the fastest way to protecting couples is to simply toss the term completely
No, the fastest way to protect gay couples is to uphold the wall of separation between church and state. Christianity doesn’t own the term “marriage”, and no religious bigot of any creed or individual sect therein has the right to turn their beliefs into law. The Supreme Court said that same-sex couples have the right to marry. So stop trying to turn all marriages into a word salad (“we’re entering into a civil partnership!” vs. “we’re getting married!”) for the sake of appeasing religious bigots. Their feelings are not — I repeat, not — more important than another person’s civil rights.
I have no discomfort. Personally.
Could’ve fooled me.
The issue is “trans”. Trans covers transvestism, transgenderism, and transsexualism.
The commonly accepted usage of “trans” these days covers “transgender” (e.g., “trans woman” = “transgender woman”). Both “transvestite” and “transsexual” are considered outdated terminology. I may be a cisgendered dumbass, but I still know that much.
What it does is open up the door.
Again: Do you think the little symbols on a bathroom door are magical barriers or some shit? If a cis man goes into a women’s restroom to commit a crime, they’re going to be arrested for committing the crime, not for how they’re dressed…
In many places you can get arrested for intentionally using the wrong restroom. It may not stick but you can get arrested.
…because under the law, a cis man can and will be arrested for committing a crime regardless of whether he’s wearing a tailor-made three-piece suit or a lovely floral sundress with a set of matching heels.
Remove that barrier and more people could try it.
The barrier (a bathroom law) doesn’t even exist in a good chunk of the U.S., and there still isn’t a wave of “cis people pretending to be trans to commit crimes” crimes.
It’s rare but it does happen.
And the rarity of it happening doesn’t enter into a bigot’s mind. They need only hear about one case — just one! — to justify their anti-trans bigotry. One case gives them all the ammo they need to press for bills that, if turned into law, would help push trans people out of the public sphere and back into the closet (if not the grave, which I’m sure the bigots would be fine with as well). And guess what? You’re playing right into their hands by helping them spread the same odious lie about trans people based on a handful of cases — which is to say, you’re spreading the lie that being transgender is a “dress-up game” or an “act” instead of being transgender. Stop reading what right-wing websites say about trans people and start reading books/articles about being trans that are written by actual trans people. And if you’re discomforted by the idea that they’re not all going to play to your bigotry — that they’re not going to comfort your ignorance by telling you exactly what you want to hear? That’s a “you” problem. Guess who gets to solve it.
I don’t know which is better; throwing everyone in together or allowing a single group to cross the “boundary”.
See? That’s what the fuck I’m talking about! Instead of whining and complaining about the downsides of wind turbines — which plays into the exact same bullshit your Dear Leader was doing to discredit clean energy — you’re suggesting ideas and programs we can support. Oh, that’s that good shit!
…now if you’d only drop the bigotry against trans people and the uncritical ass-kissing fealty to Donald Trump. Do that and you might not sound like such a conservative dipshit — to the point where you could pass for someone who didn’t look uncritically at the Trump administration and didn’t think a vote for cruelty, bigotry, and good ol’ American fascism was a good thing.
Let’s just end legal recognition of sectarian marriage recognition and naming. Give the religious their little ritual. But make the legal method what it is, complete in recognition and rights as civil partnerships[.]
So long as it means all such partnerships — even the ones ordained as marriages by religious sects — are all referred to as “civil partnerships” in official government documents and on official government forms, such that a gay atheist couple and a straight Christian couple are both given “civil partnership licenses”? So long as the same legal rights/privileges given to married couples now still apply when the changeover to “civil partnerships” is completed? Hell yes, go nuts.
But if straight people/religious people still get “marriage licenses” and still get more legal rights/privileges that people in “civil partnerships”? Fuck every last bit of it. Either it’s equality or it’s “separate but equal”, and we all know how well that worked out in the past.
The biggest roadblock to marriage equality is the religious right.
Except they’re…uh…not a roadblock any more. Same-sex marriage was made legal nationwide almost six years ago. They’re an obstacle to keeping same-sex marriage legal, sure. But the Supreme Court steamrolled their shit in 2015, in terms of making it legal nationwide.
The transgender issues is more than just rights.
No, it really isn’t. Your discomfort with the existence of transgender people doesn’t, won’t, and shouldn’t have any bearing on whether they deserve equal access to civil rights and protection from discrimination based only on who they are.
Fakes. When a biological man can dress as a woman and head into the women’s bathroom, it opens up the door to fakes.
Is there now, and has there ever been, any credible indication that cisgender men are dressing up in female-coded clothing and presenting themselves as female to gain access to women’s restrooms/showers en masse? No, quoting bigots doesn’t count as a credible indication. Neither does quoting heavily biased/largely discredited sources.
Any ped can dress up as a man or woman of the opposite sex and head on in with the teens and preteens using the stall next door.
I’ve got news for you, fam: They can do that now without having to fake presenting as the opposite gender. Do you think those signs outside a bathroom are fucking magical barriers or some shit? I’m a cisgender male, and I can walk into a women’s restroom without being transported directly to jail or incinerated by a dragon or whatever you think happens if you cross that invisible line. (And for the record: I’ve never walked into a women’s restroom unless it is the only working restoom in a given building.)
If a person wants to commit a crime inside a restroom meant for the opposite sex — i.e., if a cisgender male wants to rape a cisgender woman in a stall in a women’s bathroom — they’re probably not going to dress up for the sake of committing that crime. And your worries about transgender people using “the wrong restroom” brings up a point that I don’t think you’ve ever considered: If a fully transitioned transgender female is forced by law to use the men’s restroom, what the fuck do you think is going to happen to her?
The bathroom issue is what I’m talking about when I talk about how conservatives want to push queer people out of society: A trans person who doesn’t feel safe when using the bathroom in public — as everyone does at some point in their life — will want to leave their house less. If they go out less, they become less visible in public. If they’re less visible in public, people discomforted by the existence of trans people don’t have to think that much about trans people. Ergo, using the bathroom issue as a wedge to drive trans people out of public life is one-hundred fucking percent the methodology of a conservative bigot. Congratulations — you’re on the side of the people whom you keep saying you don’t side with.
Radical changes work better when moved toward slowly.
They’re not “radical” if they’re gradual, you dipshit. It’s why the legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide was a radical change: It happened suddenly and without having to need every individual state to legalize it by themselves.
The goal is good. The implementation planned is not.
So suggest something better. Look for something better that’s already out there and champion it. But let’s not act like doing what we’re doing now — incrementally moving away from fossil fuels at a snail’s pace, letting the biggest polluters get off virtually scot-free — is making the kind of difference that needs to be made for the sake of avoiding a climate change–driven Great Extinction.
Trans is generic and covers multiple choices.
No, it doesn’t. The gender binary is bullshit, I agree, but “transgender” as a term is near-specifically intended for use in referencing that binary. (Maybe I’m wrong about that, though. Being cisgender, I’m not well-versed in terminology and usage and context for language surrounding the gender spectrum.)
There’s limits of what a society will accept. Forcing accommodation doesn’t guarantee acceptance.
Forcing accomodation guarantees accomodation. That’s where we start. Tolerance comes next — you don’t have to like trans people existing, but you have to tolerate their existence because they’re fucking human beings like you. If tolerance leads to acceptance, great. But trans people aren’t looking for your motherfucking permission to exist, and they sure as hell don’t need your permission to live out and proud.
Now fuck off back to the TERF forum that spawned you, you transmisic bigot.
It is a little weird, though. I would’ve thought that actual vampire Peter Thiel would be involved with something less prone to killing the suppliers of his blood.
