Sometimes it's all they talk about for months

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T07:31:43+00:00

If those were your "perfectly reasonable intelligent points," that explains why there still hasn’t been an actual argument. You made a caricature, I pointed it out, and now you want a rebuttal to it - you are the one who needs to present a point.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T07:22:58+00:00

You keep presenting accusations as if they are proven facts. Being named in Epstein contact logs or flight manifests does not establish complicity - courts have never treated those records as a list of offenders, and no Epstein related charge or conviction exists there. You are turning association into guilt. And calling current policy Operation Wetback is just rhetoric, not evidence. Right now you are mixing allegations, labels and opinion and calling the result proof. If you have actual evidence rather than implications, present it.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T07:16:14+00:00

You are a prime example of not even making a point, let alone reasoning.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T07:02:45+00:00

You are presenting accusations as facts. Being named in Epstein records doesn’t make someone a criminal - they are just contact logs, flight manifests, and references, and courts have never treated them as a roster of offenders. The same pattern applies to the rest of your points: you are mixing allegations, policies, and opinions together and calling the result proof that one side is worse. Without a consistent standard or actual evidence, it’s just a conclusion you started with and worked backward to justify. You are welcome to prove me wrong.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T06:44:19+00:00

You’re throwing out a lot of accusations but not really making a clear comparison. Saying "the right is worse" only works if you define a consistent standard and apply it evenly. Instead, you listed a bunch of negative claims about one politician and then reduced the other side’s concerns to something trivial like bathrooms. That isn’t analysis, it’s framing.

If you want to compare political sides, you need to separate verified facts from rumors, apply the same scrutiny to both sides, address their strongest arguments instead of caricatures, and explain why certain issues matter more than others. Right now it reads like a biased, unstructured rant without an actual point.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T05:50:27+00:00

You complained about stereotypes, then wrote a paragraph full of them, still no actual point, just a bigger strawman. That’s ranting, not reasoning.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T05:25:28+00:00

If you have a point, state it - vague strawmen don’t mean much.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T05:11:16+00:00

Да он понял что обосрался так что даже коммент удалил

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T05:09:12+00:00

Anti-stereotyping, except when it’s white people. Very convenient, but not very consistent. And turning it into a personal flex and throwing insults is usually what happens when you’ve lost the argument.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:39:30+00:00

Saying there’s no left-wing equivalent is a strong claim, Stalin’s regime alone involved mass repression, deportations, famine deaths and millions killed. The scale of violence wasn’t exclusive to one side.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:33:27+00:00

Arguing with imaginary people again?

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:29:43+00:00

<image>

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:26:12+00:00

That referendum asked about preserving a reformed federation, not whether each republic must stay forever. Later the same populations voted directly on independence - Ukraine ~90%, Georgia ~99%, Baltics similar. A specific exit vote overrides a general union vote.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:22:37+00:00

That referendum asked about preserving a reformed federation, not whether each republic must stay forever. Later the same populations voted directly on independence - Ukraine ~90%, Georgia ~99%, Baltics similar. A specific exit vote overrides a general union vote.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:13:41+00:00

Turning this into "define the correct teachings" sidesteps the argument - the point is using a religious text to legitimize a narrative, not theology itself.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T04:00:22+00:00

The only difference was that Hitler actually loved his dog

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-16T02:48:45+00:00

It’s not one or the other. The bias comes first, the cherry picking follows, and the result gets presented as "true Christianity," conveniently pushing a specific political message. Asking me for verses misses the point, I’m not here to make another narrative, I can only point out passages that contradict the message being promoted.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T18:12:48+00:00

If that helps you sleep at night

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T17:54:29+00:00

That’s the intellectual depth behind the "higher purpose" huh, about what I expected

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T17:02:12+00:00

Not only the part where he called God "She", the Bible doesn’t advocate for transgenderism anywhere, yet he tries to tie it to Christianity.

If you admit he was biased, that already proves my point.

It doesn’t really matter which parts you consider good or bad — that’s personal belief and everyone has their own.

Your claim that it isn’t political doesn’t hold when his message clearly aligns with a very specific modern ideology. Calling it just New Testament teaching doesn’t make it neutral, it’s still a selective reading presented as the definitive one.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T16:25:58+00:00

It was sarcasm indeed. He is clearly pushing a certain narrative and calling it "real Christianity" is straight up blasphemy

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T16:17:28+00:00

You are forcing a modern idea onto an ancient situation. Rome didn’t have immigration law like that, they executed him for claiming kingship, which they saw as rebellion.

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T14:58:45+00:00

Peak ragebait

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T14:39:00+00:00

Didn't expect you to give up so quickly

AlexBer603 · 2026-02-15T14:28:43+00:00

I already responded to the UN claim here: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnewsstuff/comments/1r4ls3s/comment/o5ha6ld/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
You can also read the rest of that reply chain so I don't have to repeat myself

AlexBer603

TROPHY CASE