Tom Tomorrow: Conservative Jones Latest Case, why do liberals ignore the threat of Sharia?

[Fumesucker]

[saltpoint]

1. I don't have time to worry about Sharia law because

I'm too alarmed by the prevalence of rainbow icing on cupcakes.

I can only handle one critical emergency at a time.

- - -

Great post. Love TT's satire.

:thumbsup:

[krispos42]

5. Forget the rainbow icing crisis...

...it's almost Halloween and those orange-paper-wrapped fake peanut things are STILL on the market!

[saltpoint]

7. You're right -- that has to be added to the list of crises.

I hope we can still worry about all these things and have time left later for the War on Christmas.

[krispos42]

10. I just saw the thread about the rainbow icing crisis in Indiana

:rofl:

[RevStPatrick]

2. Yeah, that's pretty much how it works.

The problem with Moonbats is the "But -- but YOU just --" and the "Er -- I -- what?"
Even though we Moonbats are ALWAYS correct, we let them walk all over us.

[Demit]

6. There is no satisfying response to people who won't engage on the same level.

Our first tools in assessing whether things are true or false are evidence and logic. Their first tool is their 'gut': what they feel is true; what they want to be true. They don't want to have to think logically, because they 'know' that what they feel is right.

When you use logic to engage with them they feel threatened. The best form of defense is offense, right? So they turn it back on you, and make it an ad hominem attack. In short, they fight dirty. And again, this in their gut feels 'right'.

You're dealing with the lizard brain—supported in the background by plutocrats who encouraged these diversions so they can maintain their historic economic advantage and power.


Just curious: how would you suggest is the way to make an exchange like this work?

[RevStPatrick]

11. How would I have dealt with it?

Like this:

"Moonbat, did you just compare conservatives to Islamofascists?"

"Yes, I suppose that's exactly what I did. Birds of a feather."

"You know who else employed hyperbole as a rhetorical device? Hitler!"

"Takes one to know one."

We constantly let them off the hook by sputtering.

[Demit]

12. 'Takes one to know one'? LOL! Then what happens?

He says your mother wears combat boots? Then you say you're rubber & he's glue?

I'm sorry. I don't see what would be gained by this kind of exchange.

[RevStPatrick]

13. Gained? Not much. But nothing lost.

Sputtering is the worst thing that we can do in the simple minds of people like that. If you tell them to go fuck themselves, they will actually respect you a little bit. And they may even listen to you. But if you sputter like a loser, they will always see you as a loser.

[RandomThoughts]

3. I won't ever follow a system of coercion claimed to be based on faith.

Side note, Sharia law does not allow alcohol, and I do have alcohol still, but my point is being able to go out and buy a beer in social environment.

So even those that think they could take away beer or wine with some economic oppression, can't do it.

I argue against faith enforced by coercion, since that is not faith. And how many leaders use such comments with ideas of self righteousness that is not an accurate claim based on any thought on the rules they try and impose.

If a society does not want some behavior, and it does not infringe on minority rights, that is different, although if by decree, based on comments that can be shown wrong, is not something I would follow from any religion.

[madrchsod]

4. what about Leviticus?...............

[TexasObserver]

8. Absolutely dead on.

[DirkGently]

9. Nothing makes rightwing authoritarians madder than a competing group of rightwing authoritarians.