The new and improved progressive 10 Commandments

a reply to: The2Billies

You are creating an issue so you can ignore the question, that’s ok, I understand

People are not pigeon holing you, you pigeon hole yourself by not answering simple questions, doesn’t take an educated psych to see that

It’s a forum, I will keep asking

What Jewish laws do I as a Christian have to keep, what Jewish laws can I ignore

And if anyone else would be interested in the answer, please go ahead and ask as well, I can’t seem to get a reply

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser


This has made me consider that religion in general is very much a device of oppression. Oppress your sexual desires. Oppress your feelings of anger. Oppress your desires to think freely. Oppress your urge to question dogma, use scientific methods, seek observable answers, alter your mind with substances. Give us some money when we pass around the coffers, abide and you will be saved.

What a joke.

Oppress your sexual desires?
You can’t see a logical reason for that? Seriously?
Oppress anger, again, you can’t see logical reasons?

Oppress free thought? don’t think that’s biblical, actually, questioning and considering answers is encouraged.
Don’t question dogma, I am here questioning the author, contentedly
Use scientific method, maybe many atheists should as well cos I have a question you can’t answer
Alter your mind with substances, well yes, now you are just trying to be clever, spending your money on short term gratification, killing yourself and harming others. I think the drug thing is pretty clearly a bad thing.

Give the church money, well you seem happy to spend your money on drugs? Obviously there is an issue in the church re finances, it’s no secret
Jesus saves, not money, dogma, people or Mosaic laws

Your argument is silly in context, not much different from a snowman smelling carrots 🥕

a reply to: The2Billies

We have had 2 Islamic exchange students in our home, if that answers your question.

May Allah help them endure their time with you.

Have fun re-conditioning them.

My OP is NOT sarcastic. It is simply my interpretation of the value system I see in the progressive left and modern US society and the modern values. This demonstrates the changes that have become the new and "improved" value system of the progressive left, liberals, the Democratic Party, Hollywood, media, music, and society in general today.

Noted. That's why the OP is problematic.

originally posted by: chr0naut
...
The truth is, Jesus was a radical and extremely progressive but the traditionalist 'powers that be' have since painted Him as a pacifist conformist.

Remember, Jesus is the guy who disrupted commerce in the temple, smashing their shops, and who whipped the shop owners with ropes. He also was the one who spoke out in public to large crowds, against the ruling authorities, to the point where the authorities conspired to have Him assassinated,

Jesus was no sheep. He was the shepherd.

You are so full of BS it's not even funny.

....
Bismarck also said, “a little socialism would prevent the development of a more virulent socialism.” Of course, Germany eventually produced the most virulent form of National Socialism the world has ever known–Nazism.

After the monarchy collapsed following WWI in 1919, the new German government implemented even more sweeping healthcare reforms. Doctors went to work for the government. And no longer for the individual patient. (Remember this, the next time you hear about the merits of Obamacare.)

In the 1930s, the Nazis took over. And this led to the most widespread abuse of medical ethics the world has ever seen. State doctors and public health professionals participated in–and in many cases actively led–medical abuses against the disabled and the infirm. And eventually against 18 million Jews, Catholics, and gypsies.
...

drmicozzi.com...

Under the nazis the German healthcare system became more socialist with the government controlling it. Doctors no longer worked for their patients, but for the government and "for the good of all..."

As for Jesus, you are so wrong it's a wonder why you lie through your teeth as if it was the truth.

Jesus got angry when merchants were trying to sell their wares in the temple during what today would be called mass. He wasn't going after "capitalists" 24/7 like you are claiming. After all he was a carpenter and lived off capitalism/trade just like his step father.

Jesus wasn't a radical, nor a progressive like you are trying to claim...

Matthew 5:17

...
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
...

biblehub.com...

Matthew 22:15-22

15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. 16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.[a] 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. 20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.
...

www.biblegateway.com...


You are as much a hypocrite as those Pharisees were by trying to change whom Jesus was and what he said...

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: The2Billies

We have had 2 Islamic exchange students in our home, if that answers your question.

May Allah help them endure their time with you.

Have fun re-conditioning them.

My OP is NOT sarcastic. It is simply my interpretation of the value system I see in the progressive left and modern US society and the modern values. This demonstrates the changes that have become the new and "improved" value system of the progressive left, liberals, the Democratic Party, Hollywood, media, music, and society in general today.

