anonymous asked:

I'm trying to fight islamaphobia in the indian community but I get hit with the mughals were imperialistic and brutally ruled over and oppressed minority indigenous Indian religions and made them feel savage like for more free thought and expression. Also, that in Bangladesh and Pakistan, the atrocities and laws against Hindus are much worse. What is your advice?

The thing is, even waY before the Mughals, South Asian religious groups were always fighting against each other. You had Vaishnavite rulers grind Jains who refused to convert alive in oil mills; Saint Ramanuja was exiled from Chola Nadu for refusing to comply with the caste system and Shaivite Brahminism, and many Iyengars who stayed in Chola Nadu were then brutally executed. You’ve got the Mahabharatha that talks about a great war that killed thousands of people–though the most of the intricacies and specific characters of the story may not be true, the war it mentions was very likely real (though again, probably not in the way the epic mentions it). King Thirumangai was an anti-Buddhist iconoclast before he reformed; one example is of how he sacked a Buddhist temple and smelted its icons and idols to rebuild a wall in the temple of Sri Rangam. The Gupta period in South Asia was famous for its further stratification and enforcement of the caste system. 

History books quite obviously don’t mention all of these; instead, they focus on “blah blah the Mughal Empire was bad, forced conversions, yada yada” and totally disregard that literally every empire and every kingdom everywhere did incredibly shitty things, often with religion as an excuse. 

Also, as for atrocities against Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan, yeah, it is a big problem in those regions; however, you have many, MANY cases of Islamophobia in India as well, so hatred between religious groups (which again, has plainly always been a thing in South Asia wHICH SUCKS OFC) shouldn’t be an excuse to be Islamophobic (or Hinduphobic…lookin’ at those South Asians who don’t care about the anti-Hindu violence in Pakistan and Bangladesh). 

I hope that helped! Tldr; there’s always a percentage of people in every community who are extremists, but that shouldn’t be an excuse for discrimination. 


Ladies and gentlemen, poison doesn’t always come in bottles. And it isn’t always marked with the skull and crossbones of danger. Poison can take the form of words and phrases and acts: the venom of racial and religious hatred. Here in the United States, perhaps more than ever before, we must learn to recognize the poison of prejudice and to discover the antidote to its dangerous effects. Evidences of racial and religious hatred in our country place a potent weapon in the hands of our enemies, providing them with the ammunition of criticism. Moreover, group hatred menaces the entire fabric of democratic life. As for the antidote: you can fight prejudice, first by recognizing it for what it is, and second by actively accepting or rejecting people on their individual worth, and by speaking up against prejudice and for understanding. Remember, freedom and prejudice can’t exist side by side. If you choose freedom, fight prejudice.

Vincent Price, The Saint, “Author of Murder”

Since I’m just as scared and sad and worried about the outcome of Tuesday’s election as many other Americans… I want to imagine what would happen if it was Cassie who won the 2016 presidential election.  When the policymakers lowered the minimum age to run from 35 to 30, it was Jake they had in mind (after all, he received over 50,000 write-in votes for the 2004 election) but most people are just as happy to have Cassie in charge.  

Imagine that she runs on a Democratic ticket, because she has to choose a party if she wants a nomination, but that neither party knows what to make with her.  She makes speeches in jeans and hiking boots, morphs wolf and runs the campaign trail rather than wasting money on a helicopter, and doesn’t so much set up photoshoots as she gets caught accidentally by photographers in her moments of being awesome: feeding pigeons on a bench in Wisconsin, listening intently to little girls who want to be just like her under the Arizona sun, helping one of her own interns change his flat tire midway through Louisana, plunging elbows-deep into a calf birthing gone wrong at an Iowa farm.  

