Poll of the Day > So Apparently It's Now Illegal To Say "Illegal Alien" In New York

(+) Yeah! (+)

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?
---

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?
---

kangolcone posted...

Thats actually my original point to Sunnys ridiculous legislation shouldnt be about how you treat people, statement.

I don't think it's fiscally responsible of government to spend tax dollars telling people to don't demean each other.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

They're not illegal aliens, they're Alternative Legality Uncitizens.

They're not convicted felons, they're justice-involved person".
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

Thats actually my original point to Sunnys ridiculous legislation shouldnt be about how you treat people, statement.

I don't think it's fiscally responsible of government to spend tax dollars telling people to don't demean each other.

*deletes civil rights*
---

I dont know if this was posted before but I made it in like three paragraphs and found this:

It's important to note that this guidance does not affect all kinds of speech: The law covers workplace harassment, tenants' rights, and public accommodation. Merely calling someone an illegal alien on the street, or threatening to call Immigration and Customs Enforcement on them, would not be illegal.

---

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?

Right, because those two things are very much equivalent. Massive large scale protests about an authoritarian and totalitarian government is the exact same situation as dont call your coworkers illegal aliens or tell them to go back to their country.

Those two are so incredibly similar Im glad you pointed that out.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

Thats actually my original point to Sunnys ridiculous legislation shouldnt be about how you treat people, statement.

I don't think it's fiscally responsible of government to spend tax dollars telling people to don't demean each other.

Ok, so Sunny is pro-sexual harassment in the work place. Thats the type of quality take I enjoy.
---

Let's not pretend that this isnt a sneaky way of the government trying to normalize illegal immigration and cast anyone in a negative light that speaks out against it

kangolcone posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?

Right, because those two things are very much equivalent. Massive large scale protests about an authoritarian and totalitarian government is the exact same situation as dont call your coworkers illegal aliens or tell them to go back to their country.

Those two are so incredibly similar Im glad you pointed that out.

Similar in that they will never effect anyone here, and your argument was "it doesn't effect you, so why do you care"

if that's not what you meant then you should have said what you meant. If that is what you meant then your logic is just plain dumb. You dont gotta get mad at me. I didn't make you say that.
---

What are they going to do deport you?

kangolcone posted...

PyroBlade1985 posted...

kangolcone posted...

PyroBlade1985 posted...

Mead posted...

Boo fucking hoo

Just call them undocumented

No. They're here illegally. So call them what they are. Illegal Aliens. And if Illegal Aliens pisses you off just call them Illegals. And if Illegals still pisses you off then just call them Illegal Aliens.

So you think the federal government should protect your targeted harassment of coworkers?

Harassment? I just hate being PC.

The article, which you didnt read, states you can use the term all you want as long as you arent in a workplace using it to harass or demean somebody.

So, are you for or against work place harassment?

Someone didnt read the article:

The 30-page guidance notes, for instance, that "the severity or pervasiveness of the harassment is only relevant to damages. Even an employer's single comment made in circumstances where that comment would signal discriminatory views about one's immigration status or national origin may be enough to constitute harassment."

[Emphasis mine]

Its saying watch what youre saying at work because if you say something that someone could interpret to mean that you might be discriminatory in general you could be guilty of harassment, even if that something is in no way hostile.
---

kangolcone posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

Thats actually my original point to Sunnys ridiculous legislation shouldnt be about how you treat people, statement.

I don't think it's fiscally responsible of government to spend tax dollars telling people to don't demean each other.

Ok, so Sunny is pro-sexual harassment in the work place. Thats the type of quality take I enjoy.

Nice job of completely misconstruing in order to slander. On top of that, when did I even mention sexual harassment. Ffs sake man, get a grip of yourself.
---

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?

Right, because those two things are very much equivalent. Massive large scale protests about an authoritarian and totalitarian government is the exact same situation as dont call your coworkers illegal aliens or tell them to go back to their country.

Those two are so incredibly similar Im glad you pointed that out.

Similar in that they will never effect anyone here, and your argument was "it doesn't effect you, so why do you care"

if that's not what you meant then you should have said what you meant. If that is what you meant then your logic is just plain dumb. You dont gotta get mad at me. I didn't make you say that.

I just dont understand how you think those two are equivalent at all. Especially since the specific post I was replying to stated they were going to start committing work place harassment. My statement was directed at him and was in direct reference that this law would only impact him if he worked in NYC.
---

Wow, that's a rare sight. Someone arguing with sunny and sunny manages to come across as the more reasonable one. Congrats kang. Good to have you back.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Let's not pretend that this isnt a sneaky way of the government trying to normalize illegal immigration and cast anyone in a negative light that speaks out against it

Exactly
---

jramirez23 posted...

