Fuck that guy. He wasn’t properly quarantined, not screened for infectious diseases at all, and definitely had diseases and/or parasites that could have decimated the population if they weren’t very lucky.
And he went there to intentionally destroy their culture.
I hope his estate was confiscated to help pay to keep them isolated, and anyone who helped him was imprisoned or fined into the poor house. This was an attempted cultural genocide.
Leave them alone!

ProselytizIng should be a felony. Repeat offenders should get life.
*quality

Dumb shit snowflakes have been whining for the last 2 years, ignoring orders to make minor changes for both public health and to be able to reopen quickly, but like spoiled two year olds on time out, you guys kept defying orders, making the pandemic and the shutdowns exponentially worse, and restarting the “time out” clock.
You also complained non stop about shutting down the economy, hurting small businesses and commerce, but when a tiny (100+-) group of mostly white, swastika/confederate flag waiving truckers decide to shut down international commerce, costing hundreds of millions of dollars weekly (more than all rioting damage done in 2020, because they are targeting businesses and commerce) just to throw a tantrum, not achieve a thing, you are not just accepting of it, you support it.
Clearly your complaints about shutting down and hurting the economy to fight Covid and save hundreds of thousands of lives were not genuine since you are happy to do the same and worse to save the feelings of 100 truckers.…fuck your feelings, remember?…...big surprise, bob is a hypocrite willing to say anything to support his position today, including the exact opposite of his position yesterday.

All Trudeau needs to do is confiscate the trucks at gunpoint. Any trucker joining loses his truck. If it’s not their truck, they’ll have a huge bill from the owner.
Also, maybe remove their licenses for 2 years (or until restitution is paid in full). (Edit: nice, seems they actually thought of all that and have made it the law, and added up to a year in prison for those blocking commerce.)

Dumb shit, the restrictions
1)were also USA restrictions, like everyone else, Canadian truckers can’t cross the border without vaccinations. How does Trudeau stop that?…serious question I know you will ignore.
2) were being lifted in short order once the current variant slows its roll or border crossers get vaccinated
3) you really think a few hundred truckers (and a few hundred more rabble rousing morons with them) should have veto power over an entire federal government, and a federal government in another country, don’t you? But only when they look like you and waive confederate and nazi flags.
No, that’s not right? It has nothing to do with race? Why didn’t you support Trump defunding the police and/or removing immunity then?

So incredibly short sighted, myopic, hypocritical, self centered, likely racist, and just plain dumb Bob. You never disappoint.

Lemme guess, you support My Crackhead’s plan to illegally fly a helicopter over the protest and dump thousands of his pillows with bible verses covering them on Canada in a massive foreign littering/proselytizing scheme against a country that’s already banned him from entry. Right?

@bcglorf
Reading bible passages in class as “something we can all agree on” is the definition of proselytizing to a captive audience….and outside of private religious schools is totally inappropriate.

It’s not “fun” to be ostracized in public because you believe different mythology or are smart enough to ignore all stone aged mythology…..really only disbelieving one more myth than the believers.

Getting the season completely wrong because you don’t know it was chosen to make it easier to use religion as a political tool is a bit different from “the exact date being inaccurate”. It’s an outright, bold faced, well documented lie, created as a political ploy from the 4th century used to degrade and absorb Zoasterism/Mithraism in order to control the masses politically. That is absolutely a “credibility” issue, and if you don’t get it, that’s an education and/or ethics issue. Christianity has many major credibility issues, being “created” (codified) as a political tool is just one of them. Stealing almost every bit of the mythology from previous religions and denying it is another.

Yes, the misuse of Fauci clips out of context is another issue of truthfulness here, but those who are intentionally ignorant of the reality they just lived through are lost and not worth wasting my breath on. As anyone with two brain cells knows, the first, “you don’t need to wear a mask in public” was recommended at that time because a massive mask shortage meant health care workers had to reuse paper masks sometimes for months during a major pandemic, (and clearly they needed priority on the limited supply) not because we had information saying they weren’t useful….but that’s a minor detail of history I feel only brain dead ignoramuses consider in question, relevant, or factual, and they have discarded fact, truth, reason, and logic in favor of their cult of personality….so there’s no real point arguing with them. Just let them get Covid and hope for EIA.

Preaching one religion in a public class room and claiming “we all agree” is a continuation of a much more pernicious, long term, continuing battle for the religious freedom our country was founded on, and I find it outrageous and anti American that you dismiss it as nothing. I can only hope your children’s teachers aren’t a vastly different, contradictory religion than you and they don’t teach your children that everyone agrees with their religion, not yours, and don’t use proveable fallacies to make their point….but if they do I’ll be here to dismiss your concerns.
🤦‍♂️

@newtboy and @fuzzyundies

I know you at least had an emoji on proselytizing but...