We allow for citizens’ arrests to provide an average citizen with the legal cover they need to lawfully intervene in cases such as the ones you describe. Handing the power of police — of arrest, of armed violence in defense of others, of the right to extrajudicially execute people who are deemed a “threat” to the general public — to a group of paid vigilantes with potentially no standards for hiring and no oversight on how they operate is not now, and has never been, a good idea.
Getting rid of qualified immunity doesn’t get rid of all immunity. Cops are allowed to break certain laws — e.g., to buy and sell drugs and guns illegally — as part of their job. Society extends that privilege to police in the hopes that police will use that privilege for the common good (i.e., to catch criminals in the act).
Ending qualified immunity will not end all police privilege. No lawmaker would dare to think of ending all police privilege. To do so would be to commit political suicide.
Does the average police department need a SWAT team?
Does the average police department need an MRAP?
Does the average police department need sonic cannons?
Because numerous “average” police departments across the country have at least those things.
We do not need police departments to become an unofficial part of the United States Armed Forces — and to treat the United States as a war zone where every civilian is a potential threat to “blue lives”. Anyone who thinks otherwise is part of the reason we can’t reform policing from something resembling a military outfit to something resembling a group of people dedicated to protecting everyday citizens without reckless disregard for human life.
…and besides all that, ten bux says you think Derek Chauvin was justified.
My issue with this article is that it seems to imply that there is no alternative but police priviliege.
No lawmaker in the United States would revoke police privilege in its entirety. The lawmakers that want to revoke the privilege of qualified immunity face a massive uphill battle in getting that done. For now, there really isn’t an alternative until American lawmakers grow back their spines.
And what would you suggest as a solution — doing nothing? Doing something that gives cops the ability to buy more MRAPs, or gives them greater authority and power with even less oversight? I don’t see you tossing out any ideas on how to deal with a broken police system or the underlying issues that turn people into desperate criminals, so if you’re going to criticize what I have to say on the issue, the absolute bare minimum you can do is bring some fucking ideas of your own to the table. If you can’t do that: Further contributions from you will be regarded as irrelevant and treated accordingly.
Nobody is saying there isn’t a place for police in society. But police have to be more than armed assholes who operate with little-to-no oversight and are placed above the same laws they swear to uphold. Police have to be more than violent thugs who are trained to see every citizen as a potentially lethal threat.
Police also have to stop being the be-all, end-all of emergency response. People calling the cops for wellness checks have gotten other people killed by those cops. That shit needs to end.
Do we need the police? Arguably, yes. Do we need them for everything? Objectively, no. Do we need to give them the funding they need to buy military-grade equipment and use it on everyday citizens like American cities are fucking war zones? Fuckin’ hell no.
Per CNN: “Citizen, an app that started as a service for real-time crime alerts made waves late last week with news that it was testing a private, on-demand security force, after a company-branded patrol car was spotted in Los Angeles. Now the company has said that test is over, and that it will not launch its own private security force in the future — but would not rule out partnerships with other companies that would accomplish the same thing.”
Funding the police won’t solve the fundamental issues that create the conditions for people to become criminals. You want to solve the problem of crime? Solve the problem of desperation — the problem of people feeling so out of options that they turn to crime. Starting with poverty is the bare fucking minimum.
those who want protections under civil partnerships can be recognised as such
So long as those secular civil partnerships are on equal legal footing with government-recognized sectarian marriages and both are referred to using the same terminology (i.e., “civil partnerships”) in official government documents, I have little issue with that. But if the idea is to make those civil partnerships “separate but equal” to sectarian marriages? Fuck that noise.
That a portion of our population didn’t get behind the invented gender movement: sorry if you’re not happy with that. Let’s get equality of access and care and respect, before we start inventing more genders to create more road blocks.
We can start by guaranteeing equality of access and care and respect to transgender people. They’re people, too — or do you not believe they deserve to have their civil rights protected (and their basic humanity recognized) by the government?
I don’t claim any representation for the progressive movement.
Never said you did. Besides, it’s clear that you’re the kind of self-hating queer person that votes for the same politicians who want people like you stashed away from the rest of society — six feet under, if possible, but simply being in the closet will work well enough for them.
Wind turbines? Let’s just ignore the detriments to birds.
Let’s not and say I didn’t. But wind turbines are a cleaner and overall safer-to-the-environment form of energy than, say, burning fossil fuels. How about the detriments to wildlife and humanity alike caused by the smoke emitted by coal power plants?
Physical pollution is on of the larger problems. We need a Japanese style recycling system. Everything man can make man can unmake.
Recycling is nice, but it won’t fix the bigger problem — which is that major corporations (especially the “Big Energy” companies) are the leading polluters in the world and few people are doing anything to make those companies work towards preventing the worst-case climate change scenarios.
“Wiping out entire forest habitats is all part of our ‘inevitable’ transition to a wind powered future”
I’m against the en masse eradication of wildlife habitats. That said: Rejecting clean energy altogether because of its potential impact on the environment is basically throwing one’s hands up in the air and saying “welp, this can’t work, so we might as well keep burning fossil fuels until we go extinct”.
We can create clean energy facilities — including wind farms — that balance our need for energy with the protection of the environment (and the wildlife therein). We must find ways to do that. To act like we can’t is to give up. Unless you want people being born today to live in an even worse environment once they become adults, we can’t give up on trying to find the right solutions for this problem.
The premise of the electoral count is to give the minority representation.
Irrelevant. Nobody mentioned the Electoral College.
The majority of the country
You can show me the map that shows how “red” counties outnumber “blue” counties and other such horseshit that you think justifies the claim “over half of the country supported Trump”. I can demolish that “evidence” in five words: Land doesn’t vote. People do.
You can’t fight the statistics: If we look at the popular vote, less than a quarter of the country — and less than half of all participating voters — voted for Donald Trump in both 2016 and 2020. So don’t bring up that fake-ass bullshit claim again, you fractally wrong dipshit.
That queer people were serving isn’t really an issue. Putting men in the women’s barracks is.
I can’t even pretend to know enough about the experience of trans people to have an opinion on this facet of the broader trans community — but I know that referring to trans women as men is bullshit, especially coming from someone who themselves claims to be queer.
The progressive push for all creates an environment of all or nothing.
And the conservative push for “none” — as evidenced by the transgender military ban enacted by Donald Trump — leaves no room for finding a solution that works for both the military and trans people. And besides, conservatives don’t want to even recognize the humanity of trans people. To conservatives, trans people are…oh, how best to put this…let’s say, “undesirables”. Yeah, that seems like the reich terminology for their beliefs.
We can’t even get a unified front.
And that’s because of queer people like you, since I’m almost sure you’re one of those “drop the T” folks. You want me to recognize and give you credit for your queerness, but you’re not willing to stand and fight for fellow queer people because they’re transgender? Fuck. You. (And on behalf of the Gay Agenda: Your invitation to Pride Month has been, by thine own hand, revoked.)
Focus on the now with the environment.
Focusing only on the short-term is a bad idea. Clean up enough trash and you’ll think “oh, hey, things are okay now” — and you’ll get lazy and watch things go back to “not okay” (or worse). We must focus on changing entire systems, not individual behaviors.
Yes, we should all do our part to reduce our impact on the environment. But regular jackoffs like you and I have a near-negligible impact in comparison to the major polluters in this world. We have to work towards eliminating the incentives to pollute — to keep using fossil fuels, to lower emissions standards, to refuse responsibility for disasters such as oil spills — or else those polluters will keep doing what they do.
Recycling our plastic bottles won’t mean shit unless we make the manufacturers of those plastic bottles pollute less. Taking fewer/shorter showers won’t mean shit unless we make energy companies stop polluting water sources. We must change our actions, yes — but we must also fight to change the systems that enable the worst polluters to pollute in ways that harm the world and its living beings…including people like you and me.
