Genocide is cool if you go though the proper legal channel.
4 Likes
Was she calling for a law change to legalise beheadings? I missed that in the reporting.
Naw but free speech nâahtâŠ
1 Like
Youâre damn right!
Yes, we should just have a normal, civil debate with people who believe that 4.5% of the population should be put to death by the government solely for being LGBTQ.
Both sidesâŠright?
You canât have a civil debate about genocide.
Choose your backlash.
âNoneâ does not appear to be an option.
You are okay with someone who wants the law changed to kill living breathing people based on their sexuality?
What is wrong with that?
If you donât know already there is no response I could give you that wouldnât end up in a ban here.
3 Likes
Of course not, but then again there are also people who get upset when white supremacists and Nazis arenât given free reign to spew their venom as if they were discussing tax policy or local traffic patterns.
Whatâs wrong with somebody wanting another person put to death simply because of what sex theyâre attracted to? Seriously?
This is a pretty weak backlash dude. Itâs just s couple nobodies talking shop on the internet.
Start the conversation about having American citizens killed over their sexuality?
1 Like
Was the pastor/sheriff calling for a change of the law? Because that also seems to be missing
Donât go too far. People like white supremacists being able to speak freely is a constitutional right and as much as I think they are idiots and such, and Iâll support their right to say that, that is much different than being a person advocating for killing the same people they speak against and much more so for a person who could actually make that legal, or worst case actually do so and be exonerated doing such things.
1 Like
âBut maybe there is something about what the Germans did that exercises a deadly fascination over us- something that opens the catacombs of the imagination. Maybe part of our dread and horror comes from a secret knowledge that under the right- or wrong- set of circumstances, we ourselves would be willing to build such places and staff them. Black serendipity. Maybe we know that under the right set of circumstances the things that live in the catacombs would be glad to crawl out. And what would they look like? Like mad Fuehrers with forelocks and shoe-polish moustaches, heil-ing all over the place? Like red devils or demons, or the dragon that floats on its stinking reptile wings?â
âI think most of them would look like ordinary accountants. Little mind-men with graphs and flow-charts and electronic calculators, all ready to start maximizing the kill ratios so that next time they could kill twenty or thirty millions instead of only sixâ.
Stephen King, Apt Pupil
4 Likes
When someone advocates for white nationalism, what do you think the logical end goal of their views is when America is a melting pot? How do you believe the non whites will be excised from their idea vision of America?
There is no realistic plan that doesnât involve violence or even mass murder. And sure, everyone has their constitutional right to be a hateful piece of garbage, but the rest of us have a right to call them out an ostracize them from society. Not just a right, but a duty.
1 Like
Genocide? Killing off a specific class of persons? I donât think so. I said I wouldnât go his route.
One could argue though that the State is to her citizens as a mother is to her children. And if itâs OK to kill a baby to protect the health and lifestyle of the mother, it should also be OK to kill a citizen to protect the health of the state.
Every civilisation that went down this decadence road collapsed. Should we allow the âmotherâ to die just so some of her âchildrenâ can have a few years of unbridled debauchery.
China knows this and is promoting this same decadence through itâs Hollowwood control, to producing for the West material 95% of which is illegal to show in China.
Iâm not worried though. Jesus IS coming back, and the planet WILL be rehabilitated. However, it will become very MESSY in the interim under secularist control.
Have you read Hannah Arendt book on the Eichmann trial?
Arendtâs book introduced the expression and concept of the banality of evil .[6] Her thesis is that Eichmann was actually not a fanatic or a sociopath, but instead an extremely average and mundane person who relied on clichĂ© defenses rather than thinking for himself, and was motivated by professional promotion rather than ideology. Banality, in this sense, does not mean that Eichmannâs actions were in any way ordinary, or even that there is a potential Eichmann in all of us, but that his actions were motivated by a sort of stupidity which was wholly unexceptional.[7] In his 2010 history of the Second World War, Moral Combat , British historian Michael Burleigh calls the expression a âclichĂ©â and gives many documented examples of gratuitous acts of cruelty by those involved in the Holocaust, including Eichmann.[8] Arendt certainly did not disagree about the fact of gratuitous cruelty, but, she claims, âbanality of evilâ is unrelated to this question. Similarly, the first attempted rebuttal of Arendtâs thesis relied on a misreading of this phrase, claiming Arendt meant that there was nothing exceptional about the Holocaust.
Yes. Letâs have a calm debate. That would be good.
You canât have a calm debate about genocide, that is how genocide happens, this idea and statement is so horrifying it doesnât even deserve debate.
2 Likes
