Evil fucks and also stupid evil fucks. Hypocrisy is just a minor side effect of applying the violent double standard (us vs them) fundamental to fascism.
They're not really hypocrites, because they have no framework of logic there that they're going against. It's literally Us: "So, because this is that, [tautological conclusion]" Them: "No." It's like what physicist Wolfgang Pauli famously said of some particularly egregious theory: "That's not even wrong". These "people" fundamentally don't believe in reality.
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Sure how I read it.
the new argument rolled out is "i believe in the original constitution before they changed everything" which is very obviously just as incoherent as anything else.
Yes. That's one of the Reconstruction Amendments that were put into the Constitution during the Civil War, and the South was required to accept them as part of re-joining the Union. They've hated them since day one, and have always worked to undermine or reinterpret them, regardless of which party represented them. Now that the GOP has control of the government, they'll roll them back in all but name.
Not every GOP leader has tried to cancel the Constitution. Nixon, of course, but then not til GW, although he had no clue what he was doing, he was just doing what Cheney told him to do.
Right now they don't bother with rolling it back, because they know that's a process they could lose. Right now they're just denying it because not enough people are going to stop them for it to matter if they ignore it. Same as always with Trump and his posse.
These people are insufferable. The fifth amendment says "No PERSON shall..." not "No CITIZEN shall..." PERSON. NOT CITIZEN. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY'RE HERE ILLEGALLY. THEY ARE PEOPLE. THEY GET DUE PROCESS. THE END.
I no longer support this kid, immediately after the kirk thing, he said he would rather support the right than the Dems if he was forced to make a choice between the two
It’s not a criminal offense to be in the US without documentation, so there is no crime technically. And the constitution guarantees rights like habeus corpus to everyone in the US regardless of their documentation status, so right off the bat this guy is wrong. Even without the religious contradiction.
Yea everyone is talking about the content and politics meanwhile I'm so sure this is either AI or something has happened in video editing Trends to make everything look like AI.
Pin them down. Repeat your question: "Who is right, God or Trump?" - no more, no less. They start to say anything else, interrupt with that sentence. Over, and over, and over again. Until they either pick, or give up and leave.
i don't believe in debating this issue. the only point that should be brought up is ROOT they use to justify everything they say and actions. THE BIBLE IS FAKE. the bible is a collection of campfire stories. this is the scientific fact. "The oldest books began as songs and stories orally transmitted" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Development_and_history
Maybe so, but if someone defines their life by their belief in this book, then it's still appropriate to call them out when their actions contradict it.
studied world religions (in catholic university), cultures untouched by the white christian savages (remote islands, deep jungles...) none had any written materials, all their history, sailing routes... were transmitted by chants and songs for thousands of years. so were their campfire stories of spirits and gods. whoever had the best magical story telling got the biggest share of food and sexual favors and least work load. https://www.surfandsunshine.com/polynesian-dances-and-chants-explained/
But what we genuinely need in these moments is the divine eloquence of mollywhopping someone who admits to being a bigoted POS. They don't understand words or even thoughts. They only understand consequences, so we need to teach them the consequences of what they're doing.
From watching the cruelty of drump and his acolytes, I would assume drump is wrong compared to any deity or human with any shred of decency. Plus this vid was irony about people who preach the Bible but don’t read it or use the information past how it benefits them.
> PaperinoVB : "There is no finesse in this kind of people, he should be blunt: 'So, God says a thing and Trump says the opposite. Who is right, God or Trump?'" ...They've been answering that loudly & proudly every day since the moment they began supporting this disaster-in-chief.
But this means… Trump’s gotta *** again for our sins, right? lol I’m almost down to take that bet because I’m quite confident he won’t come back after three days. lol
the finesse is the packaging, not how you unpack it. You gotta make it real easy for these folks, they're not good at puzzles, or following instructions.
I'mma be honest. They're not stupid. They know. Oversimplify, and they'll reject the argument for being simplistic. Go into detail, and they'll circularize it until you can't reach and endpoint. They already know what it really means.
This is a circle that's so small it can only circle not believing in god, and when he got to the core contradiction, he framed it in one sentence. I feel like he struck a pretty good balance.
They are stupid as fuck, they don't think they're doing any of that. They don't know what any of it means, no matter how many times they go around in the circle, they were showed the circle and told it is good, so they never realize it should be a spiral and not just around and around.
Honestly, I have my doubts. I think you could hand them irrefutable proof, enchanted by a genie to be impossible to disbelieve that he hates god and raped little girls, and they'd internalize that, justify it, and lie about believing it.
I had a similar conversation with a family member and asked why he thought his struggle was greater than that of Jesus and in all seriousness said that Jesus never had to deal with Obama.
I personally have no use for these types of arguments. There's a million sects of religion, and Christianity in particular, because people have different interpretations, translations, opinions, and emphases on what any given religious doctrine says. A better arguments would be what the constitution says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make (1)
(2) "or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 14th amendment states that any person in US jurisdiction has equal rights. Religion doesn't even need to be brought up because it is irrelevant to the law.