Imagine that she’s a little shy, a little awkward, during her speeches, but that people lean in to listen to her anyway.  Anyone who hears her—either during one of her many informal gatherings or through their home televisions—knows why it is that this short, overweight, soft-spoken young black woman captures American idealism in a way that forty-three tall, bellowing white men never have.  She doesn’t make grandiose promises, and she doesn’t use fancy campaign slogans.  Instead she tells them honestly, in plainspoken language, that she’s angry.  That she’s an idealist who has been battered and shoved around by this harsh, ugly world since she was thirteen years old.  That she’s tired.  Tired of being called an American hero one month and reduced to her gender and race the next month.  Tired of inequality, of loss, of seeing poverty and hatred all around her.  Tired of this country dismissing its poor and ignoring its minorities.  

Imagine that it’s not all smooth sailing and easy wins, because as much as she wants change she still has to live in this world.  So the press tell her she’s too young, too battle-hardened, too uneducated, too well-connected, too unpolished.  People use unrepeatable words when talking about her, and she can’t turn into a polar bear and threaten them all.  People comment on her hair, her body, her fashion choices, and she doesn’t have Rachel there to defend her.  She averages three hours of sleep most nights, and she and Ronnie barely get to see each other in between press events.  People give her pitying looks whenever she mentions one of her boys—Ax and Jake, Tobias and Marco—in the present tense, and unflinchingly declares that until she hears official news of their deaths she’ll keep assuming they’re out there somewhere, thanks.  Conservative pundits make veiled pokes at her competency any time she talks openly about her nightmares, her insomnia, and her other battle scars.  

Imagine she wins anyway.  That she’s the first female president, the first African-American woman to shatter that glass ceiling, that she’s the youngest president in history, that she attracts more conservative voters than any Democrat before or since.  That she makes a short and humble acceptance speech, then rolls up her sleeves and gets to work the instant January 20 rolls around.

Imagine that for four years, she chooses diplomacy over war.  She cuts taxes and brings in thousands of new jobs when she dismantles all the parts of the U.S. military that are unnecessary in light of the new kind of warfare the yeerks brought to this planet, repurposing those resources and those funds and those selfless warriors to building this country up from the inside.  She shatters monopolies and cracks down unforgivingly on racism and classism and religious fear and hatred in all its forms.  She speaks softly and carries a very big stick in the form of the millions of Americans whose lives she has changed for the better—with education reform and new health care policies, with business incentives and job creation—who will defend their president to the death.  

Imagine she gets re-elected by a landslide, even though she spends almost the entire election season helping Florida bring in a new immigrant-citizenship program and all but misses her own campaign.  That her opponent is smiling as he concedes defeat.  That she sits him down the day after the election ends and tells him he had some good ideas for small-business startup incentives, and she’d like to hire him on as her Secretary of Labor.  

Imagine that during her presidency, unity triumphs over division.  That love triumphs over hatred and the common identity of being human triumphs over all other meaningless distinctions between people.  That the economy thrives and human rights move forward in huge bounds of legislation.  That even the people who don’t agree with the president will admit she knows what she’s doing.  

Imagine that as the President of the United States she is one of the first people alerted when the U.S.’s andalite allies spot an unidentified flying object fast approaching Earth’s atmosphere from the outer reaches of the solar system.  Imagine she’s the one who officially accepts the salutation from the craft, tears in her eyes.  

Imagine that she’s standing there on the Washington Mall when the Rachel touches down on the grass and the seven warriors—two of them nothlits, three of them far from where they started, all of them battle-weary but so grateful to be returning at long last—step off the ramp of the fighter and onto the soft grasses of home.  

When anybody preaches disunity, tries to pit one of us against the other through class warfare, race hatred, or religious intolerance, you know that person seeks to rob us of our freedom and destroy our very lives
—  Make Mine Freedom, 1948
The quote is used in Bastille’s “The Currents”.  

BTW I’m rethinking my two state stance, due to both actually being here now and having spoken with multiple people on the subject whilst here.
We spoke with a very right wing, settler, Bennett supporting lady, and right after we spoke with a very leftwing Christian Palestinian man who grew up going to Israeli Zionist schools, and the morning prior we spoke with a man who wasn’t really on the left/right divide, and was a secular Israeli Jew.

