SPLC Tells Americans to 'Fight Hate' by Voting Democrat
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
On the eve of the midterm elections, the far-Left smear group the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) urged Americans to "fight hate" by voting — and they don't mean voting to support President Donald Trump or his party. In fact, the group clearly intended to convey the message, "To fight hate, vote Democrat."
"The midterm elections on Tuesday are not about partisan politics," SPLC President Richard Cohen said in post called " To fight hate, vote ." Cohen argued that the midterms are "about the future of our country. Whatever your political persuasion, reject hate and vote."
The post began by referencing three horrific attacks and suggesting that President Trump was the source behind them:
First, a white gunman killed two African Americans in Jeffersontown, Kentucky, after trying to break into a black church.
Then, a man who reportedly identified as a white supremacist was arrested for mailing pipe bombs to President Barack Obama, George Soros, Hillary Clinton and other people President Trump has criticized.
And on Saturday morning, as worshippers gathered at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, a white gunman shouted “All Jews must die” as he opened fire, killing 11 people .
Behind each attack was the same kind of naked hate.
Notice the subterfuge. The SPLC only mentioned Trump in the case of Cesar Sayoc, the alleged "MAGA bomber." The political affiliation of the alleged Jeffersontown shooter remains unknown, and it seems unlikely this hater of black people would be glad to hear Trump hosted a huge meeting of black conservatives at the White House just last week. The Pittsburgh synagogue shooter loathed Trump, attacking him as controlled by Jews.
The SPLC previously attempted to tie Trump to the synagogue shooter, despite the fact that shooter hated Trump. The group also suggested Trump's opposition to "globalism" is coded language for anti-Semitism . Trump, the proud father of a convert to Judaism and a staunch supporter of the state of Israel, seems an odd target for charges of anti-Semitism. Trump's opposition to globalism has everything to do with the UN and loss of national sovereignty and nothing to do with anti-Semitism.
The SPLC's post went on to describe other horrific acts of terror:
Last week’s terrorist attacks were far from the first of their kind. Three years ago, white supremacist Dylann Roof massacred nine African Americans at a church in Charleston. Three years before that, neo-Nazi Wade Michael Page killed six at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin. And there have been many other far-right attacks and plots in recent years.
"This irrational fear that 'the other' — minorities and people of color — will take the country away from whites is the through-line connecting a spate of violence targeted at houses of worship across different religions in just the past six years," Heidi Beirich, director of the SPLC's Intelligence Project, argued.
If it were not clear the SPLC's remarks against "hate" were aimed at Trump and his party, the group made it clear Tuesday morning by tying Trump's immigration policy to "white supremacist goals."
The SPLC focuses on "hate crimes," and this obsession blinds them to the fact that there have been 1,705 deadly force attacks against religious organizations — churches, mosques, synagogues, temples — since 1999, only 5.87 percent of which were motivated by animus against people groups.
None of this diminishes the utter disgusting evil of the Pittsburgh shooter, the MAGA bomber, the white supremacist Charleston shooter, or others. It does suggest, and underscore, the fact that the SPLC specifically chooses the attacks that fit their narrative, conveniently ignoring those that do not.
According to Carl Chinn , founder of the Faith Based Security Network, the deadly-force attacks were motivated by robbery (25.97 percent), domestic disputes (16 percent), personal conflict (13.6 percent), mental illness (10.97 percent), or gang-related issues (8.89 percent).
Chinn remarked that "the Southern Poverty Law Center is a flagship for what's wrong with the study of hate crimes." The SPLC brands mainstream conservative and Christian groups "hate groups," and focuses on instances of apparent animus against people due to their skin color, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. The group has been known to fall for "hate" hoaxes and to fail to correct the record afterwards.
Most important for any description of fighting "hate," however, the SPLC has published a "hate map" plotting every "hate group" across America. One terrorist used this "hate map" to attack the Family Research Council (FRC), intending to shoot everyone in the building. The man who shot Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) at the congressional baseball game shooting last year, and aimed to kill many congressional Republicans, also "liked" the SPLC on Facebook . The SPLC had repeatedly attacked Scalise specifically.
In its haste to fight "hate," it seems the SPLC has itself inspired a great deal of "hate." Furthermore, the SPLC wrongly listed Maajid Nawaz , a Muslim reformer, as an "anti-Muslim extremist." The group paid Nawaz's organization $3.375 million in a settlement, and about 60 organizations immediately began discussing whether or not they have a defamation case against the SPLC.
The SPLC has wielded the "hate group" label as a cudgel against anyone brazen enough to oppose liberal orthodoxy on issues ranging from Islam to immigration to LGBT activism. The group branded ACT for America a "hate group," leading Hyatt Hotels to ban them last month .
The Left-wing smear group has branded Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a Christian law firm that won nine Supreme Court cases in the last seven years, a "hate group," twisting out of context decades-old quotes about homosexuality. The SPLC also placed D. James Kennedy Ministries on their "hate group" list, leading Amazon to exclude the nonprofit from its charity program, Amazon Smile. D. James Kennedy Ministries responded with a lawsuit .
The SPLC branded the small Catholic nonprofit the Ruth Institute a "hate group," citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church's position against same-sex marriage. By the SPLC's logic , 1 billion human beings belong to an anti-LGBT hate group headed by Pope Francis.
After the white nationalist riots in Charlottesville, Va., last year, the SPLC published a "hate map" plotting Confederate monuments. This map, released at a time when protesters were targeting these monuments for violent protest and vandalism, included elementary schools , middle schools, and high schools. The map even included Stonewall Elementary , which was named after a stone wall, not General Stonewall Jackson.
As Americans vote on Tuesday, they would do well to discount any advice from the SPLC. Voting Democrat does not constitute voting "against hate."
Indeed, Shane Mekeland, a Republican candidate for Minnesota's state House, blamed Democrats for inspiring the incivility that led a man to punch him out of nowhere, leaving him with a concussion and the inability to campaign outside without getting a headache.
"They're constantly driving this narrative of 'It's okay to be violent,'" Mekeland said. How do they drive this narrative? Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called on activists to harass members of the Trump administration in public places like gas stations and restaurants. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) encouraged activists to "get up in the face" of Republican candidates and office-holders. Hillary Clinton said Democrats "cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for." Eric Holder declared , "When they go low, we kick them."
America's civility crisis is a good reason to vote Republican , not Democrat. The SPLC, in seeking to find any excuse to connect Trump to the latest domestic tragedy, seems utterly blind to the dangers of a Democratic mob. They're too busy finding anti-Semitic "dogwhistles" uttered by a president who welcomed Jews into his family with open arms.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
52 visitors
“Chinn remarked that "the Southern Poverty Law Center is a flagship for what's wrong with the study of hate crimes." The SPLC brands mainstream conservative and Christian groups "hate groups," and focuses on instances of apparent animus against people due to their skin color, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. The group has been known to fall for "hate" hoaxes and to fail to correct the record afterwards.” ....... “Indeed, Shane Mekeland, a Republican candidate for Minnesota's state House, blamed Democrats for inspiring the incivility that led a man to punch him out of nowhere, leaving him with a concussion and the inability to campaign outside without getting a headache.