That's too long and complicated. They don't even understand you can't be identified as a citizen without due process. Or, of course, know it perfectly and happily abuse it.
This is Dean Withers. He does DAILY live TikTok and YouTube streams where he cooks Trump supporters. It’s glorious. Not only that, but I’ve learned so much and have been able to hold my own against these morons since j started listening. Go check him out!
He also said that if people didn't stop giving him shit about his emotional response to Charlie Kirk's death, he'd "side with the right", just kind of putting it out there that he doesn't actually stand for any (or at least some of) the stuff he debates about. Not saying he can't react any way he wants to a gruesome death of someone he interacted with several times, but to threaten to switch like that was pretty tactless. Lost some respect for him that day but he does do a great job debating
Pretty sure every person within the United States is extended the protections of the Constitution, no matter how they got there. Pretty sure the Constitution explicitly states that.
Which there is a loophole in all this though. If you are not physically in the US, or a non US person not physically in the US, but you do business in the US. You are not protected the same way. Worked at a UPS Store back in the day. Had a person who lived in another country open a mail box with us, and forward their mail to them. One day there laptop was stolen. It said it showed up, but it didn’t, and they (mailbox holder) needed a police report for it. 1/2
The cops showed up to do the report. We told them what happened. When the cop found out the mailbox holder wasn’t even in the country and never has been in the country (Which the customer said over the phone. When the cops called them.) They laughed and told them to “kick rocks” as they couldn’t do anything since they do not live here, or are here physically. Customer was a nice person, and kept there mail box though.
I don't know about the whole constitution and it might depend on your definition of "protection", but the 14th Amendment is very clear that no "person" can be deprived of due process. Obviously some protected rights like the right to vote only applies to citizens and the constitution does specify that.
Makes me sick how the current US government (and Bush Jr's, let's not forget) is side stepping due process and literally murdering people. Trump bombing civilian boats, for example.
The old testament also says to burn witches, gay is bad, shrimp is an abomination, and don't sit where women on their period sat. So while the caller is a dick for being a bigot, using Leviticus as a canonical arbiter of morality isn't a great argument. Caller is still an anti-Constitutional, anti-American bigoted asshole, though.
Doesn't actually say gay is bad. That passage has been fucked with so many times it's not funny. If I'm not mistaken, that passage was originally either about incest of pedophilia, can't remember, but it's not actually against homosexuality. Only mention of abortion in the bible is instructions on how to do it, as well.
You're thinking of the New Testament. The Old Testament pretty clearly says that a man should not have sex with a man. The only serious debate is about whether it refers specifically to anal or all homosexual acts between men. Lesbianism is not mentioned at all.
If you believe Christ died for your sins, none of that Old Testament shit applies anymore. They leave that out. I'm going to eat some bacon-wrapped shrimp and sodomize my Jewish wife. It's what he died for!
Aye, but that’s why it works. The caller had two choices: (1) Say “I follow the new covenant” and lose the foundation for most of his politics. (2) Abandon his religion in favor of Donald Trump. This is what we all wish fundies would experience — a clear distinction between their politics and their religious devotion.
1) If witches were real, we probably should be burning them 2) pedophilia is bad, it's just been mistranslated to gay 3) have you seen a live shrimp? they're disgusting 4) there were no tampons or pads when Leviticus was written. this was probably just sanitary practice. /humor
Well if the stereotype of witches, created to make witches look bad, was a real thing, yea sure. But real actual witches do exist and they aren't anything like that.
I'm pretty sure the old testament doesn't say to burn witches, the fanfic where witches exist comes much later, it bans sorcery slightly less than it bans adultery and about the same as it bans eating shellfish.
I dont think thats really and argument for someone who defines themselves as christian. The book is the book the rules are the rules. I know its common for poeple to pick and choose buuuut if we want to be technical. Christians should declare they are a sub sect that uses a bible that doesn't follow those codes.
You can still burn witches with a sick insult It says if a man lies with another man, they should be stoned (break out the weed my boy) Shrimp is an abomination, fucking thing gives me a rash from another dimension
Never said that gay is bad actually. It says raping little boys is bad, and then someone translated it to say gay is bad because they needed a goat to scape.
Those idiots have no problem using Leviticus to justify their hate on gays whenever they have the possibility,so it is just showing them their hypocrisy.
Actually the word translated as "homosexual" appears nowhere but the Bible bc Paul invented the word. So there's no context for determining the meaning, but it's construction sounds like it's referring to men raping young boys. And translations not influenced by early 20th century conservative American scholarship don't translate it as homosexuality. Older German translations, for example, say pederasty.
I'm ok with calling a (self proclaimed) Bible-believing Christian out if they aren't believing the Bible. I don't think people should buy into it, but if they are going to they should be consistent. But the whole thing is so easy to be inconsistent.... take care of the foreigner, but that includes being ok enslaving them. It's just problematic all the way around. That does strengthen your point.
