Total posts: 4,833
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Dysphoria is defined as dissatisfaction. It's not a sexual orientation, it's stress.you're the one who asked"how do you solve the issue of (gender) dysphoria ?"that's like asking"how do you solve the issue of homosexuality ?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You gota feel sorry for the likes of Barr and Pence. There are people for whom the social contract is invisible because they think of it as the fabric of the universe.
They can't imagine anything outside of it, not really. War is far off and in other countries. Political prosecutions happen in distant banana republics. Election fraud is something you laugh at and shake your head when it happens in Africa.
They aren't capable of conceptualizing what is happening now. All they see is both sides competing as to who can be more lawless and they refuse to accept that both sides are moderate compared to their bases.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I suggest we outlaw outlawing assertions because some people claim that those assertions are dangerous to people who suffer from gender dysphoria. On paper this is already law (see 1st amendment), but you know there are a lot of people who don't let something like the bill of rights stop them; and of course there are all the other anglophone countries.ok, so you're against outlawing trans people
...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
because i don't understand why any of this bothers people so much
Same reason any cult bothers people. They think it steals people's purpose and happiness and replaces it with false hopes and lies.
i certainly see no danger in promoting the "trans agenda"don't knock it till you've tried it
I've tried promoting agendas, winning is fun so I bet it is much more fun with every university, actor, news channel, and government entity above the township level backs you 100% and implies and criticism of you is terrorism.
saying that jesus loves me and takes a personal interest in my life is also delusionYes, and a dangerous one when people start trying to criminalize anyone who denies it.are you suggesting we should outlaw gender dysphoria ?
Where are you getting this stuff from?
I suggest we outlaw outlawing assertions because some people claim that those assertions are dangerous to people who suffer from gender dysphoria. On paper this is already law (see 1st amendment), but you know there are a lot of people who don't let something like the bill of rights stop them; and of course there are all the other anglophone countries.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
*mind explodes*Also, Kristi Noem is a woman.
They do exist....
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
People kill billions of animals a year.
Not all animals are equally worthy of existing and not all inter-species relationships have the same implications.
I really dont see what you have to complain about about Kristi Noem.
We're pack animals (or troop animals I guess), so are dogs.
It rubs our instincts the wrong way to integrate an animal into our pack/troop and then treat them like they're worthless. It should. Loyalty is a baseline social virtue.
Created:
What a thread...
They don't regularly eat dogs in China. There are a billion people there, there are always going to be some people doing some thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Do you believe a president who appoints someone for cash to a high position is immune? Appointing someone is after all an official act.it is common practice for large campaign contributor to receive ambassadorships
Also bribery is explicitly listed in the impeachments clause... that is not immunity that is specification of jurisdiction (which you conflated with legal standing).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
you're arguing that there will be an apocalypse of suicides if we don't get this gender identity thing "under control" ?
No
Those are not delusions. Saying someone without a ovaries has an ovulation, that is delusion.saying that jesus loves me and takes a personal interest in my life is also delusion
Yes, and a dangerous one when people start trying to criminalize anyone who denies it.
the issue was created to get attention. It worked,i guess that means you're playing right into their hands
You're here too.
There are two and only two genuine solutions:you forgot solution number threedon't look up their skirts
Well there you have it Mall, the cure to gender dysphoria that was right in front of us the whole time!
Created:
Posted in:
Well on the surface you have a point, but what they are really mad about is their belief (which as far as I can tell is incorrect) that Israel drove off everyone before setting up settlements.
In reality they fled because they did not want to live under Israeli law. That's also why anyone in Gaza is suffering right now. There is absolutely no way 80% of houses are destroyed. They left the houses because they might be destroyed and they might be destroyed because Israel has a better idea of where Hamas is than Hamas or the locals do.
Created:
-->
@veronicadoublesawyer
Well he's moved on to Japenese style imperialism.