This has been pretty intense, to say the least, but one point was consistent: one way or another, a two state solution isn’t practical and just doesn’t have the population supporting it, and if it was forcibly implemented it would likely only worsen the conflict and hatred.

The Palestinian man suggested something like the “Swiss system”, where the Jews would have control of Jewish areas, Palestinians/Arabs would control their areas, possibly other larger sections could get separate control over their areas, and a larger government would connect these groups through joint control over military, food, water, roads, electricity, etc.

In his words, he said both Israeli and Palestinian populations due to their histories have developed a severe victim complex and thus both are reacting to a threat that they are creating BY reacting in the first place, in a two way fashion. Think if it like a causation loop, but it’s two circles stuck together.

I actually like this idea a lot, because it gives each group local autonomy and room for intra-politics, and then it gives another layer for national politics between the groups. It doesn’t stamp out Palestinian national aspirations, it doesn’t push the Israelis into the sea, it doesn’t murder this group or that group, and even opens the door for other groups to get a stronger voice, if they want it. The goal of this idea is to remove the stigma and slowly reduce the hatred, without there being a loser. Jews can still have law of return and Jewish culture protected, Palestinians can build up their infrastructure and resources without worry, the land itself stops getting blown up, the people are not stuck in constant anxiety with rockets overhead, and the Old City is jointly protected.

I think this is a more nuanced version of the “binational one state solution”, that rather that inspiring competing nationalisms and reactionary IntraPolitik, would instead foster brotherhood and autonomous respect.

To sum him up, he said “this land is a holy land to all of us, religiously and culturally. Dividing it, that wouldn’t help. It’s like the baby brought before king Solomon, cutting it in half would only kill the land and no one who really cares about the land would want that, only those who hate would want such a thing. The people of this land, regardless of ethnicity, have dealt with terrible governments and deadly conditions, and there is now a larger culture of hatred. The thing about hatred is that it is drinking poison and expecting the other to die from it. No, what actually happens is the reactionary hatred and religious fanaticism will swallow the people’s culture and destroy it from within. Look no further than Hamas or militant Charedim as my evidence. When all the focus, all the spending, and all the conversations are focused on hatred, revenge, separatism, and murder, then who is feeding the people, planting the trees, building the communities, or educating the children? Who is helping the poor, the needy? Who is watching and checking the culture? No one. With that route, there is no future, not because it isn’t possible to implement, but because it means death. I do not mean hold hands, sing, and everything will be fine, no, there is still negotiations to be had, repercussions and justice, apologies and learning, but it is this other path that can redeem the people.”

He also spoke briefly about BDS, in a manner that I adored. It was yo the effect of “the minority that is seeking change and has a nuanced conversation going, they are exploring, good for them. The majority, however, is antisemitic, actually exasperate the issues and fanaticism, and are not working with the Palestinians best interests in mind, rather they are imposing their British, American, Canadian etc ideological niche on a nuanced middle eastern context that they cannot relate to. I don’t believe in boycotts, they stop conversation, they stop thought, and they put walls where we should make bridges.”

So yeah. He was a very powerful speaker. I find this idea preserves Zionist goals, Palestinian liberation and justice, the will of the average person regardless of affiliation, and would (hopefully) satisfy the international community. This conflict is a true test of humanities maturity, I think. If this can be sorted out, then the rest of our issues can be also. If not, we are doomed to eternal wars and suffering for profit.

William Shakespeare was a Chat Noir

So ever since we heard from Hawkdaddy that Joan of Arc was a Ladybug in the ML universe, it got me thinking how many other famous historical figures were Ladybugs and Chat Noirs respecitvely.

That’s when it hit me. William Shakespeare was TOTALLY a Chat Noir! Think about it.

1. The are a number of years where NOBODY knew what the frick he was doing (to the point they’re called ‘Shakespeare’s Lost Years’) and if that’s not shady as all hell idk what is!

