Sudan Massacre

[Bomb#20]

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me.

"rude". Interesting choice of thing to apologize for. Falsely accusing someone of Holocaust denialism is a lot of things you'd owe an apology for and "rude" doesn't really make the top ten. So you can quote him denying the Holocaust, can you?

If pood is a Holocaust denialist, I'm Lincoln's grandfather.

Yeah, well, Abraham Lincoln was my (checks notes) 5th great-grandmothers cousin by marriage, and as his cousin but also someone who reads, I can assure you that Lincoln was not the kind of man who hears terrible news and immediately starts brainstorming ways to obscure facts and hide his own complicity in whatever happened. He never had to contend with the Holocaust but he did live through another shameful period of history, and his response was to face the evils of his time head on, not construct fanciful false narratives that absolved his church or his countrymen from moral responsibility for slavery and insurrection. He died, in fact, of standing on principle.

Really. So you have evidence that Lincoln squarely took responsibility for the Sand Creek Massacre, have you?

The difference between you and me is that I feel no need to censor history just to push some version of it. I'd be more than willing to hold Lincoln accountable for his actions after Sand Creek. Are you?

Why do you keep trumping up baseless personal attacks on posters for disagreeing with you? I feel no need to censor history just to push some version of it; you made that up. Looks to me like you were whitewashing Lincoln; that's why I brought up Sand Creek. Not sure how we're supposed to go about holding anyone accountable for his actions 160 years after he died, but if you mean painting people "warts and all" when we teach about them, yes, of course I'm willing.

 

[Politesse]

I apologize for being rude, but Holocaust denialism, even the selective variety, is a pretty sore point with me.

"rude". Interesting choice of thing to apologize for. Falsely accusing someone of Holocaust denialism is a lot of things you'd owe an apology for and "rude" doesn't really make the top ten. So you can quote him denying the Holocaust, can you?

If pood is a Holocaust denialist, I'm Lincoln's grandfather.

Yeah, well, Abraham Lincoln was my (checks notes) 5th great-grandmothers cousin by marriage, and as his cousin but also someone who reads, I can assure you that Lincoln was not the kind of man who hears terrible news and immediately starts brainstorming ways to obscure facts and hide his own complicity in whatever happened. He never had to contend with the Holocaust but he did live through another shameful period of history, and his response was to face the evils of his time head on, not construct fanciful false narratives that absolved his church or his countrymen from moral responsibility for slavery and insurrection. He died, in fact, of standing on principle.

Really. So you have evidence that Lincoln squarely took responsibility for the Sand Creek Massacre, have you?

The difference between you and me is that I feel no need to censor history just to push some version of it. I'd be more than willing to hold Lincoln accountable for his actions after Sand Creek. Are you?

Why do you keep trumping up baseless personal attacks on posters for disagreeing with you? I feel no need to censor history just to push some version of it; you made that up. Looks to me like you were whitewashing Lincoln; that's why I brought up Sand Creek. Not sure how we're supposed to go about holding anyone accountable for his actions 160 years after he died, but if you mean painting people "warts and all" when we teach about them, yes, of course I'm willing.

Then stop pitching a fit about me correcting pood's misinformation about the Holocaust. Simple as dirt.

 

[southernhybrid]

I disagree. The real issue is religion. Islam is the problem

Two billion Muslims say Christianity is the problem. Who should I believe? I guess whoever wins the war was right, b’cuz neither of their gods ever fucks up.

Look around the world. Do you genuinely believe that current, modern day Christianity is *an equal threat* to Islam? That they both do the same amount of harm to non-adherents? That they're equally oppressive of women and homosexuals? That they're equally authoritarian and likely to seek installment of an authoritarian theocracy?

Uh, yeah, I kinda think there is a case to be made for just that. See almost anything that comes out of DJT’s blow hole.

Okay, go ahead and name a single nation that is currently a christian theocracy, or a current christian-dominant nation that classifies women as second-class or non-citizens and denies women the right to exist in public without male supervision, or a current christian dominant nation that punishes homosexuals with death? How about a current christian-dominated country that executes anyone who leaves christianity?

Again: Coming to a country near you. See Project 2025.

Now, maybe we'll get lucky and avoid all of that but it isn't because the US electorate has made good decisions recently.

I haven't kept up with this thread, which as usual seems unrelated to the OP. But, it also appears as if at least one poster doesn't realize that the extremist Republicans are trying to make the US into a Christian theocracy, so it's very important to vote Blue in the midterms to help stop Project 2025.

https://btlonline.org/project-2025-...uthoritarian-christian-nationalist-theocracy/

One central feature of Project 2025 that’s often overlooked is that this 900-page document is rooted in Christian nationalism — with the clear goal of replacing democracy with an extremist Christian theocracy that would enable people to use their faith to ignore many civil rights and replacing man’s law with “God’s law.”

Between The Lines’ Scott Harris spoke with Andra Watkins, a New York Times best-selling author, who’s devoted many months researching and dissecting Project 2025 on her Substack online newsletter, “How Project 2025 Will Ruin Your Life.” Here Watkins, who was raised in a Christian fundamentalist home, attended a Christian nationalist school and a church that was one of the founding members of Jerry Falwell Sr.’s “Moral Majority,” talks about the threat posed by Project 2025, that despite recent denials, would serve as a blueprint for a second Trump presidency.

ANDRA WATKINS: Project 2025 starts with four promises to the American people and the first promise is that the family is the most important thing in American life. But their definition of the family is the traditional heterosexual one man married to one unrelated woman with as many children as God gives them.

Christian nationalism is steeped in the view that the Bible is infallible and inherent and it is God’s perfect law. So all of the people in our government who adhere to Christian nationalism believe that they are called by God to replace any law that violates their interpretation of the Bible or God’s law, with God’s law, which is a form of biblical law, sacred law, sharia law. However you want to define it.

They believe that they are ordained by God to do that. So we have seen red states, Republican states follow through with that in areas of abortion and IVF, with the ruling in Alabama. In Republican refusal to enshrine the right to contraception as federal law. In attacks on transgender people and same-sex marriage and no fault divorce. All of these are things they tie to their interpretation of the Bible and they believe that they are called by God to make all of us, whether we even believe the Bible or not, live by their interpretation of the Bible as enshrined in our laws at the federal and state level.

There are countless sources of information about this if you don't like my link. You don't have to read the entire 900 pages of Project 2025. Oddly enough these extreme Christain Nationalist don't even realize that the founders were mostly agnostics, atheists, deists or simply very skeptical of religion. These poorly informed people claim that the US was a Christian nation, when in fact, it is supposed to be secular nation that allows for freedom of religion, regardless of what that religion might be.

These people are already gaining ground as explained in the linked piece. If you don't realize this, you're not paying attention or you're listening to sources of disinformation. Wake the fuck up! Democracy is under attack by an insane criminal wh has been elected president. Trump is by far the worst, most dangerous president we've ever had. He has obvious signs of dementia and severe mental illness, malignant narcissism and sociopathy or worse yet psychopathy among them. Ok. Hopefully I've made my points.

 

[bilby]

Trump is by far the worst, most dangerous president we've ever had. He has obvious signs of dementia and severe mental illness, malignant narcissism and sociopathy or worse yet psychopathy among them.

Sure, but what about the price of eggs?