RemyBrown

->The entire concept of free speech, the reason it is enshrined in the constitution, the reason political philosophers for centuries have talked about it, and the reason soldiers have sacrificed their lives to protect it has always been about protection from the government. Anyone who tries to claim some sort of “personal free speech” clearly has no idea what they’re talking about.

I apply the 1st amendment on a personal level because I don't care what opinions people say to me. People could say that my mother deserves to be raped and skinned alive, it doesn't bother me. The majority hate free speech on a personal level.

>Governments that seek to violate the rights of its citizens always start by silencing those who speak out against it.

Kamala Harris isn't in jail.

->You get to say whatever you want, and the rest of us get to say what we want in response. That’s our free speech. If it means you get cancelled that’s only because no one wants to hear what you have to say, which is exactly how a free society is supposed to work. Free speech doesn’t grant you the right to force everyone else to listen to you.

Free speech does mean Transgender A doesn't have to hear out normie run of the mill T-phobes, but Transgender A should deal with the consequences of that; they make Matt Walsh more powerful as a result of their disassociation with, "What is a woman?" askers.

This is why VA, NJ, and NYC are looking like the non-blue candidate might win.

-> You dont like what i say? Be a man and tell me.

Sure; I’ll tell you.

-> Or block me.

No; I believe in free speech.

-> All you are doing is introducing derogatory language. 

Where did I introduce deragatory language?

-> Keep this up and ill ask mods to step in.

I don’t know what else to talk about. I guess I could create a new topic if I notice much repetition.

After checking my history, there isn’t much spam or repetition here.

I don’t care about the curropt World Health Organization.

-> Complete red herring, and that's before we get to the conflation of rights and equality.

Healthcare is a right and it’s equality according to the left.

-> Chill out? I'm not the one whose politics revolves around other people's genitals.

1. Then do you concede? A no means that your politics involve other people’s genitals.
2. What are your politics then?

-> The people of Canada can worry about that one.

They won’t, because they have a party to stick too whether they will admit it or not.

-> You are clearly not a person worth taking seriously.

Just another old Leftimsult

-> It’s not a question about morality, it’s a question about plausibility, which is non-existent.

All policy is plausible if there is enough political will.

-> You said January 6th was not violent. You wanna back that statement up or try to distract with this kind of nonsense?

I misspoke. It was about as deadly as you can expect a protest to be. No guns were used. No private property was destroyed. A few people broke in; but it was mostly peaceful.

-> It means you are a sad and pathetic excuse for an American who is either incapable or unwilling to apply critical thinking and instead allow your mind to be warped by people who are laughing at how stupid you are.

Just another Leftimsult against a religious minority.

-> Yeah, that’s the problem.

Just another Leftimsult (Leftist imposed Insult). The right is IMMUNE to it.

-> Politics is a space where we as a society come together to make the decisions that will impact our lives.

So come over to my side.

-> It’s supposed to be about things like whether we all get to enjoy equal rights, how much of our hard earned money will go to the government, whether we will have the opportunity to earn a dignified living, whether we will have acres to affordable healthcare, stuff like that.

Unless there is a 100% wealth tax all of the time, we aren’t getting equal rights. No 2 people are equal; Tim Waltz is superior to Dylan Roof. If you would rather have me die than your mother, then you believe your mother is superior to me (stranger in the internet).

-> But to republicans, it’s all about how we can further trash and dehumanize something like 2 percent of the population whose lifestyle choices you disagree with.

Are 40 year olds banned from getting their sausage and meatballs cut off in TX? No. Chill out.

My black illegal immigrant friend with AIDS has dealt with worse shit than transgenders.

-> Then why are you telling me what I can post?

Im not; I’m pointing out that the Leftimsults (Leftist Imposed Insults) no longer work. You have the right to use harmless insults. They used to have weight; now they don’t. Bernie Sanders will talk about how bad racism is as he moves away from Brooklyn to get away from blacks.

-> you have a knack for losing miserably while running unopposed.

Trump lost in 2024? I mean, he won the popular vote with a higher voter turnout than in 2016, when he lost the popular vote.

Just another Leftimsult (Leftist Imposed Insult).

The right has gotten immune to that “argument”.

Here’s good advice:

Stop asking if I’m mysogonistic and start asking if I’m incorrect.

The former is a meaningless leftimsult (Leftist Imposed Insult). The ladder requires evidence.

Forgot to tag you.

-> such as why we have checks against authoritarianism

Checks that Canada doesn’t have and you’re fine with that because it’s about defending the status quo for you.