"They're constantly driving this narrative of 'It's okay to be violent,'" Mekeland said. How do they drive this narrative? Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) called on activists to harass members of the Trump administration in public places like gas stations and restaurants. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) encouraged activists to "get up in the face" of Republican candidates and office-holders. Hillary Clinton said Democrats "cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for." Eric Holder declared, "When they go low, we kick them."
America's civility crisis is a good reason to vote Republican, not Democrat. The SPLC, in seeking to find any excuse to connect Trump to the latest domestic tragedy, seems utterly blind to the dangers of a Democratic mob. They're too busy finding anti-Semitic "dogwhistles" uttered by a president who welcomed Jews into his family with open arms.”
Kim Davis was kicked to the curb by Kentucky voters and the Governor of Colorado is gay, so Jack Phillips better watch his step.
Why? Is the gay bigot governor going to be persecuting Christians when he takes office just like the SPLC does?
Who said that governor of Colorado is a bigot, unless you believe that all LGBT are bigots because they refuse to allow religious people to trample on the constitutional rights of others?
How does the SPLC persecute Christians? Do they have a top-secret lion breeding program that nobody else knows about?
Only hate filled bigots would seek to coerce or compel others to violate the free exercise there of of another’s religious beliefs when they can find others willing to participate in their rituals.
"But you're not letting me discriminate against you! Whaaaaaah! Why won't you just go away and die, you make me feel guilty for hating you, why do you even exist? Gay is a choice! You're choosing to make me angry and mad at you, why? Why won't you just do what my invisible wizard in the sky demands of you? Don't you understand? That's the only way your invisible immortal soul won't be tormented for eternity by my loving God. I mean, can't you tell I'm doing all this out of love?..."
It's what virtually every conservative Republican is thinking but is too chicken shit to vocalize because if they did they and everyone around them would realize how incredibly full of shit they are, forcing something they have to rely on "faith", aka absence of any proof, on everyone around them. They adopted archaic morals and are trying to impose them on every other American against their will, all out of the "goodness" of their hearts.
Only hate filled bigots would seek to coerce or compel others to violate the free exercise of another's choice not to believe in religion and those who have no desire to force others to participate in a fantasy reality, aka belief in an invisible alien being they have zero evidence of. But that's evangelical Christianity for you.
Jack Phillips has the same free speech and religious rights as everyone else. Discrimination in a public business is not a religious right, despite your emotional attempt to spin it. There are laws that much be followed when you choose to open a business that serves the public, so if he doesn't like those laws then sell the business or make it a private club.
He is not participating in any rituals, so drop the strawman.
so you are upset with anti-discrimination laws that business owners voluntarily agree to abide by when they voluntarily open their public business to serve the public ?
I think it was Stephen Colbert who said that the first gay mayor or governor, I forget, of Colorado should call Jack Phelps and order a celebration cake.
It is the governor-elect of Colorado that is gay.
Some would call him "light in the loafers" or a "swish".
Not ME, but others have used those terms here.
Holy crackers. The pipe bombers van in Florida is emblazoned with the Trump message of peace, harmony and love. Dems must be nuts. The SPLC is funded by the Saudis and Russians, right?
s/
The pipe bomber is a mental case. As to the SPLC, they are a bigoted hate group that has inspired acts of terrorism against mainstream conservatives they have falsely defamed and libeled as so called hate groups.
You mean the KKK is not a hate group? What of Westboro Baptists?
The SPLC has strict standards it uses to determine and certify who are hate groups like The Family Research Council and Focus on the Family...
What acts of terrorism against mainstream conservatives are you referring to?
Who has been defamed and libeled?
Unlike most terrorists, who are of course very well adjusted individuals . . .
/sarc
They are active participants in our political process!
Former KKK leader David Duke: 'We won it for Donald Trump'
A former Ku Klux Klan leader – or 'grand wizard' – has suggested fascists had helped Donald Trump win the US presidential election.
David Duke, who once led the neo-Nazi, white-supermacist organisation, tweeted the claim on election night.
“This is one of the most exciting nights of my life,” Mr Duke wrote.
“Make no mistake about it, our people have played a huge role in electing Trump!”
I suppose you know The KKK is Number One on the SPLC's List of Haters...
Mainstream conservatives? Sounds like an excuse looking for a reason.
The KKK and Westboro baptists are not conservatives. They are haters. It is a flat out lie spread by bigots to call mainstream conservative Christians in the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family hate groups.
Fred Phelps was a Baptist minister who cites the Bible to further his violent religious beliefs.
The cornerstone of the KKK is conservative Christianity, so stop trying to deny religious terrorism when Christians do it. Jack Phillips is a member of the same sect of Protestant Christianity that was behind the creation of the Klan. It took until 1982 for the SBC to reject their Klan history.
They consider themselves conservatives, consider themselves Christian, vote conservative, support Trump, want to build a wall to keep out the brown people, want to take away a woman's right to choose, demand their right to discriminate against LGTBQ Americans, believe liberals and progressives are the enemy of the people and embrace hard-line conservative interpretations of the bible. Hmmmm, that sounds an awful lot like some other guys I know...
The family Research Council, ALliance Defending Freedom, focus on the family, James Kennedy ministries, and many others. They have all been smeared, lied about, and defamed by the terrorist inspiring liberal hate group, the vile SPLC.
They are all HATE groups even though you don't think they are.
No they aren’t. The SPLC are the real haters as well as all who act on their ratings who are equally hateful bigots.
Anti- ANYTHING is a hate group according to them.
That is only YOUR opinion, not truth.
If they have been defamed then why didn't they file a civil suit and take them to court for damages?
The groups that you cite have an inherent anti-LGBT stance and oppose the equal rights of others such as women and people of other religions. It will be a cold day in Hades when I going to live my life being ruled by their bronze-age religious myths and misogynistic fantasies. Those conservatives beliefs are opposed by many Christian groups, so don't try to paint those extremists as mainstream Christians.
The SPLC has no legitimate place in honorable society.
It is the SPLC position that is clearly and obviously NOT the truth. The SPLC is lying for political and monetary advantage.
I guess there just wasn't enough money donated to the SPLC for naming only the KKK and one or two other vile groups, so they've hit the jackpot by naming anyone who dares to criticize Islam or Muslims - bet they get a fortune from Arab countries to be able to show so many multi-millions of dollars in their net worth. Add to that, the money atheists probably send them for crucifying Christian groups. A virtual windfall.