So maybe because the eternally virtuous emperor communicated that the pedos are better in an extremely vague haiku?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
You believe that Double_R?[Sidewalker] Two weeks before the 2020 election, Trump insisted that Barr arrest Biden and his family, Barr refused.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
The same system we’ve been using for 250 years.If it was Lincoln would have been taken out by a bunch of slavers who conveniently moved to DC and sat on a jury finding him guilty of conspiring with the moon to destroy the sun.Is there a point you are trying to make here?
It's pretty obvious. If you can convict anyone in any office with a jury selected from the inhabitants of Washington DC (where all federal office holders go or interact with) then all you need to do to control the entire federal government is populate Washington DC with insanely biased zealots.
What happens then when it just so happens that the forces which promote larger subsidies and bureaucratic sprawl dictate the local population? What happens when the political issue then comes to be the bureaucratic sprawl vs the average citizen?
If what you say was true, then the slavers missed an easy opportunity to subvert Lincoln.
The fact is it wouldn't have worked. Lincoln had supreme court justices put under house arrest. Anyone who tried to summon him to face charges in DC would have found themselves in an army stockade, and that's exactly what Trump should have done and should do at the earliest opportunity. It is after all, war by other means.
No congressmen, Senator, or judge has ever faced prosecution? Wow that’s news to me.Not for official acts without impeachment.I’m sure there are plenty of examples
Well if you're sure then there must be examples.
are you ascribing to the theory that if someone acts in “an official capacity” then they are and should be immune from prosecution even if their act was entirely motivated by personal gain?
You are just making up legal doctrine which does not exist in law or precedent. (much like qualified immunity or standing when they were introduced)
Nobody swears to execute their duties "so long as there is no personal gain" nor has Trump been accused of any crime where personal gain is claimed to be a factor. "entirely motivated by personal gain" is also thought crime territory.
What does have a long history of precedent is judges not handing questions of fact to juries when the Prima facie there is no way to prove the claim beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is not possible to prove any official duty was done solely for personal gain (except confession) since by definition performing as an office holder is motivation a reasonable person could not discount.
In other words you could never prove Trump didn't think the election was stolen (except by confession), and if he thought it was stolen it was his duty to try and fix it as best he could.
Or how about if a VP decided to use the power of US foreign policy for the sole purpose of getting a foreign prosecutor fired just to protect his son? Is that individual (rightfully) immune?
You are the one who cares about "sole motivations", not me. "A motivation" is enough.
Biden was (things change) de facto immune. Whether I agree with it or not is entirely besides the point. What matters is that if the left-tribe thinks they can tip the table and keep playing, they should take care about the number of "me"s they are creating. Polls say there are already too many.
Ask a slaver. This isn't about reality but who decides.This is a debate site so it’s supposed to be about examining rational thought, but you’d have to offer some for that conversation to take place.
This is the reality: The purpose of the impeachment clause which implies immunity from other forms of prosecution is to prevent small pockets of radicals from having veto power over the federal government. Even if the first radicals to try were morally right, all other factions would then need to engage in the same form of warfare which would lead to a legitimacy crises the federal government would not survive.
The first radicals could have been the slavers. You could very easily find jury pools in the south that would hang Lincoln after 23 seconds of deliberation and no evidence. They didn't control the institutions required to pull that off, they thought secession was the path of least resistance. Yet if they had tried the supreme court would certainly have ruled exactly I describe above and if there was any danger that they did not Lincoln would have 'persuaded' one or two justices.
The pocket of radicals right now are DC and Manhattan. Atlanta GA is also a very biased location but I wouldn't be surprised if it was a hung jury.
The deep blue inner cities are the plantations of the modern era. Authority is not given to them to decide the fate of the nation. Anyone who pretends they have that authority is the de jure aggressor in the next civil war.
Talking about what Trump really did or should have done, and what the laws do imply when consistently applied is something I have done and will do again, but that does not change the fact that this nation will not endure for three cycles where candidates are vetoed by juries and judges doubted my hundreds of millions. It may not survive one such cycle.
