search results matching tag: preaching

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (66)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (4)     Comments (952)   

ahimsa (Member Profile)

ahimsa says...

i have to say that it IS the topic of the video. having compassion for some beings while murdering others shows a tremendous disconnect. if the man would have killed and eaten the dog and the hummingbird instead of rescuing them, he would be considered an uncaring monster by most people.

it is also interesting that asking others not to support violence and exploitation is considered as "preaching".

“True benevolence or compassion, extends itself through the whole of existence and sympathizes with the distress of every creature capable of sensation.” — Joseph Addison

eric3579 said:

Please stay on topic of the video. Weaving veganism into any and every video is just annoying. You only do your cause a disservice by bothering people with your preaching.

ahimsa (Member Profile)

eric3579 says...

Please stay on topic of the video. Weaving veganism into any and every video is just annoying. You only do your cause a disservice by bothering people with your preaching.

ahimsa said:

interesting story-but what is also very interesting is why the man does not make the connection between the dog and bird he helped to save and the tortured farmed animals who's flesh, milk and eggs he very likely consumes on a daily basis.

“The only difference between a dog, cat, horse and dolphin and a cow, chicken, pig and turkey is perception. One is no more valuable than another. And yet in this culture, we hold the former animals in high esteem and the latter we brutalize for food. All animals are deserving of respect and freedom from violence. The way to respect others is veganism.

British Farmer's Son Shocks Meat Farmer Dad with this video

Democratic Socialism. What is it really?

enoch says...

i have watched a few of this guys videos,and while he has great energy,passion and a penchant for sly humor,but he tends to impose his understandings as somehow being more valid and accurate.

just take his example of the role of government.
he makes a valid point,and then solidifies his position by implying his view is set in this countries original documents.

which is fair,but only to a point...he literally ignores the federalist papers,which he actually references,and it was these 200+ papers and/or arguments that debated the actual role of the federal government vs the role of state government.

@MonkeySpank he is actually right.america is not a true direct democracy but rather a democratically elected representative republic.

after he makes some valid,if fairly biased points,he devolves into the gospel of capitalism and how it is a natural extension of our democratic republic.

really dude?
name ONE corporation that is democratic in any fashion?
you can't?
maybe that is due to the very obvious and plain fact that corporations are tyrannical by their very design.

this semi-educated man is just preaching the gospel of his religion:capitalism.

and referencing lenin like 20 times?
dude...read a fucking book on the history of the soviet union.

oh jesus..now he defending trickle down economics.....
sighs..how the zealots adore their doctrine of their holy texts,even if those texts are just figments of some economists wet dreams and has been proven to be an utter and glorious failure.

sanders is a democratic socialist,not like a denmark flavor but more of a FDR flavor.you know...the most popular president in this countries history and ushered in the most prosperous era in this countries history.

i could do a play by play on this man all day,and make him cry like a pretty little thailand ladyboy who cant afford his life-changing surgery into a actual woman.

well..he does have that douchebag hair.so he may already be looking for a surgeon.

yeah..im with @MonkeySpank,this dude just needs a good cock punch.

The surfer not considered hot enough for sponsorship

Neil DeGrasse melds Science and Rap Battle

Sometimes God Really Tests You

Mordhaus jokingly says...

They do not preach that their God will rouse them a little before the nuts work loose.
They do not preach that His Pity allows them to drop their job when they damn-well choose.

Clearly these were not Sons of Martha.

eoe (Member Profile)

enoch says...

glad i was cruising the comments,otherwise i would have never seen your reply.(you replied on your own page).

good to hear things are moving forward my friend.be patient,good ideas take a bit of time to take root.

i simply asked because i was impressed with your exchange with newtboy and your subsequent comments.you appear to be taking the far (though slower) tactic of sticking to the facts and dealing with people in a respectful and open-minded manner.

i think that is the best way to go,though it will not garner you the insta-following that hyperbole and drama that many vegans adopt to convey their message.

that only works in the short run,and in the end you will just find yourself preaching to the choir.a rabid,aggressive and morally questionable choir.all residing in an echo chamber,smelling their own farts.

what you are attempting is hard,will take time but ultimately will be beneficial for everybody.the information you are trying to get across is important and you are challenging not only deep set traditions but also the incredibly bad impression many vegans have left in so many people psyche.

nobody wants to listen to a self-righteous person who behaves as if their choices make them the arbiters of morality,kinda like born again christians.they will simply tune you out at best or ridicule you at worst.

who knows?
maybe you could even change my mind!

(although i aint ever giving up bacon,so let that one go)

guess i am just rooting for you because i know the uphill battle you are facing,and am wishing you luck.
stay awesome man!

ps:maybe you could start to post videos to illuminate the subject you are so passionate about? just an idea.

NOW It Makes Sense Why Preachers Need Private Jets

Drachen_Jager says...

How about, instead of Amos, you open to the book of Luke.

"No one can serve two masters. For you will hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." (NLT, Luke 16:13)

Or Matthew

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (NIV, Matthew 6:19-21)

But it's obvious these guys don't actually practice the religion they preach. They're gifted con-men, like most highly-successful American figures who tout their Christianity (looking at you GOP field).

George Lucas Explains Why He Had To Break Up With Star Wars

MilkmanDan says...

I agree about the over-reaction to the "white slavers" comment, which I think just got hyper-PC types riled up.

And he does seem pretty humble and wise, although if he was really going to practice what he's preaching he would just butt out and not say anything. To be fair, he probably got invited on the show and is just responding honestly to the questions -- which is a fair bit different than if he sought out a soapbox to complain from.

