Tue Sep 20 2016 16:26:13 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ UncensoredJews and Christians don't have people regularly committing acts of terror to perpetuate their religions.
That is an interesting wording there. What is "regularly" and what does "perpetuate their religion" in that context mean? Jews in general do not go on a mission. Christians do, but that is still a little twist. Most of the islamist terror acts were not done in order to "perpetuate their religion", but to damage stuff and hurt people. But that is not something that only islamists do, and I do not intend to dig deep in history, we can stay in the very recent century or even last few years.
Since Israel is the holy land of the jews, their forces act to defend the holy land and the people of the only True god. That could be interpreted as "perpetuating their religion". Wether it is seen as terror or not, the opinions differ. Oh, and what about how Israel came into being, wasn't there something involving bombs?
With regards to christian terror, abortion clinics and doctors are a very contemporary example. Somme terror outfits with definite christian framing are the KKK, but those are rather tame compared to the Lord's Resistance Army. Wether their terror is to perpetuate their religion or wether they simply use religion as a shield might be a philosophical debate. Anders Breivik would be another example. The spin doctors on wikipedia claim that the Ireland conflicts were not about religion, although both parties were divided by protestant/catholic faith... I could open the can of worms that is pogroms against jews, but that would lead as astray.
There is also a study that most suicide bombings (even when they have islamic background) are motivated by religion directly, but because of some territorial pissings. For 23 years, the Tamil Tigers where world leader in the suicide bombing discipline.
Most of the time, we simple do not give a flying fuck who dies and who terrorizes. As long as it is not us.
List of sources to be conveniently ignored:
I am voting my conscience. My conscience tells me that beyond a shadow of a doubt, Trump is the best presidential candidate we've had this century. What I object to is CruzBush and his supporters using "vote your conscience" as a code phrase for "vote for Hillary" -- which is absolutely, objectively, and undeniably what they are doing.
You're either with Trump or you are aligned with Satan and his desire to destroy mankind.
This is the truth. It is objective and factual and undeniable.
Interesting. It looks like Ted Cruz has been reading this discussion, because right after I posted the above message, the news started buzzing that Ted Bush Cruz is getting ready to endorse Donald Lincoln Reagan Trump.
A lot of endorsement and support ($$) has started to appear from "principled conservatives" (aka liberal faux opposition) over the last few days. It seems that they realize Trump has a real shot at winning by a margin larger than that by which Cuntbag will cheat, and they'd better start hedging their bets.
The Bush family plus Romney and the staff of National Review might end up being the only ones left standing in the #NeverTrump wing of Hillary's campaign.
I sincerely hope they all have massive heart attacks and drop dead -- right now.
Cruz's tepid endorsement of Trump would have been well-received had he delivered it at the convention. It was pretty much exactly the message we were all hoping he would have delivered at that time.
He should have chosen a venue other than the ultra-liberal hate speech site "Facebook" to deliver it, though.
The response was predictable. The vast majority of commenters were split about evenly between the "Good job Ted, you were my first choice but it's time for us to unify around the nominee" set, and the "Welcome to the Trump Train" set ... with a small minority of Glenn Beck type retards who are now taking the Cruz stickers off their cars because they are among the dwindling remains of the #NeverTrump branch of the democrat party.