Noted. That's why the OP is problematic.

A little judgemental are we?

The Islamic exchange students LOVE me, and I have never tried to convert them. That is your prejudice based on what you assume about me (which is the definition of prejudice) showing.

originally posted by: The2Billies
a reply to: chr0naut


Again I seem to have shaken your world view to the core.

Nope. The OP, which I dissected, was your world view.

I do not think Jesus was a socialist or progressive, you do. Here are 3 articles on why Jesus was not a socialist.
blog.acton.org...
reknew.org...
therevolutionaryact.com...

But you do think Jesus wanted the government to oversee and take care of everyone's everyday needs controlling their individual lives so that they will be "happier and healthier".

Well, there was all that stuff about "the Kingdom of God" that He kept on about!

But I disagree entirely.

It is ok we disagree.

For right now this is as American as Apple Pie. Disagreement with respect is a fundamental foundation of traditional American values.

They so 'respected' their American natives. They so 'respected' the Spanish, from whom they stole Florida. They so 'respected' the Mexicans, from whom they stole parts of Texas and California. At least they actually legitimately purchased Alaska from the Russians. They so 'respected' the Negro's. They so 'respected' the Chinese.

You see, their 'respect' was (and is) just an empty word. Like 'liberty', from a country that was one of the last in the world to abolish slavery, that runs prisons for foreign nationals outside its borders and not covered by laws. A country that incarcerates more people and and a higher percentage of its citizens than any country on Earth.

So keep up the meaningless American jingoism. Propaganda not truth. America never had 'respect' or 'liberty' or 'justice for all' or 'citizen safety' or 'societal compassion'.

America was never really truly Christian, either. Undoubtedly there were devout true believers, but as a nation, nah.



Also, the only American native apple species is the crab apple!

Apple pie recipes exist from 1381, from England. In fact, the apple pie with a lattice of pastry on top is a Dutch recipe and also from well before Columbus discovered the Americas.

The usual variety of apple now used in apple pies is the Granny Smith, which originated in Australia in 1868.

China also grows more apples (and always has) than the US. It's as Chinese as apple pie!

Yet another false and misleading American slogan exposed.

That is why the progressive liberal socialists want to stamp it out, they have taken to rioting, property damage, and violence to prevent anyone from disagreeing with them, even in a respectful and academic setting.

You should study some history. I seem to remember the right-wing brown shirts doing some major property damage on the "night of broken glass" and that gave rise to Nazism.

Also, how about the Unite the Right rallies? Those damned violent property damaging alt-righters!

Then, there's this little sliver of information: Hoaxes against ANTIFA From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't think Jesus would have told his disciples to riot and beat up the Pharisees and Sadducee when they spoke where children were educated. (the temples); as today's progressive socialists often do.

I don't think Jesus would have told people, don't wear a certain hat or you will trigger my disciples who won't be able to stop themselves from beating you up; as today's progressive socialists have warned people publicly.

I never said or implied that.

Likewise, did any the progressives actually say any of that, or was it the far right-wing pundits that said that of them?

I don't think Jesus would have said, believe in what I say or I'll make sure you are fired or lose your business; which is common behavior for today's progressive socialists.

Well, Jesus did say to believe in what He said and all else is death (the wages of sin, you know).

While some progressives may have done that, it has never been "common behavior". But go on, conflate very few actual instances of some wrong doing to being an overwhelming flood. That is how propaganda works.

I don't think

Really?

a reply to: The2Billies

I'd say your first one is kind of contradictory, or maybe just poorly worded.

If one is not to have a judeo christian god how could one treat other gods as equal? see where I'm getting hung up?

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: EnigmaChaser


This has made me consider that religion in general is very much a device of oppression. Oppress your sexual desires. Oppress your feelings of anger. Oppress your desires to think freely. Oppress your urge to question dogma, use scientific methods, seek observable answers, alter your mind with substances. Give us some money when we pass around the coffers, abide and you will be saved.

What a joke.

Oppress your sexual desires?
You can’t see a logical reason for that? Seriously?
Oppress anger, again, you can’t see logical reasons?

