The Left Mocks Pence For Praying With Coronavirus Task Force

Then on Sunday, a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine tweeted out a photo of Pence and his coronavirus task force in a moment of prayer, writing: "Mike Pence and his coronavirus emergency team praying for a solution. We are so screwed." They are not only praying for a solution of course, but any prayer at all is too much for leftists.



https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2020/03/02/the-left-mocks-pence-for-praying-n2562641



Today’s intolerant secular progressive left totally ignores our history of national leaders praying when there’s some big issue going on. Todays secularists would have said “we’re screwed” had they listened to FDR’s nationally broadcast prayer on D-day. The prayer in the seeded articles photo has plenty of historical precedents.

 

When will the secular progressive left accept the fact that many Americans particularly from the Heartland and south are Christians and still believe in and pray to God.

 

Action is preferred from government officials and when that is slow any other activity undertaken will be criticized.

Rightwing outrage media is designed to direct attention away and in this case the lagging response to the virus.

 

Fake outrage.

 

Why do I get the feeling that if it had been a D up there praying or someone from some other religion then either A: not one single peep would have been heard about this or B: they would have been praised for being compassionate?

 

Lagging response? According to who? Cry wolf liberals?

 

I agree fake outrage by Thomas Chatterton William's from the NYT Magazine.

 

In other words: (∃x)(Dx v Rx)⊃ (∃x) (~Px v Cx)

D = D is praying
R = Some one from another religion
P = Some one makes a peep
C = Some one is praised as compassionate
(∃x) = The is at least one member of the set x
~ = Not
v = either, or
⊃ = If, then
* = and

But that would mean…

1. (Dx v Rx)⊃ (~Px v Cx)

2. ~(~Px v Cx)⊃ ~(Dx v Rx) 1, Transpostion

3. (~~Px * ~Cx) ⊃ (~Dx * ~Rx) 2, DeMorgan Theorem

4. (Px * ~Cx) ⊃ (~Dx * ~Rx) 3, Double negation
_________________________________
5. Therefore: ~(Px * ~Cx) v (~Dx * ~Rx) 4, Implication

“It is not the case there is a single peep from someone, and no one gets compassionate praise, or that D is not praying and no one from another religion was praying.”

Is that true?

 

I suck at math.

 

I use to be good at math but now my head hurts after that.

 

Do you accept that some Americans don’t though? I wonder if any of the people in that picture are in that group but felt obliged to go along with it at fear of losing their jobs? There are a lot of Jewish people in government and a growing number of Muslims (though probably not in the current administration). Put yourself in their shoes; How would you feel if your boss lead your team in a Muslim or Jewish prayer at a meeting and you were expected to join in (especially if you were being photographed for a press release at the time)?

 

Anyone has the right to believe what they want. And everyone else has the right to find it f'ing ridiculous.
When will christians accept that? And this is coming from someone raised in the catholic church and went to catholic grade school.

 

I don't have to put myself in their shoes. As someone who is against organized religion I've been there and done that. And out of respect I would bow my head and close my eyes.

In any group setting where there is a prayer there is usually just one person saying the prayer and the rest stay silent to either listen or say their own prayer or repeat what was said, usually to themselves. You let the person say the prayer and then go about your business. You don't have to actually pray. But it doesn't hurt to be respectful towards those that do. Doesn't matter if its Hindu, Islam, Christianity or any other religion.

 

Matthew 10:22

These people doing this do so strictly to offend. If you don't feed them they will starve.

 

I don't see anyone here saying that others can't find it ridiculous. And while you have the Right to believe what you want, and express what you want, others that disagree with you have the same Rights. This thread wasn't created in a vacuum. It was created in response to someone that was derisive about Pence leading a prayer. So while people have every Right to find it ridiculous, others have the Right to comment on those peoples assertion when it comes out of no where for no reason other than to be an ass. Like Thomas Chatterton Williams tweet did.

So, XXJefferson#51 was quite a legitimate response. Yours on the other hand does nothing but imply defense of someone being an ass. If that is what you want to be known for then by all means continue defending an ass.

3....2.....1.....

 

You mean beside the OP complaining that the left is mocking those praying???
And you are contradicting yourself. In one breath you say people do have a right to find it ridiculous but then in another say that people mocking those who pray are an ass.

 

1: Complaining that the left is mocking those praying isn't telling anyone that they cannot find it ridiculous.

2: I would only be contradicting myself if I wouldn't defend the Right to be an ass. Guess, what... I do. That doesn't mean that those being an ass can't be criticized for being an ass. If someone is going to be an ass they have every Right to, but then they'd better expect push back. It's a two way street ECA. Not just one.

 

1: Yes it is
2: Spin it any way you need to

 

So disagreeing with you is telling you to stop? Sorry, that's not how it works.

It would only be spin if it wasn't true. But since it is true then its not spin. You are of course quite free to disagree with me. I won't take it as you telling me that I can't say it. I'll take it as its meant...a disagreement.

 

I never said disagreeing is telling someone to stop. Not sure where you got that idea

 

The OP disagrees with what the left did. You called it "complaining".

 

Correct....I called it "complaining". 100% true. But nowhere did I say anything about stopping it

 

The left is really getting nervous and looking for things to attack on now...they expected a lot more sick and dead Americans by now to blame Trump for...

 

Implying that someone is saying that others can't find it ridiculous.

The bold part there is what you bolded in your response to me when you said....

Here I respond to each separate point you made by separating them and numbering them.

You reply doing the same thing.

As you can see you disagreed with me and said "yes it is". In other words with all context considered you are saying exactly what I questioned you on. If however you did not mean this then you did a very piss poor job of communicating what it is exactly that you wanted to communicate.

 

And vice versa.