extremist liberal

anonymous asked:

What's wrong with PETA?

  • They kill most of the animals brought into their care, and have a history of animal cruelty
  • Animal rights and liberation extremists (no pets, no livestock, no zoos, no use of animals full stop)
  • Pro-breed specific legislation and “adopt don’t shop”
  • Pay people to abuse animals in videos/stage footage
  • Target children with gruesome, graphic campaigns
  • Create campaigns that include misogynistic, ableist, racist, fat shaming messages, like comparing the meat industry to the Holocaust & the AKC to the KKK, also so much objectification of women
  • They basically propagate that if you aren’t 100% vegan, you are animal abusing scum, while at the same time they shame and devalue human beings, promote discriminatory views, abuse animals, stage ‘cruelty footage’, commit violence, and are just generally shitty
  • @animalwelfarists have a good page on PETA
Islam apologists, you only have yourselves to blame

I know that nothing in politics is simple enough to be condensed down to a single issue but as close as this last election was, there’s a number of factors that helped swing the election in favor of Trump. One of them was his no nonsense approach to Islam. For years Muslim moderates, liberals and anti-extremists have been writing, lecturing and studying how to effectively reform Islam, deradicalize its followers and make it more compatible with the 21st century. Recognizing the distinction between people and ideas, these reformers promote tolerance and peace towards Muslims but unapologetically critique the ideas held in the Quran. This approach represents the very essence of American values - treat all individuals equally but scrutinize all ideas rigorously with critical thinking and rationality.

But at every turn, the reformers have been attacked, not just receiving threats from Muslims but by other liberals. Sam Harris was called an Islamophobe for criticizing the bad ideas held in the Quran. Maajid Nawaz, a Muslim of Pakistani origin and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an ex-muslim from Somalia are still being labeled anti-Muslim extremists by the SPLC because they talk about reforming Islam. Only two days ago Ali had to cancel her trip to Australia as she received death threats. Death threats for speaking about Islam. Dr. Bill Warner, an Islamic scholar who has studied the Quran for over 30 years, was told by the president of a Florida college that he should be censored and never be allowed to speak because he was critical of Islam. When did it become standard practice for universities to support the censorship of ideas? Ali Rizvi, Wafa Sultan, Sarah Haider and other critics of Islam have all faced the same explosive reactions from leftists, the defenders of Islam, who don’t have the slightest clue what they’re defending. Merely scrutinizing an ideology is treated as social barbarism by those unable to draw the distinction between criticism of an ideology and contempt for its practitioners. Ironically, those actually living under oppressive Islamic regimes are often grateful for the secular voices speaking out on their behalf because with Islamic blasphemy and apostasy laws they have no voice.

The left loves to assure us that terror has nothing to do with Islam yet these terror groups are only following and copying what’s in the Quran and Hadith. It’s why we have the term “moderate Muslims” as they aren’t following their Quran, many Muslims have never even read it, they don’t adhere to the fundamentals of Islam as ISIS does. When you really start getting into the meat of the Quran and Hadith, there are doctrines that pose staunch opposition with classical liberal values. It’s easy to say the critics are taking the Quran out of context but there are hundreds of Islamic scholars and clerics all studying the context and none of them can agree on one interpretation. That’s why Dr. Shabir Ally can talk about the fair nature of Islam while Abu Bakr al-Baghdadithe, who also has a PhD in Islamic studies is running a campaign of hate and terror in the name of Allah. They get their fundamentals directly from the Quran and the Hadith. There isn’t a moderate version and a terror version, it comes from the same book. The same verses can and are interpreted in different ways by different sects but the fact that it’s full of bloodshed, hatred towards infidels, beheadings and mutilation, they leave the door wide open to such easy interpretation.

Many educated Muslim apologists arguing for the peaceful nature of Islam often avoid the Hadith, avoid violent verses from the Quran, and jump through hoops to try to interpret “beat them,” “slay them,” or “If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him” in a peaceful way. But how on earth do they expect a billion Muslims - many in highly illiterate regions - to all interpret them as anything other than literal? Their violence and views come directly from the Quran and the Hadith, and for this reason alone these texts are imperfect and subsequently, so is Islam. The Quran is full of contradictions, granting Islam a tremendous amount of power because it can claim to be a religion of peace while simultaneously advocating jihad. People often say things like Islam was the first to give women their rights but Muslims are given the right to rape infidel women, permitted to rape and beat their wives and take part in polygamy. Muhammad himself at the age of 53 married and had sex with a 9 year old girl.