That's why I have Matthew 25:31-46 as my go to passage in these situations. It covers most of these situations and isn't vulnerable to the "old testament doesn't count" argument.
Furthermore, they usually just create a new denomination when this sort of thing happens. First Church of Trump? I'm sure that's been done already without even looking it up.
You're at least as confused as the caller is. The host never claimed Leviticus is an arbiter of morality. He pointed out that the caller claims to be Christian yet opposes the morality of their own sacred texts. You may be even dumber than even the Trump supporter who called in. Remarkable.
The old testament does NOT say gay is bad. The passage you are referring to is a compound word of the Greek words for man and bed and is referencing pedophilia, not homosexuality. It was purposely mistranslated about 80 years ago so US southern priests could be bigots towards gay people.
But WHEN you are so conservative that you follow Leviticus, than stop cherry picking. You can't be against gay AND against immigrants. Either you are following Leviticus or not! I think that's what the moderator wanted to say?
They have to cherry pick what applies and what doesn't apply and what applies only with context and what applies with interpretation and what applies only to certain people. They will rationalize until their dying breath so they don't have to ever admit that they were believing in bullshit written by people not by god. Lose that belief and their worldview crumbles like a house of cards. Then they have to face the world without any crutches.
I get what he's trying to do, but going to the Bible is getting into the weeds. The constitution guarantees rights to everyone, especially due process, wherever you're from.
I hear you, and it's all magic hocus-pocus to me anyway... but a lot of christians argue that the old testament doesn't apply since Jesus wiped it all away. Still, on the other hand, Leviticus is what tells a lot of conservatives that gay is bad (so is shrimp, so are cheeseburgers), so... they get very selective about what what they cherry pick from the bible.
From where I sit though, Leviticus wouldn't apply to christians. But even the new testament is full of things about loving EVERYONE.
Old Testament: "It's a rough world out there. Here are some questionable rules for navigating it. Some of them are definitely arbitrary. Don't question them." New Testament: "The world is nicer now, so you should be nice to everyone, including bad people. Don't worry; when they die, God will TORTURE THEM FOREVER. Also you should hate Jews."
To me, the problem is never what people believe; but the hypocrisy and delusion they choose to live by, especially as those two things affect me directly unlike their belief.
Yes, in the new testament, Jesus says "I was a stranger and you welcomed me" which is a parallel to the Leviticus commandment. Jesus was a Jew, and his teachings largely reflect the same beliefs.
The judgment of nations, fuck yeah! Everyone says the Old testament doesn't count, but they forget Jesus spoke a metric fuck ton about welcoming others in, living for your brothers and sisters, being a servant to everyone.
Kind of reminds me of the thing that was happening a few years ago where conservative church goers would ask their pastors where they got the woke/left-wing sermon from and the pastors would say, Jesus.
The bottom line is that people like the caller will ALWAYS cherry pick whatever quote from whatever version of the bible suits them at that moment. I've had this same conversation with many people I work with and they just continually move the goal post or claim that one scripture doesn't mean anything while quoting another to solidify their claim.
I know from personal experience that the best way to get through to these people is to use localized empathy (meaning - examples of things that will directly affect people they care about) and logic. You gotta go slow because you're effectively trying to undo decades of brain washing they've endured.
Old Testament doesn’t actually say shit about homosexuality. It calls out pedophilia which was translated in a way to equate pedophiles with homosexuals.
Also… and this is a BIG FUCKING ALSO, the New Testament contains a new covenant, a new pact, stating that you must follow Jesus. Which you know, love thy neighbor is a core tenant. JFC never says shit about homosexuality. He says love god and love your neighbor. So any Christian quoting shit from anything other than that is actually full of shit.
I'm sorry but this just isn't true. Somebody said it on the internet once and many other people liked the idea so they were eager to repeat it, without evidence. But the Hebrew word זָכָ֔ר ("zā-ḵār") in Leviticus 18:22 (I assume that's what you're referring to) just very literally means "male" and has no connotation about age, i.e. child or adult. It doesn't mean "man" and it doesn't mean "boy". It just means "male".
It says a man anally raping a man is bad. It doesn't speak of homosexuality or homosexual relationships and it doesn't even mention women at all. Not that it matters because fuck the bible, but that is the deal. Anything more is a purposeful, politically motivated mistranslation for its time.
No, it doesn't. That is a very fringe interpretation. It pretty clearly says "You shall not have sex with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination". Saying it only referred to rape, only to pedophilia, only to incest, etc. are all things that have been argued, but not generally accepted. The only strong debate is whether it refers to anal/penetrative sex or all homosexuality.
Let’s say you’re right… the fact is if you are a Christian, you aren’t bound by the first covenant. You’re bound by the covenant of Jesus. And point to the verse where Jesus says anything about homosexuality.
