Bill Maher on feminsim

[Austin]

x64cy3Bcr98

[Agrippa]

The half-Jewish Maher is a good one, his "documentary" about religious idiocies, Religulous (2008):
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/

He's absolutely right about many things and I like his humour generally speaking.

Actually, what he describes is to large degree the results of Cultural Marxism:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17073

And another recent thread relates to it too:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16810

[Austin]

What he says negative about marriage I actually don't believe really. I see and have witnessed marriages complete people not ruin them, but he has some good points on feminism.


My real curiosity is what will happen to feminism when white European/European descent males are no longer dominant in the world? Feminism is ironically dependent on white males for its continuation seeing as if they lose power to the illiberal races and cultures of the world then feminism will come to a rather brutish, crashing end.

White feminists need white males and their liberal created world in order for feminism to exist and prosper. If white males lose influence, who will propagate the open, liberal, just society that birthed feminism? The Arabs? The super Catholic Latinos/Mexicans? The illiberal simpleton blacks? All those males are extremely by default anti-feminism or just simply anti-women rights to begin with.

The sad truth is as white males lose dominance in this world, it is the white liberally oriented female who is going to have the greatest and hardest, most unforgiving fall.

I wonder what Arabs/Muslims will do with feminism in Europe? I wonder what the anti-women working, pregnant by 16 Mexican Catholics will do with feminism in America? Or the blacks in America who are renowned for their superb treatment of women....? Or the hierarchical Asians? Will they be fosters of feminism like their white male counterparts? Or will they cast women back a few hundred years?

[Agrippa]

Yes, what he said about marriage was, with the exception of some good jokes, the weakest part from the argumentative point of view, but obviously easy to exploit and best accepted by the audience probably.

[blan]

[QUOTE=Agrippa;238875]The half-Jewish Maher is a good one, his "documentary" about religious idiocies, Religulous (2008):
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/

yes he often makes good points but dont fool yourself that he is on the side of whites or white culture.
i ask you in his documentary how often did he attack the jewish faith?? even once? from what i heard it was focused almost entirely on bashing the christians. did he dare tear the talmud apart and expose the teachings within it?

[Agrippa]

[QUOTE=Agrippa;238875]The half-Jewish Maher is a good one, his "documentary" about religious idiocies, Religulous (2008):
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0815241/

yes he often makes good points but dont fool yourself that he is on the side of whites or white culture.
i ask you in his documentary how often did he attack the jewish faith?? even once? from what i heard it was focused almost entirely on bashing the christians. did he dare tear the talmud apart and expose the teachings within it?

He was probably less aggressive, but actually he brought a Jew to say something which is absolutely essential to understand all what Judaism about, namely "the loophole story".

They have absurd, ancient rules with their "contract with god", but even god they cheat and say, if you find a loophole for a rule, so that you can follow the rule literally, good knows everything and is almighty, he himself made up this loophole, so that you can use it when you need it.

This is absolutely crucial, because that way, by just being upraised in such a way, searching for "loopholes" all the time - they even discuss that in their teachings and train it, every young has to work on the "interpretations of the rules".

Thats a perfect education for things like "business, politics and legal system". Our whole legal system now is based on the principle of literally fits and not going by sense and meaning to a large degree.

That was part of his documentary and it was a good part of it.

Yet it's true he did a lot about Christians, but seriously, looking at those Christians he found, that was an easy task, because they are dumb as ....

Really, if you see Christianity, especially that kind of American Christians from the Calvinist sects primarily, you can just ask yourself what's wrong with the people and he DID GOOD SO, EVEN FOR US, because those do just harm to all Europeans and are a problem case, nothing else.

So he worked on various religious groups and if you watch carefully, you can find something about every monotheistic religion.

Probably he was somewhat softer about the Jews, that's right, but even with them he went further on than what you usually see in the mass media, so thumbs up overall for this peace of work.

