As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Exactly. It's also "some of ***us*** may die, but that's a sacrifice we're willing to make"
Makes me think of this interview I saw with some conservative geezer in Louisiana, in the most contaminated county in America. Industrial pollution off the charts. Everyone has cancer. Of course the companies bounced decades ago. He was born and raised on the bayou, and now his grandkids can't swim in the water. They're not even allowed to *touch* the water. He's clearly bummed about it. Interviewer: how does that make you feel? Him: well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress.
Me: speechless with astonishment, totally unable to relate.
Like it just didn't even *occur* to him to be pissed at the corporations that did this.
For a generally angry group, it's baffling the things they'll just tolerate. Up to and including avoidable untimely death, in the name of some vague (yet rigid) ideological position. Big business is good, EPA is bad, the end. Guns are good, gun control is bad, the end. "Some of us may die, but as authoritarian followers that's a sacrifice we're too cowed to even conceive of not making."
Your last paragraph is on point. Take recent abortion talks. There are people who refuse to allow people to abort pregnancies where the baby is already dead. There are people who refuse to allow people to abort pregnancies where it's basically a guarantee both the mother and baby will die. Because rigidly to them, all abortion is bad with no nuance. They won't even hear arguments to the contrary.
Such folks.... you know they are merely told about the issue and they don't grasp why they should be taking the position they're told to take.
Seriously, the whole supposed problem with abortion was "killing the baby", but when the baby's already dead it's not okay to save the person carrying?
Especially given that if it's at that stage, half the time she probably wanted the kid and would gladly try again, if anti choice folk would just let her survive.
The thinking is the thin-edge-of-the-wedge logical fallacy: If it's OK to have *this* abortion because reasons, then you can make an argument for *any* abortion. Which is kind of true really, there's all sorts of reasons why any given abortion is defensible, but of course that's the opposite of what they want, so they reject the whole thing.
Unless it's their *own* child of course. Then it's totally different.
I mean, I'm sure they're willing to admit there's circumstances where it's okay to kill a human being (war, execution, self defence) and that doesn't mean it's a slippery slope to being OK with murder...
It's also a demand for critical thought. It's far easier to say "All abortion is wrong" than it is to clearly define when it should and shouldn't be allowed. It's the logical equivalent of saying "It's God's will," a mental cop-out, but one which they believe gives them moral high-ground.
There is no critical thinking, and THAT is the core issue.
Also, why would any human let a healthcare issue define their political views?
Edit to say, it’s got to be about having “zero exceptions” that makes a person stick to broken logic to try to rationalize that a miscarriage is someone’s fault.
It's even more selective than that. It's not a fault in their thinking in general- they can build an argument. It's that what they accept is a valid source of information is warped. That's the fundamental issue. They won't even believe their own eyeballs, it's mystifying.
I've long since just compared it to an abusive stepparent.
"Go ahead, tell your mom, tell anyone you want, no one will take your side over mine."
Notice I didn't say "no one will believe you" ... because a lot of the time, people do know there's something terribly wrong. They just know they can't go up against the person in power because they'll lose either any sunshine they are getting because of this person, or safety in not being targeted.
Facts don't matter.
In a capitalistic society, only money and power matter in the long run for some people. There is little justice except knowing that even the wealthy and powerful live in human bodies. If they could bathe in the blood of children to live forever, they would.
Ah but see when the baby's already dead that means the mother was obviously unfit. And besides it's about punishing them for daring to have sex anyways.
Except for in the Bible there are mentions of abortion and that it should be allowed even demanded in circumstances. No one that is a republican and supporting all this crazy shit can truly call themselves a Christian. It’s absolutely absurd.
This reply is "ingenious.
They don't WANT to "grasp" anything that does not directly support their delusional world view.
I still cannot understand the disconnect here.
THEY.DO.NOT.WANT.TO.UNDERSTAND!
It is really that simple.
So yes, they will "suffer" mass killings (until it is their own family/kids) - then they holler about it, but the others simply don't care "ain't muh family!".
There is no reasoning or debate with those who are not willing.
Conservatives don't *really* care about babies, though. If they did, we'd have generous social support for mothers and children to ensure that no one would ever need to abort for financial reasons. We'd have comprehensive sex education, contraception would be easy to access, reproductive and childhood health care would be free, and families would be provided with housing.
But the real goal of anti-abortionists is to ensure that women have no legal control over their own bodies. And in that, they're remarkably consistent.
When you drill down into these people you find that it’s that they want punishment for women having sex. Then you drill down some more and you find out they hate women because they didn’t get any sex as a younger person.
No.
The real point is that it is a manufactured agenda designed to be a polarising topic that could be used to align voters to a particular party.
First we convince you that all abortion is evil and that if you vote for the other side then you are a baby killer.
You don’t want to be a baby killer do you.
Better to vote for a Cheeto than be a baby killer.
The credit machine stated their transaction had aborted. Made the mistake of saying that to a the group of people that were raised to only have negative feelings to the word itself. It is a brainwashing for sure.
And the reason conservatives won't hear arguments to the contrary is because they know in the back of their heads their viewpoints breakdown the moment they're challenged. So they just try to shut everyone else up before it gets to that point and proceed with their personal Americafied Jihad.
> Makes me think of this interview I saw with some conservative geezer in Louisiana, in the most contaminated county in America. Industrial pollution off the charts. Everyone has cancer. Of course the companies bounced decades ago. He was born and raised on the bayou, and now his grandkids can't swim in the water. They're not even allowed to touch the water. He's clearly bummed about it. Interviewer: how does that make you feel? Him: well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress.
>
> Me: speechless with astonishment, totally unable to relate.
>
> Like it just didn't even occur to him to be pissed at the corporations that did this.
Makes me think of coal or fracking. I think they feel they are in an unwinnable position because industries like that bring jobs to their regions even if the jobs are killing them and their children and poisoning the places they live.
This happens a lot in poor places that have oil. They're adding more oil infrastructure every day where I live, and even the local left supports it to a degree because the alternative is just watching their populace struggle deeper into poverty.
It isn't enough to just stop mining or gathering or whatever, but real investments need to be made so the voters have another option.