"It's illegal!" Sure, but is the law just? It was illegal for me to have sex for more than half my life (including from birth to when the sodomy laws were overturned) so I'm a criminal many times over. If all laws are equally just, then I and all the other guys who had sex before 2003 should be in jail. And FYI, 12 states still have those anti sodomy laws as part of their penal code, they just aren't allowed to enforce it anymore.
monkeybasketball
What is the host’s name??
MadFistWilly
https://media0.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1NWU5MTFzdW54MG43Y2FiMHdoZ3E1NG5vYWFhOHZlOXZpMjFoY3RldCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/LnKa2WLkd6eAM/200w.webp
seenunseen
Hypocrites and idiots
mcconnek28
Hypocrisy is the least of their crimes.
nomikos
like shooting fish in a barrel
LicensedAdHominem
Evil fucks and also stupid evil fucks. Hypocrisy is just a minor side effect of applying the violent double standard (us vs them) fundamental to fascism.
ButtblasterMcAssmaster
They're not really hypocrites, because they have no framework of logic there that they're going against. It's literally Us: "So, because this is that, [tautological conclusion]" Them: "No."
It's like what physicist Wolfgang Pauli famously said of some particularly egregious theory: "That's not even wrong". These "people" fundamentally don't believe in reality.
SecretAgentSuperBooger
rfleming1080
Doesn't Amendment 14 give the right to due process to those in the US, even if they aren't legal?
HeresYourSauce
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Sure how I read it.
NoTeEnchiles
Yes.
HypoMix
Even if it didn't, how would you determine if they are legal without due process?
newsguycraigevans
Ayup
Marikhen
Any part of the Constitution that does not explicitly state it applies solely to citizens almost certainly applies to *everyone* in the US.
MarsIsAfire
Yeah, his argument doesn't make sense in so many ways. Committing a crime means you've given up your rights? Real mouth breather this one.
Marikhen
Absolutely. Even for citizens you only lose your rights upon conviction of a crime, and even then you only temporarily lose specific rights
kirmokum
the new argument rolled out is "i believe in the original constitution before they changed everything" which is very obviously just as incoherent as anything else.
ItHappenedInThe20thCentury
"I liked the consitution before it went all woke and shit"
MarsIsAfire
lol I don't know that I've heard anyone make this argument. As if Article V wasn't part of the original US Constitution. That's hilarious though.
RanOutofWit
Remind them that this would remove the second amendment, lol
ghostalker
Yes. That's one of the Reconstruction Amendments that were put into the Constitution during the Civil War, and the South was required to accept them as part of re-joining the Union. They've hated them since day one, and have always worked to undermine or reinterpret them, regardless of which party represented them. Now that the GOP has control of the government, they'll roll them back in all but name.
custardandfishfingers24
Not every GOP leader has tried to cancel the Constitution. Nixon, of course, but then not til GW, although he had no clue what he was doing, he was just doing what Cheney told him to do.
justanothergeek
Right now they don't bother with rolling it back, because they know that's a process they could lose. Right now they're just denying it because not enough people are going to stop them for it to matter if they ignore it. Same as always with Trump and his posse.
Silver420Surfer
Religion is a disease!
hungoveratworkguy
I always appreciate when these Knuckledraggers are called out and hit with the scripture they oh so claim to love
DeepThought42
nothingunused
What did she do wrong to get stuck in customer service?
bobGrimer
Huge difference, she gets to send the "customers" to actual hell.
nothingunused
Good point, maybe she's living the customer service dream.
PastryNugget
These people are insufferable. The fifth amendment says "No PERSON shall..." not "No CITIZEN shall..." PERSON. NOT CITIZEN. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY'RE HERE ILLEGALLY. THEY ARE PEOPLE. THEY GET DUE PROCESS. THE END.
tinybartender
You are right. Your opponents may try to argue the "illegals" are not even people, but that's where they'd be wrong.
tellmeimcute
I no longer support this kid, immediately after the kirk thing, he said he would rather support the right than the Dems if he was forced to make a choice between the two
jalcantara88127001
Both are bad. Just be a good person. It's not that hard
LurkMasterP
Apparently it's not that easy for lots and lots of people
OMFGWhatHaveWeDONE
They were LITERALLY warned about falling for a Trump.
an0therthr0waway
MinnWild9
It gets worse than that. Some of these are pretty generic, but some are so spot on that it’s scary. https://www.benjaminlcorey.com/could-american-evangelicals-spot-the-antichrist-heres-the-biblical-predictions/
aoshistark
Bet you a million dollars Jimmy is a rural American.
SmellingMistake
So he claims our laws don't apply to them but is pissed that they are breaking our laws?
AriOverby
Stop quoting The Bible to modern Christians. Most of them have never even touched one.
