus. What the liberals and radical atheist have done is to have mentioned you by name in every critical post they have made so as to try to make what you say less meaningful. There are so few of us conservative voices on these threads, it does seem strange that members are so threatened by us that they are looking for greener grasses. I hope they find what they are looking for and soon.

I am a newbie but I am learning fast. It does not do any good to point out the weakness of arguments here with a few who think they rule the rust. They just don't put a few of us on ignore, they put their brains on ignore and ignore the facts whatever these are. My point being, the new threads by Stella completely ignore what was done by her on "Holier Than Thou Porn" as if I had insulted her.

I left some bait over there by misspelling patiences; I am going back to see if the trolls are biting.

 

[sr71plt]

Can't substantiate your tired old "all you liberals" think the same thing mantra, can you, Amicus? Can't even begin to try. Knew you are full of crap on this.

 

[amicus]

Ur a peach, wmrs2(wink), I trust you are as secure in your faith as I am in my knowledge of right and wrong and that you continue to expose the Trolls for what they are.

To the poster above you, I should scroll back, but the last time I did that, the portion I had typed went bye-bye...and yes, I do get ruffled when people righteously claim the right to take human life and liberty with callous disregard.

You see, that is not just my particular vantage point, that is the nature of my country and I have and will defend it in any way I can.

Amicus...

 

[sr71plt]

I can see Amicus now. Fingers in his ears, warbling "na, na, na, can't hear you."

 

[amicus]

No..your filthy mouth forfeited your right to converse with me. Although I have no one on 'ignore', there are three I do not respond to and you are one of those.

Amicus..

 

[sr71plt]

No..your filthy mouth forfeited your right to converse with me. Although I have no one on 'ignore', there are three I do not respond to and you are one of those.

Amicus..

My filthy mouth? That's rich. Let's do a little review of your recent posts. Oh, look, here's one from you on the Abortion thread, #151:

"Someone please remind this asshole that the country is at war; that Islamic Jihadists have vowed to destroy, not just America, but the entire western infidel world.

After that, remind him/her/it, of the rules of engagement concerning enemy combatants without uniform or country: immediate execution.

You want to mollycoddle the slime bag that raped your wife and child and support him for the rest of his life in prison; I would just blow his fucking head off.

Bleeding heart liberals, sure as hell fits your profile, pookie."


No, Amicus, you didn't respond to me because YOU CAN'T--and aren't man or intellectually honest enough to admit it.

And, surprise, this challenge stems from a post of mine you did quote. So, so much for that lie.

Time for you to put your fingers back in your ears. "Na, na, na. Can't hear you"

 

[wmrs2]

My filthy mouth? That's rich. Let's do a little review of your recent posts. Oh, look, here's one from you on the Abortion thread, #151:

"Someone please remind this asshole that the country is at war; that Islamic Jihadists have vowed to destroy, not just America, but the entire western infidel world.

After that, remind him/her/it, of the rules of engagement concerning enemy combatants without uniform or country: immediate execution.

You want to mollycoddle the slime bag that raped your wife and child and support him for the rest of his life in prison; I would just blow his fucking head off.

Bleeding heart liberals, sure as hell fits your profile, pookie."



No, Amicus, you didn't respond to me because YOU CAN'T--and aren't man or intellectually honest enough to admit it.

And, surprise, this challenge stems from a post of mine you did quote. So, so much for that lie.

Time for you to put your fingers back in your ears. "Na, na, na. Can't hear you"

"Someone please remind this asshole that the country is at war; that Islamic Jihadists have vowed to destroy, not just America, but the entire western infidel world.

After that, remind him/her/it, of the rules of engagement concerning enemy combatants without uniform or country: immediate execution.

You want to mollycoddle the slime bag that raped your wife and child and support him for the rest of his life in prison; I would just blow his fucking head off.

Bleeding heart liberals, sure as hell fits your profile, pookie."

I would be interested to know if you have contacted your Congressmen to let them know that these poor prisoners can rent the house next to you. Do you have a better alternative to what Ami said? Let's here it.