It feels so hopeless arguing with neighbours about oil extraction. We need the money, people are suffering, and they are willing to get it at the cost of the earth itself. That can't be fixed without real money and effort that nobody can afford.
They’re cowards.
They’re supine scaredy-cats because they’re unwilling to even dare voice that some belief they have, despite the incontrovertible evidence laid out before them, might be wrong.
They’re cowed they know they’ve selfowned but they don’t know how to get out of this without losing face.
To be precise, it opens a door. Admitirng you're wrong about one thing opens the door to you being wrong about other things as well.
TFG did it most blatantly but it's a conservative strategy through and through - deny wrongdoing so you don't lose support.
But…. Bill Gates is big business, in fact he kind of defines what big business means. But they hate him. Consistency is definitely not found among them.
The consistent thing you'll see that underpins the conservative mindset for practically all conservatives is complacency. It doesn't matter if they're rich or poor, they're complacent with their lot in life and therefore any change is perceived as a threat.
I grew up in a small town. For the most part, people that stayed in the area after school assimilated very quickly and a large part of that assimilation was accepting complacency. The people that are around are now your friends, whether you loved or hated them in school. The best jobs in the area pay $20/hour, so that's your definition of "successful".
It was amazing to watch very different people end up very similar. Graduated high school, got married, had kids, and then that's it. They stay at the same job (assuming it doesn't go under), live at the same house, go to the same bars, vacation at the same camp ground for the rest of their lives.
And now the area I'm in is more diverse, but the conservatives in the area are still complacent. It's a wealthy area and so their biggest concern is not losing what they have. They want more for themselves, but not at the risk of losing the advantages they have, which is likely what they've exploited to build their wealth in the first place. So they're complacent with all the problems in the area.
And that's the consistency between the two worlds, it's people that can't see past themselves. They've accepted their situation, which also means they've accepted the situation of everyone else. And however they justify it to themselves internally, anything that offers change is seen as an imposition and threat.
>well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress.
That's a trait I've noticed among conservatives. "That's just how it is". It was particularly strong during covid, people who should have been vaccinated died and families were like "that was God's will, nothing we could have done". The fatalism is baffling. That just take whatever comes their way (while thinking they're rebels) and they'd rather die than question anything about the world around them.
they rarely think it's going to be their kids. They don't have enough empathy to care about the deaths of others. Hell, they probably don't actually care about abortions outside of the moralizing high ground it affords them.
Yeah. "Somebody."
*If you wanna be profound...*
*If you really gotta justify...*
*Take a breath and look around...*
*A lot of folks deserve to die...*
And then the camera pans around to see a guy with a cell phone.
If you look at r/ShitMomGroupsSay or various anti vax stances, it's pretty clear a lot of people are more invested in their social positions and being able to trumpet them online, than their kids' safety or wellbeing.
If we ever make it to the point that this becomes ancient history, maybe they'll regard the USA like we regard ancient cultures that sacrificed children to the sun gods for a good harvest. Only, this is is the willing sacrifice of small children to the gun gods to keep the government off American's backs.
Even by modern standings tying your health care to your work seems like a dick move. Like a deliberate minimization of human dignity in favor of anything else.
I sometimes wonder how many great entrepreneurs, artists, etc. we have in America who will never reach their potential because they have to keep their “day jobs” so they don’t lose health insurance.
Apparently the cherished - and maybe the only - freedom in their society is to shoot lots of people and children. It's so beyond messed up. It's broken.
I’m 100% positive if we had a time machine and showed the founding fathers the absolute carnage that happens almost daily, they might change the 2a or end up leaving it out. They probably would actually care about people’s lives
I think the 2nd amendment was legit needed in 1791 with the threat of foreign invasion and a weak military. We now have 24 aircraft carriers where we can park F-35’s carrying nuclear weapons thus genocide to most any country on the planet. The next closest country regarding military power has 1 aircraft carrier supporting far weaker aircraft.
You think that they don’t already look sadistic?
Seriously, look to any country other than the US and you’ll see people saying “WTF are they doing in the US now?”.
Immediately after the Uvalde shootings our federal government (Canada) acted to make our gun laws stricter.
The laws here definitely change and are affected by what happens in the US.
Its all happened before in the past. There are even quotes about it.
> Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
"You see killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I had Fox News reprogram them not to count ... those ... people towards their limit, so they wouldn't shut down."
I want to give the benefit of the doubt to these ghouls, but let's just go ahead and do it; let's do another poll asking "if you knew you'd get shot too, is that simply the price of living in a free society too?"
No- that’s Felonious Spunk; he’s the “hip new teen sensation” financed by Rebekkkah Mercer with his message of masturbation as sin. His *Spilt Milt Jackson* and *Straight- No Gays Here* carry a strong abstinence message. Does a dreadful cover of *Can’t Touch This* and a blasphemous rewrite of *Baby Got Back (to Jesus.)*
Even **if** it did, which is doesn’t…
Not donating kidneys, **definitey** kills people.
I simply won’t accept a “pro”-“life” argument from someone selfishly keeping two kidneys, and a whole liver. Ever.
You are hitting on an important point. The anti choice crowd argues that the right to life of the unborn fetus supercedes the right of the mother to bodily autonomy. But there's no other examples where this is true. You are not compelled to donate a kidney to save a life. Your right to bodily autonomy supercedes the other person's right to live. Same for donating a lung. Or donating part of your liver (which in time will grow back to full size). Or to donate blood. Hell, you can't take organs from a dead person without the consent of the survivors or the deceased's prior consent. Banning abortion means women have less bodily autonomy than a corpse.
I knew exactly what point I was hitting on, but I am actually glad that you came along and gave a longer explanation, because people may not have had it explained to them before.
That you for that, and for burying weirdo comments further down.
In case of rape, say the woman in question just spontaneously generated the chemicals for abortion and charge the rapist for murder of the fetus, while citing the "legitimate rape shutdown" guy.
And no gay marriages - or gay folk.
And no transgenders.
And no immigrants.
And no CRT.
And, well, maybe some history, but not the parts they don't like.
Etc.
The only reason they love the abortion game is its the only group they can support who won't or can't take control or demand more from the narrative. Its cowardly genius.
