Media Khamzat Chimaev transforms into fat Santa Claus

[Kha'bless]

Sorry I keep notifications off on forums but interesting take. I agree religious people often act like dolts and I think that’s where the eternal hell fire stuff comes from. Extremely close minded neanderthal bunch a lot of super religious people. Just the way they act. My experience as a Muslim is that we are the epitome of that and these guys think that’s going to win people over to Islam but it only pushes them away. When I was 16 I posted on some dumb forum what I can do to get forgiveness after breaking up with a girl and I mentioned she was hot in the description and this 40 year old incel stuck in a sexless marriage because he’s too afraid to explore his sexuality because of cultural influence on religion even though Islam says none of that went beserk because of that descriptor and went off about how the seas will split and the sides will divide and how I’ll be on the other side and he’ll hunt me down and will forever be expelled to hell or some shit like that. There is a huge element of borderline retardation in the Muslim community but it’s still the fastest growing religion in the world even with sub optimal media portrayal which should tell you what you need to know about its authenticity.

I see this retardation on sherdog as well tbh. Think about the number of posters who joined only to pump Khabibs tires. Like that’s seriously pathetic mate. Like the ackmed guy only posts about Muslim fighters. Okay so like are you here to vicariously live through the fact that someone else is a slave to the same ideology as you? Or are you genuinely passionate about fighting and mma? Most of these guys are clearly not. To me that stuff makes my skin crawl. Like the way a lot of Muslims act is frankly anti social as fuck and Khabib fandom only highlights it. There’s a video on YouTube of khabib walking by Weili and saying hi and you have hundreds of Muslims in the comment like “see! He is respectful to woman! What a hero!” Like they have never seen someone interact with someone. The way Muslims culturally act isn’t even consistent with the teachings of Islam. For example anytime Khabib wins they make up stuff about “oh if Allah with you no one can beat you.” “He keeps winning because he is a great Muslim.” “Allah is fighting with him.” Etc. This is all nonsense. You cannot assume God’s intentions. God himself has said that religion probably won’t beat hard work and worldly influences in this world but will in the here after or something with that interpretation don’t quote me. He keeps winning because he’s pretty much been a trained soldier since the age of 3 when his competition was watching sponge bob and eating Nesquik. Yes if God doesn’t want him to win he won’t win but he’ll let due process generally play out. This kind of hyperbole only turns people away from religion. Especially because you’re saying someone is winning at a haraam activity because Allah is with him. It’s like playing poker for money and saying see I won because I pray 5x a day. No you won in a haraam activity because you are good at it and got lucky perhaps. Like is Allah only focused on MMA right now? Now that Khabib is retired will Allah fully divert his sports attention to ensure that Egypt wins the next FIFA World Cup? Is it cyclical? Thee kind of hyperbolic ways of life only turn people away from religion not towards and does not foster discussion.

but see the thing is I fit in nowhere and people can’t handle that. A radical would read my post and say I’m a suck up. But if I’m a suck up why am I so vehemently against western influence in the Middle East and abroad in general? That shit is REAL authentic white privilege.

the problem with people is they are only archetypes and they are emotionally immature and lazy as fuck. For example you’ll rarely meet a non white person who won’t go along with the notion that they are somehow oppressed because it is convenient. You have Jewish kids saying they’re hated, Muslims saying they’re oppressed, blacks saying they’re oppressed. There’s no intellectual sophistication. It’s just taking what’s there for you what’s convenient for you and running with it. That’s why they don’t like people like me and people like me don’t fit in anywhere.

for example any time I call a khabib nut hugger out they’re immediate response is you probably are not Muslim, you’re trolling, or you’re a suck up.
It’s just beyond their intellectual capacity to realize that a person can independently corroborate their view points without blindly staying on one corner of the spectrum because it’s convenient. They can’t tolerate that someone is not an archetype. Like fuck sakes we don’t live in tribes anymore but with the way people act and think (or refuse to) we might as well. People like me end up adapting by just not declaring their views on any such topic in public and just not joining a crew per se but being open to tolerable people.

You are the worst faker I've ever seen. May as well rename your username to 'Pretending to be a Muslim'.

 

[Mma23]

You are the worst faker I've ever seen. May as well rename your username to 'Pretending to be a Muslim'.

My point

 

[Fossor]

Well that just shows youn don't know what intelligence means.

Yeah, unlike people who are banging their heads, while talking to imaginary entities in the skies

 

[Lemmy Caution]

The Soviets, Maoists and Nazis were also secular. I dont think you can objectively say "secularism is objectively better" because it is also responsible for mass violence and persecution.

There's secularism of the American tradition (on paper) that means 'freedom of religion', then there's secularism of the French tradition which is more 'suppression of religion'. That's what they did following the French Revolution, they went on a Reign of Terror and actively killed Catholic clergy and invented their own religion and calendar, which eventually fell away and Napoleon came to power.

The French Revolution was a giant failure; not only did they they replace one Absolute monarchy with another Absolute monarchy, but after Napoleon's house fell they literally brought back the the old monarchy to replace it. The French Revolution is what gave birth to the Fascist and Communist lines of thought. Communism itself being named after the Paris Commune, and Fascism being born out of the right-wing current of Syndicalism.

Secularism, Communism, Socialism, Democracy, Liberalism are all buzzwords with no clear meaning or consistency.

