Trumpites: Boycott Star Wars!

No.

But it is an element.

You could interview everyone who knows me personally.

That means absolutely nothing. You become a "good Christian man" with deeds, not scraps of paper, and your thoughts presented on this board speak volumes.

If "scraps of paper mean nothing" then neither do "thoughts".

Please explain your reasoning. Your conclusion certainly does not follow on the basis of obvious logic.

It would be hilarious, but also totally unwarranted and an incredibly bad precedent.

That's 'precedent', not 'President'. They are easily confused once you've said both 'incredibly' and 'bad', so I thought I'd clarify.

"scraps of paper" are at least hard evidence of something. Thoughts, even those openly expressed are still very insubstantial.

And yet yours are giving me one hell of a headache right now.

You're giving "thoughts" more importance than they deserve.

IIRC, President Truman, while president once threatened with bodily harm a reviewer that he thought insulted his daughter and speculated (ON PAPER) about "Getting some atomic bombs, dropping one on Stalin, another on Mao".

Yet I don't think anyone either at that time or today considers Harry Truman unstable or a loose cannon.

So from now on, when you preface a post with "I thought", we can disregard what ever you're stating since they mean nothing.

There's already a precedent for banning users for racist language, abusive language, or harassing or encouraging the harassment of other users. It's not just nobodies or conservatives either. Azealea Banks (a rapper) got banned from Twitter for calling a member of One Direction a "faggot" and "curry scented bitch."

Why should Trump be exempt from the same policies?

You are confusing a thing, and what is claimed -- perhaps erroneously -- to be the physical manifestation of that thing. Thoughts are reality. Written pieces of paper are representations of what are supposed to be thoughts, but may be errors or even downright lies.

Thus, your reasoning is totally faulty. Being a "good Christian man" is entirely based on thoughts, because the nature of the gospel is to be delivered (purified, transformed) from all traces of sin. That means changing our thoughts. ("Be transformed by the renewing of your mind" is the way Paul puts it in Romans 12:1. Or, if you prefer the statements of Jesus, see Matthew 12:34-37.) If the transformation of one's thoughts, so that there is no longer any trace of sin in one's mindset, is not the goal a person has accepted, then that person has not accepted the gospel of Jesus Christ, but only some form of Christian religion.

If your goal is to be entirely delivered from sin (which, in the context of Jesus' message, means all traces of lack of consideration or caring for others, including foreigners and those who "aren't nice to us"), then that will be demonstrated by the thoughts you express. If the thoughts you express continue to reveal racism, pride, a feeling of superiority, a desire to hurt those you consider to be "bad people," then your thoughts show that you are not a "good Christian man." If your statements that seem to demonstrate such attitudes are not consistent with your mindset (IOW, "I said that, but I really think something else"), then you are not a "good Christian man" because you are a liar.

So any way you look at it, thoughts are significantly more important than pieces of paper. Pieces of paper do not prove anything, but thoughts do.

Can you show us the tweets that Trump should be banned over? I don't remember him using the word faggot or curry scented bitch.

Pfft. You're a Catholic, so as far as Dayton's concerned, you're the spawn of Satan, so nothing you say matters. In fact, you should be banned from quoting scripture.

The threshold has been extremely high in the past -- Banks repeatedly targeted specific other posters. If it were about a few offensive tweets, something like 'bleeding out the whatever' would probably qualify. But it hasn't for other tweeters, so it shouldn't for Trump.

Nope. Never been a Catholic in my life.

Oh I agree. People like 14th Doctor are just trying to ban Trump because he's Trump. They can't show any tweet from him that would even garner a warning here on Wordforge much less be banned from Twitter.

I'm not personally insisting he be banned. I don't follow him, I don't generally see the nonsense he spews unless it make the news. But if a case can be made for banning Trump based on his posting history, I don't have a problem with them doing it.

Which races are "people of color?" Is white a color?

Show his posting history.

You shouldn't need to comb through his tweets for this. The people who join you in the call for his banning should have already done that work for you. So show some examples of the things he has said that should result in a ban.

So you're claiming you don't understand the term?

He probably thinks it's the little cartoon M&Ms.

Doesn't matter, you don't believe in precisely the same things as Dayton, so you might as well be.

Oh I'm sure if Trump were on wordforge they'd find a way to ban him.

I might start a fake news website that specializes in fake stories that puts rumors of anti-Trump content into anything that is cool.

I've never taken that position. I have a degree of flexibility.

Yeah, right. That's why you get butthurt over atheists quoting the Bible.

My flexibility extends to Baptists, Methodists and other protestants.

Certainly not to atheists.

Go fuck yourself. If you genuinely believed in God, you would want people to read the Bible for whatever reason, because were it truly the word of God, such an act would lead them to salvation, regardless of what their intent was. But you don't.