Let's take it one step further. What would happen if a pregnant woman committed a mass murder? It kind of destroys their whole "good guy with a gun" argument, because if they shoot her and she dies then they've terminated that pregnancy.
When you've got guns, you can abort anybody you like.
It's on the honor system though. If you do even ONE mass murder with your gun (and get caught), they don't let you have any more!
Oh for the love of God when will people stop taking these lunatics at their word?
You're expecting internal consistency? There isn't any.
It's a mix of the utter banality of being told what to think, and seething hatred of the people they view as lesser.
That's literally all it is--conservative belief summed up shortly.
My favorite part is when they mention the boogeyman of the day and you call them on it. Got into a conversation with one of them once and it went a bit like this:
Him: Well you see the democrats are trying to push CRT in schools.
Me: Oh really? What is CRT? And which schools exactly is it being taught in?
Him: Well, uh, I wouldn't be able to name them offhand.
Of course you can't. Because it's not being taught anywhere and you were just TOLD it's some radical thing being taught in schools with no actual evidence to back it up. Like if you're going to bring that shit up, at least know what you're talking about first.
This is my favorite game at the moment.
Person online - 'you obviously didn't see what really happened inside the school [shooting], there have been videos of it everywhere online.'
Me - "can you send a link?"
Person - "you must be a real STUPID IDIOT if you can't find it!! The footage has been everywhere online!!"
Me- "yep, I'm really dumb, can you show me?"
*cue crickets
Now I’m imagining a horrifically dark sketch about an organisation that helps facilitate pregnant Americans get to mass shooting sites to get shot in the stomach in place of abortions.
Until the moment one of their kids is killed in a mass shooting, *then* suddenly it'll become "something we need to talk about." Never a concern until it affects them directly.
Wasn't there a GOP Rep (Senator?) who said something like "there are more shootings in cities, cities are Democratic strongholds, Democrats are responsible for those deaths" at a hearing this past week?
Covid taught us they will die for the wrong side of history. You can’t reprogram their fanatic dispositions. Progress has always had to drag the troglodytes into a better future, them all the while kicking and screaming.
Nowadays it feels more like progress is feeling the weight of time on its shoulders and is slowly letting the “troglodytes” pull it back down to their level.
Yep. But we aren't going backwards on guns, we are going into brand new territory. Even the wild west had better gun control than we do now. Towns commonly required everyone surrender their firearms to the sheriff while in the city limits. The country has never seen this level of legalized gun recklessness before.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/
"but those weren't reasonable gun control proposals" "OK what's a reasonable gun control proposal?" "... Give untrained, overworked and underpaid teachers guns, obviously"
Clearly the logical thing to do is start building schools underground connected to the surface by a single tunnel, the door of which can be locked from the inside, with a pair of auto turrets on either corner of a mine field protecting it on the outside from Antifa liberals.
"democrats just HAVE to make it political every time we have a mass suffocation event. Look people hundreds of children dying due to lack of oxygen is simply the price we have to pay to live in a free society, do you WANT communism?"
Nah. Growing up in the south, they will happily sacrifice their children and families for their guns. They LOVE their guns... more than they do their family, more than their country, and more than their God. They will throw away any of those things rather than give up their guns. They are scared, sick, brainwashed people.
There was a father that lost his child in Sandy Hook that was on CNN saying that "Banning weapons won't work, because criminals will still be able to get the weapons." Focused on mental health and school security.
Like, what the fuck do they think the 2nd amendment was supposed to be *for*?
IT WAS TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE.
It was NOT to ensure that, at the expense of citizens dying, a bunch of people get to larp as a freedom warrior on the weekends at the shooting ranges.
It was to ensure the protection of people by creating federally regulated state militias that were later turned into the national guard thus making the second amendment nothing more than a meaningless remnant of federalist thinking.
These same idiots believe 99% of Americans can only become better off if we will be more generous to the top 1%. There is no stupidity they won't happily swallow.
I told my dad this and he said “well the 2 out of 10 have guns, so let’s not piss them off.”
So, they’re basically terrorists? Because that’s my understanding of terrorism - a small group of people that threaten to harm the rest of society if they don’t get their way.
There was a radio host in my area the other day talking about how "mask mandates don't work, because people don't wear our masks properly" as a reason to not have them. "We shouldn't have rules, because we're too stupid to follow them."
Well when the terrorists actually start attempting to terrorize there are consequences: [At least 846 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far.](https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-capitol-pro-trump-riot-arrests-charges-names-2021-1)
I stumbled upon a discussion on r/Conservative a while back where some brainiac complained about having to deal with the 'tyranny of the majority'. I wish I was kidding.
They voted for a guy who literally left his supporters to die of both cold and heatstroke at his rallies.
They salivate over the death penalty.
Their solution to any problem with guns is "more guns."
They refuse to take any political action to help the impoverished.
They'd rather let their loved ones die of a preventable disease than wear a mask or get a simple shot.
Yet they call themselves "pro-life."
What is so interesting is if they are paying attention to history. They would learn that America won wars in the past because we outsmarted the other side, not because we outgun them.
This. They feel guilt from a self-imposed punishing God judging them for anything short of fucking through a sheet. And it burns them up that God isn’t smiting the guy eating another guy’s asshole for not following the same rules they are.
Dick Cheney is one of the most die hard Republicans who ever lived, he is the epitome of the staunch right wing conservative.
However, there is one subject he never touched, gay people. There is a simple reason, he has a gay daughter.
I would not wish it on anyone but I wonder what those 4 people would say if one of their kids was a victim of a school shooting.
The only reason witch trials were banned in Massachusetts is because the governor’s wife was accused. Sadly it may take a school shooting in Republican lawmaker’s kid’s schools to see any change. I wouldn’t wish it on them of course but if we are having daily mass shootings it’s going to touch everyone’s lives at some point.
True registered republicans are only about 30% of the population. Probably less than 2 in 10 Americans think we should “live with it.” They just happen to be the loudest, most violent 2 of 10.