Again, that's your opinion....the groups you tout are hate groups
.....The school district did not explain how it would "create a sense of belonging, inclusiveness and support" for students and parents who support conservative and Christian groups that the SPLC falsely labels "hate groups." It did not explain how these values would support Christians — whose beliefs are routinely branded "hate" by the SPLC.
The SPLC gained its reputation by taking the Ku Klux Klan to court, but in recent years it has engaged in a defamation campaign against mainstream conservative and Christian organizations. Christian nonprofits like the Family Research Council (FRC), Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Ruth Institute, D. James Kennedy Ministries, and Liberty Counsel have found themselves on the "hate group" list, alongside the KKK.
These groups have never advocated violence against anyone — ADF has won 9 Supreme Court cases in the past seven years — but they do maintain traditional Christian doctrine that sex should be reserved for marriage and that marriage is defined as the lifelong union of one man and one woman. The SPLC has twisted their previous statements out of context in order to present this view as "hateful" toward LGBT people.
Egregiously, the SPLC actually quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church — the binding belief statement for 1 billion people around the world — as proof that the Ruth Institute is a "hate group." If the SPLC were consistent, it would brand all faithful Catholics as members of a "hate group."
This branding has real-world consequences. In 2012, a domestic terrorist targeted FRC, aiming to shoot everyone in the building. He later admitted to using the SPLC's "hate map" to target this organization. The SPLC refused to remove FRC from its "hate map."
ACT for America Pressures Hyatt to Drop SPLC-Inspired 'Hate Group' Ban on Conservatives
In recent years, tech companies like Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Twitter have used the SPLC "hate group" list to exclude conservative and Christian organizations. Amazon removed ADF and D. James Kennedy Ministries (DJKM) from its charity partnership arm, Amazon Smile, and DJKM responded with a lawsuit. Vanco Payments dropped the Ruth Institute over the SPLC label.
Last week, the SPLC — which is funded, in part, by liberal billionaire George Soros — teamed up with other Soros-funded groups to push "Change the Terms," a campaign to bully tech companies into removing all "hate speech" from their platforms.
This summer, the SPLC paid $3.375 million to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim reformer whom the organization branded an "anti-Muslim extremist." In the wake of this settlement, about 60 organizations started considering separate defamation suits against the SPLC.
When presented with all this evidence against the SPLC, Denver Public Schools responded with that message — "The values expressed by the SPLC are in alignment with the values of DPS." The school district did not explain whether or not that means conservative Christians and Roman Catholics will be considered "hateful" in the Denver school system......https://pjmedia.com/faith/denver-public-schools-proudly-admits-to-sharing-the-same-values-as-left-wing-anti-christian-group/
Why was religion/religious beliefs being brought into public schools? Religious beliefs are a private matter and should not be part of a public school curriculum.
Amazon can do what they want. If you don't like it them don't shop there. They are not required to sell religious material or support religious causes.
They both hold the exact same anti-LGBT views as their Southern Baptist brethren. [deleted]
All rather infamous anti-LGBT hate groups. The Family Research Council is even led by a guy who bought his mailing list from the KKK, a guy who has given speeches to various white supremacist groups..
They/we are mainstream Christians. As to defamation suits , they are happening. The SPLC recently lost one and now we are targeting for damages any and all companies and groups one at a time rather than class action that use the SPLC ratings against mainstream conservative Christian groups for their own business purposes. This is in the formative stages as companies are given the opportunity to retract and cease and desist first before being taken to court.
No we are not haters nor are we hate groups. The SPLC on the other hand is a big time hate group.
Your ideas are not mainstream beliefs.
The SPLC is a waste of humans.
Religion is the waste of a human mind.
Billions of people around the world would disagree with you.
That argument is a popularity fallacy. Just because millions or billions of people believe in god doesn't mean that their various gods exist.
Just because you don't believe doesn't mean that there isn't a God.
It isn't about believing because belief doesn't prove anything. It is a simple fact that there is no evidence that any god exists. Yours, theirs or anyone elses.
You need to learn to move beyond belief and embrace facts and logic as the basis of your life's decisions. What are your Protestant Christian views?
I need to learn that to satisfy you? I don't think so!
My views are my own. I need not explain nor share what they are to you. You have no inherent right to such information. If I choose to share it with you, you'll be the first to know.
I am not trying to convince you to believe anything. I don't care what you think about God or religion, as I have oh-so-patiently tried to tell you on more than one occasion, but for some reason you still just don't get that.
I am only suggesting that you be more logical. I am not asking you to satisfy me because it is obvious that you could not do so.
I am merely asking what religious sect you belong to? Why would you be evasive to what should be a very simple question, if you do believe in a god? Don't get dramatic.
Why do you do this every time you respond to a religious discussion?
Ouch! Poor Tex...
This wasn't a religious discussion.
Read the article. It isn't abut religion, but about the SPLC and their hate lists.
No one is getting dramatic, as much as you would like to see that. I am not evasive, you just don't have a need to know what I believe. As I have ALREADY stated, when I think you need to know, I'll tell you.
What about that is hard to understand?
Is this how you plan to spin this discussion?
The groups in question being labeled as hate groups by the SPLC most certainly do hide their bigotry behind their conservative religious beliefs. I wonder why you are so evasive with declaring your religious beliefs when most people are quite open about the subject, unless you have somthing to hide?
I enjoy watching you spin and backpedal. Wear your PPE so you aren't injured in your efforts.
Just because you do believe doesn't mean there is a god either. There simply is no evidence/proof of any god. And belief does not equal proof.
Argumentum ad populum fallacy.
HAHAHAHAHAHA [deep breath] HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The SPLC is a waste of humans
I agree with both of those statements
Human debris as Rush refers to such people.
Did Jesus do the same?
Good points all. The seed was about the SPLC being openly partisan. Encouraging voters to vote democrat to avoid hate. They virtually implied that voting Republican was voting for hate. And yet this bigoted terrorist enabling hate group, the SPLC gets to be put on a pedastal where people take what they say seriously and censor others based on their biased nakedly partisan rants against legitimate unlike them groups who are Christians and conservatives. Why do partisan democrats get to sit in judgement over so many on so many places including here?
E,A For someone that on this Site claims to be such an Authority on/of the BIBLE, see this and YOU tell Us ok::
Matthew 23
Nice to see that you believe Jesus is real and in what He said.
No surprise at all that you don't like the SPLC. Many if not most conservatives can't stand civil rights advocacy groups.
It must bug you no end that I won't play your games with you.
I have repeatedly told you, to no avail, that it simply isn't any of your business what MY beliefs are.
I'm real sorry that it bothers you so much, but it is on a need-to-know basis only, and I have determined you don't need to know.