That is why the constitution exists. To separate powers. To enumerate responsibilities and checks. It doesn't guarantee justice, it tries to ensure stability so that justice can eventually come about without wars. Still it fails at that because sometimes people care more about what they see as justice than the continued existence of the federal government.
I am one such person. So were the slavers. So were the abolitionists. I do not delude myself or try to gaslight others though. I know I can't just throw the constitution over my shoulder and then in the next breath demand somebody obey one particular part of it when it benefits me. That is what the left tribe is doing right now and it isn't working.
Reality is Trump didn't violate any laws that everybody else didn't violate 10 times worse.How many people have taken classified documents from the WH (including nuclear secrets), refused to give them back, lied to the FBI about having them, moved the documents to evade detection, and ordered the evidence of all of this to be destroyed… and wasn’t prosecuted?
People have taken classified documents hold. They would have refused if asked, as Clinton refused. It's not a lie to not tell the FBI exactly what you have, Clinton refused to give a description. Moving documents isn't evasion if they're personal property.
Hilary also ordered evidence destroyed (based on the same quality of evidence).
In a single marriage I exceeded the so called "crimes" of Trump.
My position is that no crime should be immune, and I can’t believe that’s even controversial.
It's a fallacy of a complex question. Immunity (or the immunity actually implied by various constitutions) is about who can prosecute and who the defendant must be. Not whether crime is legal or not.
I understand immunity against civil litigation because in some positions, actions that will adversely impact someone is not avoidable. Imagine if every time a police officer made a wrongful arrest the officer could be sued personally - no one would want the job.
Speaks more to the flaws in civil litigation than any genuine need for immunity.
But this doesn’t mean officers get to use their badge as a license to murder someone.
Plenty of judges and prosecutors have said exactly that, according to a significant political faction.
Now imagine if this protection were to suddenly disappear for certain unpopular officers.... say a whistleblower? That's what this is. That's what this is about. I don't particularly care if the system is perfect or just, all that matters is that it was designed to work a certain way and poking dissident shaped holes in the filter and thinking it will end there is the act of someone looking to start a civil war (or brainwashed and/or stupid as is more often the case)
As if assessing a persons motivations is not one of the most basic elements of human nature that we all engage in and use to formulate opinions about people we meet every single day of our lives.
As if there aren't 250,000 people in the united states right now who think a significant number of democrats are child raping baby eating demons.
As if they can't form a township somewhere.
As if they can't elect their own prosecutor to charge every democrat they can list.
That's how millions of us view these "91 charges".
What legal doctrine that you acknowledge would stop them?
But every crime requires evidence to be prosecuted
Like the crime Trump was supposedly trying to obscure by labeling payments to Cohen as "legal expenses"
if you don’t have it you’ve got nothing. That’s how it should work.
but it isn't. A finite number of people made that choice for all of us. You better hope the supreme court (and other appellate) crush this shit before there is no turning back.
There are those who said the simple fact that the FBI investigate Hilary before an election was interference. This? This is and will forever be interference, but if those responsible are defeated at every turn and face harsh sentences the genie might just be put back into the bottle.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
B) People (especially children) being sterilized and then later realizing they wanted biological children and can barely attract a mate much less pass their genes on.do you believe parents should be allowed to make life and death decisions for their own children ?
It's like democracy. The worst, except for everything else. Parents on average are more likely to have the child's best interest at heart than anyone else in the world.
Now if you're claiming the parents are objectively wrong then you're claiming sterilization is objectively the only moral thing to do, and that is going to be a very hard conclusion to justify; especially given the easily predicted regret that is occurring (and will get much worse).
C) Families being broken up by a disagreement over gender identitythe number one cause of families breaking up is FINANCIAL STRESSmaybe try tackling that one first
If I had to choose I would certainly create a post-scarcity world before I cured gender dysphoria or more accurately the cult that makes gender dysphoria worse on a social level.
being trans is not automatically a "problem to solve"
Oh it's a problem. It's defined as a problem.
