You think Obama’s gayness and his wife being a dude is just nonsense?
You are putting words in my mouth, fren, so allow me to clarify:
"Big Mike" as a concept has become part of the mainstream, and so has Obama's gayness.
Like many, I recognize that Obama is definitely homosexual.
As for Michelle being Michael, I'm a skeptic. I do not think it is nonsense. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence implying that Michelle is a tranny, but it remains circumstantial evidence. If there was DNA samples available, this would be direct evidence.
My general tendency is to err on the side of skepticism when there is a lack of direct evidence. The fake stuff that comes out pretending to be evidence promoting the Big Mike view doesn't help, and is a negative indicator, imo. Stuff like the forged/fake birth certificate / voting card. Obvious fake stuff. That sort of stuff dilutes the pool of evidence, in my view.
In any case, I am skeptical to the extent that so far, I don't find enough direct evidence for me to just go all-in on the belief. So, I keep an open mind, keep my belief systems in abeyance, and wait. Because I simply do not know.
But the point of my comment was, those issues all aside, the Big Mike narrative is now mainstream, and to some extent, the factual reality has become almost secondary in terms of importance.
Some folks like to go full throttle on their beliefs, but personally, I think that Q's real focus for us was to inspire critical thinking, empirical factual considerations, not mere beliefs.
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
Q3906
It's just as important to apply the above principles to Q doctrine and Q beliefs as it is to all the other stuff out there. IMO.
It doesn't mean that I think the Big Mike theory is nonsense.
You are putting words in my mouth, fren, so allow me to clarify:
"Big Mike" as a concept has become part of the mainstream, and so has Obama's gayness.
Like many, I recognize that Obama is definitely homosexual.
As for Michelle being Michael, I'm a skeptic. I do not think it is nonsense. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence implying that Michelle is a tranny, but it remains circumstantial evidence. If there was DNA samples available, this would be direct evidence.
My general tendency is to err on the side of skepticism when there is a lack of direct evidence. The fake stuff that comes out pretending to be evidence promoting the Big Mike view doesn't help, and is a negative indicator, imo. Stuff like the forged/fake birth certificate / voting card. Obvious fake stuff. That sort of stuff dilutes the pool of evidence, in my view.
In any case, I am skeptical to the extent that so far, I don't find enough direct evidence for me to just go all-in on the belief. So, I keep an open mind, keep my belief systems in abeyance, and wait. Because I simply do not know.
But the point of my comment was, those issues all aside, the Big Mike narrative is now mainstream, and to some extent, the factual reality has become almost secondary in terms of importance.
Some folks like to go full throttle on their beliefs, but personally, I think that Q's real focus for us was to inspire critical thinking, empirical factual considerations, not mere beliefs.
Q3906
It's just as important to apply the above principles to Q doctrine and Q beliefs as it is to all the other stuff out there. IMO.
It doesn't mean that I think the Big Mike theory is nonsense.