No spinning, just facts that apparently you don't like.
That's a real shame.
I never claimed otherwise.
What part about me not caring what others believe in or not seems to be hard to understand?
I don't EVER try to recruit anyone to my religion, or to think about God like I do, or to even think about Him at all.
I spoke the truth.
Sorry if that bothers you in some way.
My problem with the SPLC isn't because they are a civil rights advocacy group.
If that was ALL they were, that would be fucking GREAT!
But sadly, they have become really no better than some of the groups they have "determined" are hate groups.
I don't like it, and have said so before.
LOL. It sounds like they've exposed one of the bigoted hate groups you support. No wonder you're so butt-hurt about the SPLC.
Congress on racial equality, (CORE) http://www.core-online.org Project 21, https://nationalcenter.org/project-21/ Two very fine civil rights groups.
Some are better left alone to their own devices.
perhaps the ones with batteries?
No, you only spoke your own beliefs.
It's funny if you think it does.
Quote my lie and prove it then.
Until then, don't feel it is necessary to comment to me.
Quite defensive, aren't you? I didn't say you lied.
E.A Seems Matthew Twenty-three 23 Must be as hard as Matthew Seven 7 or?
[Removed]
Oh, surely by NOW you have figured out what a REPLY is, haven't you?
Here, let me help:
re·ply
[rəˈplī]
VERB
say something in response to something someone has said.
"he was gone before we could reply to his last remark" · [more]
synonyms:
respond · answer · say in response · rejoin · return · retort · counter · [more]
NOUN
a verbal or written answer.
"I received a reply from the firm's managing director" · [more]
synonyms:
answer · response · acknowledgment · rejoinder · return · reaction · [more]
SMMFH
Says the guy who uses smileys alone as a reply.
But then again, I am not the one foolish enough to ask if a poster's REPLY to someone else is "talking to themselves", now am I?
Gee, I wonder who asked such a senseless question?
Your reply isn't really saying anything at all.
Says the one who asked such an inane question.
Says the one with the inane replies.
Oooh, what's next?
"I know you are but what am I?"
Let’s keep this seed about the bigotry, hate, and blatant partisanship of the SPLC and it’s minions toward us who dare to disagree with their hate and bigotry as civil as possible.
IOW, just support that heinous lie. Got it.
Well, you got 50% correct. Take your pick which.
It's funny how the majority of these hate groups are all right wing.
Is he looking in a mirror?
And yet "conservatives" are trying to protect them from one of the most effective organizations going after them, the SPLC. I know you can't see it but you've painted yourself into a corner yet again, HA.
He was looking at the SPLC and Dave Van Zandt.
Oh, the "No True Scotsman" gambit. Always handy when trying to deny the reality.
If he denied their Christianity he had a point but they're both conservative...
Butt, the KKK and Westborough do both march under the christian banner.
They are not genuine conservatives or Christians. They really are hate groups equally as bad, vile, evil, hate filled , and bigoted as the SPLC. There is no difference between the three. Many members of all three of those are hate filled bigots.
I dare you to prove that people who are members of the SPLC who are also Klan members or support Fred Phelps. The Klan and the SPLC have opposite demographics.
give everyone the defining criteria for "genuine" conservatives and "genuine" Christians.
That’s not what I said. [Deleted]
What else would you expect out of a bigoted biased partisan hate group like the SPLC and all who use their so called hate list for any purpose?
They are moral equals in their hate of those that they disagree with. None better than the other, all bad.
Give it up. If you people tag Dems with supporting Antifa then you get to own scum like Westboro, the KKK and all the neo-nazi groups who share even a smidge of your conservatism. That's the way you play the game so we'll play by your rules.
It’s the hateful bigots who are the SPLC who targets with so called hate labels traditionally mainstream conservative and Christian groups with which they disagree with on ideological grounds. The United States DOJ is disassociating itself from dealing with the SPLC and ALL groups and organizations who use their current hate list criteria.
Correct! And what about the other billion who are in hate groups not headed by the Pope (Peace be Upon Him)
Warning: When I get bored I like to engage in a bit of gentle trolling...hehehe
Except that the SPLC has never designated the Catholic Church a hate group.
There is a concerted effort to delegitimize the SPLC by certified hate groups...
Do not buy the rank bullshit being sold here. The SPLC legitimately certifies real hate groups. When mistakes are made, the SPLC is a big organization and there are a whole lot of dangerous hate groups out there, they admit it and correct it. This is indicative of a good organization trying to do great works which naturally draws criticism from the real haters they identify, certify and track. Of course the KKK and Skin Heads hate the SPLC. Taking such criticism goes with the territory. Knowing what I know of the SPLC, I would be very leery of any groups the SPLC has officially certified as official hate groups. Which are, unsurprisingly, those most often seen being critical of the SPLC. Full Disclosure - Morris Dees is a friend and my real name is inscribed on The Wall of Tolerance at SPLC HQ in Montgomery, AL...
The SPLC is already an illegitimate bastardized organization. They are a terrorist inspiring hate group no longer of any value to anyone. The sooner the SPLC is bankrupted and driven out of business just as they openly and deliberately try to do to their opposition the better off America will be.
When they only target the KKK, white supremacy groups, skin heads, neo nazis and the like we can get along with them. As long as they target mainstream conservative and mainstream Christian groups that they disagree with as hate groups, we on the right will defend those groups and target the SPLC for permanent destruction as an organization and personal bankruptcy for both the organization and Mr. Dees. They try to destroy us, we will destroy them first.
Do religious conservatives feel threatened by the SPLC?
Ah, so when they only complain about the last twenty rows of people at a Trump rally, then everything's a-okay... Those front 20 rows, totally different people. Sure, those guys in the back twenty will openly tell you about how much they hated having a black man as President for 8 years while the front twenty rows will only tell you how much they hated having a "liberal" as President for 8 years, who, for some reason, doesn't represent their values, you know, those of being born white.
Certified by who, the biased bigots at the SPLC? Who died and made them the God and judge over who is or is a hate group outside of the obvious racist ones? Why would you expect anyone to accept what those biased hateful bigots have to say about mainstream groups that dare to presume to disagree with their terrorist inspiring opinions? Their opinions don’t mean a thing to rational objective real Americans.
When these bigoted organizations want to bring about Christian Sharia laws, then yes, they are HATE groups.
Not by them but by the weak minded intellectually lazy hate filled bigots who act upon their rating as if it were on tablets from on high. It is those morons who do the real damage and defamation. Yes, MBFC, I’m talking about you too.
What bunch of hyperbolic nonsense. Christian Sharia law in the US? Hilarious!
You want to see good examples of Sharia type law? Go to places like Sudan, Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. You'd shit your pants in places like that. In the USA? Not so much.
