I wonder what Her's position is on the Shiloh Hendrix situation. If she approves of the ruling against Hendrix, then she should know how fatal/destructive/weapon-like words can be and should be removed from office immediately for "words".
It'd be easier to take you all seriously if you didn't remain silent and still vote for a known sexual predator. Just don't. You've lost this fight. Those of us who are consistently opposed to any kind of sexual misconduct and abuse, will take up this fight if there's something to be taken up. But y'all have no moral credibility. Just move on.
That's what happens when you sacrifice any sense of morality for perceived partisan gain.
This whole faux moral high ground game you play is hilarious. Coming from someone who’s dimpling for Islam, communism, the DFL/DSA and who’s remained silent about 250,000 rapes of innocent girls, women, and boys, it’s even more hilarious.
That you won’t even condemn people on your side specifically for actions that you attack your political enemies for, tells us all we need to know about your subjective morality.
You see the difference between being morally consistent like me and not morally consistent like y'all is that one doesn't need to ask if Dan is opposed to sexual predators because the answer is always no... One doesn't need to ask if Dan is opposed to corrupt politicians because the answer is always no... Is Dan opposed to military groups killing or causing harm to innocent people or targeting areas where you can expect that innocence, men, women, and children will be harmed because the answer is always no.
You all, on the other hand, consistently have voted for and supported and defended a known sexual predator who is also known to be a hedonist, a narcissist, and a corrupt businessman. You're only opposed to it when it's someone on the other side. If you are opposed to it, it's not sufficient to cause you not to vote for the guy. It is for me and that's the difference between you and me.
No one comments on all the individual instances of harm that are done because no one can. It's an impossible task. But just because Dan has not commented on whatever 250,000 girls who've been raped, doesn't mean anything except that Dan is a finite person. You have not commented on all the women and girls who've been raped, the children who've been abused and killed, the innocent fishermen executed extrajudicially. The difference is you make excuses for it when it's your killers and rapists whereas people like me are consistently opposed to it.
As to any "dimpling"- I don't know what you mean by that. I merely note that Muslims are not one blok, that Communists are not one blok. There are good Muslims and bad Muslims, good Christians and bad Christians, good capitalists and bad capitalists. There is no shame in admitting simple reality. The question is, are you willing and ready to admit that same reality? You all are living in a hedonistic and corrupt made-up fantasy world where you want to pretend to be morally grounded and yet you vote for a known corrupt sexual predator who is actively enriching himself while killing others. Who is actively abusing our justice system and has for most of his life to enrich himself and prey on others. Be better.
You factually have no moral high ground. You've wallowed with the pigs. Now you have to lay in that shit.
The problem you have is that you may be morally consistent in your mind, but that moral consistency doesn’t get expressed when the offenses are from those on your side.
It’s easy to simp for candidates who don’t meet your high, subjective, moral standards because you’ll never have to vote for them.
It’s also easy to blow things out of proportion while minimizing the failures of your candidates.?
But you keep pretending that Islam, as a worldview, doesn’t have goals and plans, that aren’t consistent with your Pollyanna rose colored myopic view based on a few outliers.
7 comments:
I wonder what Her's position is on the Shiloh Hendrix situation. If she approves of the ruling against Hendrix, then she should know how fatal/destructive/weapon-like words can be and should be removed from office immediately for "words".
She was probably aghast, but lives by different rules than the rest of us.
It'd be easier to take you all seriously if you didn't remain silent and still vote for a known sexual predator. Just don't. You've lost this fight. Those of us who are consistently opposed to any kind of sexual misconduct and abuse, will take up this fight if there's something to be taken up. But y'all have no moral credibility. Just move on.
That's what happens when you sacrifice any sense of morality for perceived partisan gain.
Dan
This whole faux moral high ground game you play is hilarious. Coming from someone who’s dimpling for Islam, communism, the DFL/DSA and who’s remained silent about 250,000 rapes of innocent girls, women, and boys, it’s even more hilarious.
That you won’t even condemn people on your side specifically for actions that you attack your political enemies for, tells us all we need to know about your subjective morality.
You see the difference between being morally consistent like me and not morally consistent like y'all is that one doesn't need to ask if Dan is opposed to sexual predators because the answer is always no... One doesn't need to ask if Dan is opposed to corrupt politicians because the answer is always no... Is Dan opposed to military groups killing or causing harm to innocent people or targeting areas where you can expect that innocence, men, women, and children will be harmed because the answer is always no.
You all, on the other hand, consistently have voted for and supported and defended a known sexual predator who is also known to be a hedonist, a narcissist, and a corrupt businessman. You're only opposed to it when it's someone on the other side. If you are opposed to it, it's not sufficient to cause you not to vote for the guy. It is for me and that's the difference between you and me.
No one comments on all the individual instances of harm that are done because no one can. It's an impossible task. But just because Dan has not commented on whatever 250,000 girls who've been raped, doesn't mean anything except that Dan is a finite person. You have not commented on all the women and girls who've been raped, the children who've been abused and killed, the innocent fishermen executed extrajudicially. The difference is you make excuses for it when it's your killers and rapists whereas people like me are consistently opposed to it.
As to any "dimpling"- I don't know what you mean by that. I merely note that Muslims are not one blok, that Communists are not one blok. There are good Muslims and bad Muslims, good Christians and bad Christians, good capitalists and bad capitalists. There is no shame in admitting simple reality. The question is, are you willing and ready to admit that same reality? You all are living in a hedonistic and corrupt made-up fantasy world where you want to pretend to be morally grounded and yet you vote for a known corrupt sexual predator who is actively enriching himself while killing others. Who is actively abusing our justice system and has for most of his life to enrich himself and prey on others. Be better.
You factually have no moral high ground. You've wallowed with the pigs. Now you have to lay in that shit.
Dan
Simping, my bad.
The problem you have is that you may be morally consistent in your mind, but that moral consistency doesn’t get expressed when the offenses are from those on your side.
It’s easy to simp for candidates who don’t meet your high, subjective, moral standards because you’ll never have to vote for them.
It’s also easy to blow things out of proportion while minimizing the failures of your candidates.?
But you keep pretending that Islam, as a worldview, doesn’t have goals and plans, that aren’t consistent with your Pollyanna rose colored myopic view based on a few outliers.
Post a Comment