Message from @SoggyCow
Discord ID: 757402831270707201
wtf?
always the trump hate
it sucks
I didnt know traveling to america is a human right jesus christ
I have like liberal friends
I mean really, how does the muslim ban deny human rights
like my friend who respects blm
tf
explain to me like jesus christ
the mental gymnastics required....
oh my God yeah, my brother says the same shit period he says our dad is racist, he says I'm racist, he says Trump is racist, he says racist to anything he disagrees with then he moved to China and now he can't stop crying about real censorship LOL
lol
racist has lost its value
i mean the meaning of it
oof
When I hear the word racist, I'm sick of it
-3-
and its ear rape
lol
if people from the 60s came to modern day america they would be disappointed af
Now is actually the best time to be racist imo. I think racism is the best comedy there is, if done correctly like Dave Chappelle etc
> if people from the 60s came to modern day america they would be disappointed af
@*sigh* very disappointed
mlk jr would be disgusted with blm tbh
yup
peaceful protesting is not burning down every building in sight
```
Although I agree with the fundamentals behind your argument, arguing for stronger enforcement of the constitution, I think it is important to apply the interpretation of the constitution equally across all Amendments. I appreciate your argument involving interpretation of the constitution, but the rhetoric of the constitution does not explicitly specify that the 2nd Amendment applies to foreign affairs, and to jump to such a conclusion is dangerous. furthermore, I did not see any citations or specifics regarding your claim that America has a "lack of human rights". The Muslim Ban was introduced as a way to promote national security interests, at the expense of travel to and from the Islamic countries. I would challenge the idea that traveling to and from the United States is a "basic human right". The rhetoric you chose to describe the "Muslim being terrorists" is a clear example of a reduction fallacy, where you disingenuously attempt to discredit the President's rhetoric in the interests of promoting the idea that the Executive Action is racist. The semantics of the Executive Order never explicitly stated the term "Muslim", and instead targeted specific countries that have a high rate of foreign terrorist activity. To extrapolate this action as a "Muslim" ban is dangerous, irresponsible, and wreckless.
```
bruh
is my teacher gonna get mad at me
lol
ah shiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
for calling someone 'irresponsible dangerous and wreckless'
is that too far?
I dont wanna get in trouble lmfao
lol their brains drank too much soy
soy boi
lol
should I remove the last sentence?
Why isn't there a conservative arts degree?
I don't know
> Why isn't there a conservative arts degree?
@StonerWithABoner marxist schools wont allow it
```csharp
Although I agree with the fundamentals behind your argument, arguing for stronger enforcement of the constitution, I think it is important to apply the interpretation of the constitution equally across all Amendments. I appreciate your argument involving interpretation of the constitution, but the rhetoric of the constitution does not explicitly specify that the 2nd Amendment applies to foreign affairs, and to jump to such a conclusion is dangerous. furthermore, I did not see any citations or specifics regarding your claim that America has a "lack of human rights". The Muslim Ban was introduced as a way to promote national security interests, at the expense of travel to and from the Islamic countries. I would challenge the idea that traveling to and from the United States is a "basic human right". The rhetoric you chose to describe the "Muslim being terrorists" is a clear example of a reduction fallacy, where you disingenuously attempt to discredit the President's rhetoric in the interests of promoting the idea that the Executive Action is racist. The semantics of the Executive Order never explicitly stated the term "Muslim", and instead targeted specific countries that have a high rate of foreign terrorist activity. To extrapolate this action as a "Muslim" ban is dangerous, irresponsible, and shows a lack of intellectual honesty.
```