 

[sr71plt]

I would be interested to know if you have contacted your Congressmen to let them know that these poor prisoners can rent the house next to you. Do you have a better alternative to what Ami said? Let's here it.

Try to keep up with the point, wmrs2--when you manage to roll out of Amicus's bed, of course.

 

[ishtat]

This is a very good post Amicus. What the liberals and radical atheist have done is to have mentioned you

Just a point of information . Last time I looked Amicus was a definite atheist with his own ideas on ethics. I would also describe him as a radical rather than a conservative but radical just a lil' bit to the right rather than radical left.

 

[Recidiva]

Amicus, you do not have a track record for allowing people to have choices.

You insist on the right choice, and the right choice is always decided by Amicus.

I attempt to insist on fairness and in this case I agree with you that censorship is bad.

This is an adult forum where you're asked to consent to having content that might offend you before you made your first post.

I'm much more of a moderate than anything else. But I think you're attempting to espouse a tenet that you yourself do not support. Though I think you're a decent guy and all. I think you mean well, I just don't think you think anybody else means well. And it grates on those who mean well and get no credit because the right choice is always decided by Amicus.

 

[cloudy]

God, ami...do you ever stop fucking nagging?

 

[amicus]

Recidiva...I accept your criticism but as always with a caveat.

There are some choices rational humans cannot make and remain rational.

There are many, many fine people of this forum, unfortunately for many, they have made some untenable moral choices that corrupt the rest of their utterances.

One cannot disregard human life without consequence nor can one advocate abridging human liberty and yet claim the freedom to speak without critical response.

I am and always have offered a rational defense and explanation for any position I advocate on any subject. I am a father and a grandfather many times over and I observe how my offspring face the changed moral environment, that to them, is normal, and it saddens me.

It is an accumulated combination of many moral failures at the heart of many of societies problems today, yet the liberals continue to ignore the results of the absence of moral and ethical teachings and examples for young people to follow and respect.

So, yes, I accept your criticism, abortion is murder, there is no other way to view the subject with reason and rationality. So, you say, I offer no choice there, that is true, I do not. It is a criminal act to kill an innocent child.

The other hot button of the left is the acceptance of homosexual behavior as normative in society. Very few, myself included, care in the least about a persons private sexual inclination. But when a minor group actively seeks to be accepted as normal and thrusts upon society, in schools, in art, in literature and in films, a lifestyle that is alien and repulsive to most, you are correct again, I offer no choice in a condemnation at the attempts to normalize what was once described as a mental illness.

Concerning economics, I maintain that any system that uses force to impose rules and regulations upon individuals is immoral and unethical. Thus again, I offer no choice but human individual freedom and a free market place.

You may find it difficult to accept, but my views were mainstream and accepted not so very long ago. The changes have occured in a mere half century, in my lifetime and only now are the consequences of those changes becoming evident.

I point out those consequences over and over again, fatherless children, drug addition, std's by children, single parent families and increasing state involvment in the raising, educating and caring for children and an always expanding role of government in all aspects of an individuals life.

So, yes again, I offer no choices save human individual freedom; slavery and control is not acceptable to me or any rational human who enjoys his freedom.

Thank you for your response...


Amicus...

 

[Liar]

I don't get what you're trying to say.

Please ami, in one sentence, that's the thesis?

 

[Recidiva]

Recidiva...I accept your criticism but as always with a caveat.

There are some choices rational humans cannot make and remain rational.

There are many, many fine people of this forum, unfortunately for many, they have made some untenable moral choices that corrupt the rest of their utterances.

One cannot disregard human life without consequence nor can one advocate abridging human liberty and yet claim the freedom to speak without critical response.

I am and always have offered a rational defense and explanation for any position I advocate on any subject. I am a father and a grandfather many times over and I observe how my offspring face the changed moral environment, that to them, is normal, and it saddens me.

