Hate Mail - Simps Never Answers Questions He Dissembles When He Doesn't Just Mumble Like A Demented Duffer

 "Denying Israel's historical right to exist . . . "

I'd ask the numbnutz to explain what an "historical right to exit" means but I know from long experience he won't answer it because that's a phrase he heard come out of some propagandist's mouth on TV or on the radio or maybe in person and liked the sound of it without considering that if history confers "rights" onto states then it would certainly have conferred one on the Third Reich, the Soviet Regime, the Hoxha regime in Albania, the Apartheid regime in South Africa, the Pol Pot regime, the Kim regime in North Korea, the American states which formed the Confederacy, etc. I hold that none of those gangster regimes had a "right to exist" and that, for example, when the United States Army destroyed the Confederate government it was doing a great thing, my parents and millions of others destroying the Third Reich was a great thing, too. 

I have pointed out to him that if "history" gives rights to nations, he should get his pasty white ass off of New York which should be given back to the ones it was stolen from, he should get his ass back to Europe. 

I've answered that years ago. 

Rights inhere to living beings by the choice of God, they do not inhere to states, corporations, organizations, the media and other entirely artificial, human made entities.  I would include religious denominations in that list of artificial, human made entities which the Roberts Republican-fascist court is giving ersatz "rights" in order to allow them to discriminate against real human beings in exactly the same way an earlier court gave porn corporations the "right" to torture and kill animals for the perverted pleasure of perverts.   The idea that the "church" of any self-appointed "pastor" or mind-washer or cargo-cult "prosperity gospel" Mammonist has natural rights that are superior to the rights of individuals to not be discriminated against for housing, employment, public accommodations, etc, is pernicious and, in the conception of "rights" that phrase promotes, true. 

I think it's false.  

Update:  It is one of the things that I learned from going online and being exposed to the unfiltered, unedited thinking of so many college credentialed snobs that few of them can think coherently, few of them are accomplished readers, certainly fewer accomplished readers of expository texts, disciplined enough to form coherent, intellectually honest arguments.  And that atheists telling the truth is somewhat more of a sometimes thing than it is for people who believe that telling lies and bearing false witness is a consequential sin.  Simps was one of the principle exhibits demonstrating that but he wasn't the only one.  If he'd never chosen to get involved with me I wouldn't have bothered to engage him in conversation.  

He proves in the comment he's too intellectually feeble to have this conversation so there's no point in continuing, it would make me feel like I was one of those assholes on the playground who made fun of the retarded kid.  I was brought up not to be those guys.  He can't get away from that playground.  

Update 2: "does (God) have a last name?" I'd say that that sounds like a joke he stole from a 1960s standup routine, a very routine routine but that would ignore the truth that literally everything he says is something he stole from a 1960s routine routine. He is incapable of original thought, a consequence of watching too much TV. 

Who is this "history" that confers rights on artificial entities? Does history have a last name?   It is a certainty that history is a human invention, the product of human imagination and documents and artifacts of human origin.  Who gave Mr. History the ability to bestow rights?  And did that entity have the right to bestow that right. 

To say that artificial entities such as states have rights makes no more sense than to ask if the pattern of paint which is this picture has a right to freedom of speech.  

  

 

So, as always, the smart-alackry of the college credentialed fails to get to the starting post.   

Moses got the answer to what God's name was, Exodus 3:14. which is a more interesting idea than I've ever heard come from any atheist at the Eschaton "Brain Trust" (they really do call themselves that).