Unless you prefer to breathe polluted air and drink poisoned water, anyway.
If anything, putting a critic of the system in charge of it can only improve the system — or, at worst, keep the status quo as-is.
A critic of the system will look at the shortcomings of said system and work to mitigate or correct those flaws. Hell, a critic is willing to admit there are flaws in the first place. But someone who can’t/won’t criticize the system will never even admit that the system has flaws; their inability to look outside their own ideology (and self-interest) will doom the system. Flaws will become bigger, consequences will grow worse, and nothing will be done because the maximalists will see the harms caused by their stance as a good thing.
Give me a critic over a maximalist every day of the week. At least the critic will recognize reality.
Plaintiff argues that they “would have walked away”. But Plaintiff offers no facts in their Complaint to support this proposition.
But you went after a subject very close to me.
Yes, I’m well aware of how much your support for Donald Trump means to you.
I support gay rights. Just not in the way that makes current progressives happy.
…oh, you ignorant motherfucker. You really think you’re going to get virtual asspats for being a Trump supporter who’s in favor of civil rights for queer people? (You’re not.)
Gays for Trump had many many thousands of thousands supporters. Actually it was through the LBGT community I first heard about Gays for Trump.
Queer people aren’t a monolith. Some of them are foolish enough to vote for the furtherance of their own pain and suffering by voting for Republican politicians.
Let me throw your A or B classification onto a land mine for you: I’m proudly pan-sexual.
Let me toss that right back at you: I don’t give a flying rat fuck. You don’t get brownie points from me for saying you’re queer. It isn’t a shield that magically protects you from criticism.
The group majority is not gay marriage.
[citation needed]
The term [“marriage”] belongs to one collective faith that follows the myth of Jesu/Jesi Christi/Christo: or literally translated Chris (of) the Jew(s).
The idea of marriage, even if it wasn’t called marriage, existed long before both Christianity and Judaism did. The concept of marriage — and the word itself — belong to no one person, group, or religious creed. Or does every non-Christian and non-Jew in the world now have to refer to their marriages as “domestic partnerships” or whatever? And who’s going to enforce that “ownership” — You? Your religious leaders? The 1989 Denver Broncos?
Rather than fight for equality in the single most important progressive LGBT issue
that…that isn’t…holy shit you’re at least six years behind the times, what the fuck
While making sure same-sex marriage remains legal is important, queer political groups around the country are no longer near-singularly focused on…y’know, legalizing same-sex marriage. They won that fight. Now they’re fighting for equal protection from discrimination — since, in numerous states across the country, queer people can still be fired, evicted, and denied service in public-facing businesses for being queer.
we say abolish the legal recognition completely (with opt out legal grandfathering)
So long as it’s abolished equally — take every legal privilege and tax break out of the law for all couples, not just the gay ones — I’ve no problem with getting the state out of the marriage business. But if abolishing marriage is limited only to queer people? That’s bullshit, and even you should know it’s bullshit.
Don’t pretend to represent all members of the sexual-alternate community in your beliefs.
The fact that you’re using a clumsy-ass phrase such as “sexual-alternate” — one that I’ve literally never heard until now, and I follow a decent amount of queer people on social media — instead of the reclaimed catch-all of “queer” or some variant of the LGBTQ acronym is a tell that maybe you’re not as queer as you want me to think you are.
most people who believe the earth is in a natural flux don’t deny human damage
GOP lawmakers all but deny the truth of global climate change — and if they don’t, they near-uniformly believe (or say they believe) human-created pollution isn’t a primary reason for that change. Even if they believed otherwise, they’re not proactive about stopping climate change; Trump himself extolled the virtues of fossil fuel far more than he did the same for renewable energy.
Hell, Trump himself once mocked wind turbines: “The Green New Deal, right? Green New Deal — I encourage it. I think it’s really something that they should promote. They should work hard on. It’s something our country needs desperately. They have to go out and get it. But I’ll take the other side of that argument only because I’m mandated to. I’m mandated. But they should stay with that argument. Never change. Never change. No planes. No energy. When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric. Let’s hurry up. ‘Darling’ — ‘Darling, is the wind blowing today? I’d like to watch television, darling.’ No, but it’s true.” That doesn’t sound like someone who thinks clean renewable energy is important — or someone who thinks saving the environment is a worthwhile investment.
it’s the go-green Progressives who want to flatten a good chunk of Mane’s forests to build “green-energy” supplies
[citation needed]
On the geological scale of time any influence on temperature is statistically insignificant.
I agree — the planet isn’t going to be destroyed by a rise in global temperature over a period of decades/centuries.
It’s every form of life on this planet that’s in danger of being part of the Sixth Great Extinction, which is being hurried along nicely by that aforementioned rise in global temperatures. Every person, every dog and cat, every bird and bee, every creature from the smallest rodent to the largest elephant — all of them are going to be affected by global climate change. And the lawmakers you support don’t seem to give a fuck. Or are you actually going to criticize Republican lawmakers (including Trump) for their full-throated support of the continued use of fossil fuels over the use of renewable energy?
Republicans are deeply rooted in personal property rights.
And yet, they’re trying to demolish Section 230 in an attempt to circumvent both property rights and the freedom of association.
…y’know, for someone who says they aren’t a Republican, you sure do seem to uncritically defend them a whole hell of a lot. 🤔
You really don’t understand that aspect of the party do you.
You really don’t understand that the Republican party you think you know by way of reading history books isn’t the Republican party of today. Read books that cover more recent Republican history — history such as the Southern Strategy and the Dixiecrats that flipped the ideologies of the two parties, such that the so-called party of Lincoln became the party of bigotry. (I mean, you don’t see the KKK seriously endorsing Democrats these days…)
Defend ones private property at any and all cost.
That you used the phrase “private property” in a discussion about slavery is, at best, an unintentionally misguided statement. In the future, you should do your absolute best to avoid the perception that you could be talking about actual goddamned human beings instead of land or houses.
50% of the population voted for Trump. Twice.
No, they didn’t.
According to Wikipedia, “The United States had an official resident population of 331,449,281 on April 1, 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.” Let’s round that down to an even 330 million. Now, let’s take a look at the election results from both 2016 and 2020:
In 2016, Donald Trump received 62,984,828 votes (46.1%) and Hillary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes (48.2%).
In 2020, Donald Trump received 74,216,154 votes (46.9%) and Joe Biden received 81,268,924 votes (51.3%).
Trump lost the popular vote in both elections. He didn’t hit a 50% mark in either election. And as for the claim that 50% of the U.S. population voted for Trump? In 2016, that number was closer to 20% (63 million out of 330 million); in 2020, that number was closer to 23% (74 million out of 330 million).
You can fuck with perceptions, but you can’t fuck with publicly-known statistics. Don’t try that again.
The Progressive movement has perverted the Democrat party with its own version of Judaic-Islamic-Christian bullshite.
Personally, I see someone so insecure they must cling to whatever group they are associating with says.
Sort of like how you cling to the fact that Donald Trump did no wrong, much like the group you associate with — Trump supporters — keep clinging to that same fact? 🤔
I was happy to slink off into the night.
No, you weren’t, but keep telling yourself that.
Adding alphabet soup doesn’t help the cause. It further infuriates the opposition.
Queer people were already serving in the military well before both Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (both its enactment and its repeal) and Trump’s transgender ban. Also, don’t think I don’t see that close-enough reference to “alphabet people”, a derisive anti-queer term used largely in conservative circles. Again: For someone who says they aren’t aligned with the GOP/conservatism, you’re doin’ — I say, you’re doin’ a shit job of provin’ it, sonny. (Nice kid, but about as sharp as a bowling ball.)