I think Lucas had a fantastic combination of Tolkien-esque level creativity AND knew how to adapt his specific creations to the broadly appealing "Hero of 1000 faces" fantasy prototype AND got lucky in many ways. He deserves a LOT of praise for all of that. ...BUT, for the original movies he knew how to delegate things that he doesn't do well -- dialog, directing, etc. He was reined in by internal and external constraints. When those largely went away, we got the prequels.

I love Star Wars and am very grateful to George Lucas for creating that universe. And I'm pretty much equally grateful that he isn't at the helm anymore.

LukinStone said:

Wow...I'd seen all the headlines about this, purposefully avoided most Star Wars commentary as it seems pretty weakly considered and nearly always click-bait.

Seems like the "white slavers" comment wasn't anything as serious as the hype-mill spun it. It's almost a throwaway joke that you can tell doesn't really land. I think Lucas seems humble and wise in this clip.

Religion VS Reality

JustSaying says...

I usually don't comment on videos I dislike but I really don't understand why people who think of themselves as reasonable beings spend so much effort to preach to the choir. Especially if the end result is no better than the propaganda from the other side.

Putin Tells Everyone Exactly Who Created ISIS

dag says...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

He has some good broad points, but I agree with you RedSky that Russia is also acting in in self-interest, and it's a bit much for him to be preaching on this topic.

You would have to admit that Russia has been a bit more prudent about exercising that self-interest militarily than than the US has been.

RedSky said:

Military support of Syrian rebels in the US has by all accounts been minimal, it's primarily been non-arms tactical equipment. Arms support has come largely from the Gulf states / Iran. The idea that the US fomented the Syrian civil war is also largely groundless. If you want to talk about the private military sector, let's not forget that Russia is a major arms exporter.

Meanwhile Russia has armed and provided direct bombing to support Assad directly, a guy who uses chemical weapons and barrel bombs on his people to intimidate them. His priorities are to protect his only Mediterranean port in the Middle East and to use his war footing to prop up his own domestic support the same way he did in Ukraine.

If he wanted to end the conflict he would have pressured Assad to step down in favor and have the successor negotiate a settlement and eventual elections with the rebels. Instead he's poured fuel on the fire. The longer these conflicts last, the more radicalized the opposition becomes. Now that he's let it play out and fanned the flames, he can blame the US for creating the mess.

RT-putin on isreal-iran and relations with america

Asmo says...

Presuming that I don't think it was completely stage managed (I do) or that Russia isn't trying to score cheap points at America's expense (it is).

But again, that doesn't make him wrong. The west, headed by the US, has been putting it's sticky fingers in to the middle east for over 50 years, and it's only gotten worse and worse. How much western equipment now rests in IS hands? How many WMD's did the US find in Iraq? How many innocent people have died in the decades of war waged in the name of what exactly?

You can gussy it up as much as you like, but the US has been preaching the dogma of the greatest nation on earth/leaders of the world for years. Leaders set examples, so I guess it's not a massive surprise that the world is in such a god awful state...

I have little regard for Putin but for most of this dog and pony show, he's pretty much on the money.

RedSky said:

@Asmo

On your comment:

The CIA's role in the 1953 Iran ouster is generally exaggerated. Several things - (1) by 1953, the Islamic clergy supported Mossadeq's ouster, something they have been suppressing ever since in inflating their anti-US stance (2) by the time of his ouster he also lacked the support of either his parliament or the people, (3) prior to it that year, he deposed his disapproving parliament with a clearly fraudulent 99% of the vote in a national referendum, (4) strictly speaking Iran was still a monarchy and the shah deposed his PM legally under the constitution, something that Mossadeq refused to abide by.

Did the UK put economic pressure on Iran when it threatened to nationalize its oil and usurp its remnants of imperialism? Sure. Did the UK then convince Eisenhower to mount a political and propaganda campaign against Mossadeq? Sure. Was that instrumental in fomenting a popular uprising of the parliament, the clergy and large portions of the 20m general population against him? Probably not.

Also I listened to it. Really, it's a meandering, probably scripted (the parts where he feigns surprise at the questioning is particularly humorous) that tries to generalize US actions, some of which were obviously harmful and support his argument. Putting Stalin in a positive light relative to the willingness of the US to use the bomb is, amusing? I'm not sure what to call it.

That the US needs a common threat to unite against holds some grains of truth in the present day but is really part of a wider narrative by Putin to construct the US as imperalist and domineering when by all accounts since the end of the Cold War, excluding GWB's term, it has been pulling back. It hardly needed to invent Iran's covert nuclear ambitions in the early 2000s, NK's saber rattling or China's stakes on the South China Sea islands.

Modern US foreign policy largely relies on reciprocation. The US provides a military alliance and counterweight to China's military for small SE Asian nations at a hefty cost to itself, and presumably gets various trade concession and voting support in various international agencies. The key word being reciprocation, something that Russia could learn a fair bit from in its own foreign policy.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: LGBT Discrimination

bobknight33 says...

Civilized societies don't go around letting people stick dick up each other asses.

Funny thing about you liberals is that you are all tolerant towards other views unless its is different. And in this case all you got is slandering homophobe. What a pile of trash.

People like you are a minority and gays are even less. If you want to be gay, play gay, preach gay go ahead but don't expect real people to capitulate to your errors in thought.

Apparently the game is not over, not even close. This depate will go on for decades, just like the abortion debate.

ChaosEngine said:

I'm going to skip all the "gay is a choice" bollocks (hint: it's not, and when did you decide to be straight?) and focus on this.

Simple answer: because you're allowed to stand against this anymore in a civilised society.

Aww, is your freedom to be a bigoted homophobe being taken away? Too fucking bad.

This is 2015. You don't get to stand against homosexuality anymore, just like you don't get to dispute women having the vote or black people being allowed to ride the bus.

It's over. You lost. Deal with it.

Pastor Dewey Smith On Homosexuality And Hypocrisy



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon