Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Bomb#20]

Dude, objecting to your outgroup censoring your ingroup is not the same thing as giving a rat's ass about free speech. Throughout the time leftists have been sounding the alarm about Project 2025 they've been enthusiastically cancelling non-leftists. Did even one of you make a stink about it when that professor got fired for saying everyone's life matters?

You're focusing on the leftist mound while ignoring Everest on the right.

Mound vs. Everest, huh? Then you can produce a long list of professors axed for saying something unconservative, can you? Few people on either wing mind censorship as long as it's their side doing it. A plague on both their houses.

A professor saying All lives matters should be fired for being so stupid. It is a misquote,

I'm not following. What's a misquote and who misquoted whom?

<rest of expression of not minding censorship done by one's own side snipped>

Thank you for providing empirical evidence for my claim.

 

[Emily Lake]

You are what you claim to hate.

Trump called people that voted against him "vermin" and said he "hates" his opponents.

That doesn't counter my post at all, you know.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have not delved very deeply into Charlie Kirk’s opinions but I do think some of the views he’s quoted as expressing are indeed hateful.

Okay, I get that this is abstract reasoning here, but bear with me.

You perceiving Kirk's views as hateful views is not the same as Kirk advocating hate.

My grandfather believed that miscegenation was sinful. My stepdad is black. My grandfather didn't hate my stepdad.

I can absolutely understand that many people see my grandfather's belief as hateful; my grandfather himself wasn't hateful - he didn't see it as hateful, and he didn't have any hate in his heart toward my stepdad. Doesn't mean there wasn't tension especially early on. There were arguments, there was a lot of anger, it went on for years. It sucked and it was sad and it was painful... but it wasn't hate.

It's good of you to confess what you mean when you "don't hate" such and such group. Opposing someone's right to marry isn't hate. Keeping a hit list of people you're trying to get fired isn't hate. Saying you think someone should be in hell for offending your favorite god isn't hate. The only thing that is hateful is admitting that you hate someone, never mind the actual injuries you do to them. That right?

You clearly learned a lot of important life lessons from your grandfather about how not to hate people. He would be proud of you, even now continuing to fight the good fight against admitting to feelings of hate.

This is an absolutely vile and cruel post, and you're being an asshole.

 

[Emily Lake]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Yes, yes, all the masses of women who were totally killed when RvW was in place. Yep. Totally.

 

[Emily Lake]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Let's suppose you're correct for the sake of argument. So what? Why do you think that has any bearing on the point in dispute? Emily and Elixir aren't arguing over whether Roe v Wade is good policy. They're arguing over whether Elixir infers hatred of women from opposition to abortions. Irrespective of whether Emily is right about abortion, do you in fact think Emily hates women?

I don't even oppose abortion! Elixir infers that I hate women because I SUPPORT RvW.

 

[Emily Lake]

The thing is few would actually admit to being a Nazi.

Well, not after they lost the war. If it becomes safe to fly the flag again without losing their job, many will fly it just as proudly as they fly the "Confederate flag" now.

Yeah, they just find a new name with the same core behaviors and slightly different window dressing.

It's also one of the reasons that the easiest way to spot them is to spot the political groups whose names do not actually match their behavior, or which have names associated with nationalism and/or populism, while espousing "smaller*" government.

If you find the people seeking to hit social spending, or advocating to make certain human conditions criminal or regulated, completely agnostic to the behavior of the person with that condition, the those people are likely Nazis too.

As it is, Nazis, when they start to precipitate into power within a society, share a number of bedfellows who I will also call Nazis.

These "Nazi bedfellows" will in any era include a large number of false "free people", who believe they value justice and freedom and independence of thought, but whose values in practice skew towards "trains running on time" and re-instating conservative policies according to biases trained into them by religious and cultural sources.

These are, in fact, the majority of Nazis, like the soil in which the roots of the toxic plant of fascist government grows.

The fact is, of you don't want Nazis in your country, you will not be the fertile soil for this.

If you hate Nazis, really, if you want to be remembered not as an individual but as part of a *sort* of individual, as an instance of something we can count on next time, then today you will show that you can reject the comforts and the utilities of the trains running on time because you are one of those who will ultimately blow up the tracks before they can carry trains of people. Name those Nazis as what they are, and speak the words into history necessary to make the next instance of you who reads the words in the next cycle and understand before things get so out of hand as you let them get here.

MAGA are Nazis.

Those who pretend "MAGA" isn't "Nazis" are cheeky Nazis.