The only thing I respect is Republicanism, specifically Constitutional Republicanism, because it has some clear meaning behind it. And as long as that Constitution is well-thought out and applicable, you can function properly and relatively-fairly whether that's the U.S. or Iran.

The reason why Europe isn't a complete warzone or shithole like its been for most of history is not because they're "liberal democracies" like people keep parroting but because they have a constitution that allows and restricts certain freedoms. Otherwise democracy only leads to one of two things demagoguery** or gynocracy. Still, there are holes in the Western system, which is why its running towards gynocracy and the air of domestic demagoguery is also in the air (Frankly, foreign-policy based demagoguery is still in full-swing). I give it about a century before this Democratic delusion collapses. The philosophers of Greek antiquity up until the US founding fathers wrote extensively against the problems of "democracy" or mob rule.

**See several states in post-partition Africa, the Balkans, South Asia and Myanmar. Democracy only enabled ethnic tribalism and demagoguery.

The Nazis were the very opposite of secular.

The US had its own Reign of Terror, called slavery.

As for Napoleon, he saved the Republic.

The ideas that underpin our modern world—meritocracy, equality before the law, property rights, religious toleration, modern secular education, sound finances, and so on—were championed, consolidated, codified and geographically extended by Napoleon. To them he added a rational and efficient local administration, an end to rural banditry, the encouragement of science and the arts, the abolition of feudalism and the greatest codification of laws since the fall of the Roman Empire.[277]

Napoleon directly overthrew remnants of feudalism in much of western Continental Europe. He liberalized property laws, ended seigneurial dues, abolished the guild of merchants and craftsmen to facilitate entrepreneurship, legalized divorce, closed the Jewish ghettos and made Jews equal to everyone else. The Inquisition ended as did the Holy Roman Empire. The power of church courts and religious authority was sharply reduced and equality under the law was proclaimed for all men.[278]

Secularism has a very precise meaning, if for no other reason than "things follow." Once you take out God, everything follows from that. Because the secularist cannot appeal to God, he has to appeal to something else. Whereas the Christian would argue that God has endowed man with rights and value, the secular argument is agency. Our ability to think and act are what give us rights and value.

Secularism isn't anti-religion as such. It just does not attribute religion any value. Arguments from religion, tradition, history, culture, etc. are logical fallacies to a secularist.

China is a constitutional republic. "Constitutional republic" is the very definition of lacking meaning. If the constitution is whack, it follows... Republic only means that there's no hereditary throne. The Scandinavian countries meet that criterion despite being "kingdoms." They are nominally kingdoms, just like the US has been nominally secular since 1776. I'm all for "republic," but if you don't understand the difference between the US and Scandinavia--revolution vs. evolution--then you know nothing. It's the same about everything. You can know everything about the English language and yet know nothing about language. You can know everything about Christianity and know nothing about religion. And that seems pretty clear to me. You are a know-nothing blowhard.

The social democracy of Europe is the very thing that keeps it from being a shithole. The problems we see in Europe today is the direct result of our oil wars in the Middle East. Two decades of wars to enrich the 1%. But that's Europe. It always ends up screwing itself. WWI decimated Europe. WWII decimated Europe. While the Iraq War did not decimate Europe, it created the largest demographic shift in Europe since WWII. You don't have to tell me Europeans are idiots.

"gynocracy"

This disqualifies you from adult conversation. But being a nice guy, I pretend you never wrote it.

I should take the word of slavers (Greek antiquity and the US founding fathers) on democracy?

Democracy is the opposite of mob rule. Mob rule you had in the American slave states (if not in pre-Civil Rights US), Nazi Germany, South Africa under Apartheid. Why are you trying to equate democracy with those things? What's your end game?

 

[depassage222]

STFU loser your avatar is evil kill people sin, Santa Claus is good guy and make people happy. Neither God or Jesus Christ will not be against that you Musliman hater cry baby

The origin of Santa Claus and Christmas - Pagan Origin with no root to Christianity

MUST WATCH

 

[ZOD66]

The origin of Santa Claus and Christmas - Pagan Origin with no root to Christianity

MUST WATCH

[

 

[depassage222]

[

references are given, you can do your homework ... But it's definitely true

Wikipedia:
Introduction of the festival
Christmas does not appear on the lists of festivals given by the early Christian writers Irenaeus and Tertullian.[3] Origen and Arnobius both fault the pagans for celebrating birthdays, which suggests that Christmas was not celebrated in their time.[52] Arnobius wrote after AD 297. The Chronograph of 354 records that a Christmas celebration took place in Rome in 336, eight days before the calends of January

 

[ZOD66]

references are given, you can do your homework ... But it's definitely true

Wikipedia:
Introduction of the festival
Christmas does not appear on the lists of festivals given by the early Christian writers Irenaeus and Tertullian.[3] Origen and Arnobius both fault the pagans for celebrating birthdays, which suggests that Christmas was not celebrated in their time.[52] Arnobius wrote after AD 297. The Chronograph of 354 records that a Christmas celebration took place in Rome in 336, eight days before the calends of January

Dude Christmas is good, childrens get toys, God love when people is happy even if devil is start all this, he lost, good won in the end. You can go to hell trying to start fight and telling people that, keep it for yourself