Total posts: 4,340
-->
@oromagi
Communism means local people own their own local means of production without any consideration of class, currency, or state- a kind of anarchist economic utopia.
This is a primitive economy; an economy with no currency. You need a common currency to facilitate trade.
Russian dictators killed those tens of millions, not communism or any other ideology.
The dictators killed those tens of millions because they fell in line with communist ideology, which is to kill all the capitalists.
I've never met a real communist (someone who both understands what communism means and thinks it is a practical, modern economic strategy) on this or any other site.
Everyone on this thread that is saying communism is a good ideology is a communist. The right denounces Nazism(while allowing it to exist under the 1st amendment) and since they denounce Nazism, they aren't Nazis. Most liberals don't denounce communism.
Most Americans would prefer starvation to slavery.
I don't think this is accurate, as starvation is more painful than almost any labor.
So, you can say, "I support racism"You can say, "I support the Klan"You can't say "let's kill black people"
Wylted got banned because he according to his ban was, "Repeatedly glorifying hate groups"(Wylted (debateart.com)) among other things. If you glorify Rand Paul, you support Rand Paul. Hate groups would be like the KKK. You shouldn't be banned for supporting the KKK, or whatever hate group he supported. Even you said, "You can say, "I support the Klan"".
There is no objective, sensible opinion in the world that would call the idea of local ownership by local small govt. worse than the idea of executing black people because they won't stay slaves.
You don't judge an idea by it's intentions; you judge an idea by its results. The results of communism resulted in 71 million people dead, entire nation's economies destroyed, and hundreds of millions of people starving in the streets. The results of KKK lynching people results in a few thousand black people dead and a few million black people segregated (which isn't as bad as starving). The KKK is less extreme than communism, so if communism is allowed on DART, so is glorifying the KKK.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
And as for capitalism, 100 million Indigenous people in the Americas were killed during the European colonization for the propagation of American capitalism
Most of these people died because of disease and I don't think the number was at 100 million. Otherwise, North America pre colonization would have been comparably crowded to Europe was at that time, since Europe had roughly 100 million residents then too.
as well as millions of African people that were enslaved as property to be profited off of by capitalists in the West
Slavery was in the past, and it's not what modern capitalists advocate for. Modern communists on the other hand, want to copy Karl Marx, who advocated for a violent revolution. Moreover, the KKK does not advocate for slavery and they deny advocating for slavery on their website.
How many people have been killed by capitalist sanctions?
Capitalism advocates for free trade.
How many people have been killed in capitalist wars?
Less than the number that have died in communist wars, because being pro war is not the same thing as being pro capitalist. War is big government. Capitalism relies on small government.
How many people have been killed by capitalist dictators like Pincohet?
Pinochet was right wing, but he was more authoritarian than libetarian. Capitalism relies on mutually consenting people trading their goods and services with one another in a mutually consensual way. Moreover, even if capitalism has committed genocide in the past, it's okay to advocate for capitalism.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
communism is about living in commune. even if its flawed, the essence is plausible.
Communism is about having the state run everything and killing people who disagree. According to Marx in The Communist Manifesto, what is the relationship between revolution and violence? - eNotes.com states that communism is a violent ideology. The idea was very violent, as 71 million people died in it's name.
the KKK was a hate group, who murdered people. big difference.
The KKK did not kill nearly as many people as communism did. You don't judge an idea by it's intentions. You judge an idea by its results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I remember when UCONN women won 90 straight games. They are still good now, but not as good as before.
Created:
Communism: Kills 71 million people in the USSR by starvation, and has oppressed billions of people in the past.
Mods: Being a communist is free speech and we won't ban any communists.
KKK: Lynches only 4000 black Americans(a quicker death than starvation), and has oppressed only millions of African Americans(still a large number, but only a fraction of the billions of people that communism has oppressed).
Mods: Anyone who supports the idea of racism and anyone who makes a racial slur that is pro KKK will get banned.
Me: Communism is the worse ideology, so why are the mods treating racism worse than communism? If communists get free speech, shouldn't racists also get free speech?
Created:
Conservatives: We want small government.
Me: Then why are you pro life and anti open borders?
Democrats: We want big government.
Me: Then why are you pro choice and want less immigration restrictions?
Conservatives: We want the right to life.
Me: Then why do you oppose UHC?
Democrats: We want choice. We are pro choice.