In Saudi Arabia, one of the most devout Muslim nations and home of Islam’s most holy site requires women have chaperones at all times, forbids them to drive, forces them to cover from head to toe and whipping and stoning women for being raped or holding hands with another female. Muslim women are denied education and within many Muslim countries only a quarter of the women are literate. In many Muslim nations they give women half a testimony in court, they aren’t allowed to speak or defend themselves in court without a male relative to speak for them and they’re often beaten or killed if they stray from any of these laws. God forbid if she has a bacon cheeseburger, wants to wear a t-shirt in summer or have a one-night stand. Even in the more “moderate” Muslim countries such as Turkey, their public swimming pools have great imposing dividing walls to keep women out of sight. Women aren’t even allowed to pray with the men, they are sent to the back or into another room. And god help her if she wants out of Islam. In some Muslim countries there are laws in place that condemn apostate with a death sentence while the rest have some other form of punishment for apostasy. They all at the very least have blasphemy laws that requires punishment of anyone who criticizes Islam or Muhammad. So much for freedom and women’s rights… The worst part is, Canada has recently voted for this exact Sharia law to be introduced into the country.

Apologists claim that the radical views and actions of many Muslims don’t represent Islam and they are using a peaceful religion for their extremism but religious extremism is not a problem if your core beliefs are non-violent. The problem isn’t fundamentalism. The only problem with Islamic fundamentalism is the fundamentals of Islam. These “radical views” which the left disassociates with Islam are really the most authentic display of Islam. It’s why 50 Muslim countries ban LGBT groups, 10 Muslim countries can legally kill gay people and many more legally whip and imprison gays, 16 Muslim countries ban all Jewish people from entering - how can they say it’s only a tiny fraction of Muslims who hold these extreme views when we are talking about entire Islamic countries following none other than Islamic law? We cannot be silent on this issue. We cannot let fear blind us or lose our compassion but we need to be discussing ways to promote assimilation and secular Western values.

Unfortunately the second we start to have this conversation, the Islamophobia card gets pulled out by privileged, blue haired buffoons who have never had their clitoris sliced off, have never had acid thrown on their face and have never been forced into arranged marriages against their will as those who they are calling Islamophobic have. Their idea of oppression is not being given free tampons from the government. They fail to distinguish the difference between anti-Muslim and anti-Islam so anyone who questions Islam must automatically make them Islamophobics who hate all Muslims. Phobia means an irrational fear and there is nothing irrational about approaching Islam with calculated caution but if you question it you are called a racist. Islam is not a race. It is a belief and a way of life that people of many different races choose whether or not to follow. It is an idea and if we can’t criticize an idea, then free speech is truly dead. All ideas should be questioned, no belief should be able to go unquestioned. If a belief is true then it will hold up to scrutiny and if it doesn’t then why try to hide it? There are thousands being killed and millions suffering worldwide in the name of a religion and yet some people are still concerned that we shouldn’t challenge a belief system for fear of offending? If terror attacks shake the beliefs of Muslims worldwide as much as they say they do and then it should lead them to question the violent nature at the core of their ideology and embrace an overhaul and begin to hold Islam to the same standard we demand and expect from other religions.

The fact is a lot of Americans are afraid because they don’t understand what’s going on, they know there’s a problem and they want to solve it in a kind and compassionate way but sadly the voices of reason, those that may be able to provide an actual viable solution are squashed. We should be having calm and rational conversation and debating how Islam needs to reform itself to be compatible with classical liberal values in the 21st century. Instead the conversation is constantly being hijacked by the apologetic, irrational left with character assassinating slurs which has silenced many great minds on the issue. Rather than having a progressive conversation about Islam, most politicians keep silent or make excuses for it, allowing someone like Trump to step in because he’s the only one that has ever addressed it. It’s why we have to put aside the septic PC gag and talk about this rationally because by silencing the intellectuals, the Muslims calling for reform and the anti-extremists, liberals on the left have handed a platform to Trump on a silver platter. The left only have themselves to blame for the rise of the Trump to presidency. Islam is guilty and the more you try to convince us it’s peaceful, the more we will prove to you that it isn’t. We must speak out and Islam must be criticized without relent for dogma, inequality, unwarranted violence and sexism have no place in the evolution and future of mankind.

