Not to mention the countless comments he's made encouraging war crimes

And rape...

I don't know enough about Duterte, I know he kills drug dealers and that he's an atheist (it was in the news recently)

but that's it

Drug dealing shouldn't be a capital offense...

No?

You don’t have to be racist

You can certainly make the case it should be

Just be duterte

If you cripple an entire section of a city with drugs, that would be forgivable?

But yeah, Duterte encouraged some soldiers under his command to commit war crimes

To be brutal, rather than to show empathy

Empathy towards your enemies will get you killed.

@SilverLining Could it not be considered an act of selflessness if you take away one person's life to save the lives of others?

Should an individual pay with their life for a non-lethal crime? No.

Also, do keep in mind

this is *extra-judicially*

Drugs can be lethal....

As in, they're not going through the court system

Heroin is deadly

for example

Drugs are worse than lethal in many cases.

Yes, in higher doses. It's not directly damaging

Many drugs are, though not all

They are capable of debilitating many.

You should get killed for dealing drugs like heroin, but if you're addicted, you should get help

If you're just selling weed, then no, you shouldn't get killed

And said drug dealers aren't forcing others to do drugs... Besides, iirc, he's punishing the users as well

He's killing people selling weed... And again, this is all *outside of the legal system* which is a pretty damn bad thing

I'm not defending duterte, I just said I know little about him other than that he kills drugs people and hates God or something

his own words

I've read up on him a fair bit...

I get that you're not defending him, but things are a lot worse than they might seem on the surface

Maybe people should... Stop?

I think if they know what will happen, and are willing to risk their life on it, then it's perfectly fine.

As they made an active decision.

Are we talking about the people doing drugs?

as in, buying them?

If so, I agree.

They know there's a risk - they're willing to risk it - that's perfectly fine.

They're not being forced to.

Nope, and they do it with the full knowledge that they could very well be killed for it.

Oh, the drug dealers?

Okay, so, question.

Should the Philippines outlaw cigarettes?

And kill any tobacco dealers?

If yes, fair. You're consistent at least. If no, why not? Cigarettes are known to be damaging to the health of users.

If they do it with the full knowledge that it could cost them their lives, then yes.

A country is fully allowed to make their own laws.

Why should it have to cost them their life?

Sure, but "being able to" doesn't mean it's moral.

Because they do it with the knowledge that it could.

I presume we're discussing morality in this situation, yes?

And that active choice would lead to it.

Why be racist when you could be duterte

"Why be racist when you could be very racist"

@SilverLining Back to your question about empathy, and this is the problem I have with the argument:

When people say you should look out for foreigners, they say that without realizing people who refuse to do so reject helping them *with the intention* of causing harm to their own people, and believe that flooding their country with migrants that bring crime is going to hurt their own people,

In other words, it assumes a lack of empathy, when there is none, it just manifests itself in a different form

*when there isn't a lack of it

One could argue the neo-liberal open-borders position is the one which lacks empathy, because it's motivated by profit

It's motivated by political gain.

Sure, the neo-liberal open borders position might be profit motivated, but I really doubt most people support open borders/accepting refugees for profit, as most people aren't business owners

A majority of people who support it merely see others in need - others suffering

I misworded that, I forgot to add "and claim you have no empathy towards others", but I;m sure you get it @SilverLining

No, but most people have belongings.

Empathy can be misplaced

And most people have homes.

Besides, this is, of course, neglecting the fact that closed borders actually *helps* profit

Lives that they have built up honestly.

Many times, businesses hire undocumented immigrants and call ICE shortly before payday

I oppose open borders because I believe it will harm the people in the host country

in order to ensure the workers don't receive any compensation for their work

Howso, razor?

Good.

Also, I must question, why do you place the denizens of the host country as more valuable than the potential migrants?

And what do you mean "good", brilliance?

You already know my position, that migrants from the third and second world are more criminal, something even the BCC reluctantly admitted recently

Do you simply enjoy the fact that the rich can exploit the needy?

That's what it soudns like.

They *needy* are not economic migrants.

I'd like a citation for that

So...

... What are you even saying?

So if somebody jumped off a cliff and dies, who do you blame?

The cliff, or the person?

@SilverLining Coming with the source soon

Economic reasons are just as valid to move.

For example, in Mexico

Which, I presume you're talking about

Yes, but there is a due process.

A due process which not only costs several thousand dollars which those illegally migrating cannot afford

But which takes several years

during which their poor family will continue to suffer, if not perish

If you go and steal an apple, and then are arrested, do you blame the system, or yourself?

Make migration easier and cheaper

You made the decision that lead to your consequences with full knowledge of what that consequence could have wrought.

If I'm nearly starving while someone else owns 1000 apples, I blame the system for forcing me into that situation.

Yet you decided to anyway.

Because I needed to

Or else I'd starve.

Imo, we just need an EU-esque American pact

@SilverLining They admitted it, but they were apologetic about it, with the same kind of left wing "It's not their fault, it's *your* fault" bullshit that i usually hear

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45419466

Read for yourself

You are a vile being if you believe we should just give away things to those who bring nothing.

Even the Bullshit Broadcast station can't even lie about it

But they do bring stuff

As in, labor.

What are you trying to imply?

That they are trash a majority of the time.

Howso?

Because they work and pay income tax, without receiving any benefits?

They are more criminal on average

also, this is german^^

We're talking about US-Mexico rn

Well, for example, here there are a lot of Somalian refugees, most do not have jobs and can not get jobs because they have no skills whatsoever.