Me: Then why do you want to ban certain choices of firearms, like the AK47 and the AR15?
Conservatives: We want personal responsibility. Right? I mean, we want you to take responsibility for pregnencies, and we oppose welfare for the common person because they should take more personal responsibility.
Me: Then why do you want to give more welfare to corporations? At least the poor person needs welfare to save their life. The corporation is just using welfare to get richer. I personally don't like either type of welfare.
Democrats: We wish to minimize pain. Non consensual pregnency is painful and welfare minimizes pain.
Me: Then why are you guys applying cancel culture on many people? That causes a lot of pain for people, and them getting cancelled causes more overall pain than people's feelings being hurt. People's feelings last a few seconds, getting cancelled lasts much longer.
Libetarians: We want small government and we want more freedoms. How are we inconsistent with this?
Me: Well, first off, you support nuclear energy, which is big government. You claim the energy is safe, but that's a statist argument(they are the ones who want all these restrictions in the name of safety). If nuclear energy was America's sole source of energy, it would cost taxpayers over $300 billion a year, which is 6x more than what conventional welfare costs the feds, and you think welfare is too much big government. 2nd off, you are against the death penalty, even though it is consistent pro choice ethic (being pro choice on abortion and letting the victims decide if they wish to execute their murderer). You claim that the government shouldn't have the power to take someone's life. However, the government doesn't have that power; the victims do, and the government merely executes the will of the victims onto the murderer (get the pun?). There is the fear of executing someone that is innocent, however, there is a risk that an immigrant commits a murder and there is a risk that an AK 47 owner will commit a mass shooting. However, you correctly point out that these risks are so rare, that they should not dictate national policy.
Conclusion: None of the 3 most common political parties are consistent and most of their members aren't either, not even the libetarians. People should, "dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another" as instructed by the declaration of independence and think for themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The text of the EO never once mentions "Muslims." It identified countries, not religions, or any other group of people by which they might self-identify other than by nationality.
So, the law banned people from certain ethnicities. This still seems too authoritarian and tyrannical. Banning all Syrians because of terrorist attacks most don't want to do is like banning AK 47s for mass shootings that most AK 47 owners don't want to do. You punish actual terrorists, you punish actual mass shooters. You leave everyone who is peaceful alone.
Further, note that the Oba'a adminstration identified the same countries, and no one, not one pitiful cancel culturist called him a racist against Muslims. So, why Trump? Because you have an agenda, but not one against Oba'a?
I don't think Obama did that, otherwise Trump wouldn't have felt the need to do it, but I don't want people deported whether Joe Biden or Obama does the deporting, or Trump does the deporting. I don't want to give immigrants free shelters or air conditioned cages whether Biden gives them the shelters or Trump gives them the shelters. I want the government to leave undocumented immigrants alone, whether the person in charge is a republican or a democrat.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Do you think that saving the lives of hundreds of Americans is something that should be considered or ignored when making policies?
Lets look at precedent to answer this question:
4,000 Americans die from not having an organ each year. Is the solution to this to make organ donation mandatory? Or is it worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone else that doesn't die from this?
30,000 Americans die of car accidents every year. Is the solution to this to make speed limits 4 mph on the highway? I mean, it would save tens of thousands of lives. Or is it just worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.
36,500 Americans die from guns every year. Is the solution to ban guns? I mean, it would in theory save tens of thousands of lives a year. Or is it just worth ignoring in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.
500,000 Americans have died from the coronavirus pandemic this year(which to put into reference, is comparable to the number of unborn babies that die each year from abortion in the US). Is it therefore justified to do indefinite lockdowns? I mean, it would save hundreds of thousands of lives. Or is it just worth not doing lockdowns in the name of liberty for everyone that doesn't die from this.
2 million starving 3rd worlders die every year from starvation. Is the solution to this to force people to rescue 3rd worlders, or is this an infringement of the liberty of the people with recourses since they never consented to this?
Conclusion: If the United States government doesn't do extremely authoritarian things to save 4000, 30000, 500000, or millions of lives per year, why should the US government do comparably authoritarian policies (like make immigrants go through so much just to get the same liberties that I got by being born here through no work of my own) just to save a few hundred lives from terrorism? We should punish terrorists, but leave every peaceful person alone. Freedom is dangerous as hell, but it makes America America, and God bless the US.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
just use bullet points for your main sentenceWhy should we have open borders
1) It is consistent pro liberty ethic and consistent with our ethos of being a pro liberty republic. Britain is land of the British. France is land of the French. China is land of the Chinese. These are all ethnostates, which are based on ethnicities. America is not like these ethnostates. America is based off an idea. That idea is to promote god given liberties and secular victimless liberties abroad and domestically. America is land of the free.