When these organizations want to take away rights of people they don't like because the bible tells them so, then yes, that is trying to impose Christian Sharia laws.
I have no reason to go to those countries thank you very much.
Damn right right you don't ..... those freedoms aren't really under attack here in the US.
In those countries your "freedoms" would already be heavily regulated by such laws ..... so give me a call when this country starts to become even remotely like that (which it isn't, not even close) and i'll be right there to help defend the folks being oppressed.
I don't want what happens in those countries to ever happen here, so these so called religious groups need to be called out for what they really are.
I wouldn't break out the worry jar quite yet but like i said. If that ever becomes reality here, i'll be right there with you to help stop it. And i know i'm not alone.
Oh and by the way, i'm Christian.
You are really angry because you cannot post articles1/* from The Stream, aren't you?
Legislating conservative Christian beliefs as secular law is just as tyrannical as legislating Islamic beliefs as secular law in the countries that you mentioned. That is why we refer to it as Christian Sharia. The fact that not even all Protestant Christian sects agree with those Christian Sharia ideas is lost on you and many others. All religion is to be kept separate from secular law and the state because of the Establishment Clause that creates a wall separating church and state unless you know more than Thomas Jefferson, John Adams,, and James Madison.
We cannot possibly have guaranteed equal religious rights for all people, regardless of their faith or lack thereof if the government is enforcing the religious beliefs of one group as secular law. If the government would enforce the religious beliefs of even a Protestant sect then the members of every other Christian belief, even those who are also Protestant have fewer rights and that leads to fighting, social upheaval and instability of the government. The only stable and rational stance on religion is to keep all religion and the government absolutely separate at all levels of the government. People have the right to believe and worship as they see fit but the government must be secular. If you work for the government then you must keep your religious beliefs separate from your job. If you cannot do that then find a job in the private sector that allows you to exercise your religious beliefs as you choose.
[deleted]
You are unhinged today.
There is no proof to support your beliefs.
so you are upset because Dave Van Zandt doesn't indulge and believe in your mythology as fervently as you do - he doesn't lockstep with your beliefs so you have branded him, logic and facts as your enemies since they don't agree with your unproven mythological beliefs ?
The Catholic church does not teach any of those ideas in their private schools. They do teach evolution.
This is their idea on the Great Flood,
On the subject of angels,
[deleted]
How is this guy a bigot? He is about as white bread as is possible.
Nah, actually none of it is lost on me.
What is however lost on many is the level of real religious freedom (or not, everyone is free to choose) here in this country is unparalleled when compared to countries that can be defined to have real "sharia" type laws. It's not even in the same zip code here and its an absolutely ridiculous comparison to make
So when progressive asshats comes on here and try to make that comparison, they are just pushing more of their usual progressive, batshit crazism.
Nothing more. nothing less.
Religious freedom, like others rights has limits to protect the equal religious and secular rights of others from being trampled on. Our religious rights are the right to believe in or not to believe god(s) and the right to worship as we choose to do. Our rights end when they come into contact with the equal rights of others because your religious beliefs do not allow you to force others to take part in your religious beliefs, just as they do not have the right to force their religious beliefs on you. I used to think that this idea, as well as the strict separation of church and state, were self-explanatory, but I have since learned that is not the situation.
Too bad neither you nor anyone else has ever been able to even remotely empirically support such claims. They're just plain absurd!
If the shoe fits. Although, pseudoscience is still giving your beliefs too much credit. And your beliefs are not free from logical analysis or scrutiny simply because it's a belief.
Nice ad hom attack and whining. But you can disagree all you want. The difference is, those who accept evolution have scientific facts and evidence on their side, while your beliefs are just...belief (or wishful thinking). You have no objective empirical support. See the difference?
I don’t care what Dave Van Zandt believes. What I do care about is his personal bias and bigotry in labeling my beliefs in such a way as he knows others will use to censor the expression of those religious beliefs elsewhere when they personally hold another opposing secular viewpoint.
The issue with the Catholic Church isn’t pseudoscience. Many Catholics have called God a liar regarding the Genesis account of origins. The issue in this seed is hate and the calling of a catholic publication hate over opposition to abortion and gay marriage. The SPLC wouldn’t dare to label their entire denomination a hate group like they do to smaller evangelical Protestant groups.
In order to have a concerted effort to delegitimize the SPLC, it would have to have been legitimate in the first place. It is not a legitimate organization in any way shape or form so there is no need for anyone to try to do to them what they have already done to themselves.
Apparently those Catholics aren't entirely stupid.
That may be because the Genesis account is a lie, or more accurately, a myth. It seems there are some Catholics with common sense to know that.
Wikipedia? They and he are like butt buddies in bed with each other in how they do their business. Everyone else questions the reliability of Wikipedia.
I wouldn’t know as I’m not one. My mom and grandmother left the Catholic Church for a Protestant one, some 5-6 years before I was born.
Yet you believe the stories depicted in Genesis? So that doesn't really change the fact of what I said.
i never mentioned anything about Dave Van Zandt's personal belief's or personal belief system. Try reading this again:
Dave Van Zandt looks for facts and evidence - two things your favorite mythology lacks. His personal belief system is irrelevant. So i guess we have established that facts, logic and evidence are your enemies, correct ?
That's been well established long ago.
I believe all of the Bible.
No, he labels others beliefs as pseudoscience so that the real bigots all across the internet who lap up his every word as their gospel from on high can cover for their own bigotry while censoring those who believe differently from him.
that's quite a conspiracy theory your conservative mind has dreamt up. i'm not sure why you can't comprehend that your mythological beliefs lack facts/evidence/logic which is why they are categorized accordingly. Just because you fervently believe in them doesn't make them verifiably true due to lack of evidence/facts/logic. Plus, as pointed out to you on other threads, there are Christian sites he doesn't label as fake since they stick to actual facts/evidence/logic. It seems you are opposed to facts/evidence/logic since they seem to disagree with your mythological beliefs.
And you also just affirmed what Phoenyx said too. But as I said, Genesis (as with many other biblical stories) is just a myth, with ZERO supporting evidence. So you can believe whatever you want. But belief does not equal fact, nor is it free from scrutiny!
Wow, that's some active imagination you have there. Conspiracy theory anyone?
Willie Sutton was once asked why he robbed banks and his answer was "that's where the money is." So it is with the SPLC --it goes where the hate is.
No shit?!
Why do you believe a book of myths, when much of it was plagiarized from earlier religions? Why do you choose to believe verbatim a book that was written almost 1900 years ago by very mortal men who didn't have the education level of an associates degree? Most of high school math and science was unknown to them. The Bible is not the literal word of god, despite what you may wish to believe, because it didn't drop out of the sky and be found beside of the 15 (scratch that..)10 commandments. Which translation do you believe is true?