anonymous asked:

you're so liberal and extremist to the point where it's tOo much for someone like me, a gay democrat. this blog actually gave me cancer and caused me to snort three lines of cocaine

hillary clinton personally sent me this message because i made a joke about macklemore becoming president

can i just be surrounded by radfems and woc for the rest of my life i can’t trust white liberal women anymore seeing their hateful internalized misogyny seep out when defending transwomen its honestly terrifying. they’ll call other women degrading female slurs, call them ugly and stuff like “transwomen are prettier than you”, and telling them that they deserve to be punched. it reminds me of women in muslim countries who will help carry out fgm and honor killings. 

slate.com
Slate: Hannity Is a Nightly Recruitment Video for the Cult of Donald Trump
At the beginning of his eponymous Fox News program on Tuesday, Sean Hannity paused to gloat. Earlier that evening, the Washington Post had reported tha ...

The extent to which conservative media has devolved into vicious, racist propaganda is unbelievable.

Sean Hannity is clear evidence of this. He is pure talk radio, and if you think his reach isn’t that wide, he has almost 3 million followers on Twitter. His show filled with conspiracy theories, such as the Seth Rich debacle, where he lied about how Democrats like Hillary Clinton may have gotten a Democratic Party staffer killed.

Hannity’s show follows a set of rules outlined in the article:

“1) The mainstream media is duplicitous.
2) The Clintons and Barack Obama are disgusting crooks.
3) President Donald Trump is blameless in all things.“

He doesn’t care about facts. He doesn’t care about being correct. He says what people want to hear. And people want to hear that their leader, Donald Trump, is a wonderful man, while those on the left are their mortal enemies who are endangering the country. It’s a terrifying vision of the world, but it’s one that brings more comfort than the nuanced, unsatisfying reality that we exist in.

The right-wing media ecosystem operates as any extreme group does. People like Hannity tell the audience that he knows the truth, that all other media outlets (except for the ones he trusts) are lying to you. He tells the audience that they are the sane ones, the ones he entrusts the truth with. He tells them that he’s on their side, their president is on their side. And then he tells them who to hate.

It’s terrifying that people like Hannity are given a platform in American politics.

Only going to say it once

I have to say that I am both disappointed and not surprised at Tumblr’s reaction and constant bitching about Chris Kyle, his book, and the movie adaptation.

It’s a crock of shit having to constantly see Chris’ name slandered by a bunch of ignorant, extremist liberal, children who don’t understand the sacrifices and decisions we service members down range have to make. Until you’ve deployed, and until you’ve faced those split-second life or death decisions, you do not have any sort of right to drag Chris Kyle’s name through the mud. Chris Kyle saved so many service members, both in Iraq and back home here in the states.

Had Chris Kyle acted outside of his ROE, not only would you have learned his name much longer ago (because it would be on every news outlet), but he would also be still alive and sitting on his ass in Fort Leavenworth Military Prison. But Chris was a trained professional with phenomenal trigger discipline, who knew the difference between a hostile target and an innocent civilian.

Yes, even that little boy and his mother were hostile targets. Why? The minute you pick up any sort of weapon and point it at US forces, you immediately become a hostile. If you start firing a weapon (or in this case tossing a grenade) at a patrolling platoon in a street, you WILL be killed. You are a threat.

Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, ISIS, Taliban, Al Nusra, and every other terrorist organization are the free world’s enemies. Anyone who sides with them, or helps them, is an enemy.

If you hate America so much, take your happy asses and get out. I’m pissed that I signed away my life to people who are so disgustingly un-patriotic and ungrateful for the sacrifices made for them to sit on this website and cry about everything.

Chris Kyle is a hero. Suck on that.

All righty it’s time for something a little more serious than petty stuff in the media. Let’s talk Antifa.


Why on Earth are they allowed to use force? Why are they entitled to military action? While they claim to be “anti fasict” it’s pretty obvious from the recent attacks on peaceful republican protests what end of the political spectrum they hail from. Long story short, they are liberal extremists at their core. And no matter what side you are on, extremism is extremism. Why is one political group allowed to push it’s agenda through raw violence?


It’s kinda funny how some liberals would try justifying that. Honestly, it’s embarrassing. As left-leaning person myself, I am honestly apalled. The apologetics being placed here to defend this blatant terrorism, just befuddles me.


But then again I shouldn’t be surprised considering these people also defend radical Islamic terrorism.

nytimes.com
NYT: Republican Jeff Flake, a Fierce Trump Critic, Will Not Seek Re-Election for Senate
Senator Jeff Flake, the Arizona Republican who was considered one of the most vulnerable senators in his party, will not run for re-election in 2018.
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg

This is not a good thing. For every standard Republican that decides to call it quits, there are extremist candidates that are waiting for their turn.