2) The US debt is paid off in 4 years while giving everyone a tax cut, due to our population, GDP, and tax revenue roughly quadrupling and as a result, paying off the debt becomes significantly easier.
3) America's GDP gets a one time boost of 400%, and rather than America having to compete with China for influence, America would dominates the world stage way more because of our skyrocketed GDP.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
It would be hard to summarize, since it's around 10 arguments against open borders and their rebuttals. Summarizing that would consist of me writing like 10 paragraphs.
Created:
-->
@Bringerofrain
I wouldn't say conservatives vote against their own best interests, but conservatives tend to be older. If your a liberal, you think this is because they are old fashioned and not with the times. If your a conservative, you think this is because they tend to have more experience as they age. I remembered when I supported Obama because he was the first black president. Now, I don't care what your race is, if you pay down the debt, repeal the income tax and replace it with a sales tax and a capitol gains tax, increase gun rights in the United States, and not punish ordinary people for their political opinions, I will support you, whether democrat or republican.
Even though I usually vote for Republicans, I don't like Romney's policies because he supports banning semi automatic guns. I'd rather vote for Jessie Ventura. Even though he is a green party person, he supports the repeal of the income tax and he is pro 2nd amendment. He supports a maximum wage and I don't support him on that, but nobody is going to agree with me 100% of the time and that's okay.
In terms of voting against their own interests, a big reason why I don't believe that economic democrat policies work is it is because of these policies that more people end up poor. When I mean left wing, I don't mean communist. Very few people advocate for communism, so it would be disingenuous to strawman them. However, a majority of democrats support Lyndon B Johnson's war on poverty because they want to help the poor. The thing is, that bill I think is the reason why we see so much poor people today. Here is a chart you should check out:
The predicted poverty rate measures the predicted poverty if the war on poverty never took place. It is because of big government intervention that people are still poor to this day. This is why I support the repeal of the war on poverty. America became the freest, richest nation in the world because of our commitment to economic liberty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Essentially the bill gets debated non stop and never reaches a final vote.
I'd expect many of the senators to change their minds on the bill eventually if they are debating the bill for a long time in DC. If they can get a majority vote in one way or another, then the bill becomes law.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
I am a Sermonist.
Does this mean theocrat?
By these principles, even applied just secularly, we would solve every single social ill we suffer today if they were fully practiced by all.
How?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
No he couldn’t because Democrats threatened to filibuster every bill in the Senate and you need 60 Senators to invoke cloture to end debate.
The democrats when Trump had the house and the senate wouldn't have the votes to make a filibuster. They all may vote no on a tax cut, but all of the GOP would vote yes on the tax cut. The dems can't do anything about it since they don't have the votes. What is a filibuster?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Democracies are slow to legislate by design.
Democracies don't have to be slow. In my home state, democrats make up 2/3 of the senate and the governor is a democrat. They can pass a bunch of left wing policy right now because the GOP can't do anything about it since they don't have the votes. Democrats control the house, the senate, and the presidency. They can pass a bunch of left wing stuff right now and the GOP can't do anything about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
What loophole would exist with that law? The reasoning could be to reduce homicide(assuming they believed it would reduce homicide).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Why does it have to be so big and complex though? Can't laws just be simple? If you say, "AR 15s and AK 47s are banned and punished by 10 years in prison for having at least one" and make that into law, there are no loopholes, it is simple and easy to create, and you don't have to waste so much time making laws very hard to read. I hope this law never passes, but what's stopping congress from making simple laws that anybody who can read understands?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
In terms of banning "assault weapons", they can make a law saying that anyone who owns an AR 15 or AK 47 gets 10 years in jail if caught with it. I hope they don't make the law, but that law isn't vague. It gets what the dems want and the GOP can't do anything about it because they don't have the votes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
If they agree on broad policy, they can just make policy then. They agree on enough that they can get it done. Politicians aren't that stubborn.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I think the punishment for assault is way too strict though. Maybe make it a few days in prison if the victim recovers in 30 seconds.
