Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Loren Pechtel]

I resent the notion that any kind of unpopular view must come from hate. I don't see any hate coming from Emily or Bomb#20, in fact quite the contrary. They don't deserve the shit they've been handed.

I was sexually assaulted when I was on a camping trip with a bunch of guys from school. I'm a small guy and not a tough guy, and he was drunk as fuck and much bigger. It sucks. I can easily understand if a woman is uncomfortable around men in the bathroom, dressing room, etc. Why in the fuck we should haul these women up as evil and hateful is beyond me.

Have you proposed involuntarily committing all big guys as a punishment for what that specific one did? The hateful part isn't that she has those feelings, the hateful part is what she wants done to innocent people because of those feelings. As a person I don't feel comfortable walking around in certain neighborhoods of my city, but I don't go online and demand that they all be bulldozed and their residents dehomed. People's feelings are their own, but only until they channel those feelings into acts of hatred and violence towards others. That's when a line has to be drawn.

What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Who do I want to have committed for what someone else did? What do you think I want done to innocent people, and can you provide ANY quote that supports your malicious and downright evil mischaracterization?

And where the holy fuck do you get off insinuating that I want neighborhoods bulldozed and people rehomed? Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

This behavior from you is immoral, unethical, and wholly unacceptable.

It's a comparison. He's not saying that you want neighborhoods bulldozed, he's saying that your approach to trans is the equivalent of leveling high crime parts of cities.

Sure, sure. My approach of legal protection from discrimination in housing and employment, but not letting any male who says magic words peep on women without consent. Truly, I'm evil and not letting the males with special womanly feels in their brains strip down and show off their dicks to unconsenting women is totally just like bulldozing cities. Yep.

You completely misunderstand the comparison.

You want to effectively ban them from society because you are afraid of some of them. Exactly like wanting to remove the bad parts of town.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I wasn't trying to address whether she hates women. Rather, I was addressing why people distrust her claim of support for the RvW position.

It's absurd to distrust my claim of support for the RvW position, when that's quite literally the only thing I've ever argued for.

The devil is in the details.

You proposed some onerous requirements on third trimester abortions--things that simply couldn't be met in smaller facilities. And as we have seen with other quests to ban "improper" abortion it comes down to whether they can prove it's proper, rather than the best medical estimate. How do you know how far along a pregnancy is? It's sometimes impossible to prove it's at less than 6 months. You argued for RvW with booby traps.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You cannot protect women in bathrooms from rape by banning transwomen from ladies rooms

Let's say that tomorrow, a new law is passed that lets any male use the women's room if they wish. There are still rooms labeled "mens" and "womens", but males can use whichever they would like to.

Do you think this law will:
A) Reduce the risk of a woman being subjected to sexual assault, voyeurism, and exhibitionism?
B) Increase the risk of a woman being subjected to sexual assault, voyeurism, and exhibitionism?
C) No change to the risk of a woman being subjected to sexual assault, voyeurism, and exhibitionism?

Please include your rationale for which option you choose as the most likely impact of that law on women.

1) It would have pretty much zero effect on sexual assault as toilets are not a common venue in the first place.

2) It probably would increase voyeurism and exhibitionism.

However, we are arguing for said person being female-presenting and with an ID that says F. That will basically screen out the perverts.

And you still haven't adequately addressed the male-presenting people that you are requiring to use the women's. You can quickly identify a FtM vs a M?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

ACTUAL enacted fascist laws and rules in place.

Why bother with that, when you can simply designate your political opposition terrorists,

Examples? Which political party has been designated as a terrorist organization? Which politicians have been designated as terrorists?

Are you not aware of Antifa being designated as a terrorist organization? Despite the fact that it's not even an organization in the first place.

send the military to terrorize enemy territory and let ‘em sue, while SCROTUS sits on its ass playing with itself.

What are you even talking about?

If anyone gets in trouble for say, burning down a judge’s house,

Arson is punishable by law, and ought to be.

breaking and entering the Capitol to impede a government function or anything like that … just PARDON!

Oh tnoes! The horror! A president *gasp* pardoned someone, that's never been done before! Obviously that's fascism in action... so yeah, every president in living memory is clearly a fascist!

The J6 pardons are not remotely like typical pardons. When has there ever been a blanket pardon of participants in a specified criminal act?

And the J6 pardons gave a strong indication that if you're doing what Hair Fuhrer wants you'll be pardoned.

 

[scombrid]

I didn’t realize Jack Posobiec was part of Turning Point USA until I was reading about the little rally they had in Washington today where he was a guest of Trump.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Are you blind to how he's totally stomping all over the Constitution?

And note that your approach to avoiding war is appeasement. History will tell you how bad a solution this is.

I see him stomping on the constitution, just like Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan. Before that I was too young to follow politics but the history books say others before them did the same.

Not "just like". He's going far, far further than they did.

“Fighting” cannot succeed if it means violence as a means of directly forcing an end, but it can motivate people.
We are in this fix right now largely because violence on 1/6 was so successfully sold as a rallying cry.

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

I'm still amused that people call it "violent", usually the same people who call "summer of love" in 2000 "mostly peaceful" while standing in front of burning buildings.

A bunch of undercover agents at a protest says nothing about whether the agents were part of the group that attacked.

J6 was a lot more violent than the 2020 protests. Look at the ratio of deaths to participants.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

ACTUAL enacted fascist laws and rules in place.

Why bother with that, when you can simply designate your political opposition terrorists,

Examples? Which political party has been designated as a terrorist organization? Which politicians have been designated as terrorists?

Are you not aware of Antifa being designated as a terrorist organization? Despite the fact that it's not even an organization in the first place.

These disingenuous fucks tend to not be aware of the most recent events (or just ignore them) and then claim we're just making things up.