NetProfit
You can't win an argument with an incompetent person but god damn, it sure as hell makes for some good entertainment
mmmerf1
For Catholics, welcoming the stranger is one of the corporate works of mercy. It's a thing we have to do.
morbidparsnip
It’s not a criminal offense to be in the US without documentation, so there is no crime technically. And the constitution guarantees rights like habeus corpus to everyone in the US regardless of their documentation status, so right off the bat this guy is wrong. Even without the religious contradiction.
doctorId
Was this entire thing made by AI, or did someone just put a pointless AI filter on an existing video? Either way, it looks like vomit.
rubberbear
Yea everyone is talking about the content and politics meanwhile I'm so sure this is either AI or something has happened in video editing Trends to make everything look like AI.
PaperinoVB
There is no finesse in this kind of people, he should be blunt: "So, God says a thing and Trump says the opposite. Who is right, God or Trump?"
Photeus
*waffling back and forth while giving no definitive answer begins*
DukeDarkwood
Pin them down. Repeat your question: "Who is right, God or Trump?" - no more, no less. They start to say anything else, interrupt with that sentence. Over, and over, and over again. Until they either pick, or give up and leave.
Timesarrows
i don't believe in debating this issue. the only point that should be brought up is ROOT they use to justify everything they say and actions. THE BIBLE IS FAKE. the bible is a collection of campfire stories. this is the scientific fact. "The oldest books began as songs and stories orally transmitted" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Development_and_history
Schnickelfritz2
Maybe so, but if someone defines their life by their belief in this book, then it's still appropriate to call them out when their actions contradict it.
Timesarrows
studied world religions (in catholic university), cultures untouched by the white christian savages (remote islands, deep jungles...) none had any written materials, all their history, sailing routes... were transmitted by chants and songs for thousands of years. so were their campfire stories of spirits and gods. whoever had the best magical story telling got the biggest share of food and sexual favors and least work load. https://www.surfandsunshine.com/polynesian-dances-and-chants-explained/
KoalaOnTheJuice
https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1d2Jpc3Uya24yNnJpZGxqZzR4NWE1NGxwbjJ2NzVlanlkMWM3OXgwaiZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/DMNPDvtGTD9WLK2Xxa/200w.webp
Wapusk
But, Trump is sent by God... ah-ha, see? SO, like Oily Josh negated and contradicted the Torah, whatever Trump says is Gospel.
Ivain
Gotta be careful with that, their brains might spontaneously combust. Not that it'd be a LARGE explosion, but still messy.
dirtybarnacles
True dat but still man, theres a calm eloquence in his demeanor genuinely waiting for each reply that I find masterful \_(“.)_/
Wraivyn
But what we genuinely need in these moments is the divine eloquence of mollywhopping someone who admits to being a bigoted POS. They don't understand words or even thoughts. They only understand consequences, so we need to teach them the consequences of what they're doing.
jojoyojimbi
FlipTheBirdBeforeTheBirdFlipsYou
TapiocaMartini
Most people just hang up or stop talking so they don't have to deal with this kind of doublethink to deal with all this hypocrisy.
DeepThought42
From watching the cruelty of drump and his acolytes, I would assume drump is wrong compared to any deity or human with any shred of decency. Plus this vid was irony about people who preach the Bible but don’t read it or use the information past how it benefits them.
OperatorWay
> PaperinoVB : "There is no finesse in this kind of people, he should be blunt: 'So, God says a thing and Trump says the opposite. Who is right, God or Trump?'"
...They've been answering that loudly & proudly every day since the moment they began supporting this disaster-in-chief.
tantallous
no see. we got the new testament (gospel) from jesus, and now he sent trump to give us the newer testament, obviously. no contradiction here
0ppai
Please don't give them ideas
LogicalLimes
But this means… Trump’s gotta *** again for our sins, right? lol I’m almost down to take that bet because I’m quite confident he won’t come back after three days. lol
Timetoupdatemyusername
Again, don't give them ideas. He already faked an assassination attempt, I wouldn't put it past him to fake a death and resurrection.
ServerMonkeyKing
Straight from the "Blessed Be's" to the budget Orange Palpatine "Let the hate flow through you" ... such a smooth transition.
BishlamekGurpgork
"This is where you fucking bow the knee and apologize for your sins" does not seem to require finesse to unpack.
akafluffy
the finesse is the packaging, not how you unpack it. You gotta make it real easy for these folks, they're not good at puzzles, or following instructions.
BishlamekGurpgork
I'mma be honest. They're not stupid. They know. Oversimplify, and they'll reject the argument for being simplistic. Go into detail, and they'll circularize it until you can't reach and endpoint. They already know what it really means.
This is a circle that's so small it can only circle not believing in god, and when he got to the core contradiction, he framed it in one sentence. I feel like he struck a pretty good balance.
glittalogik
You can't debate someone who's arguing in bad faith. And that's the only kind of faith they know.
akafluffy
They are stupid as fuck, they don't think they're doing any of that. They don't know what any of it means, no matter how many times they go around in the circle, they were showed the circle and told it is good, so they never realize it should be a spiral and not just around and around.
