@ron45282: Insane #geopolitics #charliekirk #liberal #jew #fyp

Ethan🇻🇦 :

Ili leave this here😭

ncjismsndn :

what is the Talmud?

Dawghornleghorn :

Hey man I see what you’re doing, you’re using easily debunked, fake Talmud verses from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the same fabricated garbage that has circulated on 4chan and neo-Nazi forums for years before finally reaching you through the echo chamber of TikTok pseudo-intellectualism. Unfortunately, as a Christian, you have an inability to research and challenge premises you’re introduced to after you’ve read one thing one time. You saw a cherry-picked screenshot with Hebrew letters and decided you’d uncovered the secret crimes of “the Jews,” when in reality you just swallowed propaganda that has been debunked so many times it’s practically fossilized. What the verse actually says is nothing close to what you’re claiming. The Talmud passage you’re misrepresenting is a legal discussion, not a moral endorsement, about how ancient courts would classify injuries in extreme hypothetical cases. The phrase about “a girl less than three years old” is part of a technical debate about ritual status and physical healing, not permission or normalization of anything disgusting. The rabbis were defining at what point the body could be considered physiologically capable of virginity loss. It was a crude medical distinction, not a moral teaching. The text assumes the act is abhorrent and criminal under Torah law. Every rabbi involved lived in a society where sexual contact with a child was punishable by death. You’re taking a clinical line about anatomy and twisting it into moral instruction because you can’t tell the difference between jurisprudence and endorsement. And you’re wrong because you’re repeating antisemitic talking points that have been exposed and refuted for more than a century. The “poking a finger in the eye” phrase you’re waving around refers to tissue elasticity and healing, not consent, not approval, not morality. The same metaphor appears in Greek and Roman medical texts, but no one claims they were condoning abuse. This line has been recycled from medieval church propaganda to Nazi pamphlets to modern extremist Telegram channels. You’re just the latest in a long parade of people too lazy to read context.

jason :

you sound uniformed

אוּרי 🧃 :

thing about the Talmud, no one in Israel still practices it thats firstly, they do read it but no one practices (no one is harsh some people do but we know what's modernly wrong like engaging in intercourse with a minor) secondly no one in the talmud agrees on anything!

Mason Royce🇺🇸🦅 :

Maybe because they dont know? people will know about popular thinds, and the talmud IS NOT popular in any way. I never even saw a jew on my entire life

saul :

because the whole left has been conditioned by (them) to be an enemy, and the left has been brainwashed with LGBT and pro illegal immigration ideas to destroy countries and be anti-christ, and then the right has been condition to be too hateful to do any change

MrGator :

No I don’t like either.

Truthteller10231 :

Do you even know what the Talmud is.

osamabinliftin :

The passage people cite from Ketubot 11b does exist, but it’s widely misunderstood. It isn’t a moral or practical approval of sex with minors; it appears in a purely theoretical halakhic discussion about legal status and ketubah valuation, not about what anyone should actually do. Traditional Jewish interpreters make it clear that the Talmud is not condoning or permitting sexual relations with children. Outside that narrow debate, classical Jewish law forbids sexual relations outside proper marriage, and marriage to a minor in any forced or exploitative way is considered invalid or deeply problematic. Modern Jewish communities, across the board, completely reject the idea that a minor can consent to sex. The metaphor “like putting a finger in the eye” sounds disturbing today, which is why the passage gets taken out of context, but its purpose was to describe how virginity status was categorized in ancient legal discussions, not to give moral guidance. Social and ethical norms have changed dramatically over centuries, and what was once a technical argument in an ancient legal text has nothing to do with contemporary Jewish moral standards or halakhic practice. So yes—in the narrow, literal sense, the Talmud does include that line, but it was never meant as an approval of the act itself, and Jewish tradition does not treat it as such.

Truth :

Wouldn’t it be great if the whole Noticing thing were a government-organized way to get Nazis and White Supremacists to self-identify so they could be put on a watch list? “Make sure to get a full close-up of your face and then point at your eye.” 🤣😂 One would have to be a real idiot to fall for something like that though.

daddy brick ☦️=✅ ☪️=❎ :

Zombieslayer9 :

its because they ARE jews 😭

AdvntrAlwys :

My friend who’s trans told me that Christianity is more detrimental towards trans/gay people than Islam. These people are just delusional and we’re not longer friends.