Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally detest all patriarchal religions equally and would not follow one, nor introduce my children to one.

Nonetheless, I defend the right of anyone who wants to follow them. If my kids grow up to follow a patriarchal religion, I will accept it.

I personally hate the hijab. It offends every feminist, liberal bone in my body.

Nonetheless, I defend absolutely the right of all women in the US to choose what they wear without any interference whatsoever from the government.

I object to American conservatives/Christians/Republicans engaging in a campaign of hysteria relating to Islam. I object to the tendency to claim that Muslim bad guys represent an entire religion, and yet when a Christian does something evil, he is seen as a bad individual, and not representative of his group.

I don't relish defending Islam. It is the absurd, hysterical over-reaction in this country that pushes even me to have to say, "wait a minute - that's not being fair".

Just because I don't like a religion or an article of religious clothing doesn't mean I have the right to go out and spread fear, hate, and misinformation, demonizing the adherents and practices of that religion. THAT is why I am sometimes forced to be what I see as a "devil's advocate", so to speak.

I fail to see how you can live with yourself or even call yourself a feminist.

So I guess it's woman's choice to stay in an abusive relationship, too. or OK for your daughter to marry into a patriarchal religion where her husband has full control

all fine, yes?

You cannot be against organized religion yet fully support a woman's choice to cover or to be subservient to her husband. It's hypocritical and worse, spineless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neville Chamberlain is all you need to know about liberals. Liberals are about appeasement, of "trying to get along" whatever the cost. However, there appears to be an exception: if your authority on faith and morals is the bible and upon Jesus Christ then there is no getting along, only censorship, the gulag, work camps, sensitivity training, and "rehabilitation".

Wow, this is brilliant thinking -- Neville Chamberlain! Is it possible for you to make a stupider comparison? Oh, no, stupid isn't really the word. Lazy is the word I want. You didn't even bother to think about the actual problem. If I were to make arguments by comparing conservatives to Joe McCarthy I would deserve every bit of condemnation that would follow. And yes, liberals all want to send Christians to the gulag. Such an effective argument, such incisive thinking!

Neville Chamberlain epitomizes naive hope http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/12/18/the_naive_hope_of_liberalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_Neville_Chamberlain
Chamberlain was very interested in city planning for Birmingham. In November 1911, standing as a Liberal Unionist, he was elected to Birmingham City Council for All Saints' Ward

Chamberlain was a member of the Conservative Party which merged with the Liberal Unionist Party in 1912, it changed its official name to the Conservative and Unionist Party.
Good ole Neville buddy was from the liberal wing of that union. He was NOT a conservative politician. He was a liberal.

Anonymous wrote:They hate America . Anything that weakens America or individual liberty, they are for. Christianity was around the whole time the USA became the greatest and most powerful/free country on the planet. Liberals instinctively hate the empowerment of the individual ... Islam helps destroy the individual.

Anonymous wrote:I personally detest all patriarchal religions equally and would not follow one, nor introduce my children to one.

Nonetheless, I defend the right of anyone who wants to follow them. If my kids grow up to follow a patriarchal religion, I will accept it.

I personally hate the hijab. It offends every feminist, liberal bone in my body.

Nonetheless, I defend absolutely the right of all women in the US to choose what they wear without any interference whatsoever from the government.

I object to American conservatives/Christians/Republicans engaging in a campaign of hysteria relating to Islam. I object to the tendency to claim that Muslim bad guys represent an entire religion, and yet when a Christian does something evil, he is seen as a bad individual, and not representative of his group.

I don't relish defending Islam. It is the absurd, hysterical over-reaction in this country that pushes even me to have to say, "wait a minute - that's not being fair".

Just because I don't like a religion or an article of religious clothing doesn't mean I have the right to go out and spread fear, hate, and misinformation, demonizing the adherents and practices of that religion. THAT is why I am sometimes forced to be what I see as a "devil's advocate", so to speak.