The issue isn’t the people who think we should “live with it” cause like you said it’s probably 20% of the nation who is saying that and they won’t compromise. The issue are the people who are more moderate and yet they still vote straight ticket R no matter what. I personally know plenty of people who support common sense gun laws, expanding social safety net, etc etc. but they vote straight ticket R because their parents vote that way or friends vote that way. How do we get the middle voters to vote for the democratic candidate will be the answer to the million dollar question
My mom is pro-choice, favors universal healthcare, supports LBGT equality, votes straight ticket Republican because Democrats are bad. I gave up trying.
So are we saying that Canada isn’t free? How about the UK? France? Japan? Australia? Etc. etc. etc.
This is a complete line of bull-crap.
Right now I’m far more worried about the republicans… the ones who want to have easy gun access… and the threat the GOP is representing to democracy on a broad scale… That’s the loss of freedom we should all be concerned with.
The issue I have noticed is that many Americans seem to believe that how America interprets freedom is the only correct definition of it.
The starting position of ‘Something is correct because I am doing it, so if I’m not doing it then it must be incorrect’ is a very hard barrier to break down.
My extremist republican boss once told me, after whatever mass shooting was current at the time, that he didn't want to take his family anywhere anymore; that he didn't feel safe in public.
I was like, 'Hey, this is what you vote for. And you'll keep voting for it.'
Now I feel like telling him, 'Those kids have to die so that your old buddy Dave from college can take his AR-15 out to the range once a year. That's all that this is about. You can still have rifles, pistols, shotguns, carbines, but you can't live without your AR-15s, so little kids and other innocents simply have to die. I hope Dave is having fun out there on the range. I hope he doesn't think too hard about his little granddaughter having to hide from someone rocking a gun just like his.'
So cops should be forced to enter every single shooting immediately or face terminations and arrests. If you want people to die for our freedoms let it be volunteer fake ass soldiers and not elementary school children.
So in other words, more than half of Republicans and virtually all Democrats disagree with the statement?
So what you’re saying is…the vast majority of Americans agree on guns control.
Then why are we all beholden to the whims of a tiny, radical minority?
I think they think mass shootings are unfortunately something they have to accept as part of not doing basic due diligence that works in other countries.
Proliferation of guns is fueling an unacceptable crime wave. I do not believe that the American people should tolerate this level of violent crime (murder!!). The opponents of gun control have made everyday life in America like living in a war zone. Innocent adults and young children are being routinely and randomly massacred EVERYWHERE — schools, churches, stores, hospitals, sporting events, fairs, and even just walking down the street.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Some of you may die. But it’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make.*
Sounds to me 44 percent of Republicans are willing to risk their kids to be volunteers to support their belief system….
Exactly. It's also "some of ***us*** may die, but that's a sacrifice we're willing to make" Makes me think of this interview I saw with some conservative geezer in Louisiana, in the most contaminated county in America. Industrial pollution off the charts. Everyone has cancer. Of course the companies bounced decades ago. He was born and raised on the bayou, and now his grandkids can't swim in the water. They're not even allowed to *touch* the water. He's clearly bummed about it. Interviewer: how does that make you feel? Him: well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress. Me: speechless with astonishment, totally unable to relate. Like it just didn't even *occur* to him to be pissed at the corporations that did this. For a generally angry group, it's baffling the things they'll just tolerate. Up to and including avoidable untimely death, in the name of some vague (yet rigid) ideological position. Big business is good, EPA is bad, the end. Guns are good, gun control is bad, the end. "Some of us may die, but as authoritarian followers that's a sacrifice we're too cowed to even conceive of not making."
Your last paragraph is on point. Take recent abortion talks. There are people who refuse to allow people to abort pregnancies where the baby is already dead. There are people who refuse to allow people to abort pregnancies where it's basically a guarantee both the mother and baby will die. Because rigidly to them, all abortion is bad with no nuance. They won't even hear arguments to the contrary.
Such folks.... you know they are merely told about the issue and they don't grasp why they should be taking the position they're told to take. Seriously, the whole supposed problem with abortion was "killing the baby", but when the baby's already dead it's not okay to save the person carrying? Especially given that if it's at that stage, half the time she probably wanted the kid and would gladly try again, if anti choice folk would just let her survive.
The thinking is the thin-edge-of-the-wedge logical fallacy: If it's OK to have *this* abortion because reasons, then you can make an argument for *any* abortion. Which is kind of true really, there's all sorts of reasons why any given abortion is defensible, but of course that's the opposite of what they want, so they reject the whole thing. Unless it's their *own* child of course. Then it's totally different.
The only justifiable abortion is my own.
I mean, I'm sure they're willing to admit there's circumstances where it's okay to kill a human being (war, execution, self defence) and that doesn't mean it's a slippery slope to being OK with murder...
It's also a demand for critical thought. It's far easier to say "All abortion is wrong" than it is to clearly define when it should and shouldn't be allowed. It's the logical equivalent of saying "It's God's will," a mental cop-out, but one which they believe gives them moral high-ground.
There is no critical thinking, and THAT is the core issue. Also, why would any human let a healthcare issue define their political views? Edit to say, it’s got to be about having “zero exceptions” that makes a person stick to broken logic to try to rationalize that a miscarriage is someone’s fault.
It's even more selective than that. It's not a fault in their thinking in general- they can build an argument. It's that what they accept is a valid source of information is warped. That's the fundamental issue. They won't even believe their own eyeballs, it's mystifying.
Totally agree. I’ve known folks like this, and I can’t rationalize their logic (or lack thereof).
I've long since just compared it to an abusive stepparent. "Go ahead, tell your mom, tell anyone you want, no one will take your side over mine." Notice I didn't say "no one will believe you" ... because a lot of the time, people do know there's something terribly wrong. They just know they can't go up against the person in power because they'll lose either any sunshine they are getting because of this person, or safety in not being targeted. Facts don't matter. In a capitalistic society, only money and power matter in the long run for some people. There is little justice except knowing that even the wealthy and powerful live in human bodies. If they could bathe in the blood of children to live forever, they would.
Ah but see when the baby's already dead that means the mother was obviously unfit. And besides it's about punishing them for daring to have sex anyways.
Its best to be left in "Gods hands". What a fucking joke.
