Memorial set up for Victim of a crime disrupted by disrespectful leftist activists.

[mossrose]

I don't trust anything reported by Infowars.

Seriously Infowars, mossrose. That's where you go to read about the Chupacabra, water flouridation and chemtrails as mind control, pizza child sex rings run by democrats, wild orgies inside sarcophagi in satanic rituals among the Bilderbergs and slave camps on Mars.

There was plenty of alt-right violence there. As I said, the nazis and white supremacists showed up looking for a fight. So liberals decided to show up equally armed, and according to the testimony of the reverends of a nearby Church who was preaching against white supremacy saved their life.

During violent confrontations, there will be violence.

It was the alt-righters who killed someone that day, don't forget that.

I wasn't aware that site had such bizarre stuff on it, because I don't read it. It just came up in a search.

However, I am certain there are a lot of other incidents recorded by more trustworthy sources that show the same kind of violence by the left.

Regarding the op, the actions of those who tore up the picture and whatever else were extremely disrespectful, and if a group of right-wingers did something like that, you would be up in arms, (or worse) as you stated in this thread.

[Darth Executor]

It was the alt-righters who killed someone that day, don't forget that.

Actually the person died of a heart attack and the "killer" probably panicked after his car was attacked with baseball bats by your fellow Antifas.

[Darth Executor]

I wasn't aware that site had such bizarre stuff on it, because I don't read it. It just came up in a search.

InfoWar used to be(and occasionally still is) a hotbed for conspiracy theories but that article is 100% true. Unlike leonhard's post. The mars slaves thing for example is something one of Alex Jones's crazy listeners brought up, Jones himself didn't buy it. Leonhard is just parroting what he heard from other leftists about it.

[Leonhard]

I wasn't aware that site had such bizarre stuff on it, because I don't read it.

Oh it can be an entertaining read. I don't judge, its just they're so off base that you have to take anything they're saying with a huge grain of salt.

I don't doubt that there were violent events there. But it was not a peaceful protest on either side. One side came looking for a fight. And the other side decided to arm up, and both collided.

It climaxed with an alt-righter revving his car and ramming it into a crowd of people in the style of recent islamic terrorist attacks in Europe. Ironically.

However, I am certain there are a lot of other incidents recorded by more trustworthy sources that show the same kind of violence by the left.

I'm sure there are cases. Its a very big country, and these anarchists consists of huge groups, and all huge groups will have unstable members. The prolife movement has had half a dozen successful assisinations by Christians, many of whom are in prison and to this day don't regret what they did. We've had people advocate coyly for that sort of action on this forum until a ban hammer was put down on that stuff for good, and in a recent thread started by a certain forum member, the discussion quickly veered close to approving of that.

Does that mean prolifers are terrorists? No of course not. 99% of prolifers are just groups of people standing "ominously" as its described praying. People with rosaries, and prayers, or reading scripture. That's the norm. However there's also those with bullhorns and posters, shouting loudly at the people going in there, and even more loudly as they're going out. Both are fair game, though I don't think the latter is very saintly.

And then there's a small, small fraction of weirdos who actually believe that killing abortion doctors is something God wants. They deny they committed any sin in murdering those doctors.

I do not condone violent actions. Throwing firecrackers into crowds is irresponsible and could hurt people. Thankfully you guys have been spared some of the bombs I've seen at protests in Denmark. An M-80 is a firecracker to me. We're used to the kind of explosives that totals a car, and blows out a couple of rows of windows and leaves your ears ringing for a while. So no those lil M-80's are just... will little kaboom noises. However they have the potential for serious hurt they land very close to a person.

Regarding the op, the actions of those who tore up the picture and whatever else were extremely disrespectful,

Debatable.

and if a group of right-wingers did something like that, you would be up in arms, (or worse) as you stated in this thread.

Actually I wouldn't. If I were out holding a protest and put up and installation, which I did once, I'd fully expect someone to find it and take it down at some point. I'd take some pictures and upload it. Done. What they did was make a fake story about some hiring a protestor to face them.

I seriously don't buy that the BCR is important enough for anyone to waste money on a guy protesting them. He told that to Fox and Friends, and Fox and Friends believes anything they're told as long as its critical of leftists, they report it, story is made. I almost suspect the BCR guy was hoping this would happen.

So no if someone took down what we did, I wouldn't be surprised. Nor would I start screaming about Republican persecution.

However if some guy who says homosexuals need to be tortured, and that black men are the fall of the united states and such things, you better believe I'd make my disapproval heard very loudly.

[Sparko]

You hate free speech, we get it.

only speech he doesn't agree with though.

[Sparko]

Dumb loud guy preaching with a megaphone, super angry, red headed, shouting out anyone not caring to talk to anyone. Usually shows up uninvited to places full of people, and starts bloviating. Blames persecution when he's being dragged away by police for noise pollution.

You don't exactly approve of this kind of evangelism do you?

At any rate, if a church goer who is angry, and apparently interprets this anger as a holy calling decides to go somewhere to shout at people he doesn't like, then he's fair game to be trolled by trombones and bagpipes.

Kinda like what Jesus did? not the angry part but showing up where he wasn't wanted and preaching to people who didn't like him?