Also I agree that he can be considered what I call a "rational Leftist", but Leftist nevertheless, yet this rational aspects are good and useful and I like them for the sake of it and easy communication.

There are not too many people from anywhere I can agree upon in every respect and talking about comediens and film makers, a limited proportion is at least more than what I can say about many others.

Point is, he was right with his "documentary" and this show, rest, well, nobody is beyond criticism and because of his attitude in other fields I mentioned deliberately that he is a half-Jew, just so that people can register that aspect too.

Here a video which makes his position on Zionism clear (somewhat visible in Religulous too):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrm3VDE2p2Y&feature=player_embedded

As I said, think for yourself and there are not too many people out there, in the public media, which make anything valuable or good to watch - even real fun to watch, so I take what I get, but always keep eyes open.

And it's always a good thing, beside the fun, especially if talking to people which are not right wing, if you can refer to somebody like Bill Maher or George Carlin for a legitimate but humorous criticism.

[blan]

Yet it's true he did a lot about Christians, but seriously, looking at those Christians he found, that was an easy task, because they are dumb as ....


yes he talked to your run of the mill evangelical but he did not talk to serious intelligent theologians, like it or not christianity has intelligent people in its fold. people like c.s. lewis were theologians that rarely lost debates against atheists, in fact i dont recall a time c.s. lewis lost a debate based on theology.

[Agrippa]

yes he talked to your run of the mill evangelical but he did not talk to serious intelligent theologians

He did, three scientists - two of them Catholics which are not ideological, strong believing Christians.

Ideological - stronger believer Christians are as a rule not to be taken serious in many fields, not just the theolotical in the narrower sense.

That's why it is much easier to find manipulated Evangelicals which are so dumb than others, because its insanity, not even European Christian believes, but an old Testament Fetishism of Calvinist sects or Neo-Christian back to the roots (Uneuropean) Christianity...

Yes there are intelligent ones, but not important ones for the mass of the Evangelicals in the USA...

[blan]

Yes there are intelligent ones, but not important ones for the mass of the Evangelicals in the USA...[/QUOTE]

i agree with you and i meet so many christians cheifly from the usa that are insane with stupidity, i just dont like people saying that the whole religon and history and culture of christianity is as some nonsense evangelical types teach,

one point i have to make is i notice people who attack christianity like mr maher are very quick to attack christians but very very slow to say anything about islam, did he even mention islam or is he a nut less coward like most people in the media that attack people of faith,
its open season on christians but islam.....

[Austin]

I dislike it as well that the left focuses on Christianity alone, it is obvious they do it out of fear and the fact that it is their heritage hence easier to attack than another religion.

Maher has attacked Islam though but he doesn't attack it like he does Christianity, it is also true he leaves Judaism alone.

[Agrippa]

i agree with you and i meet so many christians cheifly from the usa that are insane with stupidity, i just dont like people saying that the whole religon and history and culture of christianity is as some nonsense evangelical types teach,

one point i have to make is i notice people who attack christianity like mr maher are very quick to attack christians but very very slow to say anything about islam, did he even mention islam or is he a nut less coward like most people in the media that attack people of faith,
its open season on christians but islam.....

He argued against various Christian groups, but primarily Evangelicals, Catholics got much better away, so did Lutherans in the end, so the right ones were hit the hardest.

Also he worked on Islam, he just had the problem they were "less open" with their insanities than the Christians and seriously, they are more reasonable and don't make up such a good target as Christians, he also did work on the Jews, like mentioned and the Mormons, as well as other small sects...

Obviously, it can't be taken too seriously, but you just have to watch the people, of which some were rather exploited and tricked into something, yet they mostly spoke about things like they usually did, Maher just brought them to do it. I felt most sorry with one Muslim in the Mosque, because he was very friendly and fairly reasonable.

Evangelical Christians are just ... you can play them out much easier than others, that's a fact, because others try to be reasonable, at least in certain respects, while they as a rule are like maniacs.

But overall, you have to watch it by yourself to get the picture...