There are two and only two genuine solutions:
1.) Stop the neural pattern that creates the dysphoria
2.) Transfer the mind to a functioning body that would not create dysphoria
Since we can do neither there is nothing to do. However, people are trying to do (2) via mutilation; like leeches in the dark ages this is doing more harm than good. So even if you have every right to put leeches on your back, I wouldn't advise it if you ask me, and people are asking me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No, I used the holocaust in an ad absurdum argument to disprove the premise that "If a thing occurred before an event, that event could not increase the frequency of that thing (or make it worse etc...)"If that premise was true we could discard the holocaust, after all people have been murdered for being jews since there were jews.jesus, ok, you just jump straight to "holocaust" every time you encounter a pretty standard "slippery slope" argument ?
It wasn't a slippery slope argument. It was just an implicit false premise.
Yes I go straight for the most obvious examples. That's what makes it an appeal to absurdity. The most absurd the implied conclusion the sooner the false premise can be abandoned by the reader.
i don't think anyone was suggesting the gender thing "will never increase in frequency"
You are conflating different contexts. The context of post #28 was D)
[ADOL] People killing themselves for reasons (A), (B), and (C).
So the context is people killing themselves for those reasons.
Yes people killed themselves before those were reasons because there are other reasons, that does not mean people did not kill themselves for these reasons or that the existence of these reasons did not increase the net suicide rate.
i think the general argument here is, TRANS PEOPLE DREAM OF LIBERTY
Liberty is freedom from force, deception, and threats of force or deception.
It is not entitlement to be affirmed or accommodated, indeed affirmation and accommodation of delusion is destructive to the affirmed and those around him or her.
you know, to dress however they feel like dressing and talking however the fuck they feel like talking and telling you what they look like naked if and when they feel like telling you what they look like naked
Is a dress not real? Are the feelings not real? Is an image or a body not real?
Those are not delusions. Saying someone without a ovaries has an ovulation, that is delusion.
they just want normal individual LIBERTY, do you know what i'm talking about ?
Some do. Many who have no gender dysphoria and some who do are after much more and are sacrificing the truth in the process.
do you want the cops to tell you what clothes you can and can't wear ?
No, but they do tell me I need to wear clothes.
That in no way disproves the assertion that delusions are problematic.there are thousands of delusions that are demonstrably MORE problematic than what pronoun someone personally prefers
Yes, but there isn't a limit to the number of delusions that can be identified so that is irrelevant.
This one is popping up so often because people are making it pop up. They want attention, the issue was created to get attention. It worked, that's why this thread was created and why you asked me questions about what I believed about these particular delusions.
A) People attracting homosexuals, then rejecting them because they claim to be heterosexual (even though they are in reality seeking a homosexual relationship)who gives a fuck ?
Well the people who spent a year and a half pursuing a relationship only to have it lost with strong negative emotions should care, and so should the people who want others to be happy.
straight people get mad about getting rejected by STRAIGHT people all the time anyway
and if there was a significant number of rejections caused by a lie which millions of people fervently demanded was the truth that would be 'problematic' (your word).
they've even fought wars over it
I don't think there has ever been a war fought exclusively by one sexual orientation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
It's not who votes, but who counts the votes.I never thought I would see you quoting Stalin.
If one isn't aware of people who think like Stalin the one doesn't understand humanity.
Constitutions exist to defeat Stalins. Stalins ignore them, twist them, and anyone who lets them is asking to be ruled by a Stalin.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
One can only hope, but there are far too many people trying to 'lead' the right-tribe that are perfectly fine with a ratchet mechanism where the left-tribe faces no consequences and are only delayed till next time at which point they will have learned to violate the social contract even harder.All I can say is if Democrat's loose the election, all the Dems involved in these clown show trails better be prepared for the same onslaught being brought upon them. Ya'll set the precedent. This is how its going to be from here on out in every Presidential election.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Judges decide jurisdiction, and if a West Virginia judge be he/she federal or state level decides to allow a case to be brought in his/her court, it will proceed.judges also have jurisdiction based on GEOGRAPHY
Where does a phone call take place?