-> No, the country can change the Constitution (with enough votes).

Thats what I mean. What would be immoral about getting all of those votes if you can get them?

-> We have the footage, we can see them beating their way past the Capitol police, beating them with flag poles

Then why didn’t the cops shoot them like they would have to BLM protestors? If it’s because they’re white, then alright; white privilige exists. I’m white and I don’t want to lose white privilige because then I’m worse off. I want more white privilige over black people because I’m white and I benefit. I could see blacks wanting less white privilige. Everyone looks out for themselves.

-> Telling me you would vote for Obama is meaningless, your tacit support is the very thing that allows him to keep doing what he is doing, so there’s no meaningful daylight.

If you believe I’m a MAGA cultist, then what’s wrong with that exactly? A cult is really just a religion. Religions exist everywhere. Trump just created a new one without the title, “religion”.

-> You are obsessed with trans people.

It’s called being Republican. This statement is the same as you telling me to stop being obsessed with politics (and if I was a leftist, then you would not make this statement at all, implying you are being partisan).

-> I'm not interested in discussing incel ideology

Then don’t comment on my post if you don’t like discussing Republican ideology.

-> you guys have your own web sites for that, this isn't one of them.

This site allows for debating all political ideologies.

-> So what is the big difference? It’s the fact that the rules have already been written.

So you are status quo defending?

-> You don’t come out at halftime after getting your ass kicked and claim the rules need to change so that only the second half counts. 

1. Professional sports rules change a lot.
2. Trump didn’t get his ass kicked if he won in 2024.
3. The president’s job is to change rules in a way they see fit.

-> Trump’s job as President, the very thing he swore am oath to, is to protect and defend the constitution, not figure out ways to reimagine it despite the intentions of the amendment he seeks to violate being very clear.

You can change the constitution.

-> Trump has demonstrated time and time and time again an utter disregard for democracy itself

Jan 6 was done by MAGA supporters without firearms. It was a peaceful protest.

-> You can save your projection.

You think I’m a MAGA cultist? If a POTUS is allowed 3 terms, then Trump would run against OBAMA (and we know who would win). I prefer Obama to Trump.

Refut my contention instead of being so lazy that you have to use Chat GPT.

->The issue here isn’t about the abstract concept of third terms, it’s about the context in which Trump and his cult followers are trying to actuate it. Do you understand the difference?

Yes. Trump wants a 3rd term; something that Trudeau was easily able to obtain. Why hold Trump to a different standard?

The answer is in your mind, "Trump always bad no matter what! Trump always bad no matter what!". You just don't want to say that because it pisses off normies and the 5% of people in America that don't love or hate Trump (and immigrants coming here are also neutral, and the right annexes them into the GOP because the left refuses to engage with them due to the migrants and blacks now asking, "What is a woman?" and the left dismissing it as hate speech).

Transgenders will believe in verbal abuse and then Rage Bait as much as I do.

For me, Rage Baiting is ok because I don't believe in verbal abuse.

But trans people are hypocrites and they should change that.

My case (anyone is free to refut) is that the majority of women are stupid (aka emotional) and emotional people can't be trusted with voting.

People ask for evidence. I cite that a majority of women refuse to select the man over the bear, citing emotion as the reason why.

Only a Minority of Women Would Choose a Bear Over a Man, According to This New Survey - The Good Men Project

61%; and their Instagram messages are proof. Any woman that takes back what they said will be deemed a liar and not taken seriously. The majority of the 39% that selected the man are republican women (who would rather be with a bear than a transgender in the woods). No more voting rights for them either.

If anyone has a good case against this, then present it or acknowledge that I'm correct after thinking about it.

I'm comparing white gays and blacks, not whites and browns. BTW; I think you're becoming republican.

This is unrelated.

The bible believes in white privilege?

->The fact that Canada doesn’t have this check is irrelevant to the conversation about what to do here in the US.

Why have a different standard? Is it because Canada is left and America is right?

If the Dems lose in VA, NJ, and NYC, then on any left wing policy, a lot of left wing voters will say, "I'm not leftist, issue X isn't political." This will be done by transgenders (largely) who realize that the democrats are becoming irrelevant because of the massive cancel culture that they performed.

They will use terms like, "Human rights" (just code for democrat/leftist). It is to be ignored.

List of names used to justify censorship:

1. Nazis (1940s)
2. Commies (1970s)
3. Socialists (1990s)
4. Lefties/Democrat/Progressives/Social Democrats/Democratic socialists (2020s).
5. Human Rights (coming soon)

Maybe it will be another term. Maybe several will be after Nov of 2025 if the Dems lose everything. No matter what nice sounding term they use, there will be many people that fall for it. Don't be one of them.