Just look at Roy Moore in Alabama. He is not the only one of his kind. There are many authoritarian candidates who don’t care about the Constitution, ready to be elected to higher office by those brainwashed by propaganda.

We need people like Jeff Flake to stand up and fight the Trumpian wing of our government. Until they do, their words don’t count for a whole lot.

apparently “moonbat” is a political epithet for “left-wing extremists” (and also liberals even tho they’re basically fake centrists) so i guess i finally have a political alignment??? socialisms pretty cool dude

Thoughts on SJWs, Feminists & Extremist Regressive Liberals

They can only pretend to want to spread tolerance and acceptance of one another when you agree with them. If you don’t they want to see you bleed to death on the streets. Just look at how they talk to people and more specifically the hatred they demonstrate towards straight white cis men, attractive thin women, women comfortable with their sexuality and bodies (again that are thin and attractive), women who wish to be homemakers and mothers and look how these SJWs and feminists claim to be superior to men, whites and straight cis people. And this is done to attract minorities into their ideology by alienating majorities, which is an old liberal democratic tactic. They will accuse all people with dissenting opinions of the very things these regressive liberal SJWs feminsts are doing (racism, sexism, slut shaming, lying, sophistry, misogyny,  bigotry, hypocrisy, etc)


Feminazi’s are extreme narcissists which is why they have these childlike tantrums that you know they can’t wrap their heads around reality of the world that is whenever they are not surrounded with a group of people who constantly pat their back for the vile behavior and parroting what each other says which makes their grip on reality loosen more and more each day that they hide inside their echo chambers. 


 They have been told all their life that they are winners in order not to hurt their feelings. Then they become adults but the rest of the world are not their parents and do not constantly try to make them happy and reward them even when they have done nothing to deserve it. This is when they get aggressive and violent in an effort to make that reality around them go away thinking they can change it and being of the opinion that their happiness is the responsibility of the world around them and all they need to do for it is show anger when they do not get what they want. They are the weakest of the world who ironically constantly shout the hardest that they are the strongest and at the same time emotionally become unstable and collapse because “words hurt”. . . The safe space that they truly seem to want and need is the crib.

Veganism is a neutral moral baseline, as opposed to needlessly hurting animals, which is negative, and actively saving animals, engaging in activism, raising awareness or speaking out, which is positive.

Silent veganism* is a neutral morality of simply not using and abusing animals. There is nothing directly wrong with those who silently live vegan - being vegan is still favourable to non-veganism because you’re abstaining from hurting animals and saving lives in the process, but not hurting animals should be a given, not something to be praised. If we are ever going to see avoiding the unnecessary mistreatment of animals as the moral standard, veganism needs to be normalised, not glorified.

When you silently live vegan you’re not doing anything overtly positive, you’ve just stopped doing something negative. Albeit, vegans do automatically save a number of animals every year, but in a similar way to how I automatically save a number of humans every year by not murdering them. Being vegan and not using animals for food, clothing and entertainment is preferable to choosing to do those harmful things, but abstaining from animal exploitation, killing and abuse should be viewed as unexceptional.

Right now, because so few people are vegan compared to the general population, veganism is sometimes praised because it goes against the norm, is unconventional and sometimes requires more effort than choosing to eat animals.* Not abusing animals should be seen as customary, but when vegans are not being seen as either detestable extremists or liberal hippies, they are sometimes seen as somehow admirable or commendable.

People saying “Wow, I admire your veganism so much!” is almost analogical to “Wow, I admire how you don’t kill people!”, but putting it like this seems strange, because hurting animals is mostly socially acceptable, but hurting humans is generally not. In arguments, I often find people saying to me “I respect your veganism, but-” when the fact of the matter is I don’t need anyone to “respect” my resolve to not hurt animals. When people praise the concept of silent veganism, it’s usually well-meaning, but implies that not needlessly partaking in massive animal exploitation, mutilation and slaughter is NOT morally non-compulsory.

Silently living vegan means living with the common decency and courtesy to not exploit animals, and shouldn’t be seen as an impeccably virtuous thing. Hopefully in the future veganism won’t be patronisingly praised by those who do abuse animals, because abstaining from animal abuse will be fully mainstream, and people will learn to see not hurting animals as a neutral, rather than positive, act. Sadly, we currently live in a world where hurting animals for pleasure and convenience is seen as the normal and accepted baseline.