Oppress free thought? don’t think that’s biblical, actually, questioning and considering answers is encouraged.
Don’t question dogma, I am here questioning the author, contentedly
Use scientific method, maybe many atheists should as well cos I have a question you can’t answer
Alter your mind with substances, well yes, now you are just trying to be clever, spending your money on short term gratification, killing yourself and harming others. I think the drug thing is pretty clearly a bad thing.

Give the church money, well you seem happy to spend your money on drugs? Obviously there is an issue in the church re finances, it’s no secret
Jesus saves, not money, dogma, people or Mosaic laws

Your argument is silly in context, not much different from a snowman smelling carrots 🥕

If it were true that the only way a human could function effectively in society, not harm others and achieve an “afterlife” - and that way was only through Jesus - then every human would know that. The teachings of Jesus aren’t new. There wouldn’t be competing religions. This wouldn’t be questioned.

But that is not the case.

I buy the notion of good/evil. There are truly bad apples out there - and really good ones too. But, good or bad it doesn’t have to have anything to do with Jesus or the teachings of the church.

For instance, off the top of my head I can think of five very successful, wealthy and philanthropic people I know who don’t set foot in a church of any kind on a worshipping basis. Your argument says this isn’t possible - being a good Human is only found through Jesus.

But, the church was smart. When you equate all things “good” with what Jesus would do, you can say the “good person” I described is embodying the teachings of Jesus - even if what they’re doing has nothing to do with Jesus at all.

If its true that someone can be a very good human being and do good things for other humans, but is also not a follower of Jesus or doing it in His name, then the notion that only Jesus saves or doing things based on His teachings falls apart. Once that falls apart, it becomes reasonable to say religion is not always necessary for people to be “good”. Jesus then can’t be the only savior or arbiter of right and wrong - because right can exist without Him.

Said another way - let’s say someone cured cancer, solved world hunger and entirely cleaned up our environment globally - all in one lifetime! They also don’t drink, do drugs, recycled, drove a hybrid and were faithful to a partner of the opposite sex. But they were an atheist! They helped millions of humans - millions! But are they now not a good human/sentient being because they were an atheist? If you say “well obviously they were a good human” then poof - the argument for Jesus being the only savior or arbiter of right and wrong is toast.

As for oppression... no - I can’t think of a compelling reason to stop people from living their lives as they see fit. People make decisions, some good and some bad, and there are consequences to those actions - but it’s their life to own. Does that mean people should make those potentially bad decisions? Nope - and I never said that. It does mean they have the right to self-actualization or self-annihilation.

Lastly, those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Lots of kids have been touched and brainwashed parishioners bilked by men of the cloth. Lots. And that’s not something to sweep aside but always does in a conversation like this. Never mind the countless millions who have fought and died over religious differences over course of known history - largely propagated by Christians...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

originally posted by: chr0naut

You are so full of BS it's not even funny.

....
Bismarck also said, “a little socialism would prevent the development of a more virulent socialism.” Of course, Germany eventually produced the most virulent form of National Socialism the world has ever known–Nazism.

After the monarchy collapsed following WWI in 1919, the new German government implemented even more sweeping healthcare reforms. Doctors went to work for the government. And no longer for the individual patient. (Remember this, the next time you hear about the merits of Obamacare.)

In the 1930s, the Nazis took over. And this led to the most widespread abuse of medical ethics the world has ever seen. State doctors and public health professionals participated in–and in many cases actively led–medical abuses against the disabled and the infirm. And eventually against 18 million Jews, Catholics, and gypsies.
...

drmicozzi.com...

Try clicking on any of the links on that website. There's nothing there. The "Foundation for Economic Education" doesn't seem to actually exist apart from the one article and a bad YouTube review. Credible?

You should also probably check out who Marc Micozzi is, as part of your due diligence. According to the Education list on one website, he advanced through his courses faster than the actual course length and jumped from credential to credential and university to university a lot. He could be a charlatan, you just never know.

Under the nazis the German healthcare system became more socialist with the government controlling it. Doctors no longer worked for their patients, but for the government and "for the good of all..."

Please find some online support for that statement.

As for Jesus, you are so wrong it's a wonder why you lie through your teeth as if it was the truth.

Jesus got angry when merchants were trying to sell their wares in the temple during what today would be called mass. He wasn't going after "capitalists" 24/7 like you are claiming.

