LogFAQs > #979003523

Kradek posted...

I concur. I always bring up the Candace Owens example of how in an official hearing, meaning under oath, she said the only thing Hitler did wrong was take his policies outside of Germany.

Do I believe she is a genuine white supremacist or has a Nazi SS uniform hanging in her closet at home? No. Does that actually change anything or the effect of the words she just stated as "factual"? No.

People working towards or giving harmful conclusions are still causing harm even if they are not sincerely feeling it in their heart.

And frankly, maybe such a thought is morally wrong (If nothing else some venting), but I would just like to see a final election to guarantee LGBTQ+ rights (and maybe abortion).

Basically let the antis have their word, but if they choose to vote they agree to random a background check and inspection to prove their moral character. Failing to pass is pretty much a way to get around denying their votes. Random so there is no last minute evidence hiding.

As an added bonus, making said voters and their problems public.