There are many contridictions in the Bible, so what passage do you believe in that situation?
There are many other religious books that are much older than the Bible, so why don't you believe them instead? Books such as the Bhagavad Gita. The Chinese book I Ching is even older.
Secular freedom, like others rights has limits to protect the equal secular and religious rights of others from being trampled on. Secular rights are the right to not believe in or to believe in god(s) and the right to worship as we choose to do. Our rights end when they come into contact with the equal rights of others because your non religious beliefs do not allow you to force others to take part in those non religious beliefs, just as they do not have the right to force their secular beliefs on believers. I used to think that this idea, as well as the strict separation of church and state, were self-explanatory, but I have since learned that is not the situation. Since so many secularist have a problem with and sanctimoniously mock believers who practice their own chosen faith.
See what i did there? What you apparently don't realize is, that knife cuts both ways. Not really that hard to understand for a truly unbiased mind.
All rights logically must have limits to prevent others from being harmed or their rights from being trampled. The question is where that line is drawn, and it usually goes to the SCOTUS to do it when they rule on Constitutional interpretation. You should have learned this is your high school civics requirement.
Do you believe that your religious rights are being threatened by the actions of others?
do you think it depends on how those believers choose to practice their chosen faith ? what if their chosen way to practice their chosen faith violates secular laws - which prevails ?
I stand by every word I said that you quoted.
I believe that's what all their hysteria is about. The SPLC goes after people who are, if not directly involved in KKK or white nationalist/supremacist groups, are certainly sympathetic to them.
The name is enough to make me distrust the organization, sounds like they want to make laws to keep southerners poor. They could have come up with something better
Only the ones who make hatemongering their stock-in-trade.
That would be the SPLC and it’s followers as bigotry and hate is about all that they do anymore. Even the Washington Post questions the in accuracy and lack of fairness of the SPLC and it’s totally bogus and discredited so called hate list.
Well, of course, that completely false but we also completely understand why you have to keep peddling that lie.
Do you have a copy of the WaPo article? I refuse to trust the abridged version on WND or Breitbart.
You will have to read it yourself as I refuse to subscribe to or pay the WAPO a cent for anything.
The reporter, David Montgomery, clearly is an admirer of SPLC, but his article was titled “The State of Hate: Researchers at the Southern Poverty Law Center have set themselves up as the ultimate judges of hate in America. But are they judging fairly?”
Read more at https://mobile.wnd.com/2018/11/now-washington-post-questions-splcs-credibility/#Q8Z2M52oQ2cIU0Bi.99
I went to the WaPo site but I also do not have a subscription so I can't read it and verify that it says what you claim that it does. If you are going to cite a written work as proof of your ideas then you need to post that same work for others to read.
I will take World Net Daily and Breitbart at their word for the direct quotes that they attribute to the WAPO article and it’s author.
.......Spencer noted that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, Amazon, Patreon and GoFundMeWe rely on SPLC’s “hate” designation, and he hopes the Post article will help them “reconsider their reliance on this dishonest, hate-filled group, and begin to treat all organizations fairly.”
‘Defensible expressions of truth’ or ‘hate’?
Spencer observed that the Post’s Montgomery “likes the SPLC, and wants to admire it, but finds it difficult to do so.”
Spencer points to a “telling passage” in the lengthy piece about Montgomery’s visit to the Center for Security Policy in Washington and founder Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration official.
While Montgomery characterizes Gaffney’s views as “frankly disquieting” — Spencer argues the point is not whether they are “disquieting” but whether they are based on fact — the Post writer seems to cast doubt on SPLC’s absolute judgments.
I left Gaffney’s office with a tote bag full of 14 books buttressing his worldview. A 15th came later in the mail. In thinking about my interview, I was struck by just how little he had disputed the SPLC’s claims about the frankly disquieting positions he has taken. To some extent, it was similar to my experience at the FRC and ADF. They simply saw those positions as admirable, or at the very least defensible, expressions of truth — whereas, to the SPLC, they were expressions of hate.
Montgomery also visited the Family Research Council, whose defense of traditional marriage is an affront to SPLC.
He interviewed retired Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, FRC’s executive vice president, who pointed to a bullet hole in the ceiling from the Aug. 15, 2012, shooting attack on FRC’s headquarters by Floyd Lee Corkins.
“He came in here to kill as many of us as possible because he found us listed as a hate group on the Southern Poverty Law Center website,” Boykin told Montgomery.
“We and others like us who are on this ‘hate map’ believe that this is very reckless behavior. … The only thing that we have in common is that we are all conservative organizations.”
Montgomery, in a visit to SPLC headquarters in Montgomery, Alabama, asked SPLC President Richard Cohen “whether advocates like the FRC, or proponents of less immigration like the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or conservative legal stalwarts like the Alliance Defending Freedom, really have so much in common with neo-Nazis and the Klan that they belong in the same bucket of shame.”
“Obviously the hate label is a blunt one,” Cohen replied. “It’s one of the things that gives it power, and it’s one of the things that can make it controversial. Someone might say, ‘Oh, it’s without nuance.’ … But we’ve always thought that hate in the mainstream is much more dangerous than hate outside of it. The fact that a group like the FRC or a group like FAIR can have congressional allies and can testify before congressional committees, the fact that a group like ADF can get in front of the Supreme Court — to me that makes them more dangerous, not less so. … It’s the hate in the business suit that is a greater danger to our country than the hate in a Klan robe.”
Expanded scope
Montgomery notes SPLC was founded in 1971 to take on legal cases related to racial injustice, poverty and the death penalty. In the early 1980s, it expanded to monitoring Klan groups, neo-Nazis and other white supremacists. In recent years, he writes, “the list has swept up an increasing number of conservative activists — mostly in the anti-LGBT, anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim categories — those conservatives have been fighting back.”
He cites Mathew Staver, chairman of the Christian legal advocacy group Liberty Counsel, saying 60 organizations are interested in suing SPLC. And last year, GuideStar, a widely consulted directory of charitable organizations, removed its flags of 46 charities listed by SPLC as hate groups after pressure from critics.
Montgomery points to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ condemnation of SPLC for using its hate label “to bully and to intimidate” groups such as the Alliance Defending Freedom “which fight for religious freedom.”
And the Post writer says SPLC “undermined its own credibility with a couple of blunders.”
In 2015, it apologized for listing Ben Carson as an extremist, and this past June, the group paid $3.4 million to Muslim activist Maajid Nawaz and his Quilliam organization to settle a threatened lawsuit.
Montgomery visited the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, which supports reduced legal immigration and tougher border security. He quotes executive director Mark Krikorian saying the center supports a policy “that admits fewer people but does a better job of welcoming and incorporating those people.”