So He made a whip out of cords and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle. He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those selling doves He said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn My Father’s house into a marketplace!” His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for Your house will consume Me.” - John 12: 15-17.

After all he was a carpenter and lived off capitalism/trade just like his step father.

Jesus wasn't a radical, nor a progressive like you are trying to claim...

Matthew 5:17

...
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
...

biblehub.com...

Matthew 22:15-22

15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. 16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone's opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances.[a] 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. 20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.
...

www.biblegateway.com...

"Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘A man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me." - Matthew 10:34-38

"Then I saw heaven standing open, and there before me was a white horse. And its rider is called Faithful and True. With righteousness He judges and wages war. He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God. The armies of heaven, dressed in fine linen, white and pure, follow Him on white horses. And from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and He will rule them with an iron scepter. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God, the Almighty. And He has a name written on His robe and on His thigh: KING OF KINGS and LORD OF LORDS." - Revelation 19: 11-16.

Not radical enough for you?

You are as much a hypocrite as those Pharisees were by trying to change whom Jesus was and what he said...

Nope.

And where where the Pharisees trying to change who Jesus was?

Chapter & verse, please.

originally posted by: The2Billies
a reply to: chr0naut

2nd response part 2...

But if you think Jesus acted like today's progressive liberal and was a socialist who wanted Caesar, Herod, and Pilot to:

make all the following decisions for the people,

control who could and could not carry a sword, (UK right now has banned people from owing certain chef's knifes if they are not a working chef)

Perhaps there is a reason for the UK to curtail the carrying of weapons or potential weapons?

Ten charts on the rise of knife crime in England and Wales - BBC

The people of England don't have less liberty because they can't carry knives. But they are much less likely to be stabbed!

take their crops and redistribute them "fairly" to people who didn't want to work (substitute taxes and money for crops)

Do you imagine that those people who have paid tax have retained that money? No matter how greedy they are, they have already given the money to the government. It is a done deal and at that point, the taxed are already out of pocket. So argument about 'their' taxes are missing the point that the money is already no longer theirs.

And what are they giving the taxes to the government for in the first place, anyway? So the government can get fabulously rich at their expense? Or perhaps, instead, public money should serve the public good and non-corrupt governments have a duty to support all the citizenry (not just special interest groups) with that money.

control if and when they got medical care (yes all universal healthcare countries today ration and control this),

Universal health care implies that all people have access to healthcare, not that healthcare is 'equal'. Since the US has for years been denying healthcare to the under-insured, and, despite the expansion of medicaid and the affordable health care act, there are still those in the US who are denied health care on economic grounds. This means that the US does not have universal healthcare as generally defined. Even third world countries do far better than that.

control who gets an education and who doesn't (in countries with free college, University (our college) is tightly controlled and few get to go - the rest go to colleges we call trade schools, like the College for Custodial Services like they have in Germany),

Education in the US is extremely expensive. There are many countries where even university education is virtually free, such as Norway, Finland, Sweden, Germany Slovenia and France. They also tend to be the top performing countries ranked by standard of living (PPP or Human Development score). Funny that.

or going full on socialist as you say Jesus would have wanted: Caesar, Pilot and Herod to have ultimate control over everyone's farms, crops, animals, businesses (like making and dying cloth, making furniture, making tents, etc.) with all profits going to Caesar for him to redistribute as he deemed fair and just,

But they weren't socialists.

The 1st Century Roman Empire was a republic, under a dictator (the Emperor).

well more power to you if you think that is what Jesus preached. It is your right to believe that.

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." - Luke 18:22

"He said also to the one who had invited him, ‘When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.’" - Luke 14:12-14

"Then he told them a parable: ‘The land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, ‘What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?’ Then he said, ‘I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, ‘Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.’ But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich toward God.’" - Luke 12:16-21

"Then he looked up at his disciples and said: ‘Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled. Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh.’" - Luke 6:20-21

"When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’" - Luke 4:16-19

Jesus seemed to harp on about giving to the poor. Are you so sure that he wasn't just a little bit socialist?

We are free (right now) to believe as we wish ideologically and religiously in the USA.
That is until the PC crowd are in in control and socialism dictates what we may and may not say and where we may or may not speak of our religion or wear a symbol of our religion, or carry a book of our religion. (which has happened in some European democratic socialist countries)

Once today's progressive liberal socialists are fully in charge people who disagree with them ideologically will be brutally squelched as they do on today's campuses and with ANTIFA.