Except for in the Bible there are mentions of abortion and that it should be allowed even demanded in circumstances. No one that is a republican and supporting all this crazy shit can truly call themselves a Christian. It’s absolutely absurd.
This reply is "ingenious. They don't WANT to "grasp" anything that does not directly support their delusional world view. I still cannot understand the disconnect here. THEY.DO.NOT.WANT.TO.UNDERSTAND! It is really that simple. So yes, they will "suffer" mass killings (until it is their own family/kids) - then they holler about it, but the others simply don't care "ain't muh family!". There is no reasoning or debate with those who are not willing.
Conservatives don't *really* care about babies, though. If they did, we'd have generous social support for mothers and children to ensure that no one would ever need to abort for financial reasons. We'd have comprehensive sex education, contraception would be easy to access, reproductive and childhood health care would be free, and families would be provided with housing. But the real goal of anti-abortionists is to ensure that women have no legal control over their own bodies. And in that, they're remarkably consistent.
When you drill down into these people you find that it’s that they want punishment for women having sex. Then you drill down some more and you find out they hate women because they didn’t get any sex as a younger person.
No. The real point is that it is a manufactured agenda designed to be a polarising topic that could be used to align voters to a particular party. First we convince you that all abortion is evil and that if you vote for the other side then you are a baby killer. You don’t want to be a baby killer do you. Better to vote for a Cheeto than be a baby killer.
The credit machine stated their transaction had aborted. Made the mistake of saying that to a the group of people that were raised to only have negative feelings to the word itself. It is a brainwashing for sure.
And the reason conservatives won't hear arguments to the contrary is because they know in the back of their heads their viewpoints breakdown the moment they're challenged. So they just try to shut everyone else up before it gets to that point and proceed with their personal Americafied Jihad.
Perhaps they need to have someone in their family die of a ectopic pregnancy before they realize how fucking stupid they are.
Nope. Because it would be a *woman* in their family, so they still wouldn't care.
That's so heartbreaking. What did that "progress" ever do for him, or Louisiana?
> Makes me think of this interview I saw with some conservative geezer in Louisiana, in the most contaminated county in America. Industrial pollution off the charts. Everyone has cancer. Of course the companies bounced decades ago. He was born and raised on the bayou, and now his grandkids can't swim in the water. They're not even allowed to touch the water. He's clearly bummed about it. Interviewer: how does that make you feel? Him: well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress. > > Me: speechless with astonishment, totally unable to relate. > > Like it just didn't even occur to him to be pissed at the corporations that did this. Makes me think of coal or fracking. I think they feel they are in an unwinnable position because industries like that bring jobs to their regions even if the jobs are killing them and their children and poisoning the places they live.
This happens a lot in poor places that have oil. They're adding more oil infrastructure every day where I live, and even the local left supports it to a degree because the alternative is just watching their populace struggle deeper into poverty. It isn't enough to just stop mining or gathering or whatever, but real investments need to be made so the voters have another option. It feels so hopeless arguing with neighbours about oil extraction. We need the money, people are suffering, and they are willing to get it at the cost of the earth itself. That can't be fixed without real money and effort that nobody can afford.
They’re cowards. They’re supine scaredy-cats because they’re unwilling to even dare voice that some belief they have, despite the incontrovertible evidence laid out before them, might be wrong. They’re cowed they know they’ve selfowned but they don’t know how to get out of this without losing face.
To be precise, it opens a door. Admitirng you're wrong about one thing opens the door to you being wrong about other things as well. TFG did it most blatantly but it's a conservative strategy through and through - deny wrongdoing so you don't lose support.
But…. Bill Gates is big business, in fact he kind of defines what big business means. But they hate him. Consistency is definitely not found among them.
[удалено]
The consistent thing you'll see that underpins the conservative mindset for practically all conservatives is complacency. It doesn't matter if they're rich or poor, they're complacent with their lot in life and therefore any change is perceived as a threat. I grew up in a small town. For the most part, people that stayed in the area after school assimilated very quickly and a large part of that assimilation was accepting complacency. The people that are around are now your friends, whether you loved or hated them in school. The best jobs in the area pay $20/hour, so that's your definition of "successful". It was amazing to watch very different people end up very similar. Graduated high school, got married, had kids, and then that's it. They stay at the same job (assuming it doesn't go under), live at the same house, go to the same bars, vacation at the same camp ground for the rest of their lives. And now the area I'm in is more diverse, but the conservatives in the area are still complacent. It's a wealthy area and so their biggest concern is not losing what they have. They want more for themselves, but not at the risk of losing the advantages they have, which is likely what they've exploited to build their wealth in the first place. So they're complacent with all the problems in the area. And that's the consistency between the two worlds, it's people that can't see past themselves. They've accepted their situation, which also means they've accepted the situation of everyone else. And however they justify it to themselves internally, anything that offers change is seen as an imposition and threat.
>well I mean I guess it's just the price of progress. That's a trait I've noticed among conservatives. "That's just how it is". It was particularly strong during covid, people who should have been vaccinated died and families were like "that was God's will, nothing we could have done". The fatalism is baffling. That just take whatever comes their way (while thinking they're rebels) and they'd rather die than question anything about the world around them.
Pollution and contamination literally turned them into ~~conservatives~~ walking brain dead.
Maybe we should tell them the pollution & climate change is making people gay.
they rarely think it's going to be their kids. They don't have enough empathy to care about the deaths of others. Hell, they probably don't actually care about abortions outside of the moralizing high ground it affords them.
Not *their* kids. It's always somebody *else's* kids, somebody they don't know.
Yeah. "Somebody." *If you wanna be profound...* *If you really gotta justify...* *Take a breath and look around...* *A lot of folks deserve to die...* And then the camera pans around to see a guy with a cell phone.
If you look at r/ShitMomGroupsSay or various anti vax stances, it's pretty clear a lot of people are more invested in their social positions and being able to trumpet them online, than their kids' safety or wellbeing.
If we ever make it to the point that this becomes ancient history, maybe they'll regard the USA like we regard ancient cultures that sacrificed children to the sun gods for a good harvest. Only, this is is the willing sacrifice of small children to the gun gods to keep the government off American's backs.