I dont know if this was posted before but I made it in like three paragraphs and found this:

It's important to note that this guidance does not affect all kinds of speech: The law covers workplace harassment, tenants' rights, and public accommodation. Merely calling someone an illegal alien on the street, or threatening to call Immigration and Customs Enforcement on them, would not be illegal.

That would be outside of a workplace environment. The issue at hand is calling someone an illegal alien in a workplace or tenancy.
---

kangolcone posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?

Right, because those two things are very much equivalent. Massive large scale protests about an authoritarian and totalitarian government is the exact same situation as dont call your coworkers illegal aliens or tell them to go back to their country.

Those two are so incredibly similar Im glad you pointed that out.

Similar in that they will never effect anyone here, and your argument was "it doesn't effect you, so why do you care"

if that's not what you meant then you should have said what you meant. If that is what you meant then your logic is just plain dumb. You dont gotta get mad at me. I didn't make you say that.

I just dont understand how you think those two are equivalent at all.

Well then you evidently didn't read the post, which coincidentally is going to be what I'm gonna do.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

Thats actually my original point to Sunnys ridiculous legislation shouldnt be about how you treat people, statement.

I don't think it's fiscally responsible of government to spend tax dollars telling people to don't demean each other.

Ok, so Sunny is pro-sexual harassment in the work place. Thats the type of quality take I enjoy.

Nice job of completely misconstruing in order to slander. On top of that, when did I even mention sexual harassment. Ffs sake man, get a grip of yourself.

If I walked up to a woman in the work place and said, You look gross with your saggy tits. Thats both demeaning and work place harassment which you stated was not fiscally responsible.

Ok, so you are right, you didnt say that. What you said is that people should be able to commit work place harassment without fear of receiving punishment from the government because its more fiscally responsible.
---

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

They don't, really.
---

adjl posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.

Ive been at it all morning. Lots of people are really worried that they can no longer harass their coworkers at their jobs in NYC because of perceived immigration status.

Its very controversial that you shouldnt say go back to your country, to a coworker.
---

You can probably count on one finger how many people in New York follow mexicans around the workplace berating them by calling them illegal. It's basically legislation intending to combat a strawman. That's how you know this is more about normalizing illegal immigration and painting anyone speaking out against it as racist. This legislation is quite obviously purely politically motivated and you'd have to be stupid to believe otherwise

adjl posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.

If Im at work and I see a news report about Trump finally building his wall and I say something like Yeah, no more illegal aliens coming in that way I should not be guilty of a crime just because my coworker broke the law when entering the country.
---

aDirtyShisno posted...

adjl posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.

If Im at work and I see a news report about Trump finally building his wall and I say something like Yeah, no more illegal aliens coming in that way I should not be guilty of a crime just because my coworker broke the law when entering the country.

Well if you think the wall will stop illegal aliens, then you arent really knowledgeable on the situation.

62% of people in the US without proper documentation are people who had documentation and then it expired.

Secondly, you would be subject to a fine relative to the perceived level of injury. If you said this comment one time and didnt direct it at anybody, it would be small, but likely nothing because it wasnt used to harass or demean that colleague.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.
---

If any of you hate it so much, why don't you leave the country and illegally enter theirs to show them. I mean, that'd show them right?
We want only certain kind of people in this country, not just people who want to be here and live freely... </sarcasm>
If you gotta fight to be mean, why are you following any rules anyways? It's not about free speech, it's about being held responsible for your speech.

---

kangolcone posted...

What you said is that people should be able to commit work place harassment without fear of receiving punishment from the government because its more fiscally responsible.

Nope, I never said that. People shouldn't need government legislation to know that they shouldn't harass others. But common sense isn't yours or many others forte hence why you and others rely on government oversight to dictate what comes out of their mouths.
---

Noop_Noop posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.

Yeah, he just has the unbridled triggered rage of erik

OhhhJa posted...

You can probably count on one finger how many people in New York follow mexicans around the workplace berating them by calling them illegal. It's basically legislation intending to combat a strawman. That's how you know this is more about normalizing illegal immigration and painting anyone speaking out against it as racist. This legislation is quite obviously purely politically motivated and you'd have to be stupid to believe otherwise

Now here is somebody who finally found a reasonable objection. New York City is probably more racist than you think though and for such a reasonable point you lose credibility by stating this has only happened once.

Also, the fact that you associate Mexican with illegal validates the points I was making earlier about it being a racial comment. Not that you are being racist, but there is clearly a standard image most people get when they think illegal immigrant.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

kangolcone posted...

What you said is that people should be able to commit work place harassment without fear of receiving punishment from the government because its more fiscally responsible.

Nope, I never said that. People shouldn't need government legislation to know that they shouldn't harass others. But common sense isn't yours or many others forte hence why you and others rely on government oversight to dictate what comes out of their mouths.

