Muslim Bakers and Photographers

[Town Heretic]

Men getting screwed in court,

Cruc not only doesn't know what he's talking about, he doesn't want to.

I've explained the operation of law and restraints before and will again if needed or if anyone is curious.

screwed out of their house and home,

I'm sure some are, as I'm sure some women are, but as a rule, no.

losing kids and money,

Well, no, again. The strong trend in courts, absent a showing of cause for another course, is for joint custody. If there is a primary physical custodian then the non primary will have to pay their share of child support.

going to jail for barely touching them

Same answer. In any system that can and will happen to someone. As a rule it doesn't. As a rule, you go to jail for causing a harm. Mostly because absent proof (injuries that are objectively observable, from bruises and lacerations to broken bones or worse) it's hard to convict someone of battery.

false rape accusations

The FBI believes that around 8% of rape allegations are falsified. Most studies I've seen that survive scrutiny have the figure even lower, from 2 to 5%. In any event that leaves an overwhelming majority outside of that concern.

and most relevant to this argument right here

You don't and aren't arguing...arguments require logic that can be tested and/or factual support from verifiable authority. By way of:


Archambault, J. (2005, Winter). So how many rapes are false? STOPNewsletter. Retrieved from the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape


Belknap, J. (2010). Rape: Too hard to report and too easy todiscredit victims. Violence Against Women, 16, 1335-1344.doi:10.1177/1077801210387749

And so on. . . lain:

 

[Crucible]

Cruc not only doesn't know what he's talking about, he doesn't want to.

I've explained the operation of law and restraints before and will again if needed or if anyone is curious.

People ain't been saying the same damn thing for the past thirty years and it not be true. It's been happening for decades and is widely known.

Of course the law looks nice from afar- but it's not the law, it's the biases therein. You all intend to lie and so have no problem perpetuating the myth that all is fair between men and women in court.

And
Let's see the two who've talked here-
ex lawyer and a winner in divorce court.
No surprise at all

 

[Town Heretic]

People ain't been saying the same damn thing for the past thirty years and it not be true. It's been happening for decades and is widely known

All manner of error has been widely and popularly supported over time. The remedy for that sort of institutional foolishness is found in the application of fact and reason. When applied they will root it out. You can recognize that sort easily enough by the reluctance of its enemies to apply either.

Of course the law looks nice from afar- but it's not the law, it's the biases therein.

The law itself is a form of bias, a bias for rule and order over anarchy, deliberation over declaration. The genius of the mechanism is in its recognition of the nature of men and the provision for remedy where that nature overreaches or fails.

You all intend to lie

That is, in fact, untrue. I have met declaration, bigoted hatred and foolishness with reason and fact.

and so have no problem perpetuating the myth that all is fair between men and women in court.

In point of fact I have noted that history demonstrates that things have rarely been fair between the sexes and that for most of history in the West men held a remarkably ham-fisted advantage over women, that for a short time there existed a tender years exception that favored women as custodians of children, a notion rooted ironically enough in the bias that held it woman's work. At present the law is as even handed as can be and the facts support this, make a monkey of anyone foolish enough say otherwise, however loudly or often.

And
Let's see who's talking here- ex lawyer and a winner in divorce court

So at least two people who, your mistaken impression notwithstanding on the particulars, actually know first hand something about the business you appear to apprehend darkly and through the bottom of a glass.

 

[MrDante]

Quote Originally Posted by MrDante

Sanger didn't say anything of the sort.




Yeah, like when she spoke to the women of the Ku Klux Klan (and was invited to speak at numerous other meetings).

I can talk all day long about the racist/eugenicist/Jew hating Margaret Sanger anna, but the question is, can you spend the day defending her?

The written record defends her, all you can do is make stuff up.

 

[MrDante]

So when Sanger gave a speech to the women of the KKK, she was giving her recipe for cornbread pudding?