It is an accumulated combination of many moral failures at the heart of many of societies problems today, yet the liberals continue to ignore the results of the absence of moral and ethical teachings and examples for young people to follow and respect.

So, yes, I accept your criticism, abortion is murder, there is no other way to view the subject with reason and rationality. So, you say, I offer no choice there, that is true, I do not. It is a criminal act to kill an innocent child.

The other hot button of the left is the acceptance of homosexual behavior as normative in society. Very few, myself included, care in the least about a persons private sexual inclination. But when a minor group actively seeks to be accepted as normal and thrusts upon society, in schools, in art, in literature and in films, a lifestyle that is alien and repulsive to most, you are correct again, I offer no choice in a condemnation at the attempts to normalize what was once described as a mental illness.

Concerning economics, I maintain that any system that uses force to impose rules and regulations upon individuals is immoral and unethical. Thus again, I offer no choice but human individual freedom and a free market place.

You may find it difficult to accept, but my views were mainstream and accepted not so very long ago. The changes have occured in a mere half century, in my lifetime and only now are the consequences of those changes becoming evident.

I point out those consequences over and over again, fatherless children, drug addition, std's by children, single parent families and increasing state involvment in the raising, educating and caring for children and an always expanding role of government in all aspects of an individuals life.

So, yes again, I offer no choices save human individual freedom; slavery and control is not acceptable to me or any rational human who enjoys his freedom.

Thank you for your response...


Amicus...

Thank you.

I think you're missing that you're human and therefore prone to being irrational, just as everyone else is. Perfect rationality is not possible and there are times when circumstances are so irrational and unfair that being rational is in fact, inherently irrational. It's a human thing.

Being rational through grief and anger isn't rational. It's inhuman. Being irrational under many circumstances is perfectly understandable. I think you worship at the altar of rationality and are therefore prone to having gaping blind spots because you consider yourself to be so rational that no fault or flaw can be found. And I do really get that you want people to have better lives than they have, and that you're deeply affected by human suffering.

This is what makes you human. It's part of your charm, for me anyway.

 

[amicus]

Recidiva...you may not accept this...but I grew up at the end of an era where men were stern and unyeilding and unemotional. I take pain without a sound, I do not show emotion during the performance of my work, which was before microphones and cameras and live audiences.

You may imagine my disgust at anchor women who use a multitude of facial expressions and body language depending on the emotional content of the news item they are reading at the moment. They are more actresses than newscasters doing an objective job.

I observe and I conclude, that the gender changes that have taken effect, have feminized the men and masculinized the women to a point where few both know and feel their proper place among others.

This is a little off the subject I suppose, but the chasm, the abyss between us in understanding, is huge and you seem unwilling to acknowledge anything but your point of view and your emotional content as valid.

Since I'm on a little role, I may as well throw in this bit...Islamic women are cloistered from head to toe and controlled in their every movement and girls are given only minimal education and I begin to understand why that is the preferred lifestyle.

I cannot begin to tell you how the accumulated years of exposed breasts, ass cracks showing at the top of lowcut jeans and thong straps visible and short skirts, especially on newswomen, who delicately cross their legs back and forth, knowing that the eyes of all males watching follow each and every movement; the overt casual sexuality flaunted and intended to tittilate the male, just about gags me any more and I am truly a lover of women for all my life.

Focus, if you doubt what I say, on every camera shot in films and serial programs and even news casts, the camera lingers on breasts, thighs, butts, all intended and known to attract the eye. I mean I know sex sells, what the hell, but enough is enough. No?

And yes, I have my irrational, purely emotional moments and outbursts from time to time, usually dared or teased into being by some wayward female who just has to see if she can tempt me.

But I assure you, that by choice, most of my waking moments are rational and logical even when around grandchildren, although I do smile and make a joke once in a while.

Anyways...there was a slight tone of affinity in your post and I appreciate that.

Amicus...

 

[Recidiva]

Recidiva...you may not accept this...but I grew up at the end of an era where men were stern and unyeilding and unemotional. I take pain without a sound, I do not show emotion during the performance of my work, which was before microphones and cameras and live audiences.