@SilverLining Okay, I see, I was speaking in general

but... Let me take a look

Should we just give them a free ride because they don't take initiative?

You'll see exactly what I said, though

Unless you care to

Them admitting they are more criminal, but making excuses

the number is presumably in a vast minority

Shinning

It's not "a free ride"

What do you think the current/proposed system is?

Well they don't pay taxes.

They beg.

They do.

Income tax.

Do you not know what income tax is?

Or VATs...

They harrass.

If they, by some miracle, own propety - property tax...

Illegal immigrants in the US are more criminal than the native population, and also Hispanics in general are

They pay just as much in taxes

@SilverLining

even contributing to SSID

funds

and never see a cent of that returned

Also, pretty sure white southerners are a bit more harassive, just saying

Also, what kind of crimes?

Uh... Well you are not taxed if you make under a certain amount.

And what's the ratio?

Okay, and that applies to natives.

Or if you are on welfare

Or have refugee status.

If a native makes too little money, they, thus, won't be taxed.

But regardless

they still pay VATs

Well, I am also not in the USA

Isn't income tax still applicable regardless of income?

And if you can't track somebody, how do you enforce their payments?

I might be wrong, I've never been in a situation

but... yeah

Oh, by taking it directly, as America does.

VATs are applied upon purchase

Income is taken from the paycheck

"Also, pretty sure white southerners are a bit more harassive, just saying"

Oh, I would love for you to swap places with me, a white southerner, and hear every fucking day from black people how much of a racist sack of shit you are with absolutely no provocation done on your part, and then tell me how lovely and peaceful brown people are and how white southerners are just evil racist bigots @SilverLining

Okay... But you don't pay illegals with a paycheck.

You pay them in cash.

Eh, on average, razor.

I mean, not *all*

There is no way to track it.

Just *on average* they're more harassive.

I'm sure you understand my logic, right?

There is no way to know how much they make, or spend.

You applied the same thing to migrants.

Yes, it's in response to this just braindead notion that white southerners "just don't understand"

But yeah, red states in the south tend to vote for more...

Regressive laws.

Good.

As they should.

As in, they're the resistance of gay marriage, trans rights... Racial equality historically... and so on

Fun fact: Blowjobs were illegal in many southern states until 2003.

Who cares.

@SilverLining And black people are the least likely of all racial groups to support same sex marriage

Source: Pew Research Center

Razor, I'd encourage you to look at regional support.

The south isn't that accepting either.

White south, ofc

@SilverLining I'd encourage you to look at the demographics of the south

What percentage of the south is black?

It's the blackest region of the country

Still a minority of the south, regardless

And again, among the white population

They are a LARGE minority

They're not exactly the most progressive either

I mean, it's mostly just southern culture.

And the point I made isn't even about white southerners, it's that there's a double standard among progressives @SilverLining

But that includes quite a few white southerners.

Hating gays is suddenly okay if black people do it, and if not okay, then well, it's white people's fault

Not really

It's not okay if black people do it

I mean, it is okay

Don't know why you'd assume that

But that's besides the point

Why is it?

@SilverLining Because I hear it all the time

Might I ask

Not relevant at the moment

From where?

Well, I'm making it relevant.

Why is it okay to hate sexual minorities?

Based on their orientation

Well the blacks do it

^

And that's wrong.

And of you say that's wrong then you're racist.

Nobody's arguing that it's an okay thing.

Because it's immoral

Howso?

Well

The only acceptable sexual orientation is heterosexual

That's what the left cries.

Why?

Because tis biological

And as someone in leftist circles, I've never heard that.

Because it's their culture.

Doctor.

I have a question.

Wanna biblical

Fucking phone keyboard

@Doctor Anon Don't make a religious argument, you're arguing with a non-Christian

@SilverLining Well, I am a former leftist, and I heard it all of the time

Why is it that studies have consistently shown that sexuality is heritable/genetic/innate?

in those circles

Oh it's a heretic

Ah, from where, razor?

Just curious.

@SilverLining Because its a genetic disorder

@SilverLining It is innate, but that doesn't make it normal.

Anger issues are not a choice, correct?

It's not genetic @Doctor Anon

It's hormonal

Similar to depression

Touche, but sexual orientation brings about no harm.

99% of teen gays/lesbos will turn straight after 10 years @SilverLining

Unless, y'know, you're a masochist.

[Citation needed]

@SilverLining The orientation itself is not directly the problem,

Alright hold up

Also, puberty is a strange time... And even if that is the case, which I doubt

Why would it matter in how we treat gay/lesbian/bi adults?

What comes with that orientation, is

@SilverLining https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26048483

First of all let's establish some things here, whether or not homosexuality is a mental illness is a bit irrelevant, but we do know that homosexuals have higher rates of mental illness @SilverLining

Also research shows liberal arguments for homosexuality are based on logical fallacies

it not being a choice, literally means nothing

Mental illnesses such as?

Well, some of that mental illness could be attributed to the treatment they recieved in formative years.

I mean you're arguing with some internet racists here, by the same logic, being black isn't a choice, and you would know by now we don't care about that

Just like a person can have the gene for schizophrenia and never have it triggered.

Up to 90% of homosexual adults report being abused as children @SilverLining

Familial rejection/bullying can lead to long lasting issues. I'd assume depression is more prevalent as a result, accounting for the disparity.