Well this is not my Jesus, but he is yours I guess. That's ok, as long as you don't force your version of Jesus on me, I'm ok with it.

But, IF YOU or any progressive liberal democratic socialist regime in the US:

Decide Jesus would approve of beating me up for wearing a hat that looks like a Sadducee hat, and I will resist, resist, resist.

Decide Jesus would approve of, my ideas of how the country should be run, my political ideology is really "hate speech" and can not be uttered, I will resist, resist, resist.

Decide Jesus would approve the idea that, I'm too old to get curative healthcare and will have to put up with pain killers, I will resist, resist, resist.

Decide Jesus would approve you taking take 70% of my pension/social security to fund healthcare/university/living wage for people who refuse to work, and I will mightily resist!

Decide all this and I won't be attending any version of your churches, I'll keep to myself (which I'd be forced to), and worship in secret, my Jesus, and resist, resist, resist!

You believe as you wish, just expect me to resist when you force it on me against my will, which is the socialist way.

There is only one Jesus the Creator and God. If you have one with your name on it, you have been sold a fake. You'll never get your money back, either.

I'm not a socialist.

a reply to: EnigmaChaser

I am not arguing the word “good” isn’t subjective
I am not arguing that atheists can’t be good or arguing some Christians if not all are bad

What are you implying of me
I don’t particularly like christians, churches and I hate religion

I am not forcing anyone to do anything, I am just correcting some ignorant opinions and beliefs be they based on the Ten Commandments or atheistic drivel

Anger causes violence and destruction, broken marriages families as does liberated sexuality never mind the other consequences you happily ignore

Your argument is ludicrous and you are building strawman to hack at
It’s not relevant to my opinion

Hay Billies What law should I keep and what laws shouldn’t I keep and why

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: The2Billies

I'd say your first one is kind of contradictory, or maybe just poorly worded.

If one is not to have a judeo christian god how could one treat other gods as equal? see where I'm getting hung up?

Suggest a new wording, I'd really appreciate it. It is a work in progress before wider publication.

The meaning:

Progressive liberals as a group say that to acknowledge the Judaeo Christian god is to be sexist and homophobic. Therefore, it is a really bad thing to publicly speak of, acknowledge or have or carry any symbols of the Judaeo Christian god in public or you are a sexist and homophobe, and basically an evil person.

Progressive liberals as a group find all other "gods" and religions acceptable to speak of publicly, acknowledge and carry symbols of or wear symbols of. They say that anyone who says otherwise is racist and disrespectful of other cultures. They insist if you are with a person engaging in worship of "other" gods it is mandatory to go through the same motions they do as to not offend the other cultures or religions, if you don't you are culturally insensitive and basically an evil person.

a reply to: The2Billies

Would it be possible to get some clarity/definition around "progressive liberals as a group"?
Who, specifically, are they? Where are they saying these things?

originally posted by: Gandalf77
a reply to: The2Billies

Would it be possible to get some clarity/definition around "progressive liberals as a group"?
Who, specifically, are they? Where are they saying these things?

progressive liberals, means just that - progresives, liberals and some Democrats

I see it all over social media, all over sites like ATS, Quora and others.

Hillary Clinton, lots of Hollywood people regularly - in public situations

This article is from a very left leaning source: www.theatlantic.com... "Democrats have a Religion Problem"

www.dailysignal.com...
www.gopusa.com...
canadafreepress.com...
www.washingtontimes.com...
tsionizm.com...
nypost.com...
www.washingtonexaminer.com...

originally posted by: DeepImpactX

originally posted by: [post=24616522]The2Billies


My OP is NOT sarcastic. It is simply my interpretation of the value system I see in the progressive left and modern US society and the modern values. This demonstrates the changes that have become the new and "improved" value system of the progressive left, liberals, the Democratic Party, Hollywood, media, music, and society in general today.

You're still relatively new here so I thought I might do you a favor and tell you. I have been here as one username or another for over 12 years and have seen a lot of changes in the tone of this site, but one thing remains constant: We dont like religion of any kind.