Your entire post boils down to "conservatives are nazis, we should make sure that there are no conservatives"

 

[Emily Lake]

"transgender people are much more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators"? That's true of pretty much any demographic

Patent bullshit.

What demographic of people in the US is more likely to be a perpetrator than a victim of violence?

 

[Emily Lake]

Take as a premise that Kirk genuinely believed that transgender people are mentally ill, and that they represent a social danger. YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH THAT SENTIMENT YOU NUMBSKULLS - JUST TAKE IT AS THE PREMISE FOR THE ARGUMENT

From there, believing that mentally ill people who represent a social danger should be institutionalized is not hatred. It's protection for them and for everyone else. It's just like institutionalizing a paranoid schizophrenic who can't be managed. There's no hatred involved.

And again - you don't have to agree with the sentiment to understand the viewpoint. In fact, understanding the viewpoint and where it's coming from is the only way you can possibly change anyone's mind. Otherwise all you're left with is your own personal pogrom killing heretics.

Goddamn, I kind of feel like several of you desperately want a civil war.

Before you go locking someone up as a public danger you need to demonstrate why they are a public danger. And nobody has demonstrated such danger, it's all bogeymen with no data to back it up. It's women not wanting to see dicks. You think it's better to lock that dick up for life so you don't risk seeing it??? Do the trans somehow corrupt children? No, the only "corruption" is a tolerance of difference, something the reich wing can't tolerate. As I recently saw it presented--why in the would would someone be a drag queen to get access to children when they could take the route of priest and have them handed to them on a silver platter?

And it's not that we want a civil war, it's that the reich wing has already chosen the path of war.

Congratulations, Loren, on being a die-hard supporter of men's right to flash unconsenting women, and to peep on women without permission! Yay you!

 

[Emily Lake]

I have not delved very deeply into Charlie Kirk’s opinions but I do think some of the views he’s quoted as expressing are indeed hateful.

Okay, I get that this is abstract reasoning here, but bear with me.

You perceiving Kirk's views as hateful views is not the same as Kirk advocating hate.

My grandfather believed that miscegenation was sinful. My stepdad is black. My grandfather didn't hate my stepdad.

I can absolutely understand that many people see my grandfather's belief as hateful; my grandfather himself wasn't hateful - he didn't see it as hateful, and he didn't have any hate in his heart toward my stepdad. Doesn't mean there wasn't tension especially early on. There were arguments, there was a lot of anger, it went on for years. It sucked and it was sad and it was painful... but it wasn't hate.

Racists often make exceptions, ‘for the good ones.’

I'm struggling to say something that is within the bounds, because you just called my family racist, and in a very nasty way.

Viewing something as sinful doesn't equate to hatred. Sometimes it's stupid, definitely, and it can absolutely cause tension and conflict. But it isn't necessarily hate.

My grandfather saw marrying outside of one's race as a sin. It was a stupid position in my view, and in the view of my mom and stepdad.

My grandfather also viewed adultery as a sin. One of his best friends cheated on his wife, and they got divorced. Somehow, crazy as this might seem to those of you who are more invested in hatred toward christianity than in actually understanding other people's perspective... he never hated his friend, even though he saw his actions as sinful.

Me living with my spouse before we got married is also something he viewed as a sin. And I know that some of you can't manage to comprehend that viewing something as sinful doesn't mean you hate the person who did it, but yeah - my grandpa never hated me nor my husband.

 

[Elixir]

"transgender people are much more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators"? That's true of pretty much any demographic

Patent bullshit.

What demographic of people in the US is more likely to be a perpetrator than a victim of violence?

Uh … prison populations?
Previously addressed.

I don't even oppose abortion! Elixir infers (sic) that I hate women because I SUPPORT the eventual “camel’s nose” effect of the loopholes and defects of RvW.

FIFY. If that implies that you hate women, there are people who can help you with that.

 

[Emily Lake]

That's the position we're in though.

They want bloody conflict. They advocate for it publicly and unmistakably through their rhetoric. Even the most uneducated, alcoholic whoremonger has been told they're in God's army. Got Wit Uss. History is replete with bloody examples of what happens when God is on your side.

Democrats have a hand in this too. Seriously, Democrats have spent nearly a decade constantly telling the public that Republicans are fascists - loudly, on TV, over and over again. Their supporters, including several on this site, have spent more than a decade insisting that conservatives and even sometimes independents are nazis, or at least nazi adjacent.

The right is on a bender, but so is the left. And if you don't think that Democrats are partially responsible for the state we find ourselves in, then you are naively and blindly partisan.

What does it take to get you to recognize fascism?

ACTUAL enacted fascist laws and rules in place. Not fearmongering about how something might turn into fascism, or is on the road to fascism, or how if you assume the inner essence of someone's hidden thoughts embedded as secret messages hinted at by their speeches.

ACTUAL CHANGES to how our government functions.

 

[Elixir]

ACTUAL enacted fascist laws and rules in place.

Why bother with that, when you can simply designate your political opposition terrorists, send the military to terrorize enemy territory and let ‘em sue, while SCROTUS sits on its ass playing with itself. If anyone gets in trouble for say, burning down a judge’s house, breaking and entering the Capitol to impede a government function or anything like that … just PARDON!

 

[Emily Lake]

Or, less often but still commonly, are nonbinary, eg, don't identify with any gender stereotypes at all.

NOBODY should identify with gender stereotypes.

That said, failure to identify with the stereotypes associated with your sex do not somehow make you into the opposite sex, nor into no-sex. You're still the sex you are.

 

[Emily Lake]

This can be caused by quite an array of conditions, collectively referred to by researchers "disorders of sexual development" or DSDs. DSDs are all types of Intersex conditions, intersex being the I in LGTBQIA. Not all intersex conditions result in DSDs.

This is false, and backwards. The very small number of DSDs that have previously been referred to as intersex conditions are those that express with ambiguous genitalia at birth. People who have these conditions quite strongly object to them being called "intersex" at all, because they aren't something in between male and female - these are all sex-specific congenital conditions.

But even if we use the term intersex, all intersex conditions are DSDs; not all DSDs are intersex conditions.

Many trans people are probably intersex on some level, but how many is a disputed situation, and DSDs are a particularly rare result of intersexuality.

Again, this is backwards. DSDs aren't rare results of intersexuality - and intersexuality isn't a thing in the first place. Additionally, the overhwelming majority of people who identify as trans are not intersex in any way whatsoever. They're entirely normal both karyotypically and somatically.

This fad of people "identifying" into medical conditions is pretty damned insulting toward the people who actually have those conditions. Deleterious medical conditions aren't some trendy label to stick on your lapel so you feel like part of the "in" group.

 

[laughing dog]

The thing is few would actually admit to being a Nazi.

Well, not after they lost the war. If it becomes safe to fly the flag again without losing their job, many will fly it just as proudly as they fly the "Confederate flag" now.

Yeah, they just find a new name with the same core behaviors and slightly different window dressing.

It's also one of the reasons that the easiest way to spot them is to spot the political groups whose names do not actually match their behavior, or which have names associated with nationalism and/or populism, while espousing "smaller*" government.

If you find the people seeking to hit social spending, or advocating to make certain human conditions criminal or regulated, completely agnostic to the behavior of the person with that condition, the those people are likely Nazis too.

As it is, Nazis, when they start to precipitate into power within a society, share a number of bedfellows who I will also call Nazis.

These "Nazi bedfellows" will in any era include a large number of false "free people", who believe they value justice and freedom and independence of thought, but whose values in practice skew towards "trains running on time" and re-instating conservative policies according to biases trained into them by religious and cultural sources.

These are, in fact, the majority of Nazis, like the soil in which the roots of the toxic plant of fascist government grows.

The fact is, of you don't want Nazis in your country, you will not be the fertile soil for this.

If you hate Nazis, really, if you want to be remembered not as an individual but as part of a *sort* of individual, as an instance of something we can count on next time, then today you will show that you can reject the comforts and the utilities of the trains running on time because you are one of those who will ultimately blow up the tracks before they can carry trains of people. Name those Nazis as what they are, and speak the words into history necessary to make the next instance of you who reads the words in the next cycle and understand before things get so out of hand as you let them get here.

MAGA are Nazis.

Those who pretend "MAGA" isn't "Nazis" are cheeky Nazis.

Your entire post boils down to "conservatives are nazis, we should make sure that there are no conservatives"

You strenuously object whenever someone boils down your posts to their view of its essence. In this case, the fuel for your boiling is the erroneous conflation of conservative with MAGA. There are plenty of conservatives who did not and do not support Trump.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I have not delved very deeply into Charlie Kirk’s opinions but I do think some of the views he’s quoted as expressing are indeed hateful.

Okay, I get that this is abstract reasoning here, but bear with me.

You perceiving Kirk's views as hateful views is not the same as Kirk advocating hate.

My grandfather believed that miscegenation was sinful. My stepdad is black. My grandfather didn't hate my stepdad.

I can absolutely understand that many people see my grandfather's belief as hateful; my grandfather himself wasn't hateful - he didn't see it as hateful, and he didn't have any hate in his heart toward my stepdad. Doesn't mean there wasn't tension especially early on. There were arguments, there was a lot of anger, it went on for years. It sucked and it was sad and it was painful... but it wasn't hate.

Racists often make exceptions, ‘for the good ones.’

I'm struggling to say something that is within the bounds, because you just called my family racist, and in a very nasty way.

Viewing something as sinful doesn't equate to hatred. Sometimes it's stupid, definitely, and it can absolutely cause tension and conflict. But it isn't necessarily hate.

My grandfather saw marrying outside of one's race as a sin. It was a stupid position in my view, and in the view of my mom and stepdad.

My grandfather also viewed adultery as a sin. One of his best friends cheated on his wife, and they got divorced. Somehow, crazy as this might seem to those of you who are more invested in hatred toward christianity than in actually understanding other people's perspective... he never hated his friend, even though he saw his actions as sinful.

Me living with my spouse before we got married is also something he viewed as a sin. And I know that some of you can't manage to comprehend that viewing something as sinful doesn't mean you hate the person who did it, but yeah - my grandpa never hated me nor my husband.

Of the three sins listed, WHY would 'marrying outside one's race' be considered sinful? Because I kind of get the other ones even though I don't agree with sin as a concept.

aa

 

[ZiprHead]

You are what you claim to hate.

Trump called people that voted against him "vermin" and said he "hates" his opponents.

That doesn't counter my post at all, you know.

The irony is that you don't make a peep when Trump does it.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

You are what you claim to hate.

Trump called people that voted against him "vermin" and said he "hates" his opponents.

That doesn't counter my post at all, you know.

The irony is that you don't make a peep when Trump does it.

All I see from these people is tone-policing the left. They never do any tone-policing of the right.

 

[Emily Lake]

I have no sympathy for folks who think they are in the wrong body.

Why not? It seems to me to be a pretty good reason for both sympathy and kindness.

Don't insist I agree with your beliefs.

I don't think anyone is insisting on any such thing. They are just asking you to respect those beliefs.

I don't think Christians should be allowed to insist that I go to church; But I don't insist that they don't go themselves.

Your statement here seems to suggest that trans people should not be allowed to have beliefs that differ from yours, or at least that one should lack sympathy for them as a result.

Trans people can have whatever beliefs make them happy. It's the demand that other people respect and honor those beliefs by playing along as if they're actually for realsies the opposite sex that's the problem.

I don't care if Eddie Izzard thinks of himself as a "woman" in some bizarre stereotype-driven caricatured sense. I do care if Eddie Izzard decides that his internal feelings about his gendered essence should give him the right to strip down in women's changing areas. I don't care if Darren Merager thinks of himself as a "woman" because he likes pink and skirts. I do care a lot when Darren Merager proceeds to expose his dick to a room full of women without their consent. I don't care that Laverne Cox thinks of himself as a "woman" and mimics female attributes fairly well after having spent tens of thousands of dollars on cosmetic surgery. I do care if he demands that everyone else should be required to refer to him as "she" even if he's not present, and to pretend like the name Roderick never existed. I don't care if Jessica Yaniv wants to think of himself as some kind of "woman". I do care when he sues female muslim aestheticians who work out of their homes for not being willing to handle his dick and wax his balls. I don't care that Veronica Ivy enjoys pretending to "live like a woman". I do care that he wins female cycling competitions as an overweight middle-aged man and somehow other people are supposed to cheer for his cheating.

I don't care how people think of themselves, nor do I care how they present. Have at it! I care when their private beliefs get enacted in a way that massively disadvantages women, displaces us in our own sports, and puts us at risk in our own intimate spaces.

 

[Emily Lake]

That's called intersex, not transgender.

So (A) it's all in their mind.

It would be best not to confuse the two situations,

So keep it simple. (A) or (B), yes or no.
That's the problem.

An 'identity' would be Superman or Clark Kent. But just one physical person.
Your identity is your problem, nobody else gives a shit.
Nobody ever talks about intersex, but that's a physical reality. That, I could have sympathy for.
I have no sympathy for folks who think they are in the wrong body. That is just woo. Don't insist I agree with your beliefs.

Thank you for clearing it up for me.

Believe it or not, the mind is in fact a body part.

Which is why anorexics are actually for realsies fat, and we should all be affirming their identities and pitching in for their weight loss programs.