"Never before had I looked into a sea of faces like these. I was sure that if I uttered one word, such as abortion, outside the usual vocabulary of these women they would go off into hysteria. And so my address that night had to be in the most elementary terms, as though I were trying to make children understand," Sanger, Margaret (1938). Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography.

 

[MrDante]

I've been waiting for you to make good on your promise to pull up our original conversation which for some reason you haven't been able to do. All the pertinent answers are already there so all you need to do is link to that very convo - as you said you would.

So either get on and do it, or carry on acting like some insufferably pompous, deflective boring blowhard.

Your call Connie.

I don't think he's acting.

 

[annabenedetti]

The written record defends her, all you can do is make stuff up.

You notice how he added in parentheses "(and was invited to speak at numerous other meetings)" as if she went on to do just that, when the actual truth is that she never went to another one.

Regarding Sanger's opinion of abortion, here are her actual words:

"The only weapon that women have and the most uncivilized weapon that they have to use if they will not submit to having children every year or every year and a half, the weapon they use is abortion. We know how detrimental abortion is to the physical side as well as to the psychic side of the woman's life, and yet there are in this nation, because of these generalities and opinions that are here before us, that are stopping the tide of progress, we have more than one million women with abortions performed on them each year.

What does this mean? It means it is a very bad sign if women have to indulge in it, and it means they are absolutely determined that they cannot continue bringing children into the world that they cannot clothe, feed, and shelter. It is woman's instinct, and she knows herself when she should and should not give birth to children, and it is just as natural to trust that instinct and to let her be the one to say and much more natural than it is to leave it to some unknown God for her to judge her by. I claim it is a woman's duty and right to have for herself the right to say when she shall and shall not have children."

http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=236701.xml​

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I was fascinated by aCW's ability to drop names into this thread, so here's a list (and I'm sure I've missed a few):

Terry Bean

Harvey Milk

NAMBLA

Nazis

Margaret Sanger

Planned Parenthood

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Jimmy Carter

Barack Obama

Phil Robertson

The Shah of Iran

Ayatollah Khomeini

Harvey Levin

Herbert J.Edgar Hoover

Fixed that for ya.

You fascinate easily anna.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Pffffttttt ... and to think I was going to make you my second in command when I become dictator ...

You do realize Sandy that you and Donald Trump have more in common than being defenders of homosexuality and transvestitism don't you?

 

[annabenedetti]

Yeah, like when she spoke to the women of the Ku Klux Klan (and was invited to speak at numerous other meetings).

I can talk all day long about the racist/eugenicist/Jew hating Margaret Sanger anna, but the question is, can you spend the day defending her?

Yes you could talk all day (that's well established) but what you said wouldn't be truthful.

Anyway, while Sanger was invited to speak to a group of Christian women, your often-posted photo of her at a KKK rally is a fake, and you know the the actual photograph is of a bunch of KKK Christians around a cross.

That's got to be more than a little uncomfortable, right? KKK members saluting a cross?

So that's why it's photoshopped out. Much more convenient to show Sanger instead of the symbol of your religion, ey aCW?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Yes you could talk all day (that's well established) but what you said wouldn't be truthful.

The truth is that Sanger was invited to speak to a group of Christian women, because as history shows (your often-posted fake photo of her at a KKK rally notwithstanding) is actually a photoshop of a bunch of Christians around a cross.

That's got to be more than a little uncomfortable, right? KKK members saluting a cross?

So that's why it's photoshopped out. Much more convenient to show Sanger instead of the symbol of your religion, ey aCW?

I realize that in your world hardcore racists that murder black people (black unborn babies included) are "Christian", but the fact is that Sanger knowingly spoke to women of the Ku Klux Klan.

 

[annabenedetti]

The fact is the KKK were Christians.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

The fact is the KKK were Christians.

Not according to Jesus (and He knows a tad bit about Christianity).

 

[annabenedetti]

That No True Scotsman dog won't hunt, aCW.

That's used all the time. Christians are Christians until they do something unChristian. Then they're "Not Real Christians."

