Why are Americans so freaking sensitive

@blujay Woah, you mean grouping people under a label based on their race/sex/religious ideology can... be offensive and hurtful?...

@smile72 i never said you said that, just saying people do.

You can't blame Trump's win on the uneducated, because I feel that most people who didn't want Clinton in office voted against her, not for Trump. I don't think anybody would every vote for Trump or Clinton, only against them.

@TotalInsanity4 hearing it once or twice doesn't hurt me. Hearing it 50 times doesn't hurt me. When I am denied jobs I get pissed off. This is why I work with my uncle at the time being, I don't trust companies anymore.

@blujay You can the poorest counties of America OVERWHELMINGLY Voted for trump look at Southern Illinois that meth addicted hellhole. And look at the Chicago area EVEN DuPage and Kane voted for Clinton. AND they love money. Well....but yeah a lot of the places that did vote for Trump were less educated overall.

Huh, sounds similar to a certain "travel ban" targeting a certain group of people...

I'm giving up the ghost. You completely ignored what I said about the majority (I actually forgot to say majority but whatever) voted for who they thought was the lesser of two evils. Whether that was Clinton or Trump doesn't matter.

@blujay From what I heard a lot of people in the rural areas were very excited about Trump.And the rural areas were essential to his victory. So they are part of his majority.

Oh boy.. not homosexual issues again. Why can't people just get over with it and move on. And oh one thing: Homosexual have nothing to do with preference.. Just like heterosexual have nothing to do with preference either. Silly discussion and just move on, will you people ? Sighing!

@TotalInsanity4 in my eyes they are two different things.

Travel Ban: Somebody offers you a handful of M&M's. One is poisoned, the other is not. You deny the whole bowl because you don't want to take a chance.

White Privilege: Somebody offers you a bowl of M&M's. None were intended to be better than the rest, but some turned out to be. You get mad at the bowl because not everybody is equal.

@smile72 yeah that is true.

One BIG issue that causes though is that those in the rural areas tend not to use social media outlets such as Twitter, causing those against Trump to believe that they are the majority and the election was rigged.

I'd just like to clear up I am not for nor against Trump, just against Clinton. I believe every president since Washington has been in it for the power and the glory.

Claiming the Travelban was "Muslims" is kinda stupid too tho.
Like they wont kick you out of a plane for believing in the Quran.
You see if newspapers say it literally how it is,its boring af.
So they have to make "Muslim Travel Ban" out of "Travel ban for certain middle easter countries".
I find it questionable too,but its not a "MUSLIM travel ban".

@TotalInsanity4 Forgot to include this statement:

Travel Ban: Somebody offers you a handful of M&M's. One is poisoned, the other is not. You deny the whole bowl because you don't want to take a chance. However, by denying this bowl you may shun some of the best M&M's you could have ever had.

The travel ban is more like someone hands you millions of m&ms and a small hand full are poisoned, but every m&m that you eat is an actual human life being saved

tbh, it just makes it worse when you have to live around them. Oh how it sucks to be born in a country full of "special" folks

Thanks for the responses everyone! I'm glad I could hear your thoughts on the topic. I think it's time we should wind this down though. I don't think I can disable comments on blog posts but this has turned into mostly debate (which was bound to happen) so let's veer away from that and call it a draw. The reason being, no one is going to win.

" despite me not agreeing with this lifestyle, of course I was still called homophobic and got a lot of hate by some pansies who couldn't respect other people's thoughts."
That you would call it a lifestyle then speaks to a measure of not accepting things, or at least perhaps not understanding things. There are worse things you could be but if you are going to put such thoughts out there as a theory on how the universe should work/what you reckon some truth of the universe is, things to follow or your consideration of all the factors and the righteous path that results from that then expect such things to be torn apart and analysed.

" A) I believe every single word of the Bible is true and applicable and more important than anything so yes, it carries the same weight. There is absolutely no changing my thinking, people have tried."
Which translation and why that one? There are some rather large differences between the various ones I have seen and that could lead to fundamentally incompatible teachings -- go ten commandments and there is a rather large difference between not killing and not murdering, yet you see both in the various translations. Or if you are going for the original Hebrew and Aramaic how do you make sure your interpretations are not coloured by modern language and uses thereof*, also how do you maintain a frame of reference (camels are a repeating concept within it, usually as something of a measure of wealth, and while I have seen them in the flesh they are a rare thing I mainly see in zoos and prior to about 200 years ago many would never have seen one. You could try comparing shooting a camel to blowing up my van but I have insurance on that, and walk most places anyway)?
If you want to try deriving a philosophy from some version of the Christian bible, or indeed any religious text, then so be it, however to even attempt it without massive critical analysis and considered interpretation at every step is not something I can get to.

*I have a book here on building things from the 1940s or so. It mentions soap boxes as commonly discarded things that are useful to take apart and build into other things. I can get a soapbox today but I will have to go to an antiques shop and drop a small chunk of change. That is less than 100 years, 2000 is a rather longer period. If you reckon the bible is immune to this that is then what we call an outrageous claim and thus will need to be qualified.

Also how do you get around radio carbon dating to get to 6000 years? Seems rather fundamentally incompatible. Alas you said true rather than literal which means we get to skip the metaphor and allegory conversation.

"A few more examples you could add to OP:"
I am not sure all those are equivalently illogical, some of those would need further qualification.

tldr so how has the discussion gone so far anyway?

@jt_1258 more smoothly than I had expected, it started with some ideas and answers and those continued through the entire time. There was some questions about my stances and it eventually desolved into a political/religious debate which is fine, that's how people operate.

@TotalInsanity4 the travel ban is stupid. Islam is miss represented a lot by the media.

"into a political/religious debate which is fine"
If you are going to discuss hot political topics (at least in the US which does bear some relevance to the initial premise) and use religious text as a justification for your positions can you really expect otherwise? Such a thing is actually on topic.