Mongomery says that among the factors that got CIS added to the SPLC hate list is “the center’s habit of circulating links to articles from arguably noxious sources in its regular email roundup.”
“Providing links to immigration articles written by people who in other venues wrote things on other topics that are objectionable, and that I myself almost certainly would object to — so what?” Krikorian told Montgomery. “You’ve got to admire the Inspector Javert-like obsession to go through hundreds of these links and find out who the author was and then Google the author and see what he — I mean it’s just, get a life, people!”..... https://mobile.wnd.com/2018/11/now-washington-post-questions-splcs-credibility/
I proudly stand by and endorse as a member or philosophically aligned with each and every single one of those conservative groups listed above that the SPLC bigots have defamed as a hate group. I as a member of NewsTalkers am personally a part of each and every legitimate group it blocks here despite their being mainstream with allies in Congress and that they regularly testify before it as well as argue cases before the US Supreme Court because of the SPLC lies.
Oh please, give it a rest !
Not a chance. Never! At least until the Bigot hate group SPLC drops their malicious defamation of peaceful non hate groups.
And, the SPLC will keep lighting up intolerant cockroaches of hatred...
That's not something I'd be proud of. More like embarrassed.
Then I guess that the SPLC will keep lighting itself up as they and their leadership/ membership are the definition of cockroaches of hatred. Their intolerance and bigotry knows no bounds. Criticism from them should be worn as a badge of honor.
I’ll take the Liberty Council, Alliance Defending Freedom, Family Research Council, Concerned Women For America, American Family Association, FAIR, CIS, and all the others who are welcome in and have a key role to play in the GOP, in Congress, in the Supreme Court. They are all great all American organizations that I am proud to associate myself with and defend against the bigots who would even try to silence them anywhere any place.
Well I found a way to get the WAPO article free. As I’m limited to two seeds a day here I’m not about to waste one on it but I did seed it here if you want to see it. http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-state-of-hate.545622/
You mean hate groups.
Of course you are proud to associate with hate groups. Not surprising. it also speaks volumes about you.
The SPLC says that the groups in question even though they are mainstream and have allies in Congress and testify there and argue cases before the Supreme Court and are regulars at GOP functions and conventions are hate groups even more so because of those connections thus making the SPLC a nakedly partisan organization.
You mean just like those other conservative based groups too.
Just like. The difference is that we don’t use those other truly valiant and honorable organizations words or actions to censor content of others like people do with the words coming from the bigoted anti Christian hate filled terrorist enabling SPLC sleazeballs.
The difference is, your organizations only want to deny rights to certain groups. There's nothing honorable about that.
So now you have to resort to juvenile ad hom attacks. How typical.
Nothing is more juvenile than using the hate filled bigots at the terrorist inspiring hate group the SPLC as a reason to silence other groups they target for partisan reasons and not legitimate ones. My groups that I proudly stand by and identify with as if they were me personally are about protecting rights nor taking them.
There is a poll that says 86% believe it is wrong to censor groups based upon the labeling of the SPLC. GuideStar has backed down and stopped doing that and now is the time for others to follow.
You don't actually address anything I said, much less refute my post or support yours. No surprise either.
Oh, sure there is (as well as being a pack of lies) and that's trying to mount an attack on the SPLC which has been the tip of the spear against hate and bigotry, and at great personal risk for obvious reasons, in the South and the entire country for decades. That's obviously the reason has become such a target of hatred by the alt-right.
The alt right is not an issue here. The groups that the SPLC are targeting in the article seeded are mainstream conservative organizations well at home in the GOP, well represented at CPAC and all other conservative gatherings. Their leaders often are delegates to and speakers at GOP conventions. They and we are one and the same. These organizations have allies in Congress even members of congress as their membership. They testify before Congress on key issues on a regular basis and they argue and win cases before the US Supreme Court. I, them, and we are all one. Other conservative organizations not yet so blatantly maliciously and falsely labeled by the SPLC haters will carry their water and feature their leaders in their own media and on line. The SPLC openly admits to being partisan and to trying to destroy these groups with their so called hate label for partisan advantage so yes, as long as they continue to do so my and our goal is to literally destroy the SPLC to its foundations and every single organization that persists in using them after a cease and desist. GuideStar stopped doing so and the SPLC settled with a man for millions already. So, yes, it’s scorched earth as far as I’m concerned. If the SPLC is willing to try to destroy my favorite advocacy groups I see no problem with the destruction of their organization and all other organizations that stand with them.
Actually the AG of the United States criticized the SPLC for its false hate of legitimate conservative groups who are defending religious freedom. I stand with our former AG and current acting one on this issue.
While said conservative group/s try to prohibit or deny other groups their rights.
The only ones denying rights are the bigots and haters who follow the partisan hate group SPLC ‘s ratings as if they mean anything to intelligent Americans. They are a garbage hate organization of no remaining value to anyone in America. I can’t wait for all the legal cases against them by those whom they libeled, slandered, and defamed to begin being filed. Any day now. Hopefully MBFC will be one of the first 🎯 targeted. I’d love to see them fight and lose in court and go bankrupt as a result. My dream come true.
What rights have been denied exactly? Last I checked, individual rights are still in full effect.
Pot meet kettle.
Well, you can dream.
Jesus, HA. You keep using rightwing garbage sources and then wonder why you can't be taken seriously.
You can keep repeating that lie until your last breath but it will still be a lie.
I see you're didn't even bother citing one of your seemingly endless supply of rightwing pukefunnel sources for that one. Did you manufacture it yourself?
That's just one of the reasons that 99% of what you put up here as articles and comments is complete bullshit, a substance to which you seem to be completely addicted--so much so, that no amount of fact or truth seems to have any effect on you.
That's obvious and explains why your comments are so devoid of anything resembling fact but chock full of evidence for why you really hate the SPLC--it fights bigotry, racism and hate groups and that really gets under your skin, right?
Why this author continues to put up extreme rightwing lies like this one and pretend they have any factual basis and expect this garbage to be taken seriously is beyond rational explanation.
The SPLC is a joke and a scourge on America.
Fools continue to support them for no good reason at all.
Thanks for your post here. It is right on. I agree with you completely.
Only that part of America which yearns for White domination.
Oh, you mean thinking people not blinded by progressive logic?
BTFW, the "white domination" you decry has resulted in one of the greatest nations ever seen on the planet.
Whites dominated because they were the majority--get it?
No, I mean white nationalist fascists, KKKers and outright nazis--like the ones who keep showing up at Trumplestiltskins rallies.
Well, FINALLY, you've admitted what we already knew: You're a white nationalist.
Based solely on your reply, I'd venture you might have QUITE the future as a fiction writer!
How scared they become when they become or are soon to become the 'minority'
And Tex illustrates the "problem" she has that being so steeped in white supremacy she can't even see what a problem it is. This racial superiority complex includes a kind of blindness to self.