Accept what you are. Be proud of it. Own it. And don’t cower behind political hot topic terminology.
…says the jackass who thought saying “I’m pansexual” was going to protect them from criticism for their support of anti-queer views.
You’ve more in common with self-hating queer conservatives than you do with the broader queer community. You’ve more in common with conservatives than you do with any other political group. Accept what you are. Be proud of it. Own it. And don’t cower behind your sexual identity as a means to escape criticism for being a conservative bitch.
The community this site has sucked in is awash in echo chamber politics based on false stories from Democrat funded propaganda outlets.
…says the jackass who obviously prefers right-wing echo chambers, based on the fact that they linked to townhall.com at one point.
No matter how much evidence is presented, you stand by your political bubble.
“Nuh-uh to your uh-huh” is not evidence.
I do thank the site for opening my eyes on 230’s property rights position though. Even if users point to association.
They’re practically two sides of the same coin. That you’re not seeing that is your own mistake.
If understanding can be reached maybe, just maybe, you should look at the solution being, projecting something the opposition actually cares about.
And on issues such as gay rights, where is the compromise between, say, “gay people should have the same access to civil rights as straight people” and “gay people shouldn’t have any civil rights at all because they’re abominations unto God”? You’re so enamored with the idea that the solution is always “compromise” and “meet in the middle” that you think the centrist idea — “gay people should have equal access to civil rights” — is the “extreme left” position instead of the centrist position. (The “extreme left” position in this instance, BTW, would be “only gay people should have civil rights”. And literally nobody is calling for that.)
The answer isn’t always in the middle. The answer isn’t always compromise. Your ridiculously fucked-up fealty to the idea of “We MuSt LiStEn To BoTh SiDeS!!!1!1” has you thinking a compromise can be had on literally anything. Hey, how about climate change — where’s the compromise between “we should work on preventing future damage to the environment” and “we shouldn’t give a damn about future damage to the environment because we’re not damaging the environment”?
Democrats would make better progress on 230 issues if they focused on that property aspect.
Except no, they wouldn’t. Republican lawmakers don’t give a fuck about any of that.
For a group so concerned about association you sure don’t hold back on classing people by stereotypes and assumptions.
You admitted that you voted for Trump. You associated yourself with other Trump supporters. You said you could live with your vote — and that means you also have to live with the consequences of admitting to that vote. One of those consequences? You’re now associated with every “deplorable” human being — every racist, every homophobe, every bigot of every stripe who fell in line behind Trump and the GOP. Learn to live with that.
I likely won’t be around when they come after you with their [cancel] culture
Before what you’re referring to was called “cancel culture”, it was called “moral crusades”, and leftists didn’t invent it, conservative Christians did.
I can smile when I think about it. They WILL come for you eventually.
And when an American fascist who is infinitely more competent than Trump gets into office, I will take comfort in knowing that they will come for you, too. They always go after their own when they run out of fresh victims — you will be no different. After all, you voted for Barack Obama. How much of a loyalist can you be to the cause of Trumpism if you were willing to vote for the man who caused Donald Trump so much embarassment that he ran for president and fucked up an entire country out of spite at being mocked by a Black man?
Now fuck off back to the comments section of Infowars, Lodos. I’m sure Alex is waiting for you. 🐸
It’s possible that Tucker Carlson raped and killed a woman late last night. That doesn’t mean it actually happened.
(COVERING MY ASS STATEMENT: The preceding statement was not an actual accusation of an actual crime. I have not accused and will not accuse Tucker Carlson of having committing a rape-homicide.)
If and when evidence stronger than mere supposition says “the virus was created in a lab” comes to light, I’ll give it an honest look. Same goes for the dueling claims of “the virus escaped by oversight” and “the virus was unleashed on purpose”. Until then: I need more than mere supposition to accept the claim as anything but mere supposition. Saying a thing happened doesn’t make it so, or else I’d be saying “Lodos finally grew a brain”.
(COVERING MY ASS STATEMENT: The preceding statement was not an actual description of an actual event. I have not accused and will not accuse Lostinlodos of having grown a brain.)
NARRATOR: “I’m not going to continue to argue this,” said Lodos, who continued to argue.
What’s Squidward? All a search shows is some cartoon.
Boy — I say, boy, you need to learn about memes. (Nice kid, but about as sharp as a deflated balloon.)
Kind of hard to look up a bill without the bill number or name.
Look up Trump and the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” regulation. Seriously, you couldn’t have fucking Googled that when I first handed the name of the regulation to you on a silver platter?
Here’s the issue your missing
Two things:
It’s “you’re” — but thank you for further confirming the English proficiency of the average Trump supporter.
Damn, you really will say and think anything to justify the cruelty of the Trump administration towards immigrants both legal and otherwise, huh.
I don’t support separating families permanently
Could’ve fooled me.
Sadly much of that disappeared once he got in office.
Show me any president in modern history who managed to come through on all their campaign promises, especially in the face of a hostile Congress that literally promised to stop anything said president wanted to get through Congress for the majority of his two terms.
Choosing Trump, a former Democrat with many of the same platform claims as Obama was appealing.
I voted for Obama twice. Donald Trump was not promising what Obama had promised. Donald Trump was promising to inflict pain and suffering and cruelty upon those weren’t his voting base — to “own the libs” at any cost, and to hell with anyone who got in his way — under the guise of “making America great again”.
That he wasn’t an entrenched politician AND had no want for money made it appear he’d come through despite opposition on things he promised.
He came through on some of those things, sure. That those things just so happened to harm people you don’t seem to give a fuck about apparently doesn’t matter to you, but sure, I’ll give you that one.
Who couldn’t be trusted with classified materials.
And someone who never had any experience in any level of public service could be trusted?
Who’s interventionism view is well documented
As opposed to Trump’s approach of “fuck our old allies, let’s kiss the asses of tyrants and monarchs and Vladimir Putin”, which really did wonders for the U.S. on the international diplomacy front~.
who was a supporter of open borders
[citation needed]
who supported environmental policy at any cost
This planet is the only one we’ve got. How much are you willing to spend on saving it? Because Trump apparently wanted to spend (and do) less than the previous administration did on protecting the environment and battling global climate change. I mean, shit, Trump complained about energy-efficient light bulbs at one point.
a man with dementia
[citation needed — also Trump could damn well have it himself]
who had shifted his public policy so far left I couldn’t stomach it
What’s hilarious is how you think Biden is a leftist. He is, at best, a centrist Democrat who has an all-too-rosy view of the GOP and is being yanked ever-so-slightly to the left by his Congressional allies and the American public. Besides, most of the “leftist” policy to which you refer would probably be centrist in several other developed countries around the world. Hell, he doesn’t even support nationalized healthcare/Medicare for All.
For all the faults people claim of Trump, some real, some imagined, I still think the country is far better off than had Clinton been elected.
Tell that to the 400,000 Americans that died in the year between the arrival of COVID-19 on American shores and Trump leaving office. Tell that to the people who lost their jobs and their businesses because COVID-19 shut down a shitload of everything around the country. Tell that to the mother of Heather Heyer.
