Or you know they'll just decide that democratic elections just aren't their thing like commies always seem to do

They're supposed to set precedent mech. Our entire system runs off of precedent. Otherwise you'd be perfectly justified in having every party simply impeach the others presidents because of whimsy. The dems are actively undermining the republic with this idiotic nonsense

I hope she's right about them losing the house

Man that current affairs guy is insufferable. "Waaah, debate ME shapiro, pls, I want the free advertisement, oh please debate me, I'M a smart guy, not like all the witless cudgels you currently talk to"

Makes my helicopter senses tingle

Probably, I imagine that's all they teach you in african american studies.

Socialist nonsense and "whitey is bad"

How truly misfortunate

Better yet how did ethnic nigerians get ahead

If only you could raise IQ stats without people immediately REEEEEing insanely

Silly girl, she didn't know black people can't be racist

that's not DA RULES

Wow

To think there's a timeline out there where we nuked moscow after the japs

Of course he's a moral relativist

Literally subhuman

See? Moral relativist.

It's not his fault, it's just a product of his lefty upbringing and education. It would be like if your parents and everyone in your life taught you that evil was actually great

Violence to free ones self is not violence to stifle other's free expression or change political opinions

Violence in defense of one's rights is not terrorism. You aren't trying to change people's minds or enact policy, you're trying to defend yourself

He says, not responding to anything

No, I'm not

ter·ror·ism
/ˈterəˌrizəm/
noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Exactly

Fundamental rights transcend law. Any law which precludes fundamental rights or given by an illegitimate state, say, a monarchy which does not allow representation, is not legitimate

He legit says it's amusing

Moral relativism. Lying isn't wrong, Big

Lol you'll also lie if you think it will change someone's mind over to your side

But we shouldn't worry about that right

He legit called it amusing dude

he was amused by it

that is an endorsement, even if it's only the smallest of ones

"I wouldn't do it, but I think it is funny" is endorsement

Nice endorsement

kek

wow

mate people fucking die in street fights

are you shitting on my cock

You'd have a better appreciation for violence if you'd ever had it truly done unto you

Is what happened to andy ngo funny?

However the fuck you spell it

Asian guy, reports on antifa, they beat him for it, gave him a concussion

one of those asian nazis you know

It wasn't serving a political end obviously

He'd probably shoot you in the back of the head if he thought it would positively serve his political ends

Talk or no

He says, posting about how punching people is okay if it would end up serving his political ends

Yeah, totes not how the left is

Is he in the act

If he is actively raping someone, I would gun him down

If he is not, I would act within the full confines of the law

To see him justly convicted

No, I have very strict lines on where violence is okay.

In the protection of someone's fundamental human rights violence is called for

No, I'm not, I'm deciding based on circumstances.

I would kill a rapist if it resulted in my own death

Is he actively abusing a child?

Then yes. The moment he does, however, I will act within the full confines of the law to see a conviction

I feel like we're most likely in a simulation, which I believe to be a fundamentally religious proposition

So in a roundabout way

Sure

If they are in the act, lethal force is justified in stopping them. If they are merely fucking weirdos, let them be.

I don't believe in any of those religions, however, I think that if we're in a simulation, the simulation must have a creator

And we're almost certainly in a simulation

And if we're in a simulation with a creator I can't imagine any reason for creating such a simulation without the creator at some point judging us

Reason

Fundamental rights

Your rights end where mine begin

I know I have had this convo with others

This is always where this moral relativist nonsense goes

R E A S O N

Individual rights

They are developed from the judeo-christian faith but significantly changed

Morality is a technology just like anything else

it evolves

Because, it's right. Western countries are prosperous, happy, and non-oppressive

Look at precedent

Your shit causes the USSR

My shit causes America

I think that not standing on 40 million steaming corpses of my own civilians is a pretty good precedent

I looked at history

and was like "huh"

^

America: Not a steaming corrupt pile of corpses

Russia or China: The opposite

Pretty objective

If you'll note

When you asked me what my morals are based on

I said logic

Life, Liberty, Pursuit of happiness

Or, you know

not 40 million strong starvation periods

Ye pretty much human prosperity is the end goal

If I thought commies were right I'd be a commie just like you

He doesn't, he's a moral relativist

he's been saying that

Okay, well, call it what you want

But I will stick with the principle that doesn't say 40 million people dying unnecessarily is okay

Here's a whammy

there doesn't need to be