What is a conspsiracy?
When the federal government steals from West Virginians (In West Virginia) in order to build bombs to drop on Coloradoites in Yemen where did that crime occur?
please provide an example of this arbitrary and capricious behavior you seem so convinced of
Every single so called case civil and criminal Donald Trump and many of those involved in the "stop the steal" effort and Jan 6 have faced.
Highlights:
In New York he is being "charged" under New York law for hiding a crime by mislabeling an invoice. What is the crime that he was hiding? The judge doesn't care.
In New York Trump demanded a trial by jury for the so called defrauding of deutsche bank. The judge didn't care, in fact he lied about it claiming that no request was made. At the end of that fake trial there was an attempt to extort 500 million dollars out of Trump before he could appeal, a clear violation of the 8th amendment.
A NY judge's daughter is raising millions of dollars off Trump's prosecution as her father refuses to recuse himself, the text books wouldn't include that as an example of conflict of interest because it's too fucking obvious to be believable.
When all this can happen, a similarly "motivated" "judge" with the opposite bias will not be stopped by what you call "perfectly logical" things like "standing", no more than "immunity" has stopped these clowns. And make no mistake, they'll pretend there is immunity just as soon as it can be used to defend one of their guys.
Do you know where Trump was when he called Raffensburger? Do you know where Germany is?do you know where the contract was signed ?
You heard of electronic signing? What about power of attorney?
A jurisdiction clause, also known as a choice of law or forum selection clause, is a crucial provision often included in commercial contracts. It establishes the jurisdiction or court that will have the authority to resolve any disputes that may arise between the parties involved in the contract. This clause plays a significant role in defining the legal framework within which contractual issues will be resolved.
There is no contract dispute. It's people impersonating officer's of the court attacking Trump. They weren't a party. There is no injury (a point you dropped like a rock).
No, it's as long as you connect the so called crime to your territory or people no matter how many steps or how tenuous the connection.is this west virginia thing based on a real case or are you just making this stuff up on the fly ?
West Virginia is where you will find a jury pool with an inverted but roughly equal bias to DC or Manhattan. Specifically the hills, not Harper's Ferry. West Virginia is where they will convict Obama of murder 9/10. West Virginia is where they will convict Joe Biden of molesting a minor because of his daughter's diary.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
No, I used the holocaust in an ad absurdum argument to disprove the premise that "If a thing occurred before an event, that event could not increase the frequency of that thing (or make it worse etc...)"I proposed nothing. I answered your questions.you said gender dysphoria is like the holocaust
If that premise was true we could discard the holocaust, after all people have been murdered for being jews since there were jews.
The growth curve is identical to a contagion.i wouldn't worry too much about iti can pretty much guarantee you're immune
I'm immune from suicide too, but recall the context: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/10918/posts/440714
You asked me what the problem with delusion was. Now you're saying it's not a problem because it's not a problem unique to me. If it's not a problem for me it's only because I am resistant to the delusions.
That in no way disproves the assertion that delusions are problematic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
You didn't answer the question.the question answers itself
They never do.
There are objective answers to well defined questions, but that does not mean that who answers doesn't matter; and it always matters in legal (or pretended) legal proceedings.
It's not who votes, but who counts the votes.
do you know what a state is ?
Do you know where Trump was when he called Raffensburger? Do you know where Germany is?
as long as you know WHERE the crime was committed
No, it's as long as you connect the so called crime to your territory or people no matter how many steps or how tenuous the connection. That's the game when people are playing dirty, and this is as dirty as it gets before guns start getting pulled.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I’ll answer your question. It’s subjective. You can find jurisdiction where they let you
That is correct, and "they" are judges.
Judges decide jurisdiction, and if a West Virginia judge be he/she federal or state level decides to allow a case to be brought in his/her court, it will proceed.