Sure, the guy should get a permit to use a megaphone in public or be arrested for disturbing the peace. but that is the responsibility of the police to handle. How would you like it if every time you tried to speak to someone about Jesus some idiot interrupted you on purpose? If you think it is OK to shout down and stop people you don't agree with, then you are in the wrong. That is not how free speech works. You have a right to your own opinion but not at the expense of someone else's right.

[mossrose]

Kinda like what Jesus did? not the angry part but showing up where he wasn't wanted and preaching to people who didn't like him?

Sure, the guy should get a permit to use a megaphone in public or be arrested for disturbing the peace. but that is the responsibility of the police to handle. How would you like it if every time you tried to speak to someone about Jesus some idiot interrupted you on purpose? If you think it is OK to shout down and stop people you don't agree with, then you are in the wrong. That is not how free speech works. You have a right to your own opinion but not at the expense of someone else's right.

Jesus got angry, too, and cleaned the temple out. Twice.

He also shouted quotes from scripture while He did it.

Hate preacher, He was!

[rogue06]

Jesus got angry, too, and cleaned the temple out. Twice.

He also shouted quotes from scripture while He did it.

Hate preacher, He was!

While wielding a scourge.

[rogue06]

English has a term close to that, "hot headed." Though hotheaded is more used to describe someone who is easily made angry, not necessarily someone who is presently angry as redheaded apparently means in Danish.

Or being red with rage.

[Leonhard]

Kinda like what Jesus did? not the angry part

I kinda like how you set up "Kinda like Jesus, only not the angry part", I never set I didn't like street preachers. There are many ways this can be done successfully. Getting a bullhorn, cranking it up to eleven, and shouting into it (creating distorted sounds) with random bible verses and insults, isn't exactly effective evangelization. Its just noise. I don't mind people shutting that down, especially the guy didn't have a permit to be there. Take the first video I showed. The police showed up.

Sure, the guy should get a permit to use a megaphone in public or be arrested for disturbing the peace.

We agree on that part at least.

but that is the responsibility of the police to handle.

I'm all for people having fun with him in the meantime. I'm sure it'll give him a persecution feeling. So its a win-win. He feels he's doing something saintly, and people are shutting down a blowhard.

How would you like it if every time you tried to speak to someone about Jesus some idiot interrupted you on purpose?

I'm not in the habit of grabbing a megaphone, standing on private ground at a convention and calling everyone around me losers and sinners, and telling them the science books they're reading are fake. If some alternative version of me was doing that, I'd hope someone shut me down for it. I've evangelised many times to many people, and I've had people come from a convention I went to over to the Catholic Church to be present at mass, after talking to them about Catholicism.

Usually people find out I'm a Catholic and they have ten thousand questions about what that means, and what the Church means. That usually leads to a lot of deep discussions. I find that a lot more effective than looking at two women in cosplay outfit and calling them whores and telling them they're going to Hell.

If you think it is OK to shout down and stop people you don't agree with, then you are in the wrong.

Why?

That is not how free speech works.

I don't believe in unlimited free speech. Neither does the law or society. I can't put out a fully detailed description on tweb on how to construct a nuclear bomb (well actually now that I think about it, its probably not that classified anymore), or talk about blowing up abortion clinics and which people to target. I can't actively advocate for terrorist attacks, or use public or private channels to organise things like that. There are limits. In fact there are thousands of limits on free speech. On tweb we can't swear for instance, of all things. And on theopedia you can't advocate for theological positions that fall outside of the Southern Baptist Convention's idea of Christianity.

Its the same in public forums. For instance you can't use freedom of speech to incite imminent violent action. Freedom of Speech also doesn't protect you legally from repurcussions of committing perjury or forgery. Child pornography is also not covered under the freedom of speech.

In private forums its a no brainer. No one is obligated to grant you a platform. On campuses its a little different. I've found some respectful and classy street evangelists, who are good at what they're doing. Who can actually engage with people. But someone with a bullhorn, needs a trombone right in front of him playing false notes over anything he says. That'll frustrate him for sure.

You have a right to your own opinion but not at the expense of someone else's right.

Didn't know there was a law protecting street evangelists from counter protests.

[Sparko]

I kinda like how you set up "Kinda like Jesus, only not the angry part", I never set I didn't like street preachers. There are many ways this can be done successfully. Getting a bullhorn, cranking it up to eleven, and shouting into it (creating distorted sounds) with random bible verses and insults, isn't exactly effective evangelization. Its just noise. I don't mind people shutting that down, especially the guy didn't have a permit to be there. Take the first video I showed. The police showed up.



We agree on that part at least.



I'm all for people having fun with him in the meantime. I'm sure it'll give him a persecution feeling. So its a win-win. He feels he's doing something saintly, and people are shutting down a blowhard.



I'm not in the habit of grabbing a megaphone, standing on private ground at a convention and calling everyone around me losers and sinners, and telling them the science books they're reading are fake. If some alternative version of me was doing that, I'd hope someone shut me down for it. I've evangelised many times to many people, and I've had people come from a convention I went to over to the Catholic Church to be present at mass, after talking to them about Catholicism.