BishlamekGurpgork
Honestly, I have my doubts. I think you could hand them irrefutable proof, enchanted by a genie to be impossible to disbelieve that he hates god and raped little girls, and they'd internalize that, justify it, and lie about believing it.
TheSecondPiewackit
No, they /are/ stupid, and you're expecting logical consistency befitting a smart person.
BishlamekGurpgork
No. You only need logical consistency for a good-faith argument.
ChernoGamma
I had a similar conversation with a family member and asked why he thought his struggle was greater than that of Jesus and in all seriousness said that Jesus never had to deal with Obama.
butcherfan0301
I personally have no use for these types of arguments. There's a million sects of religion, and Christianity in particular, because people have different interpretations, translations, opinions, and emphases on what any given religious doctrine says. A better arguments would be what the constitution says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make (1)
butcherfan0301
(2) "or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 14th amendment states that any person in US jurisdiction has equal rights. Religion doesn't even need to be brought up because it is irrelevant to the law.
LicensedAdHominem
That's too long and complicated. They don't even understand you can't be identified as a citizen without due process. Or, of course, know it perfectly and happily abuse it.
Pebblebro
No maga is Christian. Most Christian’s aren’t Christians. There is no god.
derptato
This is Dean Withers. He does DAILY live TikTok and YouTube streams where he cooks Trump supporters. It’s glorious. Not only that, but I’ve learned so much and have been able to hold my own against these morons since j started listening. Go check him out!
OMGChris
He also said that if people didn't stop giving him shit about his emotional response to Charlie Kirk's death, he'd "side with the right", just kind of putting it out there that he doesn't actually stand for any (or at least some of) the stuff he debates about. Not saying he can't react any way he wants to a gruesome death of someone he interacted with several times, but to threaten to switch like that was pretty tactless. Lost some respect for him that day but he does do a great job debating
derptato
lol what? When did he say this?
Rabidbacon
https://youtube.com/shorts/50SEh0Dekhc?si=w4yVNM9Ic7qY4x6q
derptato
Ok… where is the rest of the video? I don’t even know what line he was referring to.
Which one of Dean’s streams did that 10 sec clip come from?
Rabidbacon
That means he's an opportunist.
sindail
https://imgur.com/0BdK88H.mp4
busterfixxitt
Pretty sure every person within the United States is extended the protections of the Constitution, no matter how they got there. Pretty sure the Constitution explicitly states that.
Am I mistaken?
ChiggenWuffle
Which there is a loophole in all this though. If you are not physically in the US, or a non US person not physically in the US, but you do business in the US. You are not protected the same way. Worked at a UPS Store back in the day. Had a person who lived in another country open a mail box with us, and forward their mail to them. One day there laptop was stolen. It said it showed up, but it didn’t, and they (mailbox holder) needed a police report for it. 1/2
ChiggenWuffle
The cops showed up to do the report. We told them what happened. When the cop found out the mailbox holder wasn’t even in the country and never has been in the country (Which the customer said over the phone. When the cops called them.) They laughed and told them to “kick rocks” as they couldn’t do anything since they do not live here, or are here physically. Customer was a nice person, and kept there mail box though.
iusedtodream
You are correct.
AsABiologistWhoIsNotFunAtParties
I don't know about the whole constitution and it might depend on your definition of "protection", but the 14th Amendment is very clear that no "person" can be deprived of due process. Obviously some protected rights like the right to vote only applies to citizens and the constitution does specify that.
MarsIsAfire
Makes me sick how the current US government (and Bush Jr's, let's not forget) is side stepping due process and literally murdering people. Trump bombing civilian boats, for example.
AriOverby
It quite explicitly states "Person". If you are a person, the United States Constitution automatically grants you certain unalienable rights.
busterfixxitt
Ah. That explains the MAGA position quite well, doesn't it? 'Immigrants aren't people.'
wejustdontknow
Also, being an undocumented immigrant in the US is not a crime. It is, at most, a misdemeanor.
quade
The old testament also says to burn witches, gay is bad, shrimp is an abomination, and don't sit where women on their period sat. So while the caller is a dick for being a bigot, using Leviticus as a canonical arbiter of morality isn't a great argument. Caller is still an anti-Constitutional, anti-American bigoted asshole, though.
mmmerf1
To be fair, shrimp can be an abomination. Like at Red Lobster, some of what they're doing is wrong. Wrong wrong wrong.
HavelTh3Rock
Doesn't actually say gay is bad. That passage has been fucked with so many times it's not funny. If I'm not mistaken, that passage was originally either about incest of pedophilia, can't remember, but it's not actually against homosexuality. Only mention of abortion in the bible is instructions on how to do it, as well.
2074red2074
You're thinking of the New Testament. The Old Testament pretty clearly says that a man should not have sex with a man. The only serious debate is about whether it refers specifically to anal or all homosexual acts between men. Lesbianism is not mentioned at all.