What you mean "we," paleface? Speak for yourself. I'm not convinced you have any sort of exalted position here because you joined earlier than someone else. Nobody needs your permission to post here.

a reply to: The2Billies

So are you using the terms "progressives, liberals, and democrats" to define "progressive liberals as a group"?

originally posted by: Gandalf77
a reply to: The2Billies

So are you using the terms "progressives, liberals, and democrats" to define "progressive liberals as a group"?

Yes, I added in links to my previous post that demonstrate this.

Democrats have actually these days, those the "Squad" controls are actually a little more far left than the average progressive liberal - they are nothing like the classical liberals of old. As a matter of fact JFK would be considered a right winger by many of them today.

originally posted by: Gandalf77
a reply to: The2Billies

So are you using the terms "progressives, liberals, and democrats" to define "progressive liberals as a group"?

Let me explain something about myself to help you understand. I WAS a classical liberal.

My boyfriend in college was hispanic and a member of LaRaza (I am a WF)
My husbands best friend was and is black and was our best man in the mid-1970's, before it was fashionable to have a "black friend", he was and is a real friend, we just had dinner with him last week.
I partied with the gay crowd in college and went to transsexual and gay bars, even though I am not gay, long before it was fashionable to have gay friends (early 1970's)

What happened?
My boyfriend dumped me because the people in LaRaza told him he was a sell-out for dating me and getting engaged. He later apologized and proposed again, but I knew where I stood and that he was ashamed of a white skinned blonde fiance. So I said no and went my way.
Because my husband and I are Christians I have been told over and over by today's liberals that our dear friend of many decades is simply a token to make us feel superior.
I went to a racial justice seminar where I was told that because of the color of my skin I was automatically a racist and was badgered to "admit it", when I had grown up in the military environment which was completely integrated by then and was not a racist. I left that seminar furious at the way I was treated, like an unrepentant criminal.
Because my husband and I are Christians I have been told over and over by today's liberals that I am homophobic even if I had/have "token" gay friends.
Because I am a Christian I have been told over and over by today's progressive liberals that I am anti-feminist, when I threw away my bra in college and became a University Professor, no one was going to keep me down.
Once I stated I felt abortion after viability outside the womb was wrong and should not be allowed except for the health of the mother or baby, I was definitely called the most wretched things. Anti-feminist was among the nicest of them.

I have basically been told I don't belong with the liberals because I am a white Christian who won't repent for the what white people did 200 years ago, because I didn't do it, and I find it appalling, and I am not personally responsible, so I won't apologize for something I did not do and never approved of.

So basically liberalism morphed into something I no longer recognize into an authoritarian and sometimes totalitarian moral code that I find harmful to actually reconciling the races and bettering the US as a whole. I don't want to have to look first at the color of a person's skin before interacting and hesitate and think twice before speaking so I don't ACCIDENTALLY offend when I am trying hard to make a new friend.

Progressive liberalism, is so rigid, so totalitarian and so authoritarian and dictates ones every move and thought through it's very rigid and unforgiving moral code. That to me is not freedom, is not liberal, it is repression, massive repression.

I have even been told the Democratic Party doesn't want someone like me, a white Christian with classical liberal leanings, that they don't want my sexist, racist, homophobic vote.

edit on 9/16/19 by The2Billies because: addition

I Am "Puerto Rican-American" Since July 4th, 1979...
We Have But One Commandment!

• Do Unto Others As You Would Have Done Unto You •

All Jokes Aside, OP! Get With The Program...

originally posted by: The2Billies

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: The2Billies
Those ten 'laws' were never intended to be understood as dictatorial "Commandments"; that if broken would be delt with or by a brute enforcement of concequences. They were actually just a personal "Covenant" "THE TEN COVENANTS" one made with a percieved Creator being (a handshake agreement with a wink and nod) to BEHAVE as a civilized being understanding the 'golden rule'; be unto others as yea would be unto oneself.

the 2b: So true, whereas the progressive commandments are being dealt with with brute enforcement (ANTIFA) or consequences (doxing, cyberbullying, loss of job/business, loss of reputation)

One would think liberal thinking would be the opposite of communisum/dictatorial leadership and champion individuality; in fact that is the goal: to oppress and control the masses and create (through fear tactics disguised as 'help') that traps individuals into a nanny state dependent existance (LIARS).

edit on 19-9-2019 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)