Comments by "Mark Armage" (@markarmage3776) on "Student at UC Berkeley Harassed For Christian Beliefs | Interviews" video.
-
2
-
@abhikahuja3773 She was chosen to represent the public, by definition, the public also vested her the right of using her own belief as a measure of the public if she deemed so. She abstained.
And Berkeley idiots, not being harassed isn't a right, but the first amendment purpose is not to let you say whatever every single kind of stupid and vial things possible. That's just abusing the law loopholes.
Consequences is one thing, extreme reaction based on moronic judgement, false ideology, no logic is not consequence, it's stupidity. It's immoral, unless you're saying immoral and stupidity is okay just because it's protected by the law? Go back to school, if you're going to Berkeley to learn social sciences, switch now while you still can, at least think a bit.
1
-
1
-
@UC0Rl7bQFO7OLSTZUGgtOuUg And there, done, your logic crumbled right there. If you have the right to say anything like your previous argument in how the students can react to her Christian belief just because they want to, it hurts her the same way somebody feel sad about being "harassed" sexually.
Now is that their fault for feeling bad or is the people's fault for speaking legally, in any sort logic, if sexually harassment is wrong, then the extreme action of people insulting her without reasons is also very wrong.
Not to say that any criticism or sexually oriented comment is wrong, no that's not how it works, if a person can justify their comments with logic and sensible reasons then it is justified, that's how law and order is built.
But like I said, before, it's wrong morally, not wrong legally, sexual harassment is a propaganda term, it's defined based on the subject aka the person being talked about, if the definition varies, any law relating to that is in some way very confusing and unclear, full of holes. You don't need to wait for consent before speaking, pal, any lawyer who defend in court will destroy that argument into pieces.
Berkeley is ranked very high by who? An unknown organization with unknown justification, unknown reasons? The sub prime mortgage bond was also ranked very high, they caused a global economy crisis.
Like I said before, judge things using your mind, otherwise you're gambling using your perception of the world.
Berkeley student isn't smart, they're highly skilled, anybody above average can do that with the right amount of training, most students from Asia will destroy you in computer science, math, physics, anything academically related. The only exception is that you're located in America, full of resources.
Here's the simple truth, science-wise, computer science, math, anything relating to calculations and equations, Berkeley might be the top, even though it is not clear what is the top because the result of alumnis are due to the alumnis themselves, not the school.,
Social science-wise, Berkeley is a hell hole, full of idiots who know nothing except their own opinion.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ralphbernhard1757 First off, kid, she did abstain, watch the video.
And next, separation of church and state means not letting values of the church to dictate the decision of the state. As in how you can't put in religion based laws and regulation. However, the state is also a organization based on the vote. If the people voted her even with her religious belief, like I said, she is vested the power to use her judgement, her belief as a representation of the people.
You need to study long and hard before talking nonsense, the right of liberty, in this case, hers is being infringed upon. You intentionally ignored that part or what?
Her religious view is protected by the same right, specifically the right of liberty. If she doesn't write any bill dictate her religious beliefs on anybody then she is fully capable of using the right of liberty to deem what she think is correct and represent the people who voted for her using that belief.
What kind of right is to dictate LGBT nonsense on people? Forcing views, agenda upon people like what the bill is doing, is actually violating the principles.
Separation of church and state isn't just with Christian, it's also with any crazy cult. You can't make up gender and "identity" and then force it upon other people.
Go back to school, pal, think a bit, do some research.
1
-
@ralphbernhard1757 First off, kid. She abstained, that's finished with whatever roles you can loosely interpret based on politics.
If the bill had passed, the first right being restricted is the right of liberty. Liberty of believing in what she believes and the inability to promote that belief. The bill says to "promote" LGBT nonsense, that's the first nonsense, you can't force people to promote something based on nothing.
There's a major difference between discrimination and simply deeming something invalid, kid. LGBT nonsense is fact, you can't just make up gender just because you feel like it.
No science in the world ever proved or studied into what those derogatory are, if a crazy cut himself and then claim that he is only attracted to people who are equally attracted into people who have scars? You would call him what? A "scar" something. Kid,
Moron, her right is the right of religious freedom, to believe whatever she wants to believe, LGBT nonsense have the same right, you can see them screaming it at people's face. But the bill infringe on the liberty of people who don't believe in LGBT nonsense. There is no bill promoting Christian Value.
Here's a clue, kid, you're a moron who has no knowledge of what you're talking about. My advice? Go back to school.
1
-
@ralphbernhard1757 Great, that's your concern, you have the right to call Christian crazy, they have the right to call LGBT crazy. That's your right of liberty.
What infringe it is the action of using government to promote any of the two. Clear?
Bake a cake thing was ruled in favor of the baker, the Baker sell cake, the gay people ask for gay cake, you can't force that.
If a person ask for gay gasoline, as in maybe gasoline that requires special procedures, they will be refused, too.
Learn the law, kid. And arguments are opinion supported with facts and logic.
That makes my argument valid and your argument trash. Clear?
Go back to school, you already lost.
1
-
@ralphbernhard1757 Who said that we're winning? We have to keep fighting with morons lile you, otherwise we will be defeated.
There are discrimination, and laws preventing them applies to all, but distinguish between law that protects you and abusing the law to attack people.
Like I said, logic that can't be penetrated. Crazy LGBT nonsense can believe whatever they believe, but they can't force people to promote it.
You can't force a tailor to make you a wedding suit specifically embroidered with gay promoting messaging if he doesn't want to. The same way you can't force people to report gay news just because you're gay. Idiot, get out of the bubble kid.
You think it's okay to be crazy, making up 40 genders based on feeling. I don't, act according to the law, and you're violating it by promoting your opinion using governmental act. Study, kid.
1
-
1