11Weasel11
If you believe Christ died for your sins, none of that Old Testament shit applies anymore. They leave that out. I'm going to eat some bacon-wrapped shrimp and sodomize my Jewish wife. It's what he died for!
GroverKerr
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." - Matthew 5:17
11Weasel11
Two questions, Do you eat shellfish and do you eat bacon?
GroverKerr
I couldn't give less of a shit about adhering to failed ancient ethical codes.
thefinglongerer
Aye, but that’s why it works. The caller had two choices: (1) Say “I follow the new covenant” and lose the foundation for most of his politics. (2) Abandon his religion in favor of Donald Trump. This is what we all wish fundies would experience — a clear distinction between their politics and their religious devotion.
dman88
1) If witches were real, we probably should be burning them 2) pedophilia is bad, it's just been mistranslated to gay 3) have you seen a live shrimp? they're disgusting 4) there were no tampons or pads when Leviticus was written. this was probably just sanitary practice. /humor
Styxwash
Well if the stereotype of witches, created to make witches look bad, was a real thing, yea sure. But real actual witches do exist and they aren't anything like that.
akafluffy
I'm pretty sure the old testament doesn't say to burn witches, the fanfic where witches exist comes much later, it bans sorcery slightly less than it bans adultery and about the same as it bans eating shellfish.
eradan
It says practionners of evil magic are bad. Of course, everyone knows that means female practitionners of any magic /s
TigerThong
I dont think thats really and argument for someone who defines themselves as christian. The book is the book the rules are the rules. I know its common for poeple to pick and choose buuuut if we want to be technical. Christians should declare they are a sub sect that uses a bible that doesn't follow those codes.
Groose
Shhhh we dont talk about the gays...thats how they lose their rights
TripleDane
That;s why it wasn't used as an argument for that.
You arguing against something you made up in your head.
TigerThong
Thank you, its worrying more people haven't put that together. OP having 310 Updoots its a sad sign of where peoples ability to think is.
LoneWulf17
You can still burn witches with a sick insult
It says if a man lies with another man, they should be stoned (break out the weed my boy)
Shrimp is an abomination, fucking thing gives me a rash from another dimension
Lol
richardstinks
It's Two Wrongs, but at least one's arguing for rights.
The whole "cherry-picking a single passage proves a thing," makes arguing with Christians difficult.
Strategicgnomer
Never said that gay is bad actually. It says raping little boys is bad, and then someone translated it to say gay is bad because they needed a goat to scape.
2074red2074
No, it uses the word "man", with no implication of age. The New Testament is the one people argue refers only to pederasty.
GroovyCrowley
Those idiots have no problem using Leviticus to justify their hate on gays whenever they have the possibility,so it is just showing them their hypocrisy.
shitheadtookmyname
Actually the word translated as "homosexual" appears nowhere but the Bible bc Paul invented the word. So there's no context for determining the meaning, but it's construction sounds like it's referring to men raping young boys. And translations not influenced by early 20th century conservative American scholarship don't translate it as homosexuality. Older German translations, for example, say pederasty.
Photeus
I'm ok with calling a (self proclaimed) Bible-believing Christian out if they aren't believing the Bible. I don't think people should buy into it, but if they are going to they should be consistent.
But the whole thing is so easy to be inconsistent.... take care of the foreigner, but that includes being ok enslaving them. It's just problematic all the way around. That does strengthen your point.
LanceCharisma
That's why I have Matthew 25:31-46 as my go to passage in these situations. It covers most of these situations and isn't vulnerable to the "old testament doesn't count" argument.
Photeus
Furthermore, they usually just create a new denomination when this sort of thing happens. First Church of Trump? I'm sure that's been done already without even looking it up.
ChernoGamma
You gotta talk to people in the language they understand.
GroverKerr
You're at least as confused as the caller is. The host never claimed Leviticus is an arbiter of morality. He pointed out that the caller claims to be Christian yet opposes the morality of their own sacred texts. You may be even dumber than even the Trump supporter who called in. Remarkable.
jayman0123
The old testament does NOT say gay is bad. The passage you are referring to is a compound word of the Greek words for man and bed and is referencing pedophilia, not homosexuality. It was purposely mistranslated about 80 years ago so US southern priests could be bigots towards gay people.
HelikaformerNubisKnight9
But WHEN you are so conservative that you follow Leviticus, than stop cherry picking. You can't be against gay AND against immigrants. Either you are following Leviticus or not! I think that's what the moderator wanted to say?
ikeseff
But the American Christian Right is perfectly willing to cite Levitical law when it suits them. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
HoldingAccount
On the other hand, you can be a Christian even if you don't agree with everything the bible says.
LurkMasterP
They have to cherry pick what applies and what doesn't apply and what applies only with context and what applies with interpretation and what applies only to certain people. They will rationalize until their dying breath so they don't have to ever admit that they were believing in bullshit written by people not by god. Lose that belief and their worldview crumbles like a house of cards. Then they have to face the world without any crutches.
bitemark
I get what he's trying to do, but going to the Bible is getting into the weeds. The constitution guarantees rights to everyone, especially due process, wherever you're from.