As in, "the Christians in this country are persecuted! Christians are under attack from all directions! By gays, by Obama, by liberals!"

KKK members were Christians.

"Oh. Well, they weren't real Christians."

 

[gcthomas]

Not according to Jesus (and He knows a tad bit about Christianity).

And that is a lot more than you apparently. It seems that the KKK interpreted neighbour to exclude immigrant/slaves from other continents. That is the problem with loosely written texts, isn't it? Everyone can reasonably interpret them differently. The KKK are self proclaimed Christian white supremacists.

Unless you are demonstrating the No True Scotsman Fallacy? (Anna got there first!)

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Since anna is using photoshopped pictures in an attempt to belittle Christianity, I feel it's only fair to use one to show the ties between her beloved Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

The Nazis worshipped Margaret Sanger for her views on eugenics.

The Pivot of Civilization, by Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger would deeply influence America’s infamous sterilization laws. Adolf Hitler, while in prison, was so influenced by the eugenics movement it would literally form the foundation for the Holocaust: the Final Solution as to the question of “race hygiene.”

“The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring… represents the most humane act of mankind.”

Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Vol. 1, Chapter 10
http://impiousdigest.com/planned-parenthoods-secret-origins-2/

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Not according to Jesus (and He knows a tad bit about Christianity).

And that is a lot more than you apparently. It seems that the KKK interpreted neighbour to exclude immigrant/slaves from other continents. That is the problem with loosely written texts, isn't it? Everyone can reasonably interpret them differently. The KKK are self proclaimed Christian white supremacists.

Unless you are demonstrating the No True Scotsman Fallacy? (Anna got there first!)

You seem to be confusing the values of Christianity with your secular humanist doctrine. BTW, murder is not a Christian value either.

Spoiler

 

[annabenedetti]

Since anna is using photoshopped pictures

I didn't use a photoshopped photo, I posted the real deal. The KKK saluting a cross.

in an attempt to belittle Christianity

Nice try. I was belittling the KKK. As it should be.

I feel it's only fair to use one to show the ties between her beloved Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

With another photoshop.

Sanger never met Hitler, except in her unconscious (see below). And the reality is that despite the fact that Sanger's anti-militarism and isolationism during the 1920s and 1930s at times obscured her abhorrence of the Nazis, she was deeply shocked and horrified by the evils and dangers of fascism, Hitler and the Nazi party. "All the news from Germany is sad & horrible," she wrote in 1933, "and to me more dangerous than any other war going on any where because it has so many good people who applaud the atrocities & claim its right. The sudden antagonism in Germany against the Jews & the vitriolic hatred of them is spreading underground here & is far more dangerous than the aggressive policy of the Japanese in Manchuria." (MS to Edith How-Martyn, May 21, 1933 [MSM C2:536].) She joined the American Council Against Nazi Propaganda and "gave money, my name and any influence I had with writers and others, to combat Hitler's rise to power in Germany." ("World War II and World Peace," 1940? [MSM S72:269].) For Hitler the feeling was mutual; in 1933 the Nazis burned Sanger's books along with those of Ellis, Freud, German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, and others. (Ellis to MS, Sept. 3, 1933 [LCM 3:385].)​

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I didn't use a photoshopped photo, I posted the real deal. The KKK saluting a cross.

Nice try. I was belittling the KKK. As it should be.

Yet defending the hardcore racist/eugenicist/Jew hater Margaret Sanger who spoke to the KKK and "received a dozen more invitations to speak to like minded groups".

Sanger never met Hitler

Who said that she did? Margaret Sanger was a huge influence on the Nazi eugenics program.

 

[annabenedetti]

Yet defending the hardcore racist/eugenicist/Jew hater Margaret Sanger who spoke to the KKK and "received a dozen more invitations to speak to like minded groups".

Who said that she did? Margaret Sanger was a huge influence on the Nazi eugenics program.

You're delusional. Continue babbling to yourself, I've got other things to do.