Assault Penalties, Punishments, and Sentences (freeadvice.com) states the current penalty is up to a year.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Hitting anyone is a crime whether it's a man and woman or the same sex. It's not appropriate, period.
If I slap someone, they are hurt for 30 seconds. Somehow, if I do that, I end up in jail for 3 months. I think that is cruel and unusual punishment.
Created:
Posted in:
When Donald Trump was President, there was a time when he had the house and the senate. Trump could have enacted a bunch of right wing legislation and the democrats couldn't stop them since they wouldn't have the votes.
Joe Biden is President now. He now has the House and the Senate. He can enact a bunch of left wing stuff. He could ban AR 15s and AK 47s in the entire country. He could enact his healthcare ideal right now. I don't want him to do these things, but he has the votes. Despite this, if he gets this done, it won't be for a long time. This is like this in every country in the world. Politicians are so slow.
Why are politicians so slow?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Vote Castro for Governor 2022.
In all seriousness though, Castro seems too far left, as the stereotypical Texan democrat is. He wants to legalize late term abortions, he wants to repeal the Hyde Amendment (Which forces pro lifers to pay for abortions). I'm pro choice, but I don't want to pay for other people's abortions.
He also wants racial Reperations, which will do nothing to help black people out(as if you give people free money, they spend it on worthless stuff. We see this with lottery winners all the time). The government will also go deeper into debt wasting money on black people, and we are too deep in debt to add on any new social programs.
Created:
Posted in:
I think a different republican should replace Cruz after he bailed on Texas when Texas lost power. Beto O Rouke is a baffoon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Time isn't a dimension as the quarks in this universe last forever. If something is 3m tall, after 3 m, it wouldn't exist anymore. The quarks in this universe last forever.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I'm bad at physics but I think the current popular consensus is that our universe exists within ten or eleven dimensions
What are the other 8 dimensions?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
You are applying 3rd dimensional physics to a two dimensional representation of a fourth dimensional phenomenon.
Isn't our universe 3rd dimensional? Gravity isn't solely determined by surface area, but is determined by the following formula:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
That's why I want to open the borders and build a wall around the welfare state.
Created:
Posted in:
R2d598a0ab459c363b4e3b2a21f534b03 (800×611) (bing.com) shows that the spacetime fabric is below earth by approximately .4*the radius of earth (about 1500 km). So this would mean that anything that is 1500 km below earth in the picture would cause a hole in the space time continuum. This would mean that since the moon orbits earth at an 11 degree tilt, it means that anytime the moon goes below earth relative to the north pole would mean that the moon breaks a hole in the space time continuum. It would also mean that if you launch a rocket from Antarctica and it gets a far enough distance away from earth, then that rocket would make a hole in the space time continuum. If you launch a rocket from the north pole, you won't get this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
So you think Republicans only care about illegal immigration because illegal immigrants occasionally murder people?
Trump wanted a Muslim ban because of terrorist attacks. Very rare, but very sensationalized events are used to justify national policy, like the site below:
I think I've addressed all the concerns with open borders in the flowchart below:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I think I've addressed all the concerns with open borders in the flowchart below:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
theres tons more than just illegals murdering
I think I've addressed all the concerns with open borders in the flowchart below:
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I don't advocate for abstinence only education, but I would advocate for abstinence recommended education. If you have uncontrollable urges to have sex, then make sure your treated of all STIs that you have, make sure your partner is treated as well, make sure that your partner is using the birth control pill, make sure that you are using a condom, make sure you keep your clothes on when your laying with your partner, and your good to go I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
How many "conservatives" were calling for BANK CEOs TO BE THROWN IN PRISON?Who exactly was "personally responsible" for the housing (derivatives) market collapse?
Not many people were calling for these people to be thrown in prison. Recessions happen very frequently. You can't jail someone for a recession that was out of their control.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
School systems should include LBTQ+ topics in their history and sex education
Sex education yes. Meaning, if you want to have gay sex, make sure you or your partner doesn't have an STI or an STD, and you will be good to go. If you or your partner has an STI, get it treated before any sex happens.
But given that gay marriage only got legalized 5 years ago, it's too early to put gay marriage in our history. I'd say 50 years in the future seems like a good time for that. Then, people will see it similar to how people see MLK today.