Usually people find out I'm a Catholic and they have ten thousand questions about what that means, and what the Church means. That usually leads to a lot of deep discussions. I find that a lot more effective than looking at two women in cosplay outfit and calling them whores and telling them they're going to Hell.



Why?



I don't believe in unlimited free speech. Neither does the law or society. I can't put out a fully detailed description on tweb on how to construct a nuclear bomb (well actually now that I think about it, its probably not that classified anymore), or talk about blowing up abortion clinics and which people to target. I can't actively advocate for terrorist attacks, or use public or private channels to organise things like that. There are limits. In fact there are thousands of limits on free speech. On tweb we can't swear for instance, of all things. And on theopedia you can't advocate for theological positions that fall outside of the Southern Baptist Convention's idea of Christianity.

Its the same in public forums. For instance you can't use freedom of speech to incite imminent violent action. Freedom of Speech also doesn't protect you legally from repurcussions of committing perjury or forgery. Child pornography is also not covered under the freedom of speech.

In private forums its a no brainer. No one is obligated to grant you a platform. On campuses its a little different. I've found some respectful and classy street evangelists, who are good at what they're doing. Who can actually engage with people. But someone with a bullhorn, needs a trombone right in front of him playing false notes over anything he says. That'll frustrate him for sure.



Didn't know there was a law protecting street evangelists from counter protests.

If you are just here to whine and burn straw then I won't respond further.

[Leonhard]

Whatever you say Sparko, I'm sure what you say makes sense to you. It was nice talking to you all at any rate.

[guacamole]

I'm not sure we can credit Jesus with the sort of open-air hell-fire and brimstone preaching usually associated with street preachers. In most instances in scripture, he was teaching in a synagogue. In those instances that I can think of off hand, when he is preaching out side, it is either to a large group that won't fit in a synagogue, and they have come to specifically to hear him, or to a single person, like the woman at the well. Other wise he teaches in homes. The cleansing of the temple was not open air preaching, by any stretch of the imagination.

fwiw,
guacamole

[One Bad Pig]

Debate is much stronger, but a lot of conservative debate isn't rational anymore at any rate. Just look at Trump. There's nothing rational about him in a debate, he's just bloviating. Any fact-checking meter just explodes when he talks. It doesn't matter whether he's right about what he's saying, as long as it feels real to his audience.

In a time of such people we need people of excellent rhetorics. However, and this is a very unfortunate thing. Democrats don't have that skill of rhetoric anymore, which is a loss. Because Milo would be skewered by someone like Hitchens, who also wasn't a factually accurate person, but was great at spearing political ideals on rhetorical sticks.

I'd rather see that at any rate.

You'd rather see rhetorical spearing, even if it isn't factually accurate, than other rhetoric that isn't factually accurate?

I don't see a whole lot of debate from the liberal side, just trying to shout down the opposition - which you seem to think is funny. I think it's boorish.

[Leonhard]

You'd rather see rhetorical spearing, even if it isn't factually accurate, than other rhetoric that isn't factually accurate?

I think I stated it a bit confusingly then. That's probably likely since I wrote that late at night. Factual debates are very different than what you see in the typical political arena. Trump is not a factual debater, and the examples I gave, Spencer, Coulter, Milo, aren't people who engaged in typical rational discourse. They're the ones getting the attention though, and yes since they're not engaged in rational debate, it takes someone who is a master of rhetorics to take them down, put them on the clock and make them answer their assertions.

Newt Gingrich has been caught stating falsely that crime rate was going up nationally and when this was pointed out to him (the FBI found out the opposite was true, though it was on the rise in certain pockets) he simply said something to the effect of "The average american doesn't feel that... as a political candidate I will go by how people feel and I'll let you go with the theoriticians" Thereby justifying him stating something contrary to objective statistics. "Liberals have a whole bunch of statistics which theoretically may be right, but its not where human beings are."

In an age where, given Trump's victory, facts don't matter. Trump certainly hasn't lost traction for stating false things, that still resonated with the voters. I don't see the utility of rational debate in the public because of that. It still has a place, but that place is more academic for the time being. Newt Gingrich and Trump have both just made up facts. How do you trump that in a debate? If you counter them with statistics they'll say those are false, etc...

In an age where feelings trump facts, political movements need people with rhetoric and charisma.

This is a deep problem related to the issue of various news organisations creating entire eco systems of news catering to specific world views. I don't know exactly how to fight that problem yet. Rhetorical debate and protests, are just symptom treatment. But I can't deny their importance in these times.

I don't see a whole lot of debate from the liberal side, just trying to shout down the opposition - which you seem to think is funny. I think it's boorish.

I find those kinds of preachers boorish enough that I'd gladly shut them down. However I'm an equal opportunist when it comes to that stuff. If alt-right protestors show up ready to fight, get ready for a fight. I've seen the nazies march yearly in my hometown, and every time the counter-protestors show up and there's a fight, the police arrives and breaks it up. There's nothing new under the sun there.

It has nothing to do with the guy being a Christian. I've seen vegetarians make cringe worthy protests in a similar fashion, though unfortunately not live.