Just gonna.... sorta tongue-in-moderately-cheekish-ly spin-off on this one for literally no reason at all except I'm an egotist and everything is about me, even stuff that you wrote about yourself. K? Awesome.

My issue with the right is the fact that their fight involves f*cking up the lives of millions. Stuff like: gay marriage should once more be illegal...

Gay marriage should be legalized through congress and the SCOTUS finding should remain in place until that happens, even though it's deeply flawed.

abortion is an abomination (we don't care if the woman's health is in danger or if she was raped)...

The right answer is too nuanced to legislate. There's got to be a middle ground between holding pregnant women at gunpoint until they fart out a baby, and spiriting twelve-year-old girls away from school to serious medical procedures without their parents' knowledge or consent. If we're gonna shoot for something -- because I guess we have to -- let's shoot for the middle somewhere?

birth control is the devil, etc....

Well that's just stupid. Birth control is Baal, everybody knows that. Fun fact: Baal is a bad guy in the old testament whose name I remembered, and that reference was a fucking bull's eye. Google it.

But you know, freedom of religion in the U.S. is more like freedom of Christianity.

Well that can't be surprising. In a democracy where the government concedes religious influence, the most popular religion is going to be the most represented. It's only a problem if we start trampling on the rights of citizens. Which the Christians never do, obviously.... Obviously.

The left's agenda is less...malicious.

Hang on, let me go find you some Salon articles.

I mean, don't get me wrong they did have that shit in Cali with HIV+ people, but aside from that, I mean, they don't seem so vicious, like damn vultures.

The extremes on both sides are every bit as bad as one another. The only difference is, extreme right (a la KKK) gets media play. I can do the examples game but that's not the point, it's not like we can tally up who's so-called 'side' has done the most shitty things and pick a winner. All we can do is try to be less shitty. And, I mean, and also brutally murder all the communists in public. NOT SAYING WE SHOULD! Just that, you know, we could. That's on the table, is all I'm saying. That's a thing we can do.

They complain like hell, but you know, the right were crying about damn Starbucks cups because it was red, like, who gives a f*ck? World hunger is still an issue people.

I still don't understand what was the goddamn point of that.

But like I said, I'm right in the middle. I can't completely side with one party or the other.

Nor should you. God knows I don't.

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>



<Snipped quote by Burning Kitty>
Hell yeah!

I didnt say your name or tag you, but you still quoted me regardless, I wonder why that is? :D

<Snipped quote by POOHEAD189>

I didnt say your name or tag you, but you still quoted me regardless, I wonder why that is? :D

Because it seemed so much like you, my dear boy.

The sad reality is those articles along with others like them are as much ammunition for their intended audience as their opponents. They are not particularly wise about galvanizing the two opposing factors against one another, rather it almost seems to be plain intent beyond just having you on their sites or purchase their magazine or paper. Repeated observation into their content and what it is they are saying betrays them; one could say the findings to be shocking, anything absurd and outlandishly stupid such as the aforementioned "white people shouldn't marry and have kids" or that it is somehow racist for "white people to engage in marrying outside their race".

At the very least they deserve to be criticized and dismantled in argument, just as much as the current go-to of Nazism allegations. Personally, speaking for only myself, I have nothing but distaste for both, yet why is it so difficult to gain agreement that counter-isle arguments of much the same, although mirrored, are as bad and if not worse in our day and age? It isn't as though the Fourth Reich is mechanizing right under our noses and preparing the Final-Final Solution, but it can be damnably certain we do have extremes on the other end running free, even in full public view. These magazines and news agencies that are pushing these agendas are very much aware of what it is they are doing and what it is they are saying; it is not as though they are full of rogue agents.

One might question why this matters at all, but the average consumer of information, especially news information, is not literate let alone anything close to savvy. We might all remember that a good portion of the population fell for popup advertisements of years ago or email scams, but now and today a good portion falls prey to not only fake news, but too its cousin in agenda news. There is plenty of rational explanation for how we arrived here, you can see that reflection from the Millennial who hasn't experience really any legitimate hardship in life to the old vanguard of the fallen institutions and remnants of the Boomers, but that under no circumstance means we need accept or normalize this process of saying "Everything is racist! Even trying to not be racist is racism because if you weren't racist you wouldn't need to say you weren't racist!" through the media.