Discussion of Christmas is no more proselytizing than discussion of Hanukkah or Ramadan. And in discussion of any of the 3, referencing the actual religious origins isn't really an 'escalation'.

And I get it's 'fun' to point out, but I can't believe anyone seriously feeling the exact date being inaccurate as a 'credibility' issue.

And surely wouldn't the failure to note that Fauci from March 2020 probably agrees with Fauci months later be the real big concern. FOX news for pity sake still tries to run the narrative of Fauci flip-flopping on masks using this exact footage...

Hey! No proselytizing in the classroom! 😉

Besides, the passage he read indicates that Christ’s birth would not be mid winter or the shepherds would likely not have been in the fields at night, it’s pretty cold and wet in Bethlehem (a 1/2 mile high city) in late December.
Any professor should know December 25th was Mithra’s birthday, a popular religious holiday, and emperor Constantine usurped it for Christianity as a way to consolidate religions to make it easier to use against the masses as a political tool.
You’re celebrating a dishonest political plot and an Iranian/Roman Pagan God’s birth, not the birth of Jesus.

But, without exception, that is EXACTLY what religions teach, that only those who believe correctly are correct and thus deserving of the supernatural rewards. It's how they excuse proselytizing, often with force. Can you name a real religion that says "we are the proper way to God, but other ways are just as valid."? (And I don't count individuals stating that, only the written texts that codify the beliefs).

Yes, we do treat those other people with disdain, those of us who don't buy into one or more flock that is.

They can't see through the hypocrisy and idiocy because religion/churches demand you not question your religious leaders, absolutely do not think for yourself. Don't try to interpret your dogma for yourself. Doing that leads directly to excommunication or much worse.

None of this is exclusive to Christianity, but in European/American culture it is most prevalent there.

Side question: What good has religion done that could not have been done better without it? Be specific please, with examples.

So, because one guy, Noah, sucked hard as a proselytizer, God murdered everyone else?
It must have been his failing since his message was so true and undeniable, yet it was denied and ignored, right? Why not just kill him and prove the message by miracle? Better, why not make everyone KNOW, not guess or believe, he exists and go from there. Using unverified middle men to spread your message is just plain stupid when you don't have to, and downright evil when you then torture those who don't accept it from those con men.

Like I said, complete incessant obedient subservience and worship of himself and his son under threat of eternal torture for any found lacking. That's narcissistic insecurity with absolute power, not love. Edit:part of love is accepting or at least tolerating disagreement, even disagreeable behaviour, and murdering people you find unsavory is not tolerance, sending them to hell is far closer to hate than love.
You don't threaten people into "loving" you out of love. (and worshiping out of fear isn't love)
You don't murder millions because you love them, even when they're being naughty.

I believe in a guy named Jesus, he could walk on water when it freezes, and turn water into wine using his vineyard, but his mom was no virgin and his dad was a human being. Am I good?

can we give the vegan proselytizing a rest on this channel???

Atheists do get accused of having a superiority complex over religious folks even though they don't proselytize much as far as I can see and surely far less than churchies

I feel shame, just not for what I eat.
You can try to shame me, you'll just fail. You can annoy, however, with the constant vegan proselytizing, in the same way some religious zealots annoy but don't make atheists fear hell.
You succeeded with the insult, though, intentionally or not. I don't like the implication that we are all junkies, even cheese junkies.

You know full well I never said any such thing, and adding quotes as if you cut and pasted it is not honest. What I have said is your guru, an often discredited, exaggerating, data misrepresenting, cherry picking, hyper biased, internet "Dr" that makes his living selling pro-vegan lectures, books, and videos was not a good source for reliable science....you made up the rest. The internet was invented for science.

Yes, it could be (but I'm not willing to spend time becoming an expert), because I can read and don't have the need to interpret what's clearly contradictory in a way that makes sense. Thou shall not kill is directly opposed to thou shalt kill infidels. Most instructions on how to act are in direct opposition to the golden rule - treat others as you would have them treat you. (For instance, proselytizing is expected, but if someone tries to proselytize to them, the entire community they come from should be erased....see above) Because I can admit that it's often contradictory and advocates things that are clearly evil, like slavery and murder, I don't have to do mental gymnastics to interpret it in some non-contradictory, always loving way.
Edit:read the passages I quoted and interpret them for me in a way not directing Christians to murder all non Christians (or Jews to kill non Jews perhaps, being old testament) please....because I cannot.

And as I've repeated, I have little respect for beliefs, but tolerance and understanding I have in abundance. Tolerance is not acceptance, understanding is not agreement.

