If their intent is to reveal themselves as they are, then they are incompetent manipulators.
Manipulation is done by concealing the nature of things, u/jubyeonin. If they reveal their character, they cannot later effectively manipulate/spin a story to the contrary.
Christian here. It's a little more complicated than that.
There is an attitude of contempt for, and disbelief in, God's Word that is revealed in this. That's what we recoil at, not the boogeyman of 666.
And I'd argue that this visible contempt isn't a manipulation tactic but a revelation of character.
"And then they'll say 'x', and then I'll say 'y', and then they'll say 'z', and then..."
Dude, I'm trying to figure out how to say this gently, but this is kind of an embarrassing post. Treat others like real people.
This isn't to completely bash Jim Hightower for saying this. It is good rhetoric, and in this world we will certainly find many instances where resisting is the right thing, the courageous thing, to do.
To keep with his river analogy - what makes going with the flow good or bad is whether the flow is contrary to one's proper destination.
I don't think this is true.
Consider progressives who fight to upend some previously accepted cultural norm. That they are the "resistance" - the ones fighting, refusing to conform - isn't virtuous in itself, and it should not be called courageous, any more than Adam and Eve eating the apple should be.
I agree with your assessment. Jesus said that if a man looks at a woman in order to lust after her, he has committed adultery in his heart. He wouldn't have accepted such distinctions as this person is making. Sin is sin.
Thank you for the link. I didn't know the smallpox precedent. I would assert that this makes widescale, forced, medical injections in the US much more likely.
Please, if you are reading - decide which hill you are actually willing to die on, before you are there. I have resolved that I will not entrust the bodies and lives of my wife and children to untrustworthy men.