It should act as a foil to bring focus to, that something is just not right in what it is they are saying, but breaking people out of that illusion - that naive trust in going with what sounds good - is no small task. Fortunately there is some light in all of this, that there is an ever increasing revolt against such publications; they are not just being called out and criticized, but being hit in their purses. I would not shed a tear if any of them dove and closed their doors.

@Dynamo Frokane Am I allowed to jest that I clearly have missed nothing? I don't have real internet so I can't post any juicy memes. So I feel left out. :C

@Burning Kitty

I never said that, but there are legitimate reasons as to why sometimes abortions have to be carried out. I'm not saying go and have unprotected sex and get one abortion after the next, that's irresponsible, but there are people that actually need it, and to deny them of that option is cruel. I mean, there are quite a handful of Christians in favor of having all gays exterminated (some Muslim extremists actually carry out that threat). Gays are human too. I mean, if they're willing to protect a fetus (who may actually turn out to be gay), why not just end it before they're born? They deserve to die anyway according to them.

@mdk

I agree with you. My issue is that one side claims to be holier-than-though because they have religion. Like, all these pastors out there preaching, but then they get caught engaging in homosexual acts or pedophilia.

No one's perfect (duh), and everyone has their dark side, regardless of how little it is. But when a large group of people are all about "do as I say, not as I do", then they can go screw themselves. I hate hypocrisy, and goodness knows a crazy amount of people abuse it.

.

I feel like you don't need to be a Christian, or even bring it up. You just need intellectual honestly to understand that an abortion is terminating a life. Especially so, after 5 weeks when it has its own seperate heartbeat. And that avoiding that whenever possible would be beneficial and more moral to do basically anything else. Contraceptives exist and are dirt cheap to free depending where you go. The cases for rape are incredibly minut compared to the abortions actively happening. Almost always done for financial reasons, like getting in the way of their college degree. When people bring up the health of the mother it's often referring to psychological stress of taking care of a child. (which literally most mothers have.) Opposed to like dying on the operating table, which what they want you to think.

The problem isn't with the gray area. Often when debating pro-life vs pro-choice the opposition isn't being honest, they devalue the life and don't want any Middle Ground. And they want no limits on abortion. I like to try to give some gray area slack to this issue. But often the people who are discussing it are morally repugnant or in complete denial when discussing the issue.



That doesn't even get into that it shouldn't be taxpayer-funded argument or bringing up the history of why Planned Parenthood exists. Which was founded by someone who wanted to commit genocide against the race of people. To the fact that right now there are buildings carefully placed for insidious reasons, where they expect to get the most custom. Like tobacco companies putting places to sell cigarettes near school buildings. Smoke, no I don't hate you or even have a problem with you but you have to acknowledge that's gross.

There's also an interview on the same person's channel performing an interview with someone who used to work there who was specifically instructed to sell abortion. So I'm sure this comes off abrasively, I'm sorry but these conversations rarely go well. The more extreme I see the pro-side getting in it's arguments, the farther I go to the other side with this issue.

.

Apparently my mom works with one of the women Roy Moore harassed back in the day. Guess it's a small world.

SCOTUS upheld executive order 13769, more commonly known as the Muslim ban.

SCOTUS upheld executive order 13769, more commonly known as the Muslim ban.

Good.

@mdk

I agree with you. My issue is that one side claims to be holier-than-though because they have religion. Like, all these pastors out there preaching, but then they get caught engaging in homosexual acts or pedophilia.

Literally half a dozen preachy liberals have been outed for sexual misconduct in the last three weeks. It's not the Christianity that's offensive, it's the self-righteous hypocrisy and there is PLENTY of that to go around. Let's hate it all equally.

I'll go first. Castrate clergy who touch kids, and throw anybody who protected them in jail.

EDIT: I think we're saying the same thing, I'm just defensive because the examples seem one-sided.

IN OTHER NEWS, Russia probe is developing in two directions at once. Manafort back on the hook, and also, it turns out the same agent (1) de-criminalized Comey's statement on Hilary, then (2) officially opened the russia investigation, then (3) interviewed Gen. Kelly, then (4) was just fired by Mueller for using his position to play politics.

So we have on the one hand, Manafort losing his bail agreement and clearly the investigation has something (dunno how much). Kelly, who lied to and was fired by Trump admin early but then became the subject of multiple twitterings. But then on the OTHER hand, we have, like.... some downright remarkable fuckery going on within the FBI. Interesting all around.