Edit: I absolutely admit I hold a different interpretation than many people do of the bible, and other holy books (comparative religion was an enlightening class) for the reasons stated above....I read the texts as written, not through a filter of someone else's interpretation, not with a belief they are infallible or even rational.
Religious texts are like rule books for religions....you don't get to change their meanings or ignore some parts for convenience...religion isn't monopoly. If you do it that way, as most do, you're just playing religion, not practicing it....imo.

I can respect a person while not respecting their beliefs, unlike most religious people. It's pretty sad that you seem to not understand that possibility.

The next post was a juxtaposition with 'Christians are required to proselytize', pointing out that even Christians don't respect their own beliefs. This is not vitriolic, it's factual. Christianity requires Jihad, but Christians don't follow those parts today. If you can ignore one part, why not ignore it all, since it's clear you're picking and choosing, so can't believe the bible is the undeniable word of God or every word would be followed, not just the parts they like today.

Again, reminding him what his beliefs actually are is in no way being the worst at respecting others beliefs...Christians are required to murder those with different beliefs. You are claiming that pointing that out is worse than the murders themselves.

Atheists don't murder infidels, therefore can't possibly be the worst at disrespecting beliefs.

Don't most of you know, especially those who grew up in Christian homes, that Christians are commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ to proselytize?

Mark 16:15

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation

Christians who don't proselytize are actually in disobedience to the Lord.

Second, what kind of people would Christians be if they didn't proselytize? Knowing that people all around them are headed towards eternal death, and keeping the only way to escape it to themselves? Penn Jillette understands this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6md638smQd8

I understand why people are uncomfortable being proselytized to, especially when people yell at them or try to make them feel bad. That isn't the way you're supposed to do it. The bible says to speak the truth in *love*. If you don't fundamentally care about the person you are talking to and have a genuine concern for their soul, it isn't going to be fruitful.

I grew up in a Christian home (Methodist) but never really bought in and considered myself an atheist from about ~12 years old or so.

@poolcleaner said that atheists might be the worst at "respect(ing) my beliefs and recogniz(ing) that I am not recruiting them and they are not recruiting me".

There's two parts of that. Respecting other beliefs, and not proselytizing.

Just speaking for myself, I would say that I am an atheist specifically because I don't respect the Christian beliefs that I grew up with, and feel much the same way about the dogmatic elements of any religion. Most religions share the basic tenet of the "Golden Rule" (or claim that they do), and as far as I am concerned that is the only thing of value to be found in any religion -- although it can exist perfectly fine outside of any religious context.

That's where proselytizing comes in though. For a while when I was younger, I wanted to "spread the good news" of atheism -- to show others what was so obvious and important to me, that idea that the Golden Rule works just as well outside of any religious context. I was "indignant" (as poolcleaner put it) and quick to tell people that I am atheist and to sort of "pick a fight" about it. I wanted to show people just how stupid and wrong they were.

I think LOTS of atheists are like that, especially early on after they part ways with religion. To be fair, a lot of that is defensiveness since atheists tend to get proselytized to a LOT by Christians that learn/discover that they are an atheist -- especially in the US.

Now I'm 20 years older and I live in a country that is 95% Buddhist, 4% Islamic, and 1% Christian/Other. Thailand isn't even really close to the most diverse Asian country in religious terms (Singapore has 5 religions with 10%+ of the population, with Buddhist being the most at 34%) but there is an air of practiced religious acceptance / tolerance here that is WAY different from back home in the US.

I'd wager that amongst the major religions, Christianity might contain the highest percentage of the "proselytizing type" -- those that really strongly believe in the message enough to want to spread it to those who don't, or those that have never really questioned their beliefs but who nonetheless buy in enough to think that it is important to get it out there. On the other hand, there are many more Christians who may be very strong believers but who are comfortable keeping that all internal and not proselytizing.

With atheists, I'd say that there is a high correlation between being very "out" / open about their atheism and being the "proselytizing type" of atheist. So, if you know that someone is an atheist, it is fairly likely that they will be a bit "indignant" about it. If someone is an atheist but doesn't feel the need to inform others about it, most people would never know/assume they were an atheist. I'm not talking about "closeted" atheists; just the difference between those who are going to tell you within 10 minutes of meeting you that they are an atheist without the subject ever coming up, and those that will only mention it if you directly ask them about it.

Keeping that it mind, I can actually believe that from an outside perspective, known atheists might be more aggressive than known Christians just due to that sort of selection bias. Maybe.

Considering Sanders appeal, I don't think abandoning all their ideals is called for, but examining which are important and which equate to morality bullying would be good. I think most leftists agree that the name calling isn't helpful (with exceptions for total douchbags).
Really, I think an honest, non bombastic candidate from either side would be preferable to either choice we had.

Sorry to hear that pc thuggery is so prevalent there. That does sound overboard, but I totally support banning proselytizing of any kind at a school that takes public funding. Spreading your belief on my dime is unacceptable.