Right back at you buddy
:shock: :shock: ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

:lol:

fuck you are full of shit

:shock: :shock: ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

It's sad that we need to have a discussion over whether Islam is a race or not

No words....

Where did you come up with the figure of 90 percent?
Did you go to the trouble of compiling all my posts 🙂
If so I'm glad i took up your time

When have you ever engaged in a debate? I'd say 90% of your posts in this thread is having a 'whinge and snivel' about the left.

If anything, our higher comparative wage is what drives import of cheap foreign products.
We find this all the time at work. We will start the manufacturing locally and iron out all the bugs with our customer over a year or two - some will then take the design straight to china once they are happy it is problem free and get container loads at prices we could never dream of matching.

Australian wages are high. Especially the minimum wage compared to like countries.

And...there's why I'm not interested in discussing definitions with you.

Wow, Islam is not a race is an oversimplification?
There has been a line where reasonable discourse goes off the rails and plummets into the absurd and the notion that being anti muslim is racism crosses that line and probably defecates on it . It would be as moronic as arguing that anti Christian is racist against whites, or that being against harpooning of whales is racism against asians, it just becomes utterly farcical.

I know the left adore their highly nuanced, sophisticated, expansive - we see the forest not just the trees - thinking process but you cannot have a frank discussion with them without it quickly descending into parody.

tell me about it :lol:

I personally wouldn't call Sonia Kruger racist but the whole "Islam is not a race therefore it's not racist" is a huge oversimplification. Really not interested in discussing definitions of these things because "the right" like to manipulate them to allow them to say things that aren't generally acceptable in today's society.

Christianphobe ...fuck me dead...talk about straw man arguments lol

Well fuck really? You really think that hurling allegations of racism, misogyny and homophobia are commonly justified, and not instead employed for their usefulness in silencing, ostracizing and shaming alternative points of view?

So when Sonia Kruger said they should stop Islamic migration, that vindicated calling her a racist, even though Islam is not a religion and not a race? What about the "great" misogyny speech by Gillard, that was heralded by the left media as one of the worlds great speeches, is Tony Abbott really a hate misogynist who hates women, or is it more likely that particular term was hijacked by the left because it had power in making Tony look bad and would be effective in eroding his political stocks? Does everyone who opposes gay marriage really hate and fear homosexuals? As you can see from the lefts point of view, words are just tools to bend out of shape to manipulate and exploit the masses into falling for their political and social cons.

They have no regard for truth, no respect for the essence and integrity of language, which infers they lack strong coherent arguments for their causes, and therefore resort to misappropriating and redefining the English language to give their cons traction.

Christianphobic is not a thing. Lets end this right now :lol:

People who claim that others are Christianphobic (cough Scott Morrison cough) put their views in public and got offended because people didn't agree with them :lol:

No they're not, they're terms used to describe a person with a particular opinion. They're only "slurs" because it's widely accepted that it's a bad thing to be those things. This leads to a bizarre phenomenon where people with clearly racist/homophobic/misogynistic views claim that they aren't.

Personally I think some people try and shut down debate by saying words like racist are out of bounds. I have no time for fuckwits (that's a slur) that hurl abuse at people for having a different opinion but to call that opinion any number of valid terms to describe that opinion is not abuse.

Unfortunately you're wrong, mcjules. Acceptance isn't just a "democratic process" which has an exit clause that if you don't like the result you can go around falsely accusing people of hating gays, women and non whites. That would be like saying you accept gays, women and blacks but doesn't extend to non calling them f@gs, b1tches and n*ggas. Tolerance and respect are the key ingredients of acceptance and democracy, otherwise it's just an empty, useless word.

No they aren't. We have an award wage system, and we don't have "mass immigration".

It's because they are too retarded to debate and would rather guilt shame people instead

Well mcjules, calling someone a "cultural marxist" is not the equal of calling someone a racist, homophobe or misogynist. These are simple pejoratives that carry with them some pretty awful connotations of hating people based on their sexuality, race or gender and are often attributed unfairly and for their pernicious and demonising effect. Calling someone a cultural marxist is perhaps the equivalent of calling someone an ultra conservative or laissez faire capitalist, therefore it could be observation with merit whereas calling someone a racist, homophobe or mysoginist is usually just an outright slur and designed to ostracise and silence people, if not snowball into an organised campaign to destroy their reputations and careers. Now Im not going to pretend the right are angels and always innocent in these matters, but on the balance there is clearly a concerted effort by some sections of the media and left establishment to play the man and not the ball, refuse debate, stifle free speech, and they do this more effectively and more concertedly than the right.

No, acceptance is all about the democratic process. There is no requirement for the general public to be tolerant or respectful of people with dangerous views as long as they stay within the law (some may not stay within the law but most do).

When they hurl abuse at people and accuse them of hating gays, being racist, fascist misogynist these are clear signs they don't accept the result, because acceptance conveys with it a certain degree of tolerance and respect.

Christianphobic, heterophobic, conservaphobic are all of the cards, agreed but autofascist, cultural marxist and all the other rubbish names that people use (which I glaze over when I see) are all fair game? Hypocrisy and double standards manifest.

What's your definition of accept? I see people complaining about the fact that people voted for them because they disagree with their opinions and that they can be a destructive influence. That to me doesn't mean that they don't accept the result.

We might whinge and poke fun at at your shit servile views and point out your flagrant double standards and hypocrisy but that doesn't mean you're not entitled to express them nor should you be accused of labels such as christianphobic, heterophobic, conservaphobic, racist etc for expressing an opinion.

Actually mcjules you aren't too bad its more the q and a and twitter crowd and hurl abuse and try to demonise people like Hanson and Kruger for merely expressing an opinion who are the enemy of free speech and democracy.

that's not what i am saying here......but no surprise you don't get it.....

Why can't people accept these people being elected??????

EG: clive palmer, Jackie Landy, Glen Lazarus, Pauline Hanson ETC


Edited by batfink: 22/7/2016 10:38:39 AM

Just an observation here..............................

Why do the "right" constantly whinge about the "left" for having a different view to them? Seems highly hypocritical.

:lol: So as expected George Christiensen last night made himself look like even more of a fucking imbecile, if that were even possible.

I honestly think there's an autocratic fascist esque element to it. If they had it their way right wing opinion would be banned under section 18C and "freedom of speech" would be limited to left and extreme left. Perhaps vulnerable minorities such as Muslims would be able to retain their right ultra conservative views such as execution of homosexuals, for purposes of cultural enrichment. These people are infatuated with power and want to impose their oppressive thought control regime on the world. Just because communism died doesn't mean the need to dictate the proletariat died with it, it just adapted.