EstoyPoopis
That's not what's happening here, bud.
ErectileFunction
The host isn't saying it is. He's saying the caller is going against their own holy book.
areyouelonmusk
Using curated phrases is the best way to use the holy book tho
quade
Says most churches
quade
I hear you, and it's all magic hocus-pocus to me anyway... but a lot of christians argue that the old testament doesn't apply since Jesus wiped it all away. Still, on the other hand, Leviticus is what tells a lot of conservatives that gay is bad (so is shrimp, so are cheeseburgers), so... they get very selective about what what they cherry pick from the bible.
From where I sit though, Leviticus wouldn't apply to christians. But even the new testament is full of things about loving EVERYONE.
SeeShark
Old Testament: "It's a rough world out there. Here are some questionable rules for navigating it. Some of them are definitely arbitrary. Don't question them."
New Testament: "The world is nicer now, so you should be nice to everyone, including bad people. Don't worry; when they die, God will TORTURE THEM FOREVER. Also you should hate Jews."
LiarLiarPantsUntier
To me, the problem is never what people believe; but the hypocrisy and delusion they choose to live by, especially as those two things affect me directly unlike their belief.
hyperchondriac
Yes, in the new testament, Jesus says "I was a stranger and you welcomed me" which is a parallel to the Leviticus commandment. Jesus was a Jew, and his teachings largely reflect the same beliefs.
LoneWulf17
The judgment of nations, fuck yeah! Everyone says the Old testament doesn't count, but they forget Jesus spoke a metric fuck ton about welcoming others in, living for your brothers and sisters, being a servant to everyone.
Kind of reminds me of the thing that was happening a few years ago where conservative church goers would ask their pastors where they got the woke/left-wing sermon from and the pastors would say, Jesus.
absolutelymad
NO CHEESEBURGERS!!!
thats gonna be a no thanks for me dawg
PonyMadness
The bottom line is that people like the caller will ALWAYS cherry pick whatever quote from whatever version of the bible suits them at that moment. I've had this same conversation with many people I work with and they just continually move the goal post or claim that one scripture doesn't mean anything while quoting another to solidify their claim.
PonyMadness
I know from personal experience that the best way to get through to these people is to use localized empathy (meaning - examples of things that will directly affect people they care about) and logic. You gotta go slow because you're effectively trying to undo decades of brain washing they've endured.
smax410
Old Testament doesn’t actually say shit about homosexuality. It calls out pedophilia which was translated in a way to equate pedophiles with homosexuals.
smax410
Also… and this is a BIG FUCKING ALSO, the New Testament contains a new covenant, a new pact, stating that you must follow Jesus. Which you know, love thy neighbor is a core tenant. JFC never says shit about homosexuality. He says love god and love your neighbor. So any Christian quoting shit from anything other than that is actually full of shit.
meowingintensifies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRy-UfUYYGk
Imapancakenom
I'm sorry but this just isn't true. Somebody said it on the internet once and many other people liked the idea so they were eager to repeat it, without evidence. But the Hebrew word זָכָ֔ר ("zā-ḵār") in Leviticus 18:22 (I assume that's what you're referring to) just very literally means "male" and has no connotation about age, i.e. child or adult. It doesn't mean "man" and it doesn't mean "boy". It just means "male".
razorsharpdoubleedgedlegaldualmindblades
It says a man anally raping a man is bad. It doesn't speak of homosexuality or homosexual relationships and it doesn't even mention women at all. Not that it matters because fuck the bible, but that is the deal. Anything more is a purposeful, politically motivated mistranslation for its time.
2074red2074
No, it doesn't. That is a very fringe interpretation. It pretty clearly says "You shall not have sex with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination". Saying it only referred to rape, only to pedophilia, only to incest, etc. are all things that have been argued, but not generally accepted. The only strong debate is whether it refers to anal/penetrative sex or all homosexuality.
smax410
Let’s say you’re right… the fact is if you are a Christian, you aren’t bound by the first covenant. You’re bound by the covenant of Jesus. And point to the verse where Jesus says anything about homosexuality.
DYLANLEE79
"It's illegal!" Sure, but is the law just? It was illegal for me to have sex for more than half my life (including from birth to when the sodomy laws were overturned) so I'm a criminal many times over. If all laws are equally just, then I and all the other guys who had sex before 2003 should be in jail. And FYI, 12 states still have those anti sodomy laws as part of their penal code, they just aren't allowed to enforce it anymore.
KileyBarker
It's not even illegal! Crossing the border undocumented (the first time) isn't a criminal offense, it's a misdemeanor.
Eidodk
It's not even a misdemeanor. Immigration is a CIVIL matter, and by that definition it CAN'T be a crime.