I am not saying that people switching from a meat-eating or vegetarian diet to a vegan lifestyle is not a “good” thing. It is “good” in comparison to lifestyles which cause more harm to animals, but, for the sake of moral progression, it will hopefully one day be fixed as an ethics base. Simply going vegan doesn’t make you an amazing person, it just means you’ve stopped doing something negative and have become neutral. Once you neutrally live vegan, any speaking, outreach, tweeting, protesting, promoting, saving (etc.) you can do on top of that is overtly wonderful. Activism can be minuscule or direct action, but it’s all positive! 💚

~~~

~~~

*silently (or secretly) living vegan means being vegan without being open about it or doing any activism. Not everyone can take part in all forms of activism due to health issues (mental and physical), living situations, money issues, etc. and I am not bashing people who don’t have a choice, but in my opinion, “activism” can range from tiny awareness-raising things to complete direct action. Activism can be speaking out about the movement, leafletting, attending vigils and saves, openly identifying as and talking about veganism to promote the lifestyle, going to protests, spreading information, hunt sabbing, outreach, etc. Thanks to the internet, there is something almost EVERYONE can do, and I believe you are an active (non-silent) vegan if you do anything from tiny online gestures to physically rescuing an animal! Activism can be tiny things or giant spouts of direct action, but ANYTHING other than silence is positive, rather than neutral.

** because veganism CAN require more effort for certain people in certain (sometimes difficult) situations, I understand why simply living vegan for those few people might warrant praise, but I am talking about the concept of veganism in general

Certainly nobody’s coming to me for actual real political input, right? Talking politics on tumblr is literally only personal - it’s only affecting how you approach me as a single person, or seeking validation. Both fine things, but not serious.

My words here aren’t going to make a change. I don’t actually have anything against conservatives OR extremists. Or socialists, or liberals or almost anything really. You might actually be shocked what I’m open to if you were ever to get into a discussion with me one-on-one.

Anyway, didn’t mean anything by it, my bad. I mean, if you knew my actual real opinions you probably wouldn’t respect anything I say anyway. Don’t worry about it, I’m not looking to fight anyone, promise. 🤷

5

Google ideas is a new anti-harassment PR-campaign that google has started. 

It’s a collection of extremist liberal San Francisco hipsters and some of the shittiest names in ““Social Justice””

there are rumors that they might be trying to get anything anti-SJW off of google search results, for fear that such things are “harassment”

  • me: equality is cool
  • someone, inevitably: GET OUT OF HERE WITH YOUR EXTREMIST LIBERAL BELIEFS YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE WORLD STOP SUCKING KARL MARX'S DICK AND BUY A DICTIONARY YOU UNEDUCATED FUCK
  • me: what
I came under the tag for a fandom of love not a bombardment of hate

Stop posting hate under the tag when the fucking episode hasn’t even aired we will all have our opinions and everyone will think theirs is right so stop. South Park isn’t promoting transhphobia or any of that bullshit seriously. I will defend this show with my life and I will criticise this show
With my life because those “bigots” that don’t understand and are ignorant are just as naive as the extremist left wing liberals that think bones are made of paper and glass and that no one should be offended ever that would be great but opinions are what make us different, and that’s the great thing about
Tumblr and social media all we see are opinions and we treat them like facts

I go under this tag because I like South Park that’s my opinion and I wanna find cute art and funny posts I don’t wanna be bombarded with Al this transphobia bullshit when I myself question my identity also and what/who am I (still not offended by it) watch this show. Please just stop posting hate because I would love to see your wonderful opinions and ignorant remarks but I also don’t want to be bombarded with it is a tag I go through because it’s My fandom now so can you guys at least get across the bigotry

And no one is cruel enough (except mentally ill folk or I nsane assholes) to want to promote the bullying and ostracisation of a group of people. Yes several people have done it and want to but those people had motive and reason to and were really fucking crazy. Trey and Matt are comedians and Humans and they also have a past of being very understanding, so I’m seriously getting RLy annoyed of all this hate under the tag, so if you do at least fuckig tag it hate because you’ll get more and more
Rants from me, I mean I understand you wanna tag your hate under the tag but still empathy works too, I usually don’t tag hate under its tag because I don’t wanna disturb the fandom but that’s me I mean whatever at least wait till the fucking episode airs Jesus fucking Christ