I can’t (and won’t pretend to) know what would’ve happened in the four years Hillary Clinton could’ve been president. No one can. But I can at least make an educated guess that, for all of her faults, she would’ve been a far more competent — and far less openly corrupt — national leader than Donald “yeah I asked Georgia election officials to overturn a legal election result for no reason other than to make me happy big whoop wanna fight about it” Trump.
the New Left’s Communism wrapped in Socialism
ahahahaha you actually think socialism isn’t in America
what the fuck do you think tax-funded institutions and programs like Social Security and public schools are, fuckin’ capitalism
holy shit dude
holy shit
I don’t particularly like Parler
Which is weird, because Trump supporters seem to love it, and yet here you are.
it quickly became a hangout for neo nazis
That’s no way to talk about your family.
most of the people who voted for trump consider that crap just that: crap
Yeah, and I’m sure most of them believe January 6th was an insurrection intended to subvert American democracy in favor of a man who lied about (and continues to lie about) the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election~.
(holy shit dudes, Lodos thinks I’m really that dumb, can you fucking believe that shit)
But the content is almost entirely alt-right.
Yes, and? That’s what Trump supporters actually believe. Go there and join them in your quest to rid the world of The Marxist Joe Biden and his coven of Socialist Witches and Communist Warlocks what haunt the halls of Congress, casting spells and chanting “worker’s rights” and summoning dragons and whatever else y’all think they’re doing.
Would be nice to see a middle platform.
Yes, I’m sure you’d enjoy a platform where bigots can espouse their bigotry directly at the targets of said bigotry without being punished for doing so.
At least you’ve been civil.
No, what I’ve been is measured. I haven’t been civil with you for a while; I’ve merely hidden my incivility beneath flowery language. You don’t have and dont’ deserve my respect, and you won’t get it any time soon. The only reason I haven’t been cursing you out every other fucking sentence — and I could, believe me — is because you’re the kind of uptight fuckwit who thinks cursing is an “instant lose” trigger to an argument rather than an expression of emotion. (Speaking of which: You seem to lack any emotion in your arguments. No wonder you’re a Trump supporter — you come off as a sociopath.)
But if you really want me to unload on you…well, I’m not going to give you that “honor”, either. You don’t get to control my responses or the level of measured civility therein. You’re going to get exactly as much incivility as you deserve.
Now fuck off to your Trumpian circlejerk. Nobody here is going to kiss your ass, treat you kindly, and thank you for the discourse. We’d all be better off — you included — if you left this site and never came back, you heartless son of a bitch.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
No, the fastest way to protect gay couples is to uphold the wall of separation between church and state. Christianity doesn’t own the term “marriage”, and no religious bigot of any creed or individual sect therein has the right to turn their beliefs into law. The Supreme Court said that same-sex couples have the right to marry. So stop trying to turn all marriages into a word salad (“we’re entering into a civil partnership!” vs. “we’re getting married!”) for the sake of appeasing religious bigots. Their feelings are not — I repeat, not — more important than another person’s civil rights.
Could’ve fooled me.
The commonly accepted usage of “trans” these days covers “transgender” (e.g., “trans woman” = “transgender woman”). Both “transvestite” and “transsexual” are considered outdated terminology. I may be a cisgendered dumbass, but I still know that much.
Again: Do you think the little symbols on a bathroom door are magical barriers or some shit? If a cis man goes into a women’s restroom to commit a crime, they’re going to be arrested for committing the crime, not for how they’re dressed…
…because under the law, a cis man can and will be arrested for committing a crime regardless of whether he’s wearing a tailor-made three-piece suit or a lovely floral sundress with a set of matching heels.
The barrier (a bathroom law) doesn’t even exist in a good chunk of the U.S., and there still isn’t a wave of “cis people pretending to be trans to commit crimes” crimes.
And the rarity of it happening doesn’t enter into a bigot’s mind. They need only hear about one case — just one! — to justify their anti-trans bigotry. One case gives them all the ammo they need to press for bills that, if turned into law, would help push trans people out of the public sphere and back into the closet (if not the grave, which I’m sure the bigots would be fine with as well). And guess what? You’re playing right into their hands by helping them spread the same odious lie about trans people based on a handful of cases — which is to say, you’re spreading the lie that being transgender is a “dress-up game” or an “act” instead of being transgender. Stop reading what right-wing websites say about trans people and start reading books/articles about being trans that are written by actual trans people. And if you’re discomforted by the idea that they’re not all going to play to your bigotry — that they’re not going to comfort your ignorance by telling you exactly what you want to hear? That’s a “you” problem. Guess who gets to solve it.
…fucking what
See? That’s what the fuck I’m talking about! Instead of whining and complaining about the downsides of wind turbines — which plays into the exact same bullshit your Dear Leader was doing to discredit clean energy — you’re suggesting ideas and programs we can support. Oh, that’s that good shit!
…now if you’d only drop the bigotry against trans people and the uncritical ass-kissing fealty to Donald Trump. Do that and you might not sound like such a conservative dipshit — to the point where you could pass for someone who didn’t look uncritically at the Trump administration and didn’t think a vote for cruelty, bigotry, and good ol’ American fascism was a good thing.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
So long as it means all such partnerships — even the ones ordained as marriages by religious sects — are all referred to as “civil partnerships” in official government documents and on official government forms, such that a gay atheist couple and a straight Christian couple are both given “civil partnership licenses”? So long as the same legal rights/privileges given to married couples now still apply when the changeover to “civil partnerships” is completed? Hell yes, go nuts.
But if straight people/religious people still get “marriage licenses” and still get more legal rights/privileges that people in “civil partnerships”? Fuck every last bit of it. Either it’s equality or it’s “separate but equal”, and we all know how well that worked out in the past.
Except they’re…uh…not a roadblock any more. Same-sex marriage was made legal nationwide almost six years ago. They’re an obstacle to keeping same-sex marriage legal, sure. But the Supreme Court steamrolled their shit in 2015, in terms of making it legal nationwide.
No, it really isn’t. Your discomfort with the existence of transgender people doesn’t, won’t, and shouldn’t have any bearing on whether they deserve equal access to civil rights and protection from discrimination based only on who they are.
Is there now, and has there ever been, any credible indication that cisgender men are dressing up in female-coded clothing and presenting themselves as female to gain access to women’s restrooms/showers en masse? No, quoting bigots doesn’t count as a credible indication. Neither does quoting heavily biased/largely discredited sources.
I’ve got news for you, fam: They can do that now without having to fake presenting as the opposite gender. Do you think those signs outside a bathroom are fucking magical barriers or some shit? I’m a cisgender male, and I can walk into a women’s restroom without being transported directly to jail or incinerated by a dragon or whatever you think happens if you cross that invisible line. (And for the record: I’ve never walked into a women’s restroom unless it is the only working restoom in a given building.)
If a person wants to commit a crime inside a restroom meant for the opposite sex — i.e., if a cisgender male wants to rape a cisgender woman in a stall in a women’s bathroom — they’re probably not going to dress up for the sake of committing that crime. And your worries about transgender people using “the wrong restroom” brings up a point that I don’t think you’ve ever considered: If a fully transitioned transgender female is forced by law to use the men’s restroom, what the fuck do you think is going to happen to her?
The bathroom issue is what I’m talking about when I talk about how conservatives want to push queer people out of society: A trans person who doesn’t feel safe when using the bathroom in public — as everyone does at some point in their life — will want to leave their house less. If they go out less, they become less visible in public. If they’re less visible in public, people discomforted by the existence of trans people don’t have to think that much about trans people. Ergo, using the bathroom issue as a wedge to drive trans people out of public life is one-hundred fucking percent the methodology of a conservative bigot. Congratulations — you’re on the side of the people whom you keep saying you don’t side with.
They’re not “radical” if they’re gradual, you dipshit. It’s why the legalization of same-sex marriage nationwide was a radical change: It happened suddenly and without having to need every individual state to legalize it by themselves.
So suggest something better. Look for something better that’s already out there and champion it. But let’s not act like doing what we’re doing now — incrementally moving away from fossil fuels at a snail’s pace, letting the biggest polluters get off virtually scot-free — is making the kind of difference that needs to be made for the sake of avoiding a climate change–driven Great Extinction.
No, it doesn’t. The gender binary is bullshit, I agree, but “transgender” as a term is near-specifically intended for use in referencing that binary. (Maybe I’m wrong about that, though. Being cisgender, I’m not well-versed in terminology and usage and context for language surrounding the gender spectrum.)
…fucking what
Forcing accomodation guarantees accomodation. That’s where we start. Tolerance comes next — you don’t have to like trans people existing, but you have to tolerate their existence because they’re fucking human beings like you. If tolerance leads to acceptance, great. But trans people aren’t looking for your motherfucking permission to exist, and they sure as hell don’t need your permission to live out and proud.
Now fuck off back to the TERF forum that spawned you, you transmisic bigot.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
It is a little weird, though. I would’ve thought that actual vampire Peter Thiel would be involved with something less prone to killing the suppliers of his blood.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
We allow for citizens’ arrests to provide an average citizen with the legal cover they need to lawfully intervene in cases such as the ones you describe. Handing the power of police — of arrest, of armed violence in defense of others, of the right to extrajudicially execute people who are deemed a “threat” to the general public — to a group of paid vigilantes with potentially no standards for hiring and no oversight on how they operate is not now, and has never been, a good idea.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
Getting rid of qualified immunity doesn’t get rid of all immunity. Cops are allowed to break certain laws — e.g., to buy and sell drugs and guns illegally — as part of their job. Society extends that privilege to police in the hopes that police will use that privilege for the common good (i.e., to catch criminals in the act).
Ending qualified immunity will not end all police privilege. No lawmaker would dare to think of ending all police privilege. To do so would be to commit political suicide.
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
Does the average police department need a SWAT team?
Does the average police department need an MRAP?
Does the average police department need sonic cannons?
Because numerous “average” police departments across the country have at least those things.
We do not need police departments to become an unofficial part of the United States Armed Forces — and to treat the United States as a war zone where every civilian is a potential threat to “blue lives”. Anyone who thinks otherwise is part of the reason we can’t reform policing from something resembling a military outfit to something resembling a group of people dedicated to protecting everyday citizens without reckless disregard for human life.
…and besides all that, ten bux says you think Derek Chauvin was justified.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
Qualified immunity is not the entirety of police privilege.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
No lawmaker in the United States would revoke police privilege in its entirety. The lawmakers that want to revoke the privilege of qualified immunity face a massive uphill battle in getting that done. For now, there really isn’t an alternative until American lawmakers grow back their spines.
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
And what would you suggest as a solution — doing nothing? Doing something that gives cops the ability to buy more MRAPs, or gives them greater authority and power with even less oversight? I don’t see you tossing out any ideas on how to deal with a broken police system or the underlying issues that turn people into desperate criminals, so if you’re going to criticize what I have to say on the issue, the absolute bare minimum you can do is bring some fucking ideas of your own to the table. If you can’t do that: Further contributions from you will be regarded as irrelevant and treated accordingly.
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
You really don’t fucking get it.
Nobody is saying there isn’t a place for police in society. But police have to be more than armed assholes who operate with little-to-no oversight and are placed above the same laws they swear to uphold. Police have to be more than violent thugs who are trained to see every citizen as a potentially lethal threat.
Police also have to stop being the be-all, end-all of emergency response. People calling the cops for wellness checks have gotten other people killed by those cops. That shit needs to end.
Do we need the police? Arguably, yes. Do we need them for everything? Objectively, no. Do we need to give them the funding they need to buy military-grade equipment and use it on everyday citizens like American cities are fucking war zones? Fuckin’ hell no.
On the post: Private Security Company Thinks It Should Be Able To Take People To Jail Just Like Real Cops
Per CNN: “Citizen, an app that started as a service for real-time crime alerts made waves late last week with news that it was testing a private, on-demand security force, after a company-branded patrol car was spotted in Los Angeles. Now the company has said that test is over, and that it will not launch its own private security force in the future — but would not rule out partnerships with other companies that would accomplish the same thing.”
So…uh… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
Funding the police won’t solve the fundamental issues that create the conditions for people to become criminals. You want to solve the problem of crime? Solve the problem of desperation — the problem of people feeling so out of options that they turn to crime. Starting with poverty is the bare fucking minimum.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
So long as those secular civil partnerships are on equal legal footing with government-recognized sectarian marriages and both are referred to using the same terminology (i.e., “civil partnerships”) in official government documents, I have little issue with that. But if the idea is to make those civil partnerships “separate but equal” to sectarian marriages? Fuck that noise.
We can start by guaranteeing equality of access and care and respect to transgender people. They’re people, too — or do you not believe they deserve to have their civil rights protected (and their basic humanity recognized) by the government?
Never said you did. Besides, it’s clear that you’re the kind of self-hating queer person that votes for the same politicians who want people like you stashed away from the rest of society — six feet under, if possible, but simply being in the closet will work well enough for them.
Let’s not and say I didn’t. But wind turbines are a cleaner and overall safer-to-the-environment form of energy than, say, burning fossil fuels. How about the detriments to wildlife and humanity alike caused by the smoke emitted by coal power plants?
Recycling is nice, but it won’t fix the bigger problem — which is that major corporations (especially the “Big Energy” companies) are the leading polluters in the world and few people are doing anything to make those companies work towards preventing the worst-case climate change scenarios.
I’m against the en masse eradication of wildlife habitats. That said: Rejecting clean energy altogether because of its potential impact on the environment is basically throwing one’s hands up in the air and saying “welp, this can’t work, so we might as well keep burning fossil fuels until we go extinct”.
We can create clean energy facilities — including wind farms — that balance our need for energy with the protection of the environment (and the wildlife therein). We must find ways to do that. To act like we can’t is to give up. Unless you want people being born today to live in an even worse environment once they become adults, we can’t give up on trying to find the right solutions for this problem.
Irrelevant. Nobody mentioned the Electoral College.
You can show me the map that shows how “red” counties outnumber “blue” counties and other such horseshit that you think justifies the claim “over half of the country supported Trump”. I can demolish that “evidence” in five words: Land doesn’t vote. People do.
You can’t fight the statistics: If we look at the popular vote, less than a quarter of the country — and less than half of all participating voters — voted for Donald Trump in both 2016 and 2020. So don’t bring up that fake-ass bullshit claim again, you fractally wrong dipshit.
I can’t even pretend to know enough about the experience of trans people to have an opinion on this facet of the broader trans community — but I know that referring to trans women as men is bullshit, especially coming from someone who themselves claims to be queer.
And the conservative push for “none” — as evidenced by the transgender military ban enacted by Donald Trump — leaves no room for finding a solution that works for both the military and trans people. And besides, conservatives don’t want to even recognize the humanity of trans people. To conservatives, trans people are…oh, how best to put this…let’s say, “undesirables”. Yeah, that seems like the reich terminology for their beliefs.
And that’s because of queer people like you, since I’m almost sure you’re one of those “drop the T” folks. You want me to recognize and give you credit for your queerness, but you’re not willing to stand and fight for fellow queer people because they’re transgender? Fuck. You. (And on behalf of the Gay Agenda: Your invitation to Pride Month has been, by thine own hand, revoked.)
Focusing only on the short-term is a bad idea. Clean up enough trash and you’ll think “oh, hey, things are okay now” — and you’ll get lazy and watch things go back to “not okay” (or worse). We must focus on changing entire systems, not individual behaviors.
Yes, we should all do our part to reduce our impact on the environment. But regular jackoffs like you and I have a near-negligible impact in comparison to the major polluters in this world. We have to work towards eliminating the incentives to pollute — to keep using fossil fuels, to lower emissions standards, to refuse responsibility for disasters such as oil spills — or else those polluters will keep doing what they do.
Recycling our plastic bottles won’t mean shit unless we make the manufacturers of those plastic bottles pollute less. Taking fewer/shorter showers won’t mean shit unless we make energy companies stop polluting water sources. We must change our actions, yes — but we must also fight to change the systems that enable the worst polluters to pollute in ways that harm the world and its living beings…including people like you and me.
Unless you prefer to breathe polluted air and drink poisoned water, anyway.
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
I don’t know, and I don’t want to know. Also that is a cursed question and you should know better than to ask it. 😛
On the post: Senator Chris Coons Says No One Who Has Ever Criticized Intellectual Property Can Head The Patent Office
If anything, putting a critic of the system in charge of it can only improve the system — or, at worst, keep the status quo as-is.
A critic of the system will look at the shortcomings of said system and work to mitigate or correct those flaws. Hell, a critic is willing to admit there are flaws in the first place. But someone who can’t/won’t criticize the system will never even admit that the system has flaws; their inability to look outside their own ideology (and self-interest) will doom the system. Flaws will become bigger, consequences will grow worse, and nothing will be done because the maximalists will see the harms caused by their stance as a good thing.
Give me a critic over a maximalist every day of the week. At least the critic will recognize reality.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
Plaintiff argues that they “would have walked away”. But Plaintiff offers no facts in their Complaint to support this proposition.
Yes, I’m well aware of how much your support for Donald Trump means to you.
…oh, you ignorant motherfucker. You really think you’re going to get virtual asspats for being a Trump supporter who’s in favor of civil rights for queer people? (You’re not.)
Queer people aren’t a monolith. Some of them are foolish enough to vote for the furtherance of their own pain and suffering by voting for Republican politicians.
Let me toss that right back at you: I don’t give a flying rat fuck. You don’t get brownie points from me for saying you’re queer. It isn’t a shield that magically protects you from criticism.
[citation needed]
The idea of marriage, even if it wasn’t called marriage, existed long before both Christianity and Judaism did. The concept of marriage — and the word itself — belong to no one person, group, or religious creed. Or does every non-Christian and non-Jew in the world now have to refer to their marriages as “domestic partnerships” or whatever? And who’s going to enforce that “ownership” — You? Your religious leaders? The 1989 Denver Broncos?
that…that isn’t…holy shit you’re at least six years behind the times, what the fuck
While making sure same-sex marriage remains legal is important, queer political groups around the country are no longer near-singularly focused on…y’know, legalizing same-sex marriage. They won that fight. Now they’re fighting for equal protection from discrimination — since, in numerous states across the country, queer people can still be fired, evicted, and denied service in public-facing businesses for being queer.
So long as it’s abolished equally — take every legal privilege and tax break out of the law for all couples, not just the gay ones — I’ve no problem with getting the state out of the marriage business. But if abolishing marriage is limited only to queer people? That’s bullshit, and even you should know it’s bullshit.
The fact that you’re using a clumsy-ass phrase such as “sexual-alternate” — one that I’ve literally never heard until now, and I follow a decent amount of queer people on social media — instead of the reclaimed catch-all of “queer” or some variant of the LGBTQ acronym is a tell that maybe you’re not as queer as you want me to think you are.
GOP lawmakers all but deny the truth of global climate change — and if they don’t, they near-uniformly believe (or say they believe) human-created pollution isn’t a primary reason for that change. Even if they believed otherwise, they’re not proactive about stopping climate change; Trump himself extolled the virtues of fossil fuel far more than he did the same for renewable energy.
Hell, Trump himself once mocked wind turbines: “The Green New Deal, right? Green New Deal — I encourage it. I think it’s really something that they should promote. They should work hard on. It’s something our country needs desperately. They have to go out and get it. But I’ll take the other side of that argument only because I’m mandated to. I’m mandated. But they should stay with that argument. Never change. Never change. No planes. No energy. When the wind stops blowing, that’s the end of your electric. Let’s hurry up. ‘Darling’ — ‘Darling, is the wind blowing today? I’d like to watch television, darling.’ No, but it’s true.” That doesn’t sound like someone who thinks clean renewable energy is important — or someone who thinks saving the environment is a worthwhile investment.
[citation needed]
I agree — the planet isn’t going to be destroyed by a rise in global temperature over a period of decades/centuries.
It’s every form of life on this planet that’s in danger of being part of the Sixth Great Extinction, which is being hurried along nicely by that aforementioned rise in global temperatures. Every person, every dog and cat, every bird and bee, every creature from the smallest rodent to the largest elephant — all of them are going to be affected by global climate change. And the lawmakers you support don’t seem to give a fuck. Or are you actually going to criticize Republican lawmakers (including Trump) for their full-throated support of the continued use of fossil fuels over the use of renewable energy?
And yet, they’re trying to demolish Section 230 in an attempt to circumvent both property rights and the freedom of association.
…y’know, for someone who says they aren’t a Republican, you sure do seem to uncritically defend them a whole hell of a lot. 🤔
You really don’t understand that the Republican party you think you know by way of reading history books isn’t the Republican party of today. Read books that cover more recent Republican history — history such as the Southern Strategy and the Dixiecrats that flipped the ideologies of the two parties, such that the so-called party of Lincoln became the party of bigotry. (I mean, you don’t see the KKK seriously endorsing Democrats these days…)
That you used the phrase “private property” in a discussion about slavery is, at best, an unintentionally misguided statement. In the future, you should do your absolute best to avoid the perception that you could be talking about actual goddamned human beings instead of land or houses.
No, they didn’t.
According to Wikipedia, “The United States had an official resident population of 331,449,281 on April 1, 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.” Let’s round that down to an even 330 million. Now, let’s take a look at the election results from both 2016 and 2020:
In 2016, Donald Trump received 62,984,828 votes (46.1%) and Hillary Clinton received 65,853,514 votes (48.2%).
Trump lost the popular vote in both elections. He didn’t hit a 50% mark in either election. And as for the claim that 50% of the U.S. population voted for Trump? In 2016, that number was closer to 20% (63 million out of 330 million); in 2020, that number was closer to 23% (74 million out of 330 million).
You can fuck with perceptions, but you can’t fuck with publicly-known statistics. Don’t try that again.
Again: You seem to think this all started with “leftists” when, in the plane of reality on which everyone else is sitting, conservative Christians invented “cancel culture”.
Sort of like how you cling to the fact that Donald Trump did no wrong, much like the group you associate with — Trump supporters — keep clinging to that same fact? 🤔
No, you weren’t, but keep telling yourself that.
Queer people were already serving in the military well before both Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (both its enactment and its repeal) and Trump’s transgender ban. Also, don’t think I don’t see that close-enough reference to “alphabet people”, a derisive anti-queer term used largely in conservative circles. Again: For someone who says they aren’t aligned with the GOP/conservatism, you’re doin’ — I say, you’re doin’ a shit job of provin’ it, sonny. (Nice kid, but about as sharp as a bowling ball.)
…says the jackass who thought saying “I’m pansexual” was going to protect them from criticism for their support of anti-queer views.
You’ve more in common with self-hating queer conservatives than you do with the broader queer community. You’ve more in common with conservatives than you do with any other political group. Accept what you are. Be proud of it. Own it. And don’t cower behind your sexual identity as a means to escape criticism for being a conservative bitch.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
Yes, you are.
No, you’re right. 🙃
…says the jackass who obviously prefers right-wing echo chambers, based on the fact that they linked to townhall.com at one point.
