5 Signs You’re A Regressive Liberal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2_DTlRaVzM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i85R9SWcLq0

And this guy is obviously totally fair minded and unbiased lol

Seriously though, on some of his statments you would be a regressive liberal didge lol

Notice the men at the beginning of the video - yiannopoulos, Rubin, etc

All weak men who clearly had female rejection issues and have become anti feminist.

Eilzel wrote:And this guy is obviously totally fair minded and unbiased lol

Seriously though, on some of his statments you would be a regressive liberal didge lol

Talk about proving him right?

Did you address any of his points or instead just talk about him and me lol?

You just ticked one of the boxes

But this is all you regressives can do, deflect, divert and cover up.

I mean if you want to bitch about me all day long that is fine Eilzel, but i certainly do not tick any of the boxes anymore.

I once may have done, but hen I woke up and could see the bullshit i was being fed.

Hey ho, you keep talking about me though, if that is all you are capable of lol

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Notice the men at the beginning of the video - yiannopoulos, Rubin, etc

All weak men who clearly had female rejection issues and have become anti feminist.

See another example of a regressive, Zack cannot counter any points so looks to dehumanize and make unfounded claims instead.

Another one ticks a box of the 5

There is nothing more grotesque than the self-assuredness of moral haughtiness when cloaked in academic regalia. - Gad Saad

sassy wrote:There is nothing more grotesque than the self-assuredness of moral haughtiness when cloaked in academic regalia. - Gad Saad

Another one ticks the boxes

So you have used the unrelated opinion of someone else, bravo

Now back to the points made

Intresting that you quoted him lol






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_IrI--8h5U

Even better and what is needed for some of the regressives on here to read and understand, though on this I would never count Eizel as one of them in regards to the criticism of religion. As at least on the aspect of religion he is spot on and would never fault him on that.






Let me first address the “racist” charge. In criticizing an ideology, one cannot be racist, hateful, or bigoted. These descriptors apply to positions held against people and not ideologies. It is perfectly acceptable in a free and liberal society to criticize, debate, mock, and reject any ideology. The contents of an ideology are not sacrosanct simply because they are couched in the cloak of a religion. If we were to refrain from criticizing religion, this would constitute adherence to blasphemy laws (see my earlier Psychology Today article on this matter). I was recently angered by a story regarding the refusal of Orthodox Jewish men to sit next to women on an El Al flight. Their position was rooted in otherwise deeply misogynistic religious beliefs. Given my disdain toward the behaviors and attitudes of these Orthodox Jews, does this make me a hateful, bigoted, Nazi-card carrying anti-Semite? What about individuals who might otherwise object to the Catholic Church’s position regarding abortion? Does this make them KKK Grand Wizards or are they allowed to criticize religious views that they consider sexist? Could they state that the Catholic Church is profoundly sexist even though they know innumerable Catholics who are not sexist and who have themselves had an abortion? Notwithstanding personal anecdotes to the contrary, an ideology is judged by its specific contents and by the real-world consequences that are engendered by it, when practiced in a particular way by hundreds of millions of people around the world. That Hakeem is the loveliest human being on earth says nothing about Islam.



Let us move to the “but 1.5 billion people are not violent” claim. Let me draw an analogy. Most men have never committed a rape nor will they ever commit such a reprehensible and evil act. Yet most rapists are men. Rape is a very serious issue that requires that we understand its root causes even though it is a very small minority of men who should be of concern to us. That we can all point to men who do not rape does not suggest that we should not worry about this phenomenon. Pointing to the empirical fact that rape is a largely male crime is not hateful, sexist, bigoted, or man-phobic. It is a manifestation of the fact that clear-thinking people can extract statistical regularities from the world and arrive to otherwise valid conclusions. Returning to the issue at hand, several global and reputable surveys (e.g., Pew Research Center) have offered a glimpse to the positions held by Muslims when it comes to a wide range of foundational liberal values (freedom of speech, rights of religious minorities, gay rights, women’s rights, apostasy, freedom of conscience). The picture is not pretty and it suggests that a sizeable portion (totaling in the hundreds of millions) hold views that are perfectly antithetical to the fundamental tenets along which Western values are based. So what should we do with this information? Should we refrain from having an open discussion on the matter since the majority of Muslims are indeed kind and peaceful? Should we ignore the daily carnages that are carried around the world in the name of the faith even though most people of that faith are not actively engaging in violence? How should we go about tackling this issue if we are increasingly being told that the mere hint of a criticism of that faith is unacceptable as it is “racist and gross” (to use Ben Affleck’s words)?


I should add that during Affleck’s incoherent rant he dismissed the current terror group du jour (ISIS) as a small and insignificant group that is otherwise irrelevant to the discussion given that they constitute a “minority” of extremists. Think about how diabolically smug and callous this statement is. There are thousands of people who are being beheaded, crucified, and raped by this group (rightly or wrongly in the name of their religion) yet in his infinite and blind desire to appear high-brow in his tolerance, he sees no reason to examine whether their positions might be religiously-inspired (they certainly seem to think so as do countless other similar groups around the world). The only thing that matters to Affleck is to signal to the world his bona fide progressive membership card of infinite tolerance built on the back of empty, ignorant, and childish platitudes.



Finally, by virtue of my ethnic origins, I can attest that I have known and been friends with countless people of the Muslim faith who are indeed lovely human beings. Ben Affleck lives in Southern California. I grew up in Lebanon and Arabic is my mother tongue so I do not need Ben Affleck to confirm this reality for me. That said this has absolutely nothing to do with people’s fundamental right to point to aspects of that faith that necessitate scrutiny. Sam Harris and countless other true liberals are at the forefront of that discussion. This hardly makes them hateful bigots. Rather, they are courageous defenders of Western liberal values. Those who disagree with them are free to rebut their positions in an open and free exchange. However, to repeatedly seek to stifle their voice by accusing them of the vilest descriptors is dishonest and shameful.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-consumericus/201410/ben-affleck-sam-harris-gross-racist

Ref 1st vid...


How long having I been saying this stuff...!?

So Didge, what made you change your mind?

A moment of clarity perhaps...?

the great Irony is that all these people are nothings
No great deeds to match their ideals
Were as men like the great Martin Luther King who successful transformed attitudes not only in his own country but half way around the world with a completely different set of peoples too, strongly disagree.

And as he Represents Social Progress and how to achieve it FAR more than any of these blow hards
and he is in complete opposition to what these fools call 'progress' in fact he would quite rightly point out that the OP is regressive it is taking mankind backward for it taking us away from the ideal that all peoples should be treated equally and judged on the content of their character and quality of their deeds, to treat people as the individuals they are is the end goal, it is what Social Progress is towards. Any policy or ideal that sets to treat people as nothing more than a stereotype of their race or religion is a step backwards.

eddie wrote:So Didge, what made you change your mind?

Research
Reason
Rationalize

What you fail to do on many things you post on.