Lmao. Its literally why they wrote down early laws because people are rude and mean and ruthless when allowed to be. Im glad you think most people are inherently nice and believe harassment is wrong, but reality is very different.
---

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

You can probably count on one finger how many people in New York follow mexicans around the workplace berating them by calling them illegal. It's basically legislation intending to combat a strawman. That's how you know this is more about normalizing illegal immigration and painting anyone speaking out against it as racist. This legislation is quite obviously purely politically motivated and you'd have to be stupid to believe otherwise

Now here is somebody who finally found a reasonable objection. New York City is probably more racist than you think though and for such a reasonable point you lose credibility by stating this has only happened once.

Also, the fact that you associate Mexican with illegal validates the points I was making earlier about it being a racial comment. Not that you are being racist, but there is clearly a standard image most people get when they think illegal immigrant.

I work at a tex mex restaurant two nights a week so I'm definitely aware that not all hispanic immigrants are mexican

OhhhJa posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.

Yeah, he just has the unbridled triggered rage of erik

Please show me which post expressed unbridled triggered rage? Im honestly curious. Im mostly just bored at work so Im interested to see which of these many posts communicates rage. You can just cite the post number instead of copy/paste or quoting.
---

OhhhJa posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

You can probably count on one finger how many people in New York follow mexicans around the workplace berating them by calling them illegal. It's basically legislation intending to combat a strawman. That's how you know this is more about normalizing illegal immigration and painting anyone speaking out against it as racist. This legislation is quite obviously purely politically motivated and you'd have to be stupid to believe otherwise

Now here is somebody who finally found a reasonable objection. New York City is probably more racist than you think though and for such a reasonable point you lose credibility by stating this has only happened once.

Also, the fact that you associate Mexican with illegal validates the points I was making earlier about it being a racial comment. Not that you are being racist, but there is clearly a standard image most people get when they think illegal immigrant.

I work at a tex mex restaurant two nights a week so I'm definitely aware that not all hispanic immigrants are mexican

Right, like I said, I didnt think you were being racist but you specifically said follow a Mexican.

As much as its silly to pretend the new guidelines arent politically motivated, its also silly to think those terms and phrases are generally used to target a certain group. You seem honest, so Im sure youll understand what Im saying.
---

aDirtyShisno posted...

adjl posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.

If Im at work and I see a news report about Trump finally building his wall and I say something like Yeah, no more illegal aliens coming in that way I should not be guilty of a crime just because my coworker broke the law when entering the country.

If you're doing anything to make your workplace uncomfortable for your coworkers, then yes, you absolutely should be guilty of a crime (or misdemeanour or whatever workplace harassment qualifies as because I can't be bothered to look it up). That's what workplace harassment is.

Now, in all likelihood, talking about illegal immigration in an empirical, third-person manner like that isn't likely to make anyone feel harassed enough to file a harassment complaint. You would therefore probably be fine in the example you gave (well, aside from that being a pretty contrived, awkward sentence, but that's beside the point). Understanding whether or not you're committing some form of harassment requires you to understand your audience, so if you're cognizant of how your audience feels, you probably won't have a problem.

Noop_Noop posted...

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.

Good lord you're butthurt. This is hilarious.
---

kangolcone posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

adjl posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Specifically in the workplace, housing, and public accommodations. New York City has declared using the phrase illegal alien can be considered workplace harassment even if talking about illegal immigrants in general and not referring to any particular employees, if an employee becomes afraid from possible discrimination.

Go back to your country, threatening to call ICE, and other similar phrases could also constitute harassment even if the immigration status of an unlawful immigrant is not in dispute.

This really shouldn't be particularly objectionable. It's just spelling out something that most would already know to be true. You could already make a workplace harassment case off of such comments even without them being explicitly spelled out, this is simply a matter of making it clear to the dickwads who consider this acceptable conduct that it's not.

If Im at work and I see a news report about Trump finally building his wall and I say something like Yeah, no more illegal aliens coming in that way I should not be guilty of a crime just because my coworker broke the law when entering the country.

Well if you think the wall will stop illegal aliens, then you arent really knowledgeable on the situation.

62% of people in the US without proper documentation are people who had documentation and then it expired.

Secondly, you would be subject to a fine relative to the perceived level of injury. If you said this comment one time and didnt direct it at anybody, it would be small, but likely nothing because it wasnt used to harass or demean that colleague.

But the law is worded specifically broadly to allow a perceived injury when there absolutely shouldnt be. The fact that someone could feel you might be harassing them because you said a phrase that was not directed at them at all, and because of that fear they could report you as being in violation of the law, is ludicrously vague. It opens up the possibility that just saying illegal alien may find you afoul of the law. And the victim, whom you might not even know was undocumented when speaking in general about undocumented immigrants, is the one who decides if you were being abusive no matter if you had hostile intent.

It is a gross violation of the First Amendment.
---

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

You can probably count on one finger how many people in New York follow mexicans around the workplace berating them by calling them illegal. It's basically legislation intending to combat a strawman. That's how you know this is more about normalizing illegal immigration and painting anyone speaking out against it as racist. This legislation is quite obviously purely politically motivated and you'd have to be stupid to believe otherwise

Now here is somebody who finally found a reasonable objection. New York City is probably more racist than you think though and for such a reasonable point you lose credibility by stating this has only happened once.

Also, the fact that you associate Mexican with illegal validates the points I was making earlier about it being a racial comment. Not that you are being racist, but there is clearly a standard image most people get when they think illegal immigrant.

I work at a tex mex restaurant two nights a week so I'm definitely aware that not all hispanic immigrants are mexican

Right, like I said, I didnt think you were being racist but you specifically said follow a Mexican.

As much as its silly to pretend the new guidelines arent politically motivated, its also silly to think those terms and phrases are generally used to target a certain group. You seem honest, so Im sure youll understand what Im saying.

We're talking about what is basically outlawing words in the workplace though. Words that arent even inherently offensive like some racial or homophobic terms that I can think of off the top of my head. Harrassment is harassment and I dont see why we need to legislate words to find those guilty of it

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.

Yeah, he just has the unbridled triggered rage of erik

Please show me which post expressed unbridled triggered rage? Im honestly curious. Im mostly just bored at work so Im interested to see which of these many posts communicates rage. You can just cite the post number instead of copy/paste or quoting.

You forgot to address this post first, Ja.
---

Sarcasthma posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

OhhhJa posted...

Is kangolcone Erik p? Because they act very much the same

More like adjl than anything, but at least he doesn't write 3 page responses that nobody reads and occasionally he reads the posts he is responding to.

Yeah, he just has the unbridled triggered rage of erik

Please show me which post expressed unbridled triggered rage? Im honestly curious. Im mostly just bored at work so Im interested to see which of these many posts communicates rage. You can just cite the post number instead of copy/paste or quoting.

You forgot to address this post first, Ja.

Oh ok I figured we could be civilized and just get beyond it. It's the way he went after sunny saying he supports sexual harassment. I'm not a sunny defender but it kinda signals anger when you start accusing people you disagree with of being pro sexual assault

Those posts certainly don't seem like they match Erik's levels of unbridled, triggered rage, though.
---

aDirtyShisno posted...

Fun times living without the First Amendment.

The first amendment has never protected harassment, libel, slander, threats, or other such forms of harmful speech. It's not a "I can say whatever I want, whenever I want, with zero consequences" get-out-of-jail-free card.
---

darkknight109 posted...

aDirtyShisno posted...

Fun times living without the First Amendment.

The first amendment has never protected harassment, libel, slander, threats, or other such forms of harmful speech. It's not a "I can say whatever I want, whenever I want, with zero consequences" get-out-of-jail-free card.

But it did protect from banning words. Until now, at least in New York City it doesnt.

Intent is required for harassment. Using a word you dont like doesnt itself prove intent, especially when that word is the definition of an object. That object being an immigrant who has entered the country unlawfully.
---

I cant call immigrants aliens at work, look how oppressed I am!
---

Mead posted...

I cant call immigrants aliens at work, look how oppressed I am!

next youre gonna tell me i cant sleep on the job #WhiteGenocide
---

Mead posted...

I cant call immigrants aliens at work, look how oppressed I am!

It's not about that. You just lack the critical thinking to see what this is actually about

OhhhJa posted...

Mead posted...

I cant call immigrants aliens at work, look how oppressed I am!

It's not about that. You just lack the critical thinking to see what this is actually about

Mead also doesn't work, so like everything else his opinion on this has 0 value
---

Schmen and the fact that I dont work seem to be getting really serious

I wonder if theyve registered somewhere I wanna get them something nice
---

kangolcone posted...

Noop_Noop posted...

kangolcone posted...

OhhhJa posted...

So I'm still free to harass them by calling them undocumented? Sweet. Now, do we see how stupid this legislation is

Are you employed in the city of New York?

By your logic we shouldn't care about the Hong Kong protests either. I mean, none of us live in China or Hong Kong and it's not gonna effect any of us, so who cares about a few thousand human rights violations, right?

Right, because those two things are very much equivalent. Massive large scale protests about an authoritarian and totalitarian government is the exact same situation as dont call your coworkers illegal aliens or tell them to go back to their country.

Those two are so incredibly similar Im glad you pointed that out.

Same concept, different scale.

Why do you guys have so much trouble with understanding basic information when it's inconvenient?
---