If you can just admit that you made up the bit about anyone âbanningâ anyone for âexpressing Christian viewsâ that will do for a starting point.
On what basis was he banned then?
âbannedâ 
You obviously support Cambridge University in denying him the right to speak on Christian topics. Are you OK with conservative colleges banning left wing academics? Can you not see how ridiculous it is for a university to refuse to listen to an academic because some of their students are outraged at his opinions? You seem somewhat fascist, a little Hitlery.
Petersonâs anti-free speech fanbois are seething.
More red pills needed.
They didnât deny him the right to speak either.
You either canât understand basic words or are trying to twist facts. Or youâre just making things up. You lunatic.
Project, project, project!
Why are you completely silent about Petersonâs cosying up to the racist far right?
Isnât that, like a little âHitleryâ? 
Youâre seething at Petersonâs success as an academic 
I donât even agree with much of what he says, but respect his right to say it. Whether one agrees with him or not, he has clearly studied the bible extensively and has lectured on the subject at Harvard. You on the other hand want everyone who disagrees with you labelled as a Nazi and banned, a classic Marxist nutcase tactic.
Is your fury due to you not having ever had a page of your gibberish published?
Wipe the froth off your mouth, pal.
The way of the world is that charlatans and frauds will always have their followers because they market themselves to gullible simpletons like yourself. Iâm well aware that that will always be the case because there will always be gullible simpletons like yoou around.
The point is that itâs a very positive development that Peterson is now recognised by one of the worldâs top universities to be a charlatan and a fraud and thus unworthy of a platform.
Iâm delighted at that because I believe that charlatans and frauds should be marginalised in the interests of promoting quality public discourse.
You hate quality public discourse because you are a far right racist extremist, and far right racist extremism depends on the dumbing down of public discourse and the promotion of charlatanism and naked bigotry, which you consistently do.
Peterson is very much a gateway to far right extremism and Cambridge really are to be congratulated on withdrawing their invitation to him. Hopefully other universities do likewise. Bigotry is never there to debate, itâs there to shout others down, and thatâs what Peterson does.
Goebbelesque gibberish. In terms of intelligent public discourse i would rank Peterson about a 5 out of 10, he has interesting things to say about the psychological basis for religion and how biblical texts give us an insight into the minds of our ancestors. I wouldnât give a shit about his self help talks, as unlike you i donât need it.
Thankfully though for the human race a charlatan and fraud called @Sidney is marginalized to an obscure Irish forum with 100 members.
Stop projecting, Nazi boy. You are the forum Goebbels, thatâs well established.
Oh, and deal with Petersonâs links to the racist far right, please.
Youâre very conspicuously avoiding this.
You always very conspicuously avoid anything to do with the racist far right - who can guess why?!
Why would I defend Peterson? Iâm not a fan of his nor do I agree with much of what he says. I do find his lectures on the psychological basis of religion interesting, but there are far better academics on the subject.
Youâve been defending him and consistently praising him on the entirety of this thread. I havenât found one post where you disagree with anything he says.
Please deal with his links to the racist far right. Iâve already posted a picture of a YouTube conversation he did with the far right white supremacist Stefan Molyneux.
Here he is a month ago in New Zealand:
I think reasonable people can fully understand why Cambridge, or indeed anybody would class him as unworthy of an academic debate - because reasonable people have no truck with the far right or anybody who deliberately courts the far right, which he unquestionably does.
Same to yourself sid. Youâre just away off on yet another solo run crying nazi nazi nazi.
Would you not grow up?
Can you not read whatâs on the ladâs tee shirt?
Do you believe it is wrong to criticize Islamic beliefs and the cultural practices in Muslim majority countries? Why are you in favor of female genital mutilation, treating women like livestock, suicide bombing, etc.?
You have never been able to bring yourself to denouce the barbarity of Islamic culture in Muslim majority countries. Why is that?
I only call people with Nazi sympathies âNazisâ, pal.
I think thatâs been well demonstrated.
Ok so
But you are the one poster on here who actually has Nazi sympathies and would fit very well in the Gestapo. Strange isnât it?
1 Like
Youâre trying to downplay religious bigotry again, mate.
Thatâs because youâre a religious bigot, as well as a racist one.
Any religion can be criticised if done in good faith - no reasonable person argues otherwise.
However youâve consistently shown youâre utterly unable to make criticisms of anything in good faith - you much prefer simple naked religious and other bigotry.
I mean you seriously and entirely unironically suggested that all Islam should be banned!
Islamophobia is generalised hatred of Muslims - it does not refer to legitimate criticism of a religious ideology. People who have a problem with the medieval ideology of the Saudi regime, for instance, are not âIslamophobicâ.
People who display irrational hatred for Muslims in a broad brush general sense, and promote intolerance and prejudice against them, are very definitely Islamophobic.
You unquestionably do this and have a long record of doing so.
The chap wearing a t-shirt in the photo with Peterson was also doing exactly that.
Iâd love to have seen your reaction had Ilhan Omar posed with somebody wearing a t-shirt with the slogan âIâm a proud Anti-Semiteâ on it.
It would be slightly different, I imagine.
The evidence is clear - you accept hatred of Muslims as an entirely legitimate thing, and so does Peterson.
Accepting and promoting broad brush generalised hatred of people of a particular religion is extremely Nazi-ish, it doesnât get much more Nazi-ish than that.
Youâre arguing like a five year old, mate.
Get some new lines.