Your earlier posts were a lot funnier.'maybe we should rethink that fiction career for ya!
Nothing fictitious about your white supremacy complex though. It's right up there in black and white.
Now see, THAT was MUCH funnier.
Maybe I shouldn't write off your new career quite yet!
You're drowning, Tex.
If you are in some roundabout way attempting to call me a white nationalist, just do it without beating around the bush.
The SPLC really is a scourge on all Americans.
so verifiable facts/evidence/proof instead of relying on emotional mythological beliefs is now a " scourge on all Americans " ? seriously ?
Nothing roundabout about it. Let's review your own words, shall we:
Me (6.2) : Only that part of America which yearns for White domination
You (6.2.1, emphasis added):
So, you're basically telling us that whites deserve to dominate simply because they were the majority--no other ethnics need apply, right? And, too bad that the whites who "dominated" to make such a great nation also imposed the institution of slavery and followed that up with the de facto enslavement of Jim Crow the elements of which are still alive in this country today. Being a white nationalist/supremacist is never acknowledging the whole story about whiteness in America, right--only how great white people are. So, if the shoe fits (and it looks like it does from here......well, you know the rest.
And how could I have left out the very first thing that gave you away...suggesting that whites were the only "thinking people." Did you mean just at that time or ever since humans came into existence and for all time hence? Oh, and the founders of this country, for all their flaws, were the "progressives" (or "enlightened" to use the term of their times) of their day--in fact, considered radicals (and, of course, traitors) by their British enemies. C'mon---'fess up, Tex. You believe whites (i.e., of anglo-saxon extract) are the unchallengeable superior form of humanity, right?
Nice debate you seem to be having alone.
That is what happens when you don't understand what is written plainly before you.
Have fun!
I can certainly understand your retreating from it.
Since you want to tell me what I stated and what I mean, I don't see how it is necessary to indulge you in your game any further.
Have fun!
Yeah, quoting you is soooo unfaaaayyyyyerrrrrrrr.
The biggest fools of all are the ones who use their partisan bigoted hate ratings in the operation of their own businesses. Most of them don’t have the deep pockets when the lawyers I like come calling that the SPLC does. GuideStar was smart and hopefully the rest will follow their lead before the lawyers cease and desist letters arrive in the mail. It won’t be class action but against each business alone on their own against the collective affected and defamed sites.
You have a gift for amusing irony.
The haters got to hate!
Indeed they do. The SPLC targets our ideological soulmates out of hate toward our ideology and all who use their defamatory attacks against us for their purposes due so out of that same feeling they direct at us.
You mean conservative hate groups? Yeah, we already knew that.
Except that he doesn't intend it as such -- which makes it even funnier.
awwwwwwww
Sorry, fresh out of tissues for you--had to give the last of them to the last crying progressive liberal I encountered.
Come back next week, I hope to be replenished by then.
Let's examine that. Do liberals and atheists want to stop you from going to church? Have any humanists tried to convince you that if you go into that Church again you may be accepting a future of ultimate suffering?
The fact is that nearly all liberal humanist atheists would love nothing more than to never hear or have to discuss or debate about religion again. They would be much happier spending their time focusing on the things we have discovered and how we can apply them to the betterment of humanity than philosophizing about the unknown.
So if the religious conservatives would simply worship however they like at home and in church but stop trying to force their religious beliefs out into public we'd never have another problem. Atheists and evangelicals could live side by side in harmony, they just have to agree to stay out of each others mind gardens unless invited. The problem with this is that most evangelicals believe they have some commission from their imagined God to metaphorically invade other people gardens and try to plant their Gods imaginary seeds. And when you try to stop them from invading your garden or your children's garden, they act as if you're denying them their God given rights.
My point is, there's a reason for what you call "hate towards your ideology", though I'd call it "exasperated frustration" towards your ideology. Religious conservatives excuse the injection of their religion into all things because its their brand, they love it, but they get angrily defiant at anyone else attempting the same. The SPLC has rightly pointed out this double standard which is why they support voting for Democrats who are the only party large enough to put a check on the overzealous religious conservatives.
Yes, I'm not surprised you'd go through a lot of them and fast at your house.
Yeah, even in Texas, we have our share of progressive liberals always crying about something or other.
I think this time it was something about turning Texas purple or some such crap, and how Beto was going to win.
Not to worry--I expect an Amazon delivery soon, and will be able to provide to progressive liberals what they seem unable to supply for themselves.
I guess telling yourself lies like that is as necessary as spreading them around. The average polling lead for Cruz up to election day was 4.9% ( ). The actual vote spread was only 2.6%. Just to be clear, no one, repeat no one predicted O'Rourke was going to win. But he did narrow the winning margin by a huge amount compared to Cruz's 2012 blow out ( 16% spread ). So something is happening in TX, Tex, and it isn't good for white supremacists. You might wanna check out Austria or Hungary. I hear those countries have a really strong white nationalism governments in place.
You are getting a little funnier with every post you dream new stuff up in!
Tissue?
No, thanks. I wouldn't want to cut into your "short supply" as you'll need as much as you can get.
Why would I need more? You planning on crying and bitching some more?
Sorry, but I'll have to start charging if you want me to supply you any longer.
The SPLC needs some tissue to get over all the hate their hateful organization spews against conservatives in such fine American groups as Alliance Defending Freedom, Concerned Women For America, Liberty Council, CIS, FAIR, American Family Association, Family Research Council, and many other fine upstanding conservative Republican organizations. May God richly bless all the social conservative organizations that the SPLC spews partisan political hate against for no good reason.
The SPLC is a crap organization.
No thinking American should put much credence into what they have deemed hate groups.
You're being too kind.
Yet, many do. I give as much credence to the SPLC as I do to Snopes and MediaBiasFactCheck - and that is near-zero.
Too true!
Out side of actual illegitimate violent real hate groups, getting a hate rating from them is a badge of honor and courage. The SPLC is exactly as the seeded article describes them as well as being a smearing partisan hate group. They have no honor and no legitimacy whatsoever.
Too kind and too true about both those biased bigoted groups. Well said.
Or sub zero.
I saw a bunch of programs on the Fox News Channel Thanksgiving evening and Friday and interestingly enough, the leader of or a key spokesperson of a great number of the social conservative or evangelical Christian groups SPLC has wrongly labeled as hate were interviewed on key issues in the news. Family Research Council, Alliance Defending Freedom, Liberty Council, CIS, FAIR we’re all on the prime time opinion shows or afternoon news programs. It was great as a conservative to see them and that articles about them and their missions will be generated by 3rd party media as a result. Because of the SPLC we are going to give those groups more funding and positive publicity than if the SPLC had never labeled them.