Another Credible Rape Claim Against Trump....

[oxmixmudd]

Nah, post #183 is as blatant a case of "whataboutism" as there is. I don't have a problem with "whataboutism," but if you're going to call out others for it, then it's only fair you get called out too.

I don't see that. IOW, I suppose it might be possible to classify it as that, but it would be about the tamest form of it there is, not a 'blatent case of' it. Most of the time it's not just about pointing out common actions, it's about excusing the behavior of one by pointing out something similar was done by the other. Carpe isn't excusing anything. He's just saying it's a common problem.

Speaking of which, there is a sort of inverse whataboutism that happens a lot - at least towards myself. People often make the false assumption I might excuse some behavior in hillary or obama (or whoever) that I'm calling out in Trump. And that simply is not the case.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

What has you confused?

Jim

[Raphael]

What has you confused?

Jim

I had to read your post a couple of times to figure out where you wanted to insert historical/orthodox into Leonhard's sentence. I figure Adrift had the same problem

[Adrift]

I don't see that. IOW, I suppose it might be possible to classify it as that, but it would be about the tamest form of it there is, not a 'blatent case of' it. Most of the time it's not just about pointing out common actions, it's about excusing the behavior of one by pointing out something similar was done by the other. Carpe isn't excusing anything. He's just saying it's a common problem.

That's the exact same sort of argument used by those that he charged with "whataboutism". I don't care that he's using a "whataboutism" (and implicitly or otherwise, he is using a "whataboutism"). I personally think the whole concept of "whataboutism," and calling people on it is silly. I care that carpe is being a bit of a hypocrite once again.

Speaking of which, there is a sort of inverse whataboutism that happens a lot - at least towards myself. People often make the false assumption I might excuse some behavior in hillary or obama (or whoever) that I'm calling out in Trump. And that simply is not the case.

I agree, and I think that's unfair because you've stated often enough that you didn't/don't support the bad actions of Hillary and Obama, and the reason that you were silent during Obama's administration is because you simply weren't engaged in political topics at the time.

[oxmixmudd]

I had to read your post a couple of times to figure out where you wanted to insert historical/orthodox into Leonhard's sentence. I figure Adrift had the same problem

Ok - I can see that. Sorry. Just trying to point out that I think that Trump is just doing what he has to do to court evangelical voters, Some form of Christian faith does not appear to be an integral part of who he actually is and likely will disappear if he no longer needs the evangelical vote. Whereas I think Buttigieg is a different situation. He and his denomination genuinely see him as a Christian, and his beliefs and actions in that regard are not likely to change with his political fortunes.

Jim

[Adrift]

What has you confused?

Jim

Are you saying that the shift should now be called "traditional" or "orthodox," or are you saying that Leonhard should have qualified his statement about Christians with "traditional/orthodox?"

[myth]

Good catch. I didn't actually read the transcript, I just listened to the podcast and then went to the transcript to quote portions I remembered them talking about. The "may" statement she made is also not one I'd count as likely to be true. Unless it's part of their normal speech pattern, when a person qualifies any statement at all, I'm suspicious of it. Example:

Me: Have any meth in your pockets?

Meth-head: None....that I know of.

lol.

[Cow Poke]

Not so sure about that Leonhard. There is a shift taking place. Perhaps you could add the term orthodox or historical. Again, I'm not advocating for it, but there is a significant rise in the mainstreamness of LBGT people that identify themselves as Christians and churches that are willing to accept them as is w/o asking them to change or remain celibate.

Jim

Yes, mainstream churches are getting more liberal, and appealing to those who don't want like the word "repent".

[Cow Poke]

Me: Have any meth in your pockets?

Meth-head: None....that I know of.

lol.

Yeah, I always get a kick out of LivePD where they ask...

Am I going to find drugs or weapons in your vehicle?
"Well, um... you shouldn't!"




Then comes the "but it's my cousin's car...." or "my brother has been using the car the last couple weeks"....

I'm sure you've heard them all.

[One Bad Pig]

Yes, mainstream churches are getting more liberal, and appealing to those who don't want like the word "repent".

I'm sure it's entirely coincidental that their membership numbers are tanking.

[carpedm9587]

Nah, post #183 is as blatant a case of "whataboutism" as there is. I don't have a problem with "whataboutism," but if you're going to call out others for it, then it's only fair you get called out too.

We'll have to agree to disagree...


Unless you'd like to disagree about that too!

[carpedm9587]

I'm sure it's entirely coincidental that their membership numbers are tanking.

I just a quick check, and membership numbers appear to be down for Episcopalians, Southern Baptists (lowest in 30 years) and Catholics. Of the three, only the Episcopal church, AFAIK, has embraced the LGBTQ community. Perhaps the decline has more to do with reduced emphasis on religion in general, and not necessarily with the LGBQT issue? I can't find enough detailed numbers to do a cross comparison on percentages between sects, so it's hard to say more.

Just a thought.

[Cow Poke]

I just a quick check, and membership numbers appear to be down for Episcopalians, Southern Baptists (lowest in 30 years) and Catholics. Of the three, only the Episcopal church, AFAIK, has embraced the LGBTQ community. Perhaps the decline has more to do with reduced emphasis on religion in general, and not necessarily with the LGBQT issue? I can't find enough detailed numbers to do a cross comparison on percentages between sects, so it's hard to say more.

Just a thought.

The Methodists are not far behind the Episcopal Church in going the liberal route. And part (probably pretty small) of the SBC decline is that many SBC Churches are disassociating with the name SBC because of the history of racism, and/or simply because they're going more "non-denominational" - such as Cowboy Churches or Bible Churches.

[oxmixmudd]

Are you saying that the shift should now be called "traditional" or "orthodox," or are you saying that Leonhard should have qualified his statement about Christians with "traditional/orthodox?"

The latter.

Jim

[Adrift]

The Methodists are not far behind the Episcopal Church in going the liberal route. And part (probably pretty small) of the SBC decline is that many SBC Churches are disassociating with the name SBC because of the history of racism, and/or simply because they're going more "non-denominational" - such as Cowboy Churches or Bible Churches.

Yep. Pew, Gallup and General Social Survey all indicate that while Mainline churches (United Methodists, Episcopalians, and American Baptists) have seen "tremendous declines over the last 40 years", Evangelicals have largely remained the same size. Nones (religiously unaffiliated) are growing exponentially though. For some of the latest numbers, Christianity Today has a good article on the subject here.