MeanMrMustard

Joined

• started 67 topics
• posted 3,910 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MeanMrMustard

• 
  55

  Cults in our Midst

  by Lee Elder in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is related to a comment i made in a previous thread.

  cults exist in many diverse parts of society.

  this includes politics.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  They 1) espouse an all-encompassing belief system; 2) exhibit excessive devotion to the leader; 3) avoid criticism of the group and its leader; and 4) feel disdain for non-members.

  #1 - How are you applying this to Trump supporters? What is meant by “all-encompassing”? See #3.

  #2 - The devotion (actually a bad word for it. “Loyalty” is more accurate) comes from the fact that he moving in the right direction. It’s about the actions, not him. It’s the policies, not him.

  #3 - This definitely doesn’t apply. Take a listen to Moleneux when he bombed Syria. Take a listen to Levin (or just about every other right leaning YouTube channel or radio show) when he signed the last spending bill. If you think there is blind devotion, you are living under a rock. But that is the difference these days between the left and right: the right is willing to be critical when it compromises princliples, the left will do whatever it need to do to advance its ends, even twist itself into philosophical knots.... or call people cultists or useful idiots for Russia.

  #4 - Nope. I have a lot of family and friends and workmates that do not agree. But if they put on a pussy hat, yeah, they deserve the ridicule.
• 
  55

  Cults in our Midst

  by Lee Elder in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is related to a comment i made in a previous thread.

  cults exist in many diverse parts of society.

  this includes politics.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @Lee Elder:

  Yet another person claiming that the Republican Party is a cult and is degrading into a deplorable state. No real reasons, just something about Trump, and families of immigrants, and you know, other reasons. But hey, I was willing to entertain the idea that there might be a point in there somewhere. So I clicked on the article by the former Republican strategist, conscious stricken by the state of his party... and this is the first paragraph:

  For months, Steve Schmidt, a longtime Republican strategist, has warned about the degradation of his party, saying the Trump administration is responsible for a “coarsening of this country” and calling the president a “useful idiot” for Russia.

  Did you catch that last part? He is a useful idiot for Russia? Do you understand how that completely and utterly undermines his (the author, not Trump) credibility? You have any clue what that one statement means?

  Is this a Republican moderate? Lee Elder, do you think Putin is pulling the strings of this President?
  
  
• 
  72

  Since Democrats Are All About the “Children” why does ABORTION Not Bother Them?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if everything is supposed to be about the lives of children, how can they hypocritically fight to take babies and kill them?

  what about the children and their quality of life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  I don't think women should have abortions. Not even in cases of rape or incest.

  I also don't think the state should be dictating what women can and can't do with there bodies.

  I believe that a fetus should be granted basic human rights. But I also think the rights of the fetus DON'T supersede the rights of the mother.

  So am I Pro-life? Or am I pro-choice?

  I feel like I see both sides of the argument. But there's a profound difference between how I think other people oughtto behave vs. what sort of behavior I think the State should mandate.

  Now this post, I completely agree with. Even in Libratarian camps, the line between the rights of the mother and the rights of the fetus is highly debated. One thing that I noticed, however, is that most people do believe there is a line. How thick is the line? That is very hard to agree upon. But there is a line that once crossed implies the baby is murdered if aborted.

  I agree. State should stay out of it. Those on the right should not use the power of government to legislate their morality. Neither should the left.
• 
  72

  Since Democrats Are All About the “Children” why does ABORTION Not Bother Them?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if everything is supposed to be about the lives of children, how can they hypocritically fight to take babies and kill them?

  what about the children and their quality of life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  @Lee Elder: if what you say is true, then this entire section of the site should be deleted.
• 
  72

  Since Democrats Are All About the “Children” why does ABORTION Not Bother Them?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if everything is supposed to be about the lives of children, how can they hypocritically fight to take babies and kill them?

  what about the children and their quality of life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Starting to think you are a troll.

  Who?
• 
  19

  Separating children at the border....

  by mikeflood in

  1. social
  2. current

  i mean, the law about separating children from their fathers crossing southern us border have been in the books since before obama's era.

  the thing is that enforcing that law it has become a public relations disaster for the trump administration.

  there's also to much animosity in latin america too, remember the classic agitator "u.s. is the evil empire that treat us badly just to see always their own interests".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  This is like the 10 thread on this topic...
• 
  72

  Since Democrats Are All About the “Children” why does ABORTION Not Bother Them?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if everything is supposed to be about the lives of children, how can they hypocritically fight to take babies and kill them?

  what about the children and their quality of life?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  What does the abortion issue have to do with the care and responsibility of nurturing living children ?

  That is like saying, “What does the healthcare issue have to do with people getting medical care?”
  
  
• 
  37

  Help: Anyone identify Gary Breaux's ring?

  by Fay Dehr in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  can anyone identify this ring?

  (ideally, a link to a page on the internet with photo and description).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  It is clearly the logo of the dreaded “Kerfuffles”. The ring has an undisputed “K” on its side, surrounded gold, and in the middle a red stone, indicating his rank in the elite group. To obtain a red stone, it means he would have had to slay his former master.
• 
  37

  Help: Anyone identify Gary Breaux's ring?

  by Fay Dehr in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  can anyone identify this ring?

  (ideally, a link to a page on the internet with photo and description).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  It is the unmistakable clear insignia of “the kerfuffles” - an elite force of fighting JWs, capable of killing a man with a single blow. “The Kerfuffles” also have a strong web presence, often involved in doxing of exJWs. I hope you didn’t search that image... that would have activated the algorithm.
• 
  27

  Eye-brow Wigs ... are a thing?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  ... and apparently justin trudeau wears them.

  also, they can come off or slip down while you are doing a press-conference to a global audience.

  what a god awful embarrassment this fool is, he should stick to his indian costume dress-up and dancing routine.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g46km4da3yw.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MeanMrMustard

  Here is a better revision. Now the post has a much deeper meaning:

  Simon and the Watchtower have a lot in common. If they don't like a conclusion they attack the person or institution making the claim instead of addressing the claim itself. And instead of providing facts to support the claims they make - they simply resort to disparaging the motives of anyone who disagrees with them.

  It's a cheap and dishonest move. And one that needs to be called out more often on theses forums.