You may imagine my disgust at anchor women who use a multitude of facial expressions and body language depending on the emotional content of the news item they are reading at the moment. They are more actresses than newscasters doing an objective job.

I observe and I conclude, that the gender changes that have taken effect, have feminized the men and masculinized the women to a point where few both know and feel their proper place among others.

This is a little off the subject I suppose, but the chasm, the abyss between us in understanding, is huge and you seem unwilling to acknowledge anything but your point of view and your emotional content as valid.

Since I'm on a little role, I may as well throw in this bit...Islamic women are cloistered from head to toe and controlled in their every movement and girls are given only minimal education and I begin to understand why that is the preferred lifestyle.

I cannot begin to tell you how the accumulated years of exposed breasts, ass cracks showing at the top of lowcut jeans and thong straps visible and short skirts, especially on newswomen, who delicately cross their legs back and forth, knowing that the eyes of all males watching follow each and every movement; the overt casual sexuality flaunted and intended to tittilate the male, just about gags me any more and I am truly a lover of women for all my life.

Focus, if you doubt what I say, on every camera shot in films and serial programs and even news casts, the camera lingers on breasts, thighs, butts, all intended and known to attract the eye. I mean I know sex sells, what the hell, but enough is enough. No?

And yes, I have my irrational, purely emotional moments and outbursts from time to time, usually dared or teased into being by some wayward female who just has to see if she can tempt me.

But I assure you, that by choice, most of my waking moments are rational and logical even when around grandchildren, although I do smile and make a joke once in a while.

Anyways...there was a slight tone of affinity in your post and I appreciate that.

Amicus...

I do accept this. I think you idealize the times you lived in and the ideals that made you the person that you are.

I'm no more enamored of the obvious use of overt sexuality to sell things, but to me, news is a product. It's going to be sold and packaged. If it bothers me, I don't watch.

I think you idealize many things and take personal offense at the way the world is. I think you've accumulated a great deal of knowledge and unfortunately very little ability to forgive or the wisdom to let go of certain things you can't control. You can't accept the world's flaws or your own, and you resent that those flaws can be so easily provoked from you.

I don't necessarily find being attracted to a woman irrational. So I don't judge you for that. You judge yourself. You want to be unaffected. You're not. If you were entirely unaffected I probably wouldn't care anyway.

You have my compassion and my wish that you find some peace, some acceptance of your own flaws and the flaws of the world, and to find yourself in imperfect company and still know that to be GOOD company. I give that to you freely and with good will, the same way you give to me the judgments you offer and the exhortations that the world must change or things will not be right. I accept that you mean me no harm, want me to be happy and we both have that to offer to each other, though good will in its many guises often clash, just as polka dots and stripes do.

It's not that I don't get it, really. It's that I've made a different choice. I can't say whether or not my choice is better or whether or not the world would be a different place if I were more Dona Quixote as you appear to be.

I do know that I choose my battles carefully and I don't fight the ones I can't win, while I think you're often found tilting windmills and getting knocked about. I have to hope you really like it and that's what you find exhilarating and what gives your life purpose.

The only problem is, I'm really not a windmill, I'm a human being, flawed, and I don't really want you to land on your ass. You've chosen Cervantes as your inspiration, I've chosen the Serenity Prayer.

But the world would be a less inspiring place if either of those two works were missing or went unrepresented.

 

[xssve]

I'm staying out of the censorship thread, so I don't know what the fuss is about - I don't mind dissenting viewpoints, it's a challenge, it spurs me to think, i.e., competition is good.

I don't even bother reading most of ami's posts anymore, just scroll past them, it's always the same predictable, delusional rhetoric, nothing really to respond to besides the self serving hypocrisy and projection and I've done that ad nauseum, it's just gotten old and ceased to be amusing, I don't have time for somebody who can only make an argument by putting words in my mouth - it's mental masturbation.