Created:
Posted in:
Republicans: We are so scared of murderers who are undocumented immigrants even though .1% of undocumented immigrants will committ murder in their lifetime.
Democrats: We are so scared of blacks getting killed by the police, even though the odds of a black person dying from the police is .1% in their lifetime.
Me: You both are so scared of things that are so rare. Can't we focus on bigger things like the US debt, which effects every American and will be solved easier with opening America's borders(since it quadruples America's population and therefore quadruples our GDP), or the single motherhood epidemic, which negatively impacts 70% of African American children and 40% of American children? Lets not focus on super rare incidents and focus on things that impact significant portions of the country. Make America Great Again(by great, I mean where we don't focus on rare but sensationalized events).
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
I'm not a democrat, but I want Kyle Kulinski to run on the democrat side. I disagree with him on every economic issue, but he's no idiot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Conservatives believe in what they do for a reason, so it's best to figure out what they want and see if they base their ideology off of it. I'd say what conservatives want is personal responsibility. It fits almost all of their beliefs on issues.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
You didn't get the joke did you? I don't like John Castro, but his last name isn't the reason why I don't like him. I also didn't vote for Trump, but how did he create a refugee crisis? He just didn't let people into the US. That's not making a refugee crisis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
LIBERALISM in the UNITED STATES is "a political and moral philosophy based on what liberals consider the unalienable rights of the individual. The fundamental liberal ideals of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, the separation of church and state, the right to due process and equality under the law are widely accepted as a common foundation of liberalism"
This definition does not describe 21st century liberals, just like the word, "conservative" doesn't mean conserving the status quo. If being conservative meant keeping the status quo, then they wouldn't want to lower taxes or overturn Roe V Wade, since both of these ideas go against the status quo. Being conservative means being pro personal responsibility first and economic liberty second. Being a liberal means wanting to reduce suffering and expand life. This is why they want to ban radical right wing speech, which they see as causing emotional suffering and a threat to the expansion of life because of their fear of extreme speech radicalizing into extreme actions.
I seriously doubt you could find even one serious legal or political thinker who thinks that American governments should restrict "anything offensive to somebody and that hurts their feelings,"
Then, why do people want to ban Klansmen from expressing their opinions? Should the KKK be banned? | Debate.org states that 78% of the people here want to ban the KKK, so there are people that want to ban the KKK. If they don't want to ban the KKK because they are "offensive to (minorities) and that hurts their feelings", then why do these people want the Klan banned?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Vote Castro for Governor 2022.
The last time someone with the name of Castro took power somewhere, it created a refugee crisis. I wouldn't want to vote for someone named Castro.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I think advocating for violence should be protected under the 1st amendment and here is why:
If someone says, "Death to murderers. I want all murderers to die", this would be free speech, whether or not you agree. Everyone believes that you should have the right to advocate for the death of murderers. Telling someone to kill a murderer is not legal, since it's not your place, but the states (Although I think murder victims should have the power to put their murderer to death).
If someone says, "Death to rapists. I want all rapists to die", this would also be free speech, whether or not you agree. Everyone believes that you should have the right to advocate for the death of rapists. Less people will agree with this position, but everyone agrees with the right to say it.
If someone says "Death to pedophiles", this is also free speech.
If someone says, "Death to drug dealers", this is also free speech.
If someone says, "Death to J walkers", this is also free speech. Granted, you probably won't be able to find anyone who believes that J walkers should be put to death, but it is your right to advocate this position. You can't tell people to kill J walkers though. It becomes a problem when you kill J walkers, since that is illegal.
If you say, "Death to unwanted fetuses. They cause so much unwarranted pain to women" or "Death to women who get abortions. Abortion is murder and should be tried as mush", then this is also free speech. You can't kill women who get abortions, but you can advocate for their death.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
it’s whether the content of your speech taken to its logical end would incite or serve as justification for violence towards another group.
The pro life ideology believes that abortion should be classified as murder. This means punishing women who commit abortions with life imprisonment (just like murder since apparently abortion is murder). They would commit violence to women who have committed abortions by beating them up for it, similar to how if someone murdered your mother, you would want to beat them up for it (and maybe shoot them) if you knew the cops wouldn't do anything about it.
The pro choice ideology believes that a fetus isn't a person. This means that they advocate for the right to commit violence to unborn babies.