Should they be able to do that? That is an entirely different question; does all of this lead to contradictions? Yes, but I wasn't the one who claimed it was perfectly logical.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
I proposed nothing. I answered your questions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
When you really press them about why it bothers them so much, they tend to talk about it as if it's contagious, I think that is very telling.
The growth curve is identical to a contagion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Ah, so if West Virginia makes a rule, they have standing.within their jurisdiction
Who decides jurisdiction?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
So no harm needs to be quantified?the maker of the rules has automatic standing to enforce the rules they make
Ah, so if West Virginia makes a rule, they have standing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Kinda like how Trump fully repaying a European bank was zero quantifiable material harm to New York?any technical violation of the law within the jurisdiction of new york state can be prosecuted by that state
So no harm needs to be quantified?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
for reasons (A), (B), and (C)i'm pretty certain all of those things were happening long before the term "gender identity"
and jews were beaten before the holocaust, but that doesn't mean things didn't get worse.
Also "C" has the term "gender identity".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Right, and I'm sure he visited other states, and people knew him from other states, and I bet he once bought something made in a state like West Virginia. That's how the game works. Any thread will do if you can keep a straight face and the judge and jury want to attack.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
For instance there is a presumption that anyone who violates any criminal statute has injured the public. That's why the court case is THE STATE vs THE ACCUSED. Yet for some reason you thought there would be no legal standing for West Virginia to prosecute Obama for murder.zero quantifiable material harm to the state of west virginia
Kinda like how Trump fully repaying a European bank was zero quantifiable material harm to New York?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
One lunatic claiming he is a god is a problem for that lunatic and a few others who interact with him. 50,000 people claiming the lunatic is a god is a problem for a whole lot more than 50,000 people.what's the hypothetical "worst case scenario"for people "misgendering" themselves ?
I think we've seen it at the worst it's going to be:
A) People attracting homosexuals, then rejecting them because they claim to be heterosexual (even though they are in reality seeking a homosexual relationship)
B) People (especially children) being sterilized and then later realizing they wanted biological children and can barely attract a mate much less pass their genes on.
C) Families being broken up by a disagreement over gender identity
D) People killing themselves for reasons (A), (B), and (C).
E) Governments stealing from others to perform cosmetic often sterilizing medical procedures on others
F) Governments threatening force against people who build only two variants of restrooms or insist on holding to the original/correct definition of gender
G) Women's sports leagues being destroyed
H) Hyper paranoia leading to baseless lawsuits claiming discrimination and wrongful termination
I) Women being frightened or made uncomfortable by males entering their private spaces
I.1) People actually being raped by males using the public fear of the cult to enter women's spaces as actually happened in a Virginia school
I.2) People actually being raped by males using the delusion to enter female prison populations
J) The biggest one in my opinion is the backlash all the previous are creating. The pendulum is coming back and the momentum that is building is itself a return to previous irrationality.
Since J is happening, I think we've seen the worst.
If you're asking about how bad it could be in other circumstances, I've said many times that the delusion of humanity is unbounded. If I were to say there was a society that brought men to the top of a step pyramid and declared that since the male was truly a female, the penis is a demon in disguise and when they cut it off he won't bleed to death unless he lacked faith; that would not be something you could honestly say is impossible for humanity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
legal standing is perfectly logical and easily determinedYou think so huh?Then why is this a question:also, why would west virginia care at all about drone strikes ??the question illustrates my pointwhat part of "legal standing" do you think is problematic ?
The fact that it is not defined in such a way as to be susceptible to objective determination. Same problem with qualified immunity.
They are both adjacent to valid concepts, but not used or defined as such. "immunity" implies there are crimes that government commits that are considered non-crimes, and the is exactly how it is used. Taxes are theft for example. Arbitrary detention by cops is abduction and threats of violence.
"legal standing" is adjacent to "injury in fact" but doesn't follow any rules.
For instance there is a presumption that anyone who violates any criminal statute has injured the public. That's why the court case is THE STATE vs THE ACCUSED. Yet for some reason you thought there would be no legal standing for West Virginia to prosecute Obama for murder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I'm sure they can make something up. Creativity is the name of the game in lawfare.They can make shit up all they want, they still don’t have jurisdiction.
Trump doesn't have 91 counts against him. It doesn't matter what is legal, it matters what you can convince people is legal.
If 12 people get to decide that, then who gets to decide who the 12 people are?The same system we’ve been using for 250 years.
If it was Lincoln would have been taken out by a bunch of slavers who conveniently moved to DC and sat on a jury finding him guilty of conspiring with the moon to destroy the sun.
All of those individuals face the threat of prosecutionHistory disagrees, but nothing lasts forever.No congressmen, Senator, or judge has ever faced prosecution? Wow that’s news to me.
Not for official acts without impeachment.
Even they didn't have the gumption to charge and convict Lincoln of crimes before he could be elected.Lincoln didn’t have the gumption to commit serious crimes like trying to steal an election.
Ask a slaver. This isn't about reality but who decides. Reality is Trump didn't violate any laws that everybody else didn't violate 10 times worse.
Yea, except they have done the exact same things and far worse; in every single case.Complete and total bullshit.
bla bla bla
He is doing whatever he wants, and so did Obama, and so did Bush, and so did Clinton.I actually agree with you here. They did do whatever they wanted, which was fine because trying to steal an election wasn’t one of them.
So the only crime you think doesn't have immunity is election related?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Faith is a problem, one not to dissimilar though since very few people would invent and believe in a religion if they didn't have hundreds to millions of people telling them it's true and validating their unfounded beliefs.
A cursory look at human history shows that we are capable of mass and individual delusion of staggering inaccuracy.
If I was a therapists (which I would not be) focused on the mental health of a single person I would say individual delusion is a problem. As a commenter on society in general, converting individual delusions into cult movements is a much bigger problem since very few people are equipped to resist peer pressure much less peer pressure towards something tempting.
One lunatic claiming he is a god is a problem for that lunatic and a few others who interact with him. 50,000 people claiming the lunatic is a god is a problem for a whole lot more than 50,000 people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
but if they start to say things like "that piece of silicone makes me a nursing mother" or "that piece of gold makes me a god" there is a problem.how, how is this a serious problem ?
The purpose of the brain is to identify reality and choose a course of action that reshapes it to ideals chosen by the brain... or at least that is the purpose of a sapient brain.
When it can't identify reality, there is no chance for the rest.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Oh I'm keeping loose track of all the bold predictions around here. It may not work so well on DART either.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
I think people who fantasize about their enemies being raped in prison while at other times virtue signalling about believing anyone who claims to have been raped should be buried in shallow graves so that their entrails are picked out by random scavengers.Key Takeaways:
- Recent legal processes say Donald Trump has 91 Felony charges
- Despite some improvements in prison security, Trump will soon be putting on a dress and dancing for his cell mate "Rocky".
- The halls will be filled with the sound of "The Donald" squealing like a pig.
- Rocky's new nickname for Trump will be "My Bitch".
- Trump also squeals like a pig for Rocky's friends, relatives, and some large mammals.
- Trump learns to enjoy squealing like a pig for Rocky and his friends.
Thoughts?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
How do we fix this to avoid the dysphoria cases?
There is no fixing without understanding. This doesn't happen much but FLRW's post is spot on. We're in the dark ages in terms of mental/brain medicine. We can accept that and work to the day when we understand or we can bring out the leeches and start talking about humors.
There are some things we know are not a fix, and firmly within that category is any denial of reality. If somebody feels better because they're wearing an earing or got breast implants, good for them; but if they start to say things like "that piece of silicone makes me a nursing mother" or "that piece of gold makes me a god" there is a problem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
Seeing that quote next to a economic satan is quite appropriate (at the time his avatar was Karl Marx)
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I'm not as left wing as you think I am.
I said you don't care about facts. I'll say further that you don't understand science or rational epistemology.
Political dogma is an optional symptom, not a root cause.
They care about facts.So you don't have to (TM)Incorrect. You cited a far right poll and I cited Pew Research.
Where did I cite a "far right poll"?
I'm pretty sure I linked to the law published by the state.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Who fucking causes 80% of a country to be homeless?
Hamas, communists, fascists, nazis, crusaders, jihadists... oh we're full circle since Hamas are jihadists
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Oh no.I don't trust your fact check (which is really biased).
I trust the experts (so not you). I trust people with PhDs from Ivy League Schools; the smart people
You mean Kyle Kulinski.
and they claim a zygote is a human being due to science and I agree with them, so it's not even entirely leftist
Do they now? "Follow the science"
rofl
They care about facts.
So you don't have to (TM)
Anytime they are wrong, they change their stance.
Consider emulating "them", then you might be worthy of being emulated yourself.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
You spread lies, it's not good to follow your example.I don't lie about politics; everything I say I believe is true.
Then you are mentally disabled because I showed you a lie you spread in exacting detail and you did not care nor retract.
My fact check is that you are:
This 1/3 doesn't care about facts
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
So your argument is that you build up a tolerance for Anderol (just like heroin) that can't be re completed with more aderol the next dose and unlike aderol, food doesn't have a tolterance build up?
That is a fact, I wouldn't call that a primary point.
The primary point is that his brain is broken and if that wasn't a problem they wouldn't be hiding it and the drugs they use to tease moments of clarity out of it.
Your brain may as well be broken for (apparently) not seeing the difference between prescription high-level stimulants and food.
If this is your argument, then Biden can do a livestream debate with Trump. If Biden is mentally there during the debate, then it's safe to assume there is no significant tolterance build up for whatever drug he is taking (if any) to stay mentally alert.]
How about this, somebody asks Biden point blank if he's taking drugs to mental acuity and to provide a blood test before going on stage.
I would vote for Kamala Harris over Trump (Mr. Jan 6).
You spread lies, it's not good to follow your example.
If Biden admitted he was only coherent while on powerful stimulants, he would never have been unduly elected.If Trump admitted that he couldn't mentally function without coffee, then none of his supporters would care.
Most would take it as a joke, and it's known that coffee does not temporarily alleviate symptoms of Dementia or Alzheimers.
I would treat Biden the same way with whatever drug he takes to stay mentally there (if any).
But you are nuts, and this is another reason why liberty and modular independent government is so important. You're insanity should almost exclusively damage your own life, not mine.
Because your insanity is a threat to my life, you are a threat to my life, and I need to prepare to neutralize that threat as it manifests through government.
It is a great irony that you would mention Jan 6 as supporting factor for your insanity when that is a counter-attack made necessary by insanity like yours.
You are lost to civilized discourse already, you can't dangle yourself as bait for compromise.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
It's a drug that's easy to get.
So is cocaine, and it sure gives you energy, but it can't be maintained at the dosage required to counteract his obvious dementia. Food and sleep can. We know Biden is not on it all the time at the same dosages, that's why he can't answer questions off the cuff, face the press without scripted questions, and often has more gaffes towards the end of a public appearance.
Another big difference is transparency. Everybody knows Donald Trump drinks, eats, and sleeps. If Biden admitted he was only coherent while on powerful stimulants, he would never have been unduly elected.
This should be obvious. If it's not obvious you don't have the basic life experience (or capacity to understand) to be participating in world-view-level (full context) debates, which is something I would say is true considering many other things you've said or presumed.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
You don't get to change your question and then claim I didn't answer it.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
To be certain the car is blue.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
No, my goal is not to change your mind. It's to debunk bad logic by identifying fallacies and pointing out absurdities.
Created:
Posted in:
Previously in this thread I talked about the range of fraudulent ballots a single person could be responsible for. In the above example a single person was responsible for 52 fraudulent ballots.
Created: