Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On June 09 2025 03:20 LightSpectra wrote: Christian pastors saying gay people and feminists should be executed could easily be rounded up on the basis of hate speech and encouraging violence. In fact, that's a lot more damaging to society than crossing some arbitrary geographical line.
Hate speech is protected in the US - you might have accidentally set up your profile location wrong - so you'd need certain laws to be passed or judicial decisions to come down in order to be able to round up both of the pastors who say things like that.
People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
The concern is less about who is on the list to get investigated for deportation and more about how the authorities are going about it. They have been very fast and lose with grabbing people off the street in very dangerous manners (e.g., using unidentified officers who seem unofficial), rushing them out of the country to avoid interference by the courts that would slow the process down, violating court orders, delaying correcting mistakes, and making statements (from senior government officials) that due process is not required or should not be required.
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
When the hypothetical future far-left president starts shipping bigoted Christian pastors to CECOT, they can say the same thing Marco Rubio did to the Senate: "There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy."
But I know this exercise is pointless, because asking someone pro-oppression to try and imagine themselves being oppressed would require them to have empathy to work.
On June 09 2025 03:41 LightSpectra wrote: Do you mean people who are confirmed to have joined the gang MS-13, or people that Bondi wrote "MS-13" above their fingers in Snapchat?
Assuming this President Newsomnator somehow convinced El Salvador to take US citizen pastors in his prison, he would have presumably used his executive authority to rescue all the human traffickingers that weren't actually in MS-13 so there wouldn't be any left.
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
When the hypothetical future far-left president starts shipping bigoted Christian pastors to CECOT, they can say the same thing Marco Rubio did to the Senate: "There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy."
But I know this exercise is pointless, because asking someone pro-oppression to try and imagine themselves being oppressed would require them to have empathy to work.
You're still not getting how this "If the shoe were on the other foot" thing works. Deporting people for being here illegally is not the same as deporting conservative christians for hate speech. There's no hypocrisy there if you oppose one and not the other.
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
When the hypothetical future far-left president starts shipping bigoted Christian pastors to CECOT, they can say the same thing Marco Rubio did to the Senate: "There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy."
But I know this exercise is pointless, because asking someone pro-oppression to try and imagine themselves being oppressed would require them to have empathy to work.
You're still not getting how this "If the shoe were on the other foot" thing works. Deporting people for being here illegally is not the same as deporting conservative christians for hate speech. There's no hypocrisy there if you oppose one and not the other.
Trump is deporting people who are here legally.
As for hypocrisy: no, it's not hypocritical to be a fascist, or defend police abuse. But it is absolutely hypocritical that the same people doing these things also claim to be Christians and care about the U.S. Constitution.
On June 09 2025 03:41 LightSpectra wrote: Do you mean people who are confirmed to have joined the gang MS-13, or people that Bondi wrote "MS-13" above their fingers in Snapchat?
Assuming this President Newsomnator somehow convinced El Salvador to take US citizen pastors in his prison, he would have presumably used his executive authority to rescue all the human traffickingers that weren't actually in MS-13 so there wouldn't be any left.
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
When the hypothetical future far-left president starts shipping bigoted Christian pastors to CECOT, they can say the same thing Marco Rubio did to the Senate: "There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy."
But I know this exercise is pointless, because asking someone pro-oppression to try and imagine themselves being oppressed would require them to have empathy to work.
You're still not getting how this "If the shoe were on the other foot" thing works. Deporting people for being here illegally is not the same as deporting conservative christians for hate speech. There's no hypocrisy there if you oppose one and not the other.
Yeah, i know. One group is your guys, so doing anything against them is bad.
The other people are brown, so not really real people anyways.
On June 09 2025 03:26 LightSpectra wrote: People accused of illegal migration are supposed to get a fair trial too, but I understand you haven't been reading or watching anything that a reasonable person could describe as "news" more than "state media".
By statute it actually depends on the situation whether there is any trial at all. The "typical" situation you're probably thinking involves a civil hearing at some point. A trial would be for criminal charges. Did someone tell you everyone without legal status had the right to a jury trial?
When the hypothetical future far-left president starts shipping bigoted Christian pastors to CECOT, they can say the same thing Marco Rubio did to the Senate: "There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. No judge, and the judicial branch, cannot tell me or the president how to conduct foreign policy."
But I know this exercise is pointless, because asking someone pro-oppression to try and imagine themselves being oppressed would require them to have empathy to work.
You're still not getting how this "If the shoe were on the other foot" thing works. Deporting people for being here illegally is not the same as deporting conservative christians for hate speech. There's no hypocrisy there if you oppose one and not the other.
Yeah, i know. One group is your guys, so doing anything against them is bad.
The other people are brown, so not really real people anyways.
This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
Ive asked them this several times before, they just like it, they know theyre not gaining anything, or changing anyones mind
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
Ive asked them this several times before, they just like it
Yeah, i mostly stopped doing that. But sometimes you just get pulled in, and then you regret it afterwards. At this point, i guess I have mostly accepted that rightwingers just cannot be reasoned with.
But sometimes my underlying belief in humanity gets through again, and i wrongfully believe that surely they cannot be this dense, again, and must see that they are arguing against all principles they previously claimed to have. Obviously incorrect, but also our only hope, because for some reason there are just so many of them that they have so much power to make everyones lives worse.
So our only hope is that at least some of them will eventually figure out that making everyones lives worse is not a good thing. That having actual principles and living by them, and even holding your own team to them, is the only way to make the world a better place.
Mostly, it is just a feeling of sad impotence. These people hurt everyone, including themselves, and are incapable of rationally analyzing anything. But they are also powerful enough to keep hurting people, so they cannot be ignored either.
Edit: Also, sometimes people like oBlade just constantly spam something so absurdly stupid that it is really, really hard to ignore, like the reply below mine.
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
They're not that bad, some of them just still never got the firmware update that "illegal immigrant" isn't a race of people or political ideology.
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
It's just personally entertaining to listen to people that voted for a man with 34 felony convictions, 57 other felony indictments canceled because he won an election, adjudicated for sexual assault, called for armed insurrection on live TV, compromising national security by openly taking bribes explicitly forbade by the Constitution, try to tell us that crossing an arbitrary geographic line is such a heinous crime that immigrants need to have their families torn apart by secret police without due process. There's just something perversely funny about getting a small window into their deeply disturbed psyche.
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
Ive asked them this several times before, they just like it
Yeah, i mostly stopped doing that. But sometimes you just get pulled in, and then you regret it afterwards. At this point, i guess I have mostly accepted that rightwingers just cannot be reasoned with.
But sometimes my underlying belief in humanity gets through again, and i wrongfully believe that surely they cannot be this dense, again, and must see that they are arguing against all principles they previously claimed to have. Obviously incorrect, but also our only hope, because for some reason there are just so many of them that they have so much power to make everyones lives worse.
So our only hope is that at least some of them will eventually figure out that making everyones lives worse is not a good thing. That having actual principles and living by them, and even holding your own team to them, is the only way to make the world a better place.
Mostly, it is just a feeling of sad impotence. These people hurt everyone, including themselves, and are incapable of rationally analyzing anything. But they are also powerful enough to keep hurting people, so they cannot be ignored either.
Edit: Also, sometimes people like oBlade just constantly spam something so absurdly stupid that it is really, really hard to ignore, like the reply below mine.
My solution to them is I literally check the name on a post first thing and then if I recognize it as the name of a right wing debatelord type I literally scroll past the post. It got me through the Danglars years and the JimmiC years, though JimmiC wasnt a right wing debatelord, obviously.
The thread is much more readable when you scroll past the ramblings and ravings lol
On June 09 2025 04:57 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: This thread has reached "head, meet wall. Wall, head." levels of stupidity. Arguing with these 3-4 individuals is a clinical study of insanity. If someone can educate me on why anyone still engages with these people, please, do so.
Ive asked them this several times before, they just like it, they know theyre not gaining anything, or changing anyones mind
My theory is nazi rabies. The only purpose of words is to distract from the fact that their believes are evil, cruel and unjust. They are the bad guys of their own story and frantic about it.
Their brain lost the capacity to accept that they are wrong, like a rabies infested dog will be terribly afraid ingesting anything, but produce more saliva to spread more rabies.
They franticly blabble on and if you tell them to stop they get agressive - or agressively play the victim.
There is a pop cultural solution to nazis:
And there is a real world solution to nazis, which costs everything.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/XCDKP7WYUVN6JCDYJBT6B5ROD4.jpg)