Both sides you could argue advocate for violence towards one group if you take the ideology to its logical conclusion. For pro lifers, that is violence towards women who have had abortions. For pro choicers, this is violence towards an unborn baby. I could argue both beliefs are hate speech, but both beliefs should be legal because "hate speech" is protected under the first amendment, and jailing someone for their opinions is a violation of the 8th amendment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Because... most people don't have access to wells
If people don't have access to wells, why can't they build their own wells?
plus the wells are also having problems, such is how water works.
How are wells having problems? If it's due to lack of electricity, why can't you make your own electricity?
Plus... in order to have enough water to run a house.. that takes a lot of money.
It's probably cheaper than the government giving everybody free water because wells are made by private companies, who have an incentive to provide a good well for a cheap price. The government doesn't have incentive to produce cheap or good quality wells. They can just tax you more to pay for wells if they can't get a good well(and you can't say no since its a tax). The money wouldn't even go to wells often, but would go to the government's buddies. That's why I think the government should privatize the wells and let private companies run the wells. They have incentive to make good wells for a cheap price, and the government doesn't have that incentive. My house has a well I think, and if we made our own electricity and had batteries, I think we can survive blackouts. A generator helps survive blackouts with electricity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I didn't read the whole thread, so I don't know too much about your situation. If people are having problems with water, why can't people get their own well and be independent of the government?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I'm not from Texas, so I wouldn't know this for sure, but I think Texas is warmer now, so I think Texas got it's power back now. I guess when the engineers built the power stations, they knew it could be very cold in Texas, but they knew it would only last for a few days, so they would be fine with people losing power for a few days every 5 decades if it saved some money on building costs. I think you will get your power back soon. I'd let the private sector build their energy grid up.
Also, if your from Texas and you lost your power, how did you post the comment(since DART uses the internet)?
Created:
Posted in:
SJW Liberals: Hate speech should be banned.
Me: What do you think is hate speech?
SJW Liberals: Anything offensive to somebody and that hurts their feelings. The KKK are offensive to black people, ban Klansmen. The Nazis are offensive to Jews, ban Nazis. People who misgender on ideological grounds are offensive to transgenders, ban misgenderers.
Me:
The Pro life movement is offensive to women who have had abortions because your dehumanizing them as murderers. Should we ban pro lifers?
The Pro choice movement is offensive to unborn babies because your dehumanizing them. Should we ban pro choicers?
The Anti gun control crowd is offensive to victims of school shootings because it doesn't care about their feelings. Should we force people to support gun control?
The Pro gun control crowd is offensive to owners of AK 47s because they don't care about the feelings of AK 47 owners. They want to ban these guns regardless. Should the
US make it illegal to support gun control?
Back the Blue offends black people, should we ban the Back the Blue movement?
BLM offends police officers, should we ban BLM?
Kneeling for the national anthem is hating where America is right now. Is this hate speech towards America?
Being a Republican entails being hateful towards AOC. Being a democrat entails being hateful towards Ted Cruz. Are political parties now hate speech towards politicians?
Very few democrats want to ban Pro lifers, being Anti gun control, Back the Blue supporters, or Republicans.
Very few republicans want to ban Pro choicers, being Pro gun control, BLM supporters, or Democrats.
With the exception of the popularity of an idea (which shouldn't be a justification for banning an idea) there is no principled difference between banning Klansmen (which you could argue is hate speech towards black people) and banning pro lifers or pro choicers (you could argue that pro lifers preach hate speech towards women since they call women who get abortions murderers)(you could also argue that pro choicers preach hate speech towards unborn babies since they dehumanize unborn babies).
We should legalize being pro life, we should legalize being pro choice, and we should legalize being in the KKK. Legalize all the ideologies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I'd say the following is true:
Conservatives care about personal responsibility and small government, and worldwide freedom(in that order). In the event of a conflict, they care about personal responsibility. This is why they are pro life, pro gun, oppose welfare, oppose UHC, support increased military spending. I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.
Libetarians care about small government. This is why they are pro choice, pro gun, oppose welfare and UHC, and support a smaller military. I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.
Liberals I think care about minimizing pain and extending life. In the event of a conflict, they care about minimizing pain. This is why they are pro choice, relatively anti gun, support welfare, support UHC, support decreased military spending. I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.
Authoritarians care about extending life. This is why they are pro life, relatively anti gun, support welfare, and support UHC. I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.
Does this answer your question?
Created: