Blasterbot
Well-known member
his lisp may make it hard to understand. but he is spitting facts.He's right.
his lisp may make it hard to understand. but he is spitting facts.He's right.
So yeah they're accusing the FBI of creating the troon shooter and turning her loose.
And they're probably right.
That's the tranny that shot up those kids and the accusation is that the FBI trained her, wrote her manifesto and sent her out thereWhat am I looking at and why is it an FBI trans-manifesto?
I would like to say that is crazy. then I look at the Gretchen Whitmer kidnaping case. and Jan 6th.That's the tranny that shot up those kids and the accusation is that the FBI trained her, wrote her manifesto and sent her out there
WATCH: Trump Vows to BAN Child Sexual Mutilation in ALL 50 States
As if I needed more reason to support the man.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Okay so for more of a white pill/
True voting republican will help but I don’t think it will be enough. Let me remind you while trump may have good ideas he has no idea how to implement them. Look at the Muslim ban that the courts slapped down.You know, for all the Alphabet Soup protestations, they're not exactly proving against the whole groomer and kiddie-fucker thing.
Trump vowing to ban this shit will not only make the unhinged more unhinged towards him, but it'd also get many Average Joes and Janes voting for him.
True voting republican will help but I don’t think it will be enough. Let me remind you while trump may have good ideas he has no idea how to implement them. Look at the Muslim ban that the courts slapped down.
Depends. The smart ones would say that "Live and let live" is supposed to work both ways and the left side obviously has been reneging on their side of the deal for a long time.I agree with all this but how do “muh small government states rights” people support this stuff?
I can support it because I don’t give a fuck about states rights and support a strong central government.
Depends. The smart ones would say that "Live and let live" is supposed to work both ways and the left side obviously has been reneging on their side of the deal for a long time.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Okay so for more of a white pill/
Yeah. One can make a strong argument that a lot of the underlying Leftist ideology especially underlying Critical Theory and Trans issues is philosophically a religion and that teaching that stuff in schools violates the Establishment clause. However, that's an argument the Courts would never want to touch with a ten foot pole as it involves, in effect, redefining religion from the "common" understanding of it (IE "Dealing with the supernatural.") to a more philosophical definition (IE "Dealing with questions of morality and being"). The Trans stuff especially runs straight into religious territory with how a lot of it is phrased.Honestly, I'd argue a lot of the pro-grooming policies violate certain aspects of the constitution enough to make the argument moot, but that's a door that you open with a shiiitttoon of other implications that'd make 99.9% of Judges unwilling to hear it.
Arguably with good reason.
Yeah. One can make a strong argument that a lot of the underlying Leftist ideology especially underlying Critical Theory and Trans issues is philosophically a religion and that teaching that stuff in schools violates the Establishment clause. However, that's an argument the Courts would never want to touch with a ten foot pole as it involves, in effect, redefining religion from the "common" understanding of it (IE "Dealing with the supernatural.") to a more philosophical definition (IE "Dealing with questions of morality and being"). The Trans stuff especially runs straight into religious territory with how a lot of it is phrased.
But the idea of small government isn't based on fucking over people or not. The people who support it claim that it improves efficiency the most in a nation(I disagree) but if it is true and you believe it then it's cutting off your nose to spite your face.Depends. The smart ones would say that "Live and let live" is supposed to work both ways and the left side obviously has been reneging on their side of the deal for a long time.
Like what aspects of the constitution would it violate?Honestly, I'd argue a lot of the pro-grooming policies violate certain aspects of the constitution enough to make the argument moot, but that's a door that you open with a shiiitttoon of other implications that'd make 99.9% of Judges unwilling to hear it.
Arguably with good reason.
I mean if you redefine religion to be things other than dealing with the supernatural then almost everything is a religion. Having a civics class where they teach the virtue of democracy and the evil of slavery, or Nazism would be religion since it is imparting an answer of morality(democracy is good racism is wrong)Yeah. One can make a strong argument that a lot of the underlying Leftist ideology especially underlying Critical Theory and Trans issues is philosophically a religion and that teaching that stuff in schools violates the Establishment clause. However, that's an argument the Courts would never want to touch with a ten foot pole as it involves, in effect, redefining religion from the "common" understanding of it (IE "Dealing with the supernatural.") to a more philosophical definition (IE "Dealing with questions of morality and being"). The Trans stuff especially runs straight into religious territory with how a lot of it is phrased.
The 8th ammendment prevents judicial punishment that is cruel and unusual. So if you have some horrible killer who actually deserves to go through that torture the courts can't impose it.I wasn't even batting that loose, honestly. I was thinking about the amendment that prevents citizens from being tortured by government officials as most kids that get transitioned have parents that are either on welfare or work for corporations and institutions that receive government funding.
But you make an eerie point in addition to the one you were making in that a case could be made that SRS is a form of ritualized genital mutilation...
A lot of them are not protected by the constitution at very least. For one propagandizing for it, contrary to what all the activists thing, is not something they are entitled to do in any public institutions, especially public schools, even if teachers agree. Nothing stops the government from going "you stick to the curriculum or you are looking for a different job".Honestly, I'd argue a lot of the pro-grooming policies violate certain aspects of the constitution enough to make the argument moot, but that's a door that you open with a shiiitttoon of other implications that'd make 99.9% of Judges unwilling to hear it.
Arguably with good reason.
Socialist governments being efficient is a myth as demonstrated by every big government in existence.But the idea of small government isn't based on fucking over people or not. The people who support it claim that it improves efficiency the most in a nation(I disagree) but if it is true and you believe it then it's cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Not completely, but as far as doctrine in public education goes yes, and the current conservative status quo hangs on the fact that we don't vote in many leftists for the central power. If we did, conversely we would have policies like Sweden instead.Also you are Polish isn't Poland a unitary state with strong central power? The provinces are completely subordinate to what the government in Warsaw decides?
Well, what stops schools from making a turn and pushing Mises and Hoppe on kids from grade 1 to 12? They are secular after all, just political. There is a number of social conservative commentators not overtly basing their relevant positions on supernatural arguments, and as such the right might as well be cheeky and respond to left's protests against conservative propaganda in schools violating the Establishment clause and go "oh no, this has nothing to do with religion, we just think those guys, look, one isn't even a Christian, have swell ideas, and it's just a total coincidence that the religious people have similar views". Pushing the educational establishment and the left into a choice between putting moral\philosophical issues of all stripes out of schools... or not.Yeah. One can make a strong argument that a lot of the underlying Leftist ideology especially underlying Critical Theory and Trans issues is philosophically a religion and that teaching that stuff in schools violates the Establishment clause. However, that's an argument the Courts would never want to touch with a ten foot pole as it involves, in effect, redefining religion from the "common" understanding of it (IE "Dealing with the supernatural.") to a more philosophical definition (IE "Dealing with questions of morality and being"). The Trans stuff especially runs straight into religious territory with how a lot of it is phrased.