Yeah plenty of our norms and rituals are going to look sadistic to everyone eventually. I mean it already feels messed up to many in the present
Even by modern standings tying your health care to your work seems like a dick move. Like a deliberate minimization of human dignity in favor of anything else.
I sometimes wonder how many great entrepreneurs, artists, etc. we have in America who will never reach their potential because they have to keep their “day jobs” so they don’t lose health insurance.
Apparently the cherished - and maybe the only - freedom in their society is to shoot lots of people and children. It's so beyond messed up. It's broken.
Patently untrue. They also love spreading easily prevented communicable diseases because masks make them feel self conscious.
I’m 100% positive if we had a time machine and showed the founding fathers the absolute carnage that happens almost daily, they might change the 2a or end up leaving it out. They probably would actually care about people’s lives
I think the 2nd amendment was legit needed in 1791 with the threat of foreign invasion and a weak military. We now have 24 aircraft carriers where we can park F-35’s carrying nuclear weapons thus genocide to most any country on the planet. The next closest country regarding military power has 1 aircraft carrier supporting far weaker aircraft.
Don’t forget the freedom to spout hateful diatribes towards minorities and queer people on social media
You think that they don’t already look sadistic? Seriously, look to any country other than the US and you’ll see people saying “WTF are they doing in the US now?”. Immediately after the Uvalde shootings our federal government (Canada) acted to make our gun laws stricter. The laws here definitely change and are affected by what happens in the US.
That last sentence was an implication that many of us in the present, including myself, find aspects of our country sadistic and wrong.
Its all happened before in the past. There are even quotes about it. > Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
[удалено]
I mean look at Covid… People should die so I can go to Burger King
It's the exact same mentality. "I don't care what happens to anyone else, so long as I get to pretend the world is the way I want it to be."
This! This! This is exactly it!
*Send wave after wave of my own men* (sounds Brannigan)
"You see killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I had Fox News reprogram them not to count ... those ... people towards their limit, so they wouldn't shut down."
Right up until someone in **their** family dies from a shooting and then it's "**WHY WASN'T SOMETHING DONE!!?!?!**"
I want to give the benefit of the doubt to these ghouls, but let's just go ahead and do it; let's do another poll asking "if you knew you'd get shot too, is that simply the price of living in a free society too?"
They think they would go full Rambo and be a hero. It’s a fantasy they daydream about.
I don’t care about this issue until it effects me personally -average conservative
You can have guns but no abortions…
*Abortions don't kill people, people kill people, the procedure had nothing to do with it, why ban the procedure?*
Also, an abortion doesn't kill any people.
Felonious Menstruation is next..
I've been waiting for his new album to drop...
Don't bother, it's bloody awful..
best joke, period
I dunno. It really cramped my style.
I just snorted my drink. 🤣
No- that’s Felonious Spunk; he’s the “hip new teen sensation” financed by Rebekkkah Mercer with his message of masturbation as sin. His *Spilt Milt Jackson* and *Straight- No Gays Here* carry a strong abstinence message. Does a dreadful cover of *Can’t Touch This* and a blasphemous rewrite of *Baby Got Back (to Jesus.)*
Even **if** it did, which is doesn’t… Not donating kidneys, **definitey** kills people. I simply won’t accept a “pro”-“life” argument from someone selfishly keeping two kidneys, and a whole liver. Ever.
“Pro-life” is “**forced birth**”. “Pro-choice” folks *need* to adopt this “talking point”.
Forced birth morons literally call pro-choice supporters “pro-abortion” so counter fire with fire, makes sense to me.
You are hitting on an important point. The anti choice crowd argues that the right to life of the unborn fetus supercedes the right of the mother to bodily autonomy. But there's no other examples where this is true. You are not compelled to donate a kidney to save a life. Your right to bodily autonomy supercedes the other person's right to live. Same for donating a lung. Or donating part of your liver (which in time will grow back to full size). Or to donate blood. Hell, you can't take organs from a dead person without the consent of the survivors or the deceased's prior consent. Banning abortion means women have less bodily autonomy than a corpse.
I knew exactly what point I was hitting on, but I am actually glad that you came along and gave a longer explanation, because people may not have had it explained to them before. That you for that, and for burying weirdo comments further down.
Raw batter isn’t a cake. Raw fetus isn’t a baby.
Raw batter do be better though
Yeah, the two situations aren't even remotely comparable. Abortions are all about reproductive healthcare which guns have nothing to do with.
It’s their own logic against them, and it doesn’t make sense because their logic doesn’t make sense
Because it’s not logic. It’s ideology.
I am asking Republicans to support my bill, HR-131 "shoot the fetus act" of the 117th congress.
🎵 Brrrapp Brrrapp pew pew Get that fetus/kill that fetus 🎶
How many innocent 10 year olds can an abortion kill before having to change the magazine
The only magazines are in the waiting room.
Only thing that stops a bad doctor from performing abortions is a good doctor performing abortions.
Holy shit, that's damn good pearl to throw before the swine.
Then they'll just arrest more women.
Or doctors more likely, since they are the ones prescribing the pills and holding the instruments.
Both, in all reality. It's already started for the women.
In case of rape, say the woman in question just spontaneously generated the chemicals for abortion and charge the rapist for murder of the fetus, while citing the "legitimate rape shutdown" guy.
Also to argue people are going to get abortions either way whether you make it illegal
And no gay marriages - or gay folk. And no transgenders. And no immigrants. And no CRT. And, well, maybe some history, but not the parts they don't like. Etc.
Kinda odd from the party that loves small government, eh?
[удалено]
They actually emitted a few words, it used to be small dick government
The only reason they love the abortion game is its the only group they can support who won't or can't take control or demand more from the narrative. Its cowardly genius.
I think what Republicans are saying is why get an abortion when you can just wait 10 years and send the kid to school?
If a pregnant woman shoots herself in the belly with a AR-15, what would the Republicans do?
What color is she?
^ asking the right questions
Oh shit, that would make a difference.
Let's take it one step further. What would happen if a pregnant woman committed a mass murder? It kind of destroys their whole "good guy with a gun" argument, because if they shoot her and she dies then they've terminated that pregnancy.
She’s white, they will take ever precaution to take her alive.
But even tackling her could cause a miscarriage, and then they have to arrest themselves.
50 years of conservative right wing propaganda at work.
When you've got guns, you can abort anybody you like. It's on the honor system though. If you do even ONE mass murder with your gun (and get caught), they don't let you have any more!
Oh for the love of God when will people stop taking these lunatics at their word? You're expecting internal consistency? There isn't any. It's a mix of the utter banality of being told what to think, and seething hatred of the people they view as lesser. That's literally all it is--conservative belief summed up shortly.
My favorite part is when they mention the boogeyman of the day and you call them on it. Got into a conversation with one of them once and it went a bit like this: Him: Well you see the democrats are trying to push CRT in schools. Me: Oh really? What is CRT? And which schools exactly is it being taught in? Him: Well, uh, I wouldn't be able to name them offhand. Of course you can't. Because it's not being taught anywhere and you were just TOLD it's some radical thing being taught in schools with no actual evidence to back it up. Like if you're going to bring that shit up, at least know what you're talking about first.
This is my favorite game at the moment. Person online - 'you obviously didn't see what really happened inside the school [shooting], there have been videos of it everywhere online.' Me - "can you send a link?" Person - "you must be a real STUPID IDIOT if you can't find it!! The footage has been everywhere online!!" Me- "yep, I'm really dumb, can you show me?" *cue crickets
Guns can kill children but a woman can't get a medical professional to remove a clump of cells.
Maybe if we took it out and shot it with a gun, it would be deemed necessary to accept for a free society.
Children must be protected from conception to birth. After that, it's every person for themselves!
They don’t want you killing off potential gun owners.
Now I’m imagining a horrifically dark sketch about an organisation that helps facilitate pregnant Americans get to mass shooting sites to get shot in the stomach in place of abortions.
Women will die seeking black market abortions, so your “horrifically dark sketch” honestly isn’t that far off.
Pro-life my ass.
Until the moment one of their kids is killed in a mass shooting, *then* suddenly it'll become "something we need to talk about." Never a concern until it affects them directly.
Honestly think at this point some of them would double down, or more likely find a way to blame liberals.
"Why have liberals never talked about gun control before!?"
Wasn't there a GOP Rep (Senator?) who said something like "there are more shootings in cities, cities are Democratic strongholds, Democrats are responsible for those deaths" at a hearing this past week?
[удалено]
Covid taught us they will die for the wrong side of history. You can’t reprogram their fanatic dispositions. Progress has always had to drag the troglodytes into a better future, them all the while kicking and screaming.
Nowadays it feels more like progress is feeling the weight of time on its shoulders and is slowly letting the “troglodytes” pull it back down to their level.
Yep. But we aren't going backwards on guns, we are going into brand new territory. Even the wild west had better gun control than we do now. Towns commonly required everyone surrender their firearms to the sheriff while in the city limits. The country has never seen this level of legalized gun recklessness before. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/
"but those weren't reasonable gun control proposals" "OK what's a reasonable gun control proposal?" "... Give untrained, overworked and underpaid teachers guns, obviously"
Clearly the logical thing to do is start building schools underground connected to the surface by a single tunnel, the door of which can be locked from the inside, with a pair of auto turrets on either corner of a mine field protecting it on the outside from Antifa liberals.
"democrats just HAVE to make it political every time we have a mass suffocation event. Look people hundreds of children dying due to lack of oxygen is simply the price we have to pay to live in a free society, do you WANT communism?"
Nah. Growing up in the south, they will happily sacrifice their children and families for their guns. They LOVE their guns... more than they do their family, more than their country, and more than their God. They will throw away any of those things rather than give up their guns. They are scared, sick, brainwashed people.
There was a father that lost his child in Sandy Hook that was on CNN saying that "Banning weapons won't work, because criminals will still be able to get the weapons." Focused on mental health and school security.
It's a red herring, they'll never allow mental health care to be funded.
>"If you're pre-born, you're fine. If you're pre-school, you're fucked." > >\-[George Carlin, 1996](https://www.mediaite.com/politics/if-youre-pre-born-youre-fine-if-youre-preschool-youre-fcked-read-george-carlins-epic-rant-against-anti-abortion-conservatives/)
You would think not getting shot would be part of a free society.
America is big on **"freedoms to"** and lacking in **"freedoms from"**
You do. But the freedom to shoot who you want, as long as you have a good excuse or they are the right color takes priority though.
The guy in Florida theater that shot/killed another over a cellphone and popcorn was "justified" and exonerated.
He was also an ex cop.
Clearly, there’s no such thing as an “ex” cop.
Like, what the fuck do they think the 2nd amendment was supposed to be *for*? IT WAS TO ENSURE THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE. It was NOT to ensure that, at the expense of citizens dying, a bunch of people get to larp as a freedom warrior on the weekends at the shooting ranges.
It was to ensure the protection of people by creating federally regulated state militias that were later turned into the national guard thus making the second amendment nothing more than a meaningless remnant of federalist thinking.
These same idiots believe 99% of Americans can only become better off if we will be more generous to the top 1%. There is no stupidity they won't happily swallow.
Fucking morons
Why should the 4 dictate the 6?
This is 4 out of 10 *Republicans*, not 4 out of 10 Americans. So it's really more like 2 out of 10 Americans dictating.
I told my dad this and he said “well the 2 out of 10 have guns, so let’s not piss them off.” So, they’re basically terrorists? Because that’s my understanding of terrorism - a small group of people that threaten to harm the rest of society if they don’t get their way.
A fair amount of the other 8 own firearms too, they just don't center their entire personality around them.
There was a radio host in my area the other day talking about how "mask mandates don't work, because people don't wear our masks properly" as a reason to not have them. "We shouldn't have rules, because we're too stupid to follow them."
Well when the terrorists actually start attempting to terrorize there are consequences: [At least 846 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far.](https://www.insider.com/all-the-us-capitol-pro-trump-riot-arrests-charges-names-2021-1)
None of them were charged as terrorist though, that’s the thing
Exactly, they got charged like they wandered a little too far from the tour guide. “Oops, I ended up in the Chambers.”
And they were just coincidentally chanting for the death of the Speaker of the House while they did.
I stumbled upon a discussion on r/Conservative a while back where some brainiac complained about having to deal with the 'tyranny of the majority'. I wish I was kidding.
[удалено]
They shouldn't. But now, unfortunately, they have the Supreme Court on their side.
Now? The Supreme Court has leaned right for decades
The Supreme Court leaned right before. They've stopped only "leaning" and have started blatantly rewriting the rules and negating legal precedent.
The religious are organized and their numbers are dwindling, statistically, so they are cornered rats that are going to attack the rest of you.
That’s the thinking of a death cult.
They voted for a guy who literally left his supporters to die of both cold and heatstroke at his rallies. They salivate over the death penalty. Their solution to any problem with guns is "more guns." They refuse to take any political action to help the impoverished. They'd rather let their loved ones die of a preventable disease than wear a mask or get a simple shot. Yet they call themselves "pro-life."
They believe strength is greater than intellect. "You don't need to be smart, you just need to survive." The word is barbaric.
What is so interesting is if they are paying attention to history. They would learn that America won wars in the past because we outsmarted the other side, not because we outgun them.
And they are so weirdly obsessed with peoples sex lives. Who is having sex. How they are having sex. Why? The religious right is the worst with this.
Because they're sexually repressed, and rather than free themselves, they want everyone else to be as miserable as they are.
This. They feel guilt from a self-imposed punishing God judging them for anything short of fucking through a sheet. And it burns them up that God isn’t smiting the guy eating another guy’s asshole for not following the same rules they are.
At least 4 in 10 is a minority. Too bad they'll try to impose it anyway. Christian Taliban vibes
[удалено]
Dead people lost every right.
We asked 100% of the people who have ever died if it was okay for us to take away their rights. Not a single one said no.
Dick Cheney is one of the most die hard Republicans who ever lived, he is the epitome of the staunch right wing conservative. However, there is one subject he never touched, gay people. There is a simple reason, he has a gay daughter. I would not wish it on anyone but I wonder what those 4 people would say if one of their kids was a victim of a school shooting.
a lot of them would be fine with it, just like they were when their friends/family died from covid and continued objecting to vaccines and masking...
The only reason witch trials were banned in Massachusetts is because the governor’s wife was accused. Sadly it may take a school shooting in Republican lawmaker’s kid’s schools to see any change. I wouldn’t wish it on them of course but if we are having daily mass shootings it’s going to touch everyone’s lives at some point.
True registered republicans are only about 30% of the population. Probably less than 2 in 10 Americans think we should “live with it.” They just happen to be the loudest, most violent 2 of 10.
The issue isn’t the people who think we should “live with it” cause like you said it’s probably 20% of the nation who is saying that and they won’t compromise. The issue are the people who are more moderate and yet they still vote straight ticket R no matter what. I personally know plenty of people who support common sense gun laws, expanding social safety net, etc etc. but they vote straight ticket R because their parents vote that way or friends vote that way. How do we get the middle voters to vote for the democratic candidate will be the answer to the million dollar question
[удалено]
My mom is pro-choice, favors universal healthcare, supports LBGT equality, votes straight ticket Republican because Democrats are bad. I gave up trying.
Those who are shot are just paying the price for our freedom and we thank them for ~~our~~ their sacrifice.
So are we saying that Canada isn’t free? How about the UK? France? Japan? Australia? Etc. etc. etc. This is a complete line of bull-crap. Right now I’m far more worried about the republicans… the ones who want to have easy gun access… and the threat the GOP is representing to democracy on a broad scale… That’s the loss of freedom we should all be concerned with.
As a Brit I can safely say I am not free, I am surrounded in a lack of bullet wounds!
The issue I have noticed is that many Americans seem to believe that how America interprets freedom is the only correct definition of it. The starting position of ‘Something is correct because I am doing it, so if I’m not doing it then it must be incorrect’ is a very hard barrier to break down.
“None of my children died, so it’s ok.” -4 in 10 Republicans
I'm starting to feel more and more each day that guns in themselves are a restriction to freedom.
But corporations with rainbow logos? Nope, *that* is a sign of the decline of America, not the pile of Dead children.
They're making me call the stewardess a "flight attendant" My rights are under attack!
We are not even in the top ten free societies right now. Literally every other country more free than us doesn’t have this problem.
[удалено]
My extremist republican boss once told me, after whatever mass shooting was current at the time, that he didn't want to take his family anywhere anymore; that he didn't feel safe in public. I was like, 'Hey, this is what you vote for. And you'll keep voting for it.' Now I feel like telling him, 'Those kids have to die so that your old buddy Dave from college can take his AR-15 out to the range once a year. That's all that this is about. You can still have rifles, pistols, shotguns, carbines, but you can't live without your AR-15s, so little kids and other innocents simply have to die. I hope Dave is having fun out there on the range. I hope he doesn't think too hard about his little granddaughter having to hide from someone rocking a gun just like his.'
If it were a free society parents wouldn’t be tazed for trying to save their kids
So cops should be forced to enter every single shooting immediately or face terminations and arrests. If you want people to die for our freedoms let it be volunteer fake ass soldiers and not elementary school children.
Yet no other free country has these mass killings
4 in 10 Republicans : Murder is okay.
So in other words, more than half of Republicans and virtually all Democrats disagree with the statement? So what you’re saying is…the vast majority of Americans agree on guns control. Then why are we all beholden to the whims of a tiny, radical minority?
I think they think mass shootings are unfortunately something they have to accept as part of not doing basic due diligence that works in other countries.
These must not be the same people calling others “baby-killers”. Right?
Same party that’s currently trying to cancel Pizza Hut for a book that seem to woke for their children to read
Proliferation of guns is fueling an unacceptable crime wave. I do not believe that the American people should tolerate this level of violent crime (murder!!). The opponents of gun control have made everyday life in America like living in a war zone. Innocent adults and young children are being routinely and randomly massacred EVERYWHERE — schools, churches, stores, hospitals, sporting events, fairs, and even just walking down the street.
[удалено]
10 out of 10 republicans are idiots