2. Look at how clever, witty and puntastic he is! I’m not saying every Chat Noir is a pun master, far from it, but how good would it be for Adrien’s predecessor to literally be the man to write such beauty as “ ask for me to-morrow, and you shall find me a grave man” or  ‘Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by this sun of York.’?Like can’t you just picture Shakespeare’s LB groaning as they took on the Spaniards together and he was spewing line after line of glorious dick jokes and puns?

3. He and his Ladybug could have been secret agents for Queen Elizabeth during the war with the Spanish who, in my historical AU headcannon, were being manipulated by a Spanish Hawkmoth aka Polilla, using religious hatred and bigotry to control them, in order to gain power and eventually take over the world. Especially considering how much world they were discovering at the time in history! But first he had to bring down the other dominant country at the time, England!

4. There was a lady he wrote about in his sonnets, aptly title ‘The Dark Lady’ sonnets. No historians have ever been able to fully identify who this woman was. She was described as having dark features and dark eyes, and being married. The person speaking in the sonnets has a torrid love affair with her. Now of course the Sonnet speaker may not be Shakespeare himself, but it would be very interesting, especially considering he throws in a sonnet dedicated to his own wife (and historians debate whether or not they were in love, though most of what I’ve read suggests it was a marriage of convenience, particularly as he was 18 and she was 26 and pregnant with his child when the marriage occurred).

In summation:


Originally posted by thebonetrousler

On the Word Antisemitism

Many people seem to think that antisemitism can refer to all Semitic [speaking] people, but that is not the case. The word antisemitism only refers to the hatred of Jews because it was created to only refer to the hatred of Jews. 

The word antisemitism has less to do with one’s “Semitic-ness” and more to do with the fact that German racial scientists literally never had any idea what they were talking about. I’ve seen many people argue that Jews are not “real” Semites because they do not live in the Middle East or have any ties to the Middle East. This is untrue for a few different reasons:

  • There are actually Jews who live in the Middle East or have heritage from the Middle East.
  • All Jews have ancestry that can be traced back to the Middle East.
  • The Semitic languages are not restricted to solely the Middle East, but also North Africa and the Horn of Africa. 

Not to mention, Hebrew is a Semitic language; plus there are Jews who speak Arabic or other Semitic languages.

Wilhelm Marr popularized the term antisemitism in the 1800s as a more scientific-sounding way to refer to Judenhass (Jew-hatred). He and many others believed there were corresponding racial groups to the “Aryan” languages and Semitic languages; thus, Jews were referred to as Semites. Marr thought the word Judenhass had a religious connotation, and he wanted something that would carry a racial connotation. 

For this reason, antisemitism is more than just a religious hatred; it is also an ethnic or racial hatred (although today less people view Jews as a race). It was especially a racial hatred in Nazi Germany; for if a Jew converted out of Judaism, there wouldn’t be any reason to hate them. There needed to be some sort of racial inferiority, a racial difference, to perpetuate hatred and violence against Jews.

The term antisemitism was never created to refer to anyone other than Jews. This is not the fault of Jews. It is the fault of German racial scientists who created and popularized the word. It is the fault of racial scientists who were looking for any and every reason to hate Jews. In fact, Wilhelm Marr dedicated a lot of his time to perpetuating oppression against Jews; he founded the League of Antisemites in 1879, an organization which aimed to combat the “Jewish threat” to Germany.

This is why Jews get so upset when non-Jews try to change the meaning of the word antisemitism. This word, the main word that has been used to describe our oppression for the past few centuries, carries a long and tragic history with it. You can never divorce Jewish oppression from antisemitism; you can never attach non-Jewish oppression to antisemitism.

The moment you change the meaning of the word antisemitism is the moment you erase and ignore our history, our struggle, and our marginalization in a world that has hated Jews for a very long time.


Presidential hopefuls Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee today both came out with words of disgust towards the #SCOTUS decision to legalize gay marriage.

Cruz said: “Today is some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history,” Cruz said.

Huckabee said: “The Supreme Court has spoken with a very divided voice on something only the Supreme Being can do-redefine marriage,” Huckabee said in the statement. “I will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our Founders acquiesced to an imperial British monarch. We must resist and reject judicial tyranny, not retreat.”