The next generation needs to have connotations for terms be irrelevant; the democrats only win because they call themselves, "progressives" and not the synonymous, but negative connotation of the phrase, "loose cannon".

Once connotations become irrelevant, the democrat party and whatever terms they like to use as euphemisms will fail as well.

->I dont see a systematic white privledge in today's age. Maybe if it were 10+ years earlier, sure. (Speaking specifically for usa)

What changed?

My ideal immigration policy:

1. If you are currently here legally, then you are allowed to stay.
2. If you are currently here illegally and wish to become legal, then we will impose the same requirements on you that your home country would impose on illegal Yankees in your home country. Failure to meet them means we will treat you the same way that your country would treat illegal Yankees. If that means a fine, then we will replicate. If it's deportation, then we will replicate. If it's execution, then we will replicate. Don't be a hypocrite.

I doubt if your immigration approach is fiscally sound (otherwise other countries would take in the immigrants first), I certainly don't care about humaneness.

Being humane is leftist. Leftism is soft. Americans don't like soft; this country was built on genocide; we don't care about softness.

Also, are you a woman? If no, then say that. If yes, then I ask how is it being treated like a man in the arguing scene? If you hate it because of how rough and controversial it is, then maybe you should consider abstaining from voting (although if you love it, then welcome to equal rights). But equal rights is for those that can accept equal responsibilities.

If you want voting rights, then accept voting responsibilities. Before you comment again, change your profile name to a masculine name, have a masculine image. Make people think that you are a man. Argue under those conditions. If you can't handle it, then you will realize that voting responsibilities are not for you, so therefore, you don't deserve voting rights.

I think women need to endure way more pain in life and I think they're too soft.

Does this mean rape? No.

But childbirth hurts way less than getting kicked in the balls. Any man that is willing to have their child murdered if it means they don't have to get kicked in the balls everyone would view as psychotic. But women get away with the same thing wrt abortion (but their good looks shield them from criticism that's as harsh as if a male did the same thing and abortion wasn't associated with women). Looking back, we even saw this with circumcision; it's commonplace for men; it's a human rights abuse when done to women. It's the same thing.

Women get coddled too much, and if I'm a misogynist for saying that, then fine; misogyny is normal and I don't think that's a bad thing. Everyone that disagrees will be either:

1. A ciswoman/nonbinary/transman/transwoman; these people hate arguing; if men want this, then they may call men mean names, but it's short term; men get more rights by giving women less of them because there are only so many rights to go around.
2. A man; who would try and come up with devils advocacy against it, but wouldn't take the issue nearly as personally.

What's wrong with misogyny anyways? Women don't deserve equal thinking rights to men; you give them equal thinking responsibilities, they call it mansplaining. If a woman wants to be treated like a man wrt arguing to gain their voting rights and wants to see what it's like to be treated like a man for what should be a man's right (voting rights), then she should change her name, profile picture, and disguise herself as a man (like Mulan) and be held to a man's standard, be treated like a man, see how much it sucks for her, and accept that she should not be given the right to vote (or if she can survive a male environment for long enough, then she would earn her voting rights).

I'm less misogynistic than Mulan; my Chinese military would have let Mulan in (but she would be treated like a man). But I suspect the majority of women that try and pull a Mulan will bluntly realize that they can't handle it. Stick to the kitchen and away from controversy; women hate contraversy; so they shouldn't get voting rights.

The concern was women's bodily autonomy vs fetal life.

Be anti abortion if you want (honestly, I am too) but you can't murder people for being pro choice. That's INSANE!

But the normal person who is anti-abortion knows that 60% of the US or so is pro choice and 25% of the female population has had an abortion, so they combine their goal of reducing and prosecuting abortion with pragmatism of, "You can't murder 60% of the population; that's insane!". So the blend is usually attempting to find people in the 60% of Americans that are pro choice and convincing them to support prohibiting abortion (sometimes for all sex, sometimes for solely consensual sex).

Normal people heavily incorporate pragmatism into their abortion positions. The left lost their pragmatism when Kirk got shot and many got more mad at Kirk 2 days after than the person that murdered them.

More items:

1. Exciting: Chaotic
2. Eccentric: Bombastic
3. Relaxing: Boring

Using words with positive connotations is gay because they imply weakness. Using words with negative connotations is masculine because it implies toughness. Call it what it is. No need for sugary bullshit.