So, that Rick Perry "Strong" ad...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm surprised I haven't seen a thread on this (I searched and everything). I'll just post the video, I think it really speaks for itself.

 
I downvoted it and flagged it as hate speech against homosexuals. I hadn't realized he'd completely gone off the deep end. It's like he wants to out Bachman Bachman.

 
M

makare

I think that ad is deserving of all sorts of ridicule and is in itself hysterical in a way. However, let's not forget how terrifying it really is. I mean that he felt comfortable saying those things, not eluding to it or implying it, flat out saying it. I think that is a pretty horrifying statement about the way things are going these days, at least on that side of the fence... the kookoo conservative side.
 

Dave

Staff member
I think we should start a movement decrying the "War on Ramadan." Or Hannakuh. Channakuh. Umm...Hanukkah? That one Jewish holiday I can never spell...
 
Lol, silly me, here i was thinking this country was founded by people trying to escape an enforced governmental religion. Whelp, we all better brush up on the rules for the church of england.
 
M

makare

I have always felt that we live in a victim culture where the victims and those downtrodden on are celebrated and the underdog is always the preferred choice. The Religious Right just wants a piece of that. I will not say Christians because having some of the things I believe lumped in with these ignorant bastards pisses me off! "I am not ashamed to admit that I'm a Christian" well guess what Rick I am ashamed that you CALL yourself a Christian. Forgive my hyperbole but Rick Perry is to Christianity what Al Qaeda is to Islam.

The idea that the Religious Right, the immense powerful Christian majority is being persecuted in any form is ludicrous. It takes a very high level of intentional active ignorance to believe it. The mental gymnastics required to pull that crap is astounding. I would be impressed if I wasn't so busy feeling sick about it.
 
I enjoy the fact that the entire religions of Christianity and Catholosism can be factually disproved in today's society and yet people cling to it as something with merit. Merit enough to use it as grounds for your entire Presidential Campaign.

Look if you want to ignore facts and go off "faith", then more power to you, but don't insult the rest of us by trying to run for President on that motto.
 

Necronic

Staff member
I enjoy the fact that the entire religions of Christianity and Catholosism can be factually disproved in today's society and yet people cling to it as something with merit. Merit enough to use it as grounds for your entire Presidential Campaign.

Look if you want to ignore facts and go off "faith", then more power to you, but don't insult the rest of us by trying to run for President on that motto.
How can you factually disprove an anti-intellectual assertion? I never get why people fall into this rabbit-hole.

-------------

Anyways, one thing that always tickles me is when people talk about how the founding fathers may have pushed for a separation of church and state, but they were all fundamentally Christians and assumed that this was a Christian nation.

For some reason they never seem to listen when you point out that a large chunk of the founding fathers were Deists (or heavily Deist leaning):

Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Paine
Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
George Washington
Benjamin Franklin

and many more.

But then you have to explain to them what Deism is.
 
Easily, by proving that most of the fundemental stories that the entire belief is based upon are plagiarised from older stories (not similar, straight out plagiarism) and that dates used and locations for certain events have been scientifically and factually disproven multiple times.

So yeah, it can be and has.

That is not the discussion here, I've already stated that if someone wants to have faith in something regardless of facts, that is entirely their choice but they can't expect it to be the grounds for a Presidential election because just like any major religious official, when confronted with the fallicies in their religion, they'll have nothing to fall back on and stumble on what they "believe" that it makes the entire "base" of their campaign weak.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
How can you factually disprove an anti-intellectual assertion? I never get why people fall into this rabbit-hole.
This is a trap I often fall into as well - disproving a specific religion vs disproving faith in general, or the existence of a creator.
 
Oh I'd never try to disprove "faith". It can't be done. Neither can be the "creator" etc.

What can be, is the majority of major stories in the Bible and they have. Multiple times. As strong as your "faith" is and how much you want to make excuses for it, they are mostly just "inspiring stories" being told, but it's still Fiction.
 

Necronic

Staff member
Easily, by proving that most of the fundemental stories that the entire belief is based upon are plagiarised from older stories (not similar, straight out plagiarism) and that dates used and locations for certain events have been scientifically and factually disproven multiple times.

So yeah, it can be and has.

That is not the discussion here, I've already stated that if someone wants to have faith in something regardless of facts, that is entirely their choice but they can't expect it to be the grounds for a Presidential election because just like any major religious official, when confronted with the fallicies in their religion, they'll have nothing to fall back on and stumble on what they "believe" that it makes the entire "base" of their campaign weak.
I don't disagree with your conclusion, religion really has no place in politics, especially not "elect me because I'm closer to god holla-back-yall."

I just think that how you got there is wrong (or maybe I misunderstand you). As Gas said, there's a difference between proving that the historical documents of a religion are more mythology than factual and proving that an anti-intellectual concept of faith is logically false.

One you can do, the other is impossible by definition.

Edit: Ah you ninja'd me. Damn ninjas.
 
:ninja:

Anyway, this isn't a general religious debate, it's about how stupid Rick Perry is and how funny it is that he thinks he has any chance at this election.

His latest Youtube video has comments/voting disabled. :rofl:
 

Necronic

Staff member
Well he has faith.

Actually someone needs to get do a mash-up with George Michael's "Faith" song and a bunch of things of Rick Perry praying and his polling numbers continuing to drop.

It works on a lot of levels.

Because he's gay.
 
M

makare

I just get so annoyed that people claim to have strong faith or strong Religious faith, as the case may be, but it seems that unless they subject every other person on earth to their beliefs their faith is damaged. I mean really? Your faith is that weak that it can't survive different people having differing views? If your kid does not get to pray at school he will lose his faith? How about you pray at home or is taking responsibility to teach your kid your values just too much work? I mean it's just absurd really.

Man this really is starting to make me angry. This kind of ad and political platform is everything this country (the US >.>) was meant to be against. It's just so frustrating!
 

Necronic

Staff member
Really it's not that bad considering. Perry is only doing this because he is desperately trying to grab onto the religious right in....whatever state it is....I can't remember. No candidate that was doing well would ever consider doing something like this because most people have the reaction to it that we do (in one form or another).

But he already lost all of the reasonable voters by making the critical error of speaking.
 
I downvoted it and flagged it as hate speech against homosexuals. I hadn't realized he'd completely gone off the deep end. It's like he wants to out Bachman Bachman.
OK, I've just done the same thing. Thanks, I did not seriously consider doing it before.
 
M

makare

I think Perry can believe all he wants but he isn't going to get anything. He is a douche
 
R

Rick Parry

Easily, by proving that most of the fundamental stories that the entire belief is based upon are plagiarised from older stories (not similar, straight out plagiarism)
You do realise that using that as proof relies on assuming the stories are made up in the first place, right?
 
I don't. It sounded like that of someone wanting to pry open a conversation, but with the account presence of someone without a spine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top