Please fight bigotry, every day.

Preacher’s Kid

I grew up the daughter of a Southern Baptist preacher. They say that preacher’s kids are the worst and I’ve always resented that sentiment. It was aimed at me by churchgoers as a joke because I was very quiet and shy and studious and never did anything wild. When people refer to me as a trainwreck in regards to detransition it hits me in a place that intersects with this set of memories. I want to say, you have no idea who I am. I am the daughter of a preacher who got straight A’s up through high school and played hymns on my violin in the Christmas nativity production and refilled the pews with prayer request cards some days when I went to work with my dad. 

I feel like the pressure that comes from your father being a minister in a fundamentalist church like that is different than what other families in the congregation experience. I remember my mother yelling when I was five or six: she was ironing and starching my dad’s shirts; I remember the smell. They had a fight. She was tired of always having to go to church, never getting a break, having to do her duties as his wife.

As the daughter or wife of a preacher you have to always go to church - Sunday mornings, Sunday nights, Wednesday nights, sometimes other days if there’s a special event. Sunday mornings were especially important, of course. I came to understand that being the daughter of a preacher meant being a living example of how dad was a good and godly head of the family. It could feel a lot like being an exhibition. If you were not at church everyone would notice and ask about it and judge. Sometimes you get mentioned in sermons. A lot of times you have to meet and talk to a bunch of people that you don’t want to before and during and after the service, while knowing that you, in part, represent him - an ambassador of sorts. A pastor’s whole life is in plain view of the congregation, and a pastor’s family is a particularly visible part of his life. 

This is all to say that my experience with fundamentalist christianity is from a particular angle that most people with religious backgrounds don’t share. It comes with extra baggage and with the weight of religious service being my father’s job. Rebelling or simply choosing to not participate was not an option. I remember when my dad got a new job at a new church and we moved - I was about 11. He told me that I needed to be baptized because I was getting too old to not be. The underlying message was that it was not ok for the preacher’s kid to not have been formally baptized. In order to maintain his image, I had to participate in a public production of being “saved” and dunked in a glorified bathtub. The whole thing was incredibly anxiety-producing for me, as a shy child with her own, very private, thoughts on spirituality. 

As I got older and learned about what being gay was from furtive google searches at midnight on the family computer, I started weaving together my own knowledge and sense of self. This intertwined with the increasingly explicit condemnations of “homosexuality” in my church and formed a knot in my stomach that I could not ignore. I remember sitting through entire High-School-Girls-Sunday-School lessons geared towards dating and boys and “when we should make them stop” when they inevitably went “too far” and tried to have sex with us. I remember hearing the Sunday School teacher mention a kid who was gay one day; she said that his parents came around to supporting him and now said that he was born that way. She thought that was so sinful and horrendous of them to accept their son. 

By the time I was 16, I was sure I was going to Hell because I knew I was a lesbian and I was growing increasingly worried that God was not willing to change that fact. I prayed about it a lot. I made my friend hold onto a couple CDs of a female music group for me, because the music made me think “impure thoughts.” These impure thoughts involved me imagining holding hands with a girl and fantasizing (if I was really daring,) that we might kiss. I would count the days I could go without thinking “impure thoughts.” That mostly meant that if I saw a girl and thought she was pretty or even just had a non-verbal flash of “”lust”” in my heart (and I was never even daring to think about sex at this point), I had to start the count over. 

As an older teenager I felt more and more broken and isolated and doomed for Hellfire and Eternal Torment. I had been cutting myself since I was 13. My parents knew but didn’t want to talk about it. I was depressed a lot. Sometimes I would come home from school and close the blinds in my room and just sit in the darkness or lay on my bed for a long time without moving or doing anything. My mother got really mad at me for things like that. She started yelling at me a lot, but unpredictably. I started starving myself at school and then binging when I got home. I became vegetarian and developed an eating disorder. I started purging at home after school too. I cut more. 

I would cut in the bathroom every night, as a ritual before my shower. Then I would bandage my cuts with paper towel and tape I smuggled in with me, and walk out of the bathroom to the laundry room past my parents and try not to limp. The areas of lacerations were usually too large for any real bandages. When the cuts stopped bleeding I’d take the paper towel off and smother my thighs in Neosporin and that was it, until the next round. My pain and desperation as a teenager was in very large part tied to my shame of being a lesbian and the fear of my parents’ reactions when they eventually found out, and the Hell that was waiting for me after that. 

One night when I was 16 or 17, I sat on the corner of the bathtub with my usual razor blades and prayed one last time. I asked God to fix me. There was still no answer. I decided that this was it, and I whispered out loud, “this is for you,” (addressed to God.) I sliced open my thigh right up near my torso at the base of my leg and I sat there in shock looking at the deepest cut I’d ever made, then or since. I heard white noise in my head and I stopped believing in God right then. 

Nothing good came out of the religion I grew up in. I’m still healing. I feel such a deep rage sometimes when I think about how trans people say detransitioners are all like ex-gays. How dare they. My transition was just the next leg of the path of shame and attempting to normalize myself. I actually remember asking my dad if he would re-introduce me to the church as my male name around age 19 or 20 after I’d moved out and denounced christianity. I wanted to be accepted so badly. 

Who I love is not trivial. Separating me from my being a lesbian is severing me from myself. As far as I know my parents still don’t accept me. I think they might think of me as a “non-practicing homosexual” right now. I have been careful not to mention it in the past couple years and always turn my apartment upside down hiding half my belongings when they visit (my rainbow flag, for instance.) It really hurts to keep quiet about breaking up with your fiancé while your dad casually mentions how things are going at church. It hurts to think of all the conversations that I tried to have but that they were not willing to engage in. It’s overwhelming to look at all the damage dealt to my psyche from my family’s church - and it’s a goddamn spiritual experience in and of itself to look at how far I’ve come out of that religious hatred. I’m proud to be me. I’m proud to have discovered that loving other women - emotionally, spiritually, physically - is a Good and pure thing…That lesbian sex is normal…That I am free from the judgement of “God” even if I am not free from the judgement of people. There’s nothing wrong with me being a lesbian - but I am crystal clear on the fact that the church I grew up in taught me that I was broken. I did not come by this demented guilt on my own. They should be ashamed. 

I can remember the 1980s and the great satanic panic scare. Everyone was afraid of Satanists. You would never reveal you were a Satanist to anyone for fear that you might be physically attacked. It was quite honestly a modern-day witch-hunt so it really did not matter what your thoughts were, what your beliefs were or your ideology / theology. If you were branded a Satanist, you were “evil and bad” and according to the Xtian Church, that belief has not really changed that much over time.

In today’s popular culture, being a Satanist is more acceptable and you’re not really seen as the “Devil incarnate”. It is now a wonderful time to be open and honest about everything…. or so it would seem.

Just like racism, religious hatred and persecution remains “alive and well”. In a world of technology and informational enlightenment, society still holds onto the stupidity and prejudices of the past. Unfortunately, it seems to be deeply embedded in the human DNA.

Aleister Nacht

Confession:  I’m an atheist who grew in the bible belt and was bullied for years because of it, but even I’m a little uncomfortable by the fandom’s vehement hatred for religious characters. Sebastian and Leliana (pre-DAI) are/were accused of being preachy despite the fact they never try to convert anyone. The closest is Sebastian bringing up the fact that he saw Fenris hanging around the Chantry and is excited about it (As in, yay my friend might like something I like? Who wouldn’t be excited?). Sebastian even states that proselytizing doesn’t work and has friendly convos with Merrill about their respective religions, and yet he’s accused of trying to manipulate Fenris and that he’s rude to Merrill and she’s just too nice to say anything (check out her convo with Anders when he puts down Dalish beliefs, she is quick to shut him down so, no, she actually enjoys her discussions with Sebastian). Not even his declaration at the end of DA2 is religiously motivated; that’s pure revenge. He has one convo where he considers turning Merrill and Anders in because of duty, but he also protests against the rite of annulment. He’s complicated, not as complicated as other characters because he’s DLC, but he’s not a sinister, preachy stereotype.

