Santorum or Khameini? Can you tell the difference?

[Berzerker]

That's the point of the OP, isn't it?

yes, and its a meaningless point

thats my point

"The good of society must prevail over the good of the individual" - Benito Mussolini

Thats from a fascist and many people agree with him without supporting his policies... See how that works?

 

[Traitorfish]

Yes, surely there was no intention of making Sanitorium look bad...
You don't have to play games to do that though.

Santorum? I thought this was a criticism of Khameini...

"The good of society must prevail over the good of the individual" - Benito Mussolini

Thats from a fascist and many people agree with him without supporting his policies... See how that works?

Did Mussolini actually say that? It honestly doesn't sound like him. Fascist theory doesn't have much time for "society", which they essentially regard as an extension of the state. It would be a very out of character comment for him to make.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

Yes, surely there was no intention of making Sanitorium look bad...
You don't have to play games to do that though.

If I wanted to make Santorum look bad, I wouldn't pick this route. I'd probably post the video of him saying JFK makes him want to puke. Much worse to me than making pseudo-theocratic and/or easily confused statements.

 

[Antilogic]

Too true - I managed to get 6/8 correct by looking at the style of speech. Khameini has a more measured, almost formal tone, as opposed to Santorum's "regular-guy" style. When Santorum switched up his style in 7, it threw me for a loop, and 8 is just weird for Khameini to say.

This is how I approached it, and was pretty successful.

I also missed where people were explicitly being killed based on their religious beliefs in the OP besides the typical rhetorical hyperbole, and if any of the conservative trio want to point that out for me, I'd be eternally grateful.

 

[say1988]

Careful. That applies to many other religions you might not be aware of. Such as global warming alarmism, anti-nuclear activism, and both sides of the abortion debate.

A lot of groups are open about wanting to impose their beliefs on others (the fact that not all of them have to do with worshipping an actual God, has nothing to do with it).

None of those are religions. And of course are going to care about any politician's beliefs on those topics.

If a politician makes religion part of his campaign (and Santorum certainly has) it is fair game, and people shouldn't be complaining about others discussing his religion.

 

[Ajidica]

I got just about all of them, #2 was a dead giveaway for Khameini. ( I thought Khomeini had said it, but I guess I was wrong).
At least the fundies in Iran can write in a way that doesn't make me wince.

 

[aelf]

Careful. That applies to many other religions you might not be aware of. Such as global warming alarmism, anti-nuclear activism, and both sides of the abortion debate.

Bwahahahaha!

 

[ParkCungHee]

Did Mussolini actually say that? It honestly doesn't sound like him. Fascist theory doesn't have much time for "society", which they essentially regard as an extension of the state. It would be a very out of character comment for him to make.

No, in Fascist theory the State (ideally) proceeds organically from society. They really weren't fans of the state in and of itself. That would have created all kinds of ideological problems vis a vis the Risorgimento. Heck, if they valued the state that much, they wouldn't have threatened it with civil war!

The key difference between Fascist and liberal thought is that they don't conceive of society as merely a sum total of a large number of individuals. It's a idealist conception of society as existing without individuals. Italians don't make Italy, Italy makes Italians.

From there, the purpose of the state is to embody the will of this nation, a kind of General Will. They certainly accounted for states not embodying this General Will.

 

[Antilogic]

"The good of society must prevail over the good of the individual" - Benito Mussolini

Did Mussolini actually say that? It honestly doesn't sound like him. Fascist theory doesn't have much time for "society", which they essentially regard as an extension of the state. It would be a very out of character comment for him to make.

Missed this when I made my post. I thought it was Spock.

 

[BasketCase]

None of those are religions.

Doesn't matter. I oppose all of them for the same reason I oppose religious zealotry. It's a question of why religious zealotry is bad. Religious zealots want you to convert for no good reason. It's all an act of faith. And it turns out that a lot of political factions here in the U.S. (including the ones I listed earlier) do exactly that. It doesn't matter that "they're not religions". They all practice the same extremely dangerous form of zealotry.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

You don't seem to oppose the cult of wilful ignorance though, which seems to have taken root in the US, big time.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yes, surely there was no intention of making Sanitorium look bad...

Intentional typo?

 

[say1988]

Doesn't matter. I oppose all of them for the same reason I oppose religious zealotry. It's a question of why religious zealotry is bad. Religious zealots want you to convert for no good reason. It's all an act of faith. And it turns out that a lot of political factions here in the U.S. (including the ones I listed earlier) do exactly that. It doesn't matter that "they're not religions". They all practice the same extremely dangerous form of zealotry.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with anything that was said.

I pointed out a factual inaccuracy in your post and then responded to it based on the discussion you got involved in.

The question was why people care about politicians' religious beliefs. It is because individuals like Santorum openly want to implement their religious beliefs into law, so people should care about them.

 

[BasketCase]

And I make no distinction between religious zealotry and any other form of zealotry. Remove all instances of the word "religious" from your post and it's perfect.

 

[say1988]

Zealotry has absolutely nothing to do with it. And I said, if any politician makes any topic (be it religion or anything else) part of their campaign it is fair game.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Yes, surely there was no intention of making Sanitorium look bad...

Maybe it was made to make Iran's supreme ruler look reasonable.



I missed #7. I assumed a classical reference would only come from a snobby college educated liberal.

 

[kochman]

Intentional typo?

Yes... intentional.

 

[BasketCase]

Zealotry has absolutely nothing to do with it. And I said, if any politician makes any topic (be it religion or anything else) part of their campaign it is fair game.

Nope. Some topics are none of our business.

If a politician proposes, say, banning possession of marijuana, I don't care if he does it for religious reasons. Now, if he proposed the DEATH PENALTY for marijuana (does happen in some parts of the world)? That would be really, really wrong. But, again, whether or not the proposer does it for religious reasons has nothing to do with it.

Whatever laws Santorum is proposing, his personal religion is none of our beeswax. BUT--if Santorum intends to convert all American citizens to Christianity? Not happening.

 

[say1988]

First, Santorum constantly brings up his religious beliefs as a reason people should vote for him. It is completely fair to use his own campaign against him. This isn`t evil Liberals forcing his religion into the election, he has chosen it as part of his campaign.

Second, he has openly said his policies will be guided by his religious beliefs. Therefore they establish a basis of what policies he intends to pursue. Clearly of concern to the electorate.

 

[Abegweit]

The big difference being, Santorum chooses to live over here, in the United States, where the law says you can't kill somebody just for being the wrong religion.

What the "law" claims and what the State scumbags actually do are two very different things. Yes, they kill.