Baal was one of the ancient Canaanite gods, one of those deities worshipped as king of the world, dying and resurrecting every year, also was god of storms, fertility and cattle.
His name got somehow twisted into an evil god because of ancient Hebrews who smeared him incessantly in the Bible since it was also one of the main gods of hellenistic Seleucid Empire and Selucids were forcing Jews to woship him, causing tons of religious tensions - and they were doing it in the time that significant parts of Bible got compiled so naturally the current issues took main place in those.
Moloch is also Canaanite god, but it’s kinda discussable if it was even a separate god or just other title of the same god (Moloch is just Melek which means “king”, while Baal means “lord”). Also got smeared in Bible and later christian theology for the sacrifice of newborns. And while that practice is confirmed, it’s still unclear if it’s even tied to Moloch/Baal and most probably the sacrifices werent alive but the babies that were stillborn or died soon after birth, since newborn mortality in those time was huge.
In short, it’s incredibly convoluted part of ancient mythology with tons of missing context, but the Elder Scrolls daedric prince Molag Bal is a combination of both names in fully biblical sense since as the god of rape, cruelty and domination he’s probably the most evil and nasty of all daedras (which is an achievement since the competition in evil and nastiness is harsh there).
So you don’t care about actually helping anyone. Because if you’re sitting there and trying to say that no one is better off with the democrats than the republicans, it’s not wonder you’re on lemmygrad. You’re either 12, or have the critical thinking skills of a 12 year old.
trying to say that no one is better off with the democrats than the republicans
Lemmygrad’s position is not that no one is better off under Democrats than Republicans. Instead, our position is that when it counts (helping the working class), both parties are united in giving workers the middle finger.
Not to defend Dems by any means, but there are some groups (e.g. our trans comrades) who are targeted by reactionary policies by Republicans that Democrats aren’t doing
Okay but the US is 4% of the world’s population. There’s millions more who don’t get to be trans because they get killed by the USA. In the past two decades alone is estimated (by US bodies) that they’ve killed 4.5 million people and displaced tens of millions more. It makes no difference who is in power, red or blue. In fact some argue that the blue are the more warmongering of the two.
When you support them, you enable them. This is what people mean about culture wars and identity politics. Trans issues are miniscule and have an inordinate focus because they don’t threaten anything. People arguing about them does the square root of zero to affect the status quo of a vastly greater evil. They steer discussions away from real things and into LGBTQ stuff.
I don’t want you to misinterpret me. I do agree with you. Certainly, the U.S.’ impact is unacceptable regardless of who is in power.
Certainly, the best thing a US President could ever do is ensure that the U.S. will not live to see another day.
The truth is though, I might be a citizen and all, but no matter what I do, I don’t get a say in voting for someone other than the warmongers. I don’t get to vote for the communists, and even if I did, anyone who would propose a serious threat would be eliminated in some fashion.
Anyways, it’s getting late, but there are people for whom the tiny marginal difference between ordinary liberal and hyper-reactionary liberal is a big deal. To say the tiny marginal difference affects “no one” isn’t correct, although it may very well be close to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
Does it make any difference to the millions of people bombed abroad whether the bombers supported trans rights? Of course not, and we both know that.
What don’t you get? You’re saying both sides are the same even though that’s just factually untrue
TIL the Ba’als from Bravely Second were based on something
Baal’s name reminds me of Molag Bal from The Elder Scrolls
Baal was one of the ancient Canaanite gods, one of those deities worshipped as king of the world, dying and resurrecting every year, also was god of storms, fertility and cattle.
His name got somehow twisted into an evil god because of ancient Hebrews who smeared him incessantly in the Bible since it was also one of the main gods of hellenistic Seleucid Empire and Selucids were forcing Jews to woship him, causing tons of religious tensions - and they were doing it in the time that significant parts of Bible got compiled so naturally the current issues took main place in those.
Moloch is also Canaanite god, but it’s kinda discussable if it was even a separate god or just other title of the same god (Moloch is just Melek which means “king”, while Baal means “lord”). Also got smeared in Bible and later christian theology for the sacrifice of newborns. And while that practice is confirmed, it’s still unclear if it’s even tied to Moloch/Baal and most probably the sacrifices werent alive but the babies that were stillborn or died soon after birth, since newborn mortality in those time was huge.
In short, it’s incredibly convoluted part of ancient mythology with tons of missing context, but the Elder Scrolls daedric prince Molag Bal is a combination of both names in fully biblical sense since as the god of rape, cruelty and domination he’s probably the most evil and nasty of all daedras (which is an achievement since the competition in evil and nastiness is harsh there).
It’s likely the other way around. Molag Bal - Moloch Baal. “Baal” just means “lord” or “master”
So you don’t care about actually helping anyone. Because if you’re sitting there and trying to say that no one is better off with the democrats than the republicans, it’s not wonder you’re on lemmygrad. You’re either 12, or have the critical thinking skills of a 12 year old.
Lemmygrad’s position is not that no one is better off under Democrats than Republicans. Instead, our position is that when it counts (helping the working class), both parties are united in giving workers the middle finger.
Tell your comrades that.
How has it helped anyone to have had Jim Crow Joe in power? Any examples at all?
Not to defend Dems by any means, but there are some groups (e.g. our trans comrades) who are targeted by reactionary policies by Republicans that Democrats aren’t doing
Okay but the US is 4% of the world’s population. There’s millions more who don’t get to be trans because they get killed by the USA. In the past two decades alone is estimated (by US bodies) that they’ve killed 4.5 million people and displaced tens of millions more. It makes no difference who is in power, red or blue. In fact some argue that the blue are the more warmongering of the two. When you support them, you enable them. This is what people mean about culture wars and identity politics. Trans issues are miniscule and have an inordinate focus because they don’t threaten anything. People arguing about them does the square root of zero to affect the status quo of a vastly greater evil. They steer discussions away from real things and into LGBTQ stuff.
I don’t want you to misinterpret me. I do agree with you. Certainly, the U.S.’ impact is unacceptable regardless of who is in power.
Certainly, the best thing a US President could ever do is ensure that the U.S. will not live to see another day.
The truth is though, I might be a citizen and all, but no matter what I do, I don’t get a say in voting for someone other than the warmongers. I don’t get to vote for the communists, and even if I did, anyone who would propose a serious threat would be eliminated in some fashion.
Anyways, it’s getting late, but there are people for whom the tiny marginal difference between ordinary liberal and hyper-reactionary liberal is a big deal. To say the tiny marginal difference affects “no one” isn’t correct, although it may very well be close to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
Does it make any difference to the millions of people bombed abroad whether the bombers supported trans rights? Of course not, and we both know that.
Okay I get it but be wary of falling into the trap of actually supporting them and knee jerking when someone criticise them etc.
Both sides are bourgeois.