Keep reading
I'm Done Accommodating Religious Hatred Toward Queer Lives
Over the last 48 hours I've come to know that I am fully and finally done accommodating religious hatred towards queer lives -- whether from foaming mout...

“How utterly pathetic that it took 49 lives slaughtered for me to pack up my ‘thank you for your point of view on why queer lives are not fully human’ table and close shop. For too long I have tolerated ‘Setting a big tent’ and ‘Allowing many points of view’ and ‘Dialogue’ when talking about LGBT people as if our lives are up for debate and as if the jury is still out on our humanity, our dignity, or our being made beautifully in God’s image.

Fuck ‘love the sinner, hate the sin.’ All I hear in these conversations now is death.”

I keep thinking about this, but someone actually said Jews should stop using the word antisemitism and start using alternatives like “Judeophobia” or “anti-Jewish”. The thing is, those words only refer to a religious hatred.

Antisemitism is never just a religious hatred, it is also an ethnic hatred. An ethnoreligious hatred. The word antisemitism captures that ethnoreligious hatred. That’s what it was created for — to persecute Jews on a level deeper than religion.

I can’t think of another word that would cover both a religious and ethnic hatred. And even if I could, I’m not going to use it just because non-Jewish Arabs want to co-opt our oppression.

There is only one word that describes our oppression and that is antisemitism. It’s not changing. I’m sorry you feel left out, but you can’t just redefine a word because you feel like it.

Antisemitism referring to Jews doesn’t erase Arab identity or the fact that Arabs are Semitic. What would really be erased is the history of our oppression.

It’s important that Democrats keep reminding the American public, every day for the next four years, of who’s sitting in the White House and what that means. Trump ran one of most vile presidential campaigns in American history, one based on racial and religious hatred, resentment and fear. He sought to normalize toxic misogyny. He celebrated violence. He mainstreamed white supremacy. His election has spurred a wave of racist intimidation and hate crimes, as bigots across the country have become emboldened by his victory to act out their most despicable impulses. He’s a demagogue and a dangerous fool, and while Democrats aren’t going to question the legitimacy of his presidency the way Republicans did with Obama, he shouldn’t ever be treated like an ordinary president with whom Democrats just have some substantive disagreements.

Matthew J. Murray was an American gunman who on December 9, 2007 killed four people in the Youth With A Mission and New Life Church shootings before taking his own life.

Murray was one of two sons of a prominent Colorado neurologist and was homeschooled by his mother Loretta in a suburb of Denver, in what friends and neighbors described as a deeply religious Christian home.

Before the shooting Murray left several violent and threatening messages on several religious websites, espousing his hatred for Christianity and his intentions on killing as many Christians as possible.

One message read: “I’m coming for EVERYONE soon and I WILL be armed to the …teeth and I WILL shoot to kill… God, I can’t wait till I can kill you people. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame, I don’t care if I live or die in the shoot-out. All I want to do is kill and injure as many of you… as I can especially Christians who are to blame for most of the problems in the world.”

This posting demonstrates that Murray was influenced by Columbine perpetrator Eric Harris, who left the following message on his website prior to his own killing spree: “I’m coming for EVERYONE soon and I WILL be armed to the fucking teeth and I WILL shoot to kill… God, I can’t wait til I can kill you people. Feel no remorse, no sense of shame. I don’t care if I live or die in the shoot-out. All I want to do is kill and injure as many of you as I can, especially a few people. Like Brooks Brown.”

it’s so weird when you go thru a random blog that like, posts no hs, has a normal pic as their icon, never mentions hs and has a p normal url and would in no way lead you to believe they are a sinner and boom. tiny little Dave in one of their text post out of nowhere. what the fuck. subtle homestucking. JUST BECAUSE YOU SIN IN PRIVATE DOESNT MEAN THE LORD CANT SEE YOU YOU SICK FUCK