“Nuh-uh to your uh-huh” is not evidence.
They’re practically two sides of the same coin. That you’re not seeing that is your own mistake.
And on issues such as gay rights, where is the compromise between, say, “gay people should have the same access to civil rights as straight people” and “gay people shouldn’t have any civil rights at all because they’re abominations unto God”? You’re so enamored with the idea that the solution is always “compromise” and “meet in the middle” that you think the centrist idea — “gay people should have equal access to civil rights” — is the “extreme left” position instead of the centrist position. (The “extreme left” position in this instance, BTW, would be “only gay people should have civil rights”. And literally nobody is calling for that.)
The answer isn’t always in the middle. The answer isn’t always compromise. Your ridiculously fucked-up fealty to the idea of “We MuSt LiStEn To BoTh SiDeS!!!1!1” has you thinking a compromise can be had on literally anything. Hey, how about climate change — where’s the compromise between “we should work on preventing future damage to the environment” and “we shouldn’t give a damn about future damage to the environment because we’re not damaging the environment”?
Except no, they wouldn’t. Republican lawmakers don’t give a fuck about any of that.
You admitted that you voted for Trump. You associated yourself with other Trump supporters. You said you could live with your vote — and that means you also have to live with the consequences of admitting to that vote. One of those consequences? You’re now associated with every “deplorable” human being — every racist, every homophobe, every bigot of every stripe who fell in line behind Trump and the GOP. Learn to live with that.
Before what you’re referring to was called “cancel culture”, it was called “moral crusades”, and leftists didn’t invent it, conservative Christians did.
And when an American fascist who is infinitely more competent than Trump gets into office, I will take comfort in knowing that they will come for you, too. They always go after their own when they run out of fresh victims — you will be no different. After all, you voted for Barack Obama. How much of a loyalist can you be to the cause of Trumpism if you were willing to vote for the man who caused Donald Trump so much embarassment that he ran for president and fucked up an entire country out of spite at being mocked by a Black man?
Now fuck off back to the comments section of Infowars, Lodos. I’m sure Alex is waiting for you. 🐸
On the post: Content Moderation Case Studies: Twitter Clarifies Hacked Material Policy After Hunter Biden Controversy (2020)
Hell, Trump tried to pressure a domestic government body to get them to do something beneficial for him.
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
It’s possible that Tucker Carlson raped and killed a woman late last night. That doesn’t mean it actually happened.
(COVERING MY ASS STATEMENT: The preceding statement was not an actual accusation of an actual crime. I have not accused and will not accuse Tucker Carlson of having committing a rape-homicide.)
If and when evidence stronger than mere supposition says “the virus was created in a lab” comes to light, I’ll give it an honest look. Same goes for the dueling claims of “the virus escaped by oversight” and “the virus was unleashed on purpose”. Until then: I need more than mere supposition to accept the claim as anything but mere supposition. Saying a thing happened doesn’t make it so, or else I’d be saying “Lodos finally grew a brain”.
(COVERING MY ASS STATEMENT: The preceding statement was not an actual description of an actual event. I have not accused and will not accuse Lostinlodos of having grown a brain.)
On the post: The Flopping Of Trump's Blog Proves That It's Not Free Speech He's Upset About; But Free Reach
NARRATOR: “I’m not going to continue to argue this,” said Lodos, who continued to argue.
Boy — I say, boy, you need to learn about memes. (Nice kid, but about as sharp as a deflated balloon.)
Look up Trump and the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” regulation. Seriously, you couldn’t have fucking Googled that when I first handed the name of the regulation to you on a silver platter?
Two things:
It’s “you’re” — but thank you for further confirming the English proficiency of the average Trump supporter.
Could’ve fooled me.
Show me any president in modern history who managed to come through on all their campaign promises, especially in the face of a hostile Congress that literally promised to stop anything said president wanted to get through Congress for the majority of his two terms.
I voted for Obama twice. Donald Trump was not promising what Obama had promised. Donald Trump was promising to inflict pain and suffering and cruelty upon those weren’t his voting base — to “own the libs” at any cost, and to hell with anyone who got in his way — under the guise of “making America great again”.
He came through on some of those things, sure. That those things just so happened to harm people you don’t seem to give a fuck about apparently doesn’t matter to you, but sure, I’ll give you that one.
…fucking what
…fucking what
And someone who never had any experience in any level of public service could be trusted?
As opposed to Trump’s approach of “fuck our old allies, let’s kiss the asses of tyrants and monarchs and Vladimir Putin”, which really did wonders for the U.S. on the international diplomacy front~.
[citation needed]
This planet is the only one we’ve got. How much are you willing to spend on saving it? Because Trump apparently wanted to spend (and do) less than the previous administration did on protecting the environment and battling global climate change. I mean, shit, Trump complained about energy-efficient light bulbs at one point.
[citation needed — also Trump could damn well have it himself]
What’s hilarious is how you think Biden is a leftist. He is, at best, a centrist Democrat who has an all-too-rosy view of the GOP and is being yanked ever-so-slightly to the left by his Congressional allies and the American public. Besides, most of the “leftist” policy to which you refer would probably be centrist in several other developed countries around the world. Hell, he doesn’t even support nationalized healthcare/Medicare for All.
Tell that to the 400,000 Americans that died in the year between the arrival of COVID-19 on American shores and Trump leaving office. Tell that to the people who lost their jobs and their businesses because COVID-19 shut down a shitload of everything around the country. Tell that to the mother of Heather Heyer.
I can’t (and won’t pretend to) know what would’ve happened in the four years Hillary Clinton could’ve been president. No one can. But I can at least make an educated guess that, for all of her faults, she would’ve been a far more competent — and far less openly corrupt — national leader than Donald “yeah I asked Georgia election officials to overturn a legal election result for no reason other than to make me happy big whoop wanna fight about it” Trump.
ahahahaha you actually think socialism isn’t in America
what the fuck do you think tax-funded institutions and programs like Social Security and public schools are, fuckin’ capitalism
holy shit dude
holy shit
Which is weird, because Trump supporters seem to love it, and yet here you are.
That’s no way to talk about your family.
Yeah, and I’m sure most of them believe January 6th was an insurrection intended to subvert American democracy in favor of a man who lied about (and continues to lie about) the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election~.
(holy shit dudes, Lodos thinks I’m really that dumb, can you fucking believe that shit)
Yes, and? That’s what Trump supporters actually believe. Go there and join them in your quest to rid the world of The Marxist Joe Biden and his coven of Socialist Witches and Communist Warlocks what haunt the halls of Congress, casting spells and chanting “worker’s rights” and summoning dragons and whatever else y’all think they’re doing.
Yes, I’m sure you’d enjoy a platform where bigots can espouse their bigotry directly at the targets of said bigotry without being punished for doing so.
No, what I’ve been is measured. I haven’t been civil with you for a while; I’ve merely hidden my incivility beneath flowery language. You don’t have and dont’ deserve my respect, and you won’t get it any time soon. The only reason I haven’t been cursing you out every other fucking sentence — and I could, believe me — is because you’re the kind of uptight fuckwit who thinks cursing is an “instant lose” trigger to an argument rather than an expression of emotion. (Speaking of which: You seem to lack any emotion in your arguments. No wonder you’re a Trump supporter — you come off as a sociopath.)
But if you really want me to unload on you…well, I’m not going to give you that “honor”, either. You don’t get to control my responses or the level of measured civility therein. You’re going to get exactly as much incivility as you deserve.
Now fuck off to your Trumpian circlejerk. Nobody here is going to kiss your ass, treat you kindly, and thank you for the discourse. We’d all be better off — you included — if you left this site and never came back, you heartless son of a bitch.
Next >>