You said they were working together, but the Republicans voted to block it. Why didn’t they make the Democrats vote to block it, it would make them look better?

I agree. Right now I am mad at the people who voted to block the list. I just don’t understand why people are saying the Democrats did that. I am trying to understand, especially if that guy thinks they are working together on this. It would make the president look better if the Republicans didn’t vote to block this, but the Republicans did that. It is a weird and divisive thing to say otherwise, right?

It is arbitrary.

It’s not illegal to depict incest, the same as it is not illegal to depict many types of acts that many would consider immoral or even acts that are explicitly illegal, like bestiality, necrophilia, or rape. There might be an argument for regulating content that depicts illegal acts on the grounds that it normalizes or potentially glorifies these acts, but that isn’t likely the reason for this. I think it is mostly a corporate choice and partially a legal issue.

I am against this partially because it is arbitrary but mostly because I don’t like a precedent set towards banning things on moral grounds.

Okay, I still don’t understand anything other than the Republicans voted to protect child sex predators, and the Democrats didn’t.

Why doesn’t it make sense? All I see is Republicans blocked it, and Democrats didn’t. Why wouldn’t they make the Democrats look bad?

Okay, but the red guys did it, right? They could a made the blue guys do it, which would’ve pushed the feudalistic billionaire breakdown of America easier for them, but… They didn’t? Why not?

But Republicans DID block it, right? That’s the only part I heard.

Sorry we’re not all fucking satire nerds like you who knows words like “serious” or “satire” or “/s”, Poindexter. Some of us make do with whatever solution is available!

Sorry we’re not all fucking math nerds like you who knows words like “significant” or “binary” or “divide”, Poindexter. Some of us make do with whatever solution is available!

Mom said you have to stop being weird on the internet and that it’s my turn to use the computer.

I guarantee that you could tax rich people more without spying.

There are 23 movies in the Air Bud cinematic universe. Everyone always talks about the first Air Bud. The basketball one. The dog does a trick and boops the basketball into the hoop. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. If I’m on the losing team to that, I can applaud that. That’s fine, whatever, I’d hurt my nose doing that. Cool. The rest of the team played well, too.

Now imagine being a kid on a sports team six years later. You arrive to your beach volleyball court and see you’re playing against a dog. You might think, woah, the dog is just gonna boop the ball with his nose, right? Cool fucking trick, he’s old as shit and has no new ones. Wrong. In Air Bud: Spikes Back, the fifth Air Bud movie, the eponymous Air Bud jumps up to the net and spikes a ball down on the opposing team. If I’m on the losing team to that, I fucking quit volleyball forever. There’s no going back. Your dad doesn’t ask how the game was, he saw the dog spike that shit on you on ESPN. What were you supposed to do? My fucking bad, our libero is a piece of shit who can’t dig it up from a FUCKING DOG??? Where the FUCK is our middle blocker??? Which one of you assholes let’s the dog go unmarked after that??? Slam the fucking ball into him, holy shit! No wonder we lost, they were too busy laughing their asses off while we floundered to get the ball over the net! Holy fucking shit, Andre, if you set the ball up so the FUCKING DOG GETS A CHANCE TO BLOCK ME WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU THE SETTER?!? No way, there is NO WAY anyone plays volleyball on that team again. Half that team kills themselves from the ridicule after that. The other half moves across the country and changes their names and faces. That dog ruins their lives. All to win a volleyball game.

This guy said there is an epidemic of parents crushing their own baby’s skulls. They are as smart as they sound.

Sorry, I’m not sure which part of “murder their babies” was unclear, but I am in agreement that you cannot defend a fake thing that doesn’t happen.

Way to cowardly backtrack on the serial child murder allegations, a thing that does not happen. Why are you not posting evidence of that? Oh right, it’s because you made it up.

Yes, you likely will get children in and out of the foster care system, because drug addiction tends to be a really big issue, and not sure if you’re aware of anything, but people tend to relapse a significant portion of the time. However, that isn’t child murder, a thing you said happens, so let’s focus on that. Is the child murder in the room with you right now?

“They keep letting parents murder their babies millions of times!!!” says local idiot about thing that never happens.

You know, the Germans had a word for people that voted for Hitler for economic reasons. It was Nazi. It doesn’t matter if you support people that want to forcibly de-transition people because they have a better economic policy.

In the end, if you don’t support human rights, you’re a bad person, and there are so many better people out there to be friends with who won’t disappoint you. And the logic that stems from this thinking is: If someone votes for people who will take away others’ rights… What will they do to me? If they won’t protect others, they won’t protect me. Regardless of if that is true, we can only judge people by their words and actions, and it’s a really easy way to judge.

It isn’t anyone’s duty to be these people’s friends. You can do it, but it’s really obvious why most people wouldn’t. It literally is a privilege to not be angry and threatened by these people. That wasn’t a dismissal of your argument, but a point for you to reflect on.

Once again, do not play the privilege card. Not on me, not on anyone. It’s not a convincing argument, and it has not a real base. And it’s somehow discriminatory towards particular groups that you do not consider “unprivileged enough”.

That is a really weird and illogical argument.

What happens if she ends up being right and in 2 years that party goes into power and do not do anything to hurt me? And I have to live my life knowing I cut a good relationship because something I was wrong about.

That is a really weird and illogical hypothetical. Best answered with, “But what if they kill you instead?”. We ALL have a line in the sand where if someone supports a thing, they cannot be our friend anymore. Like, if my friend started saying Nazi things, but was a “good guy” otherwise, they wouldn’t be a good guy at all. I would give them a chance to not be a Nazi, and then we would either not be friends or they wouldn’t be a Nazi. Everyone has that, regardless of what you say or think, and it is disgustingly easy to prove. I can prove it, if you’d like, but I feel like you have already lost this argument by ignoring the Amanda party.

Don’t play the privilege card on my.

I absolutely will. Because you are ignoring yours. Being a part of a disadvantaged group doesn’t mean you don’t have privilege elsewhere. In fact, sometimes, that is the reason why you might ignore your privilege.

You are able to be calm with your friend because you do not see there is a danger. People like your friend haven’t hurt you. But would everyone else do the same? Your friend supports people that will hurt people like you, but do they think they can stop those people from hurting you?

I would rather lose a friend who didn’t want me hurt but supported people who would hurt me because that is not a logical view, no matter how calmly it is spoken.