LogFAQs > #986438128

LurkerFAQs, Active Database ( 12.01.2023-present ), DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Red Hood Series Gets Canceled Because of Trans Writer's Remarks on Charlie Kirk
ImagineUsngAlts 09/16/25 9:39:05 PM #110:	darkknight109 posted... So if Charlie Kirk was a politician he'd be off limits? Is that the standard you're going with now? You seem to be moving all over the place on this point. Talk about being obtuse. The key factor here is obviously being a nazi advocate that pushed hate. darkknight109 posted... If you ignore the substantive list of dictators who were imprisoned and/or executed by your own country, sure. Oh, and also the fact that just because someone wasn't prosecuted or convicted of a crime doesn't suddenly make them not a criminal. That was after they were overthrown. Before that they "aren't criminals". Right, so Kirk not being prosecuted or convicted doesn't mean he's not as bad as a criminal which he'd be in other developed countries. darkknight109 posted... I also think gay people aren't criminals despite the fact that being gay is illegal in some countries. You seem to be pushing this weird idea that if someone does something that is legal in their country but illegal anywhere else, they're a criminal, which is a fascinating theory. Completely unhinged, but fascinating. By your logic gay people in countries where it is illegal are criminals and thus it's fair they're treated like one and if they don't like it they should get their laws changed. That's the logic of the idea you're pushing that the laws of the country they're in is the one that's relevant. darkknight109 posted... Which isn't her joking, it's her making a statement. Unless you're suggesting she didn't actually mean it, which we both know is not the case. People aren't supposed to laugh at that line; the intended reaction is a cheer from the people who agree with her. So far you've characterized her statement as "light joking" then "harsh joking", and now a statement that the guy isn't worth mourning. You're finally getting somewhere in the vicinity of acknowledging the truth, so there's that. It is a joke, she said "thoughts and prayers" before that. It's an amusing contrast between a somber statement and then an insult. The harshness is what makes it more of a jab than a joke but it's not actual cheering nor saying he deserved it. darkknight109 posted... I'll take things I've never said for $200, Alex. It's basically what you're doing. darkknight109 posted... Yes, and you're trying to help spread it on the left, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. You're taking all those bizarre caricatures that Trump-humpers pretend are actual left-wingers and trying to make them an real thing. I meant that the balance is now entirely on the right. What harm would leftists spreading a bit of flames for a fucking Naiz when everything is so extremely to the right currently? It's like saying the left shouldn't gerrymander because everything will be corrupt now when it used to only be the right. darkknight109 posted... No, I've said exactly what I want several times - sane governance to return to the US. Nothing you've said makes me think you or anyone who thinks like you is up to the task of doing that. So then the left shouldn't gerrymander because "that's not sane governance". --- Don't trust the ones below level 33 <cite>ImagineUsngAlts posted [p:986438128] in Red Hood S... [t:81039382]...</cite> <quote>darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>So if Charlie Kirk was a politician he'd be off limits? Is that the standard you're going with now? You seem to be moving all over the place on this point.</quote>Talk about being obtuse. The key factor here is obviously being a nazi advocate that pushed hate.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>If you ignore the substantive list of dictators who were imprisoned and/or executed by your own country, sure.Oh, and also the fact that just because someone wasn't prosecuted or convicted of a crime doesn't suddenly make them not a criminal.</quote>That was after they were overthrown. Before that they "aren't criminals".Right, so Kirk not being prosecuted or convicted doesn't mean he's not as bad as a criminal which he'd be in other developed countries.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>I also think gay people aren't criminals despite the fact that being gay is illegal in some countries.You seem to be pushing this weird idea that if someone does something that is legal in their country but illegal anywhere else, they're a criminal, which is a fascinating theory. Completely unhinged, but fascinating.</quote>By your logic gay people in countries where it is illegal are criminals and thus it's fair they're treated like one and if they don't like it they should get their laws changed.That's the logic of the idea you're pushing that the laws of the country they're in is the one that's relevant.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>Which isn't her joking, it's her making a statement. Unless you're suggesting she didn't actually mean it, which we both know is not the case. People aren't supposed to laugh at that line; the intended reaction is a cheer from the people who agree with her.So far you've characterized her statement as "light joking" then "harsh joking", and now a statement that the guy isn't worth mourning. You're finally getting somewhere in the vicinity of acknowledging the truth, so there's that.</quote>It is a joke, she said "thoughts and prayers" before that. It's an amusing contrast between a somber statement and then an insult. The harshness is what makes it more of a jab than a joke but it's not actual cheering nor saying he deserved it.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>I'll take things I've never said for $200, Alex.</quote>It's basically what you're doing.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>Yes, and you're trying to help spread it on the left, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. You're taking all those bizarre caricatures that Trump-humpers pretend are actual left-wingers and trying to make them an real thing.</quote>I meant that the balance is now entirely on the right. What harm would leftists spreading a bit of flames for a fucking Naiz when everything is so extremely to the right currently? It's like saying the left shouldn't gerrymander because everything will be corrupt now when it used to only be the right.darkknight109 posted... </cite><quote>No, I've said exactly what I want several times - sane governance to return to the US. Nothing you've said makes me think you or anyone who thinks like you is up to the task of doing that.</quote>So then the left shouldn't gerrymander because "that's not sane governance". --- Don't trust the ones below level 33</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1