@RobertGrulerEsq My favorite conspiracy theory places George Bush Sr. on the Grassy Knoll. The "witness" to this was supposedly run over by a black limo the morning before her deposition.

Honoring the rule of law requires a civil society. Would you imply we are not a civil society?

🥰 Great show tonight!

We are are not a civil society.

Not anymore.🙁

The sad thing is McCarthy is turning out to be correct, he was just 70 years too early.

@RobertGrulerEsq @FaithJoy Friday Funnies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlAoL2NPac8

@Whithers nancy pelosi assasinated marilyn monroe cause she wanted to be kennedys only mistress

Nope. That is a legit conspiracy theory. I don't give it any credence. It is simply my favorite of the one's I have read about.

That Beijing Biden has never been elected president isn't a theory, that is fact.

im trying to buy a house

so, live in a not shithole, live close to work, dont drown in debt, pick two

I have tried to do research on where the Qanon theory/conspiracy started and it was 8chan?? as far as I can tell, it’s crazy to see so many people become so consumed with all of it. It seems some one needs to be help accountable for making so many people crazy!!

Freedom of speech I'm afraid. It's scary that it's gone unchecked for so long, but there really isn't much that can be done. Twitter/YT started removing QAnon channels a while ago IIRC.

Well, not "I'm afraid".

Love freedom of speech, just, can't do much about it.

Even if it's negative on society.

The best way to combat it, is to try and make people see reason rather than shoving them underground.

What YT/Twitter was doing with contentious/conspiracy content before by tagging them and saying: "Hey, this sounds kinda unreasonable, maybe check out some of the stuff you're being told" is probably the best idea of a system to combat it they've had.

Or it flags it with a 'qanon conspiracy' tag and links to some relevant debunking/challenge to the content's voracity.

Very true, just seems like it was a manipulative way to play with people’s emotions. I know some people that were into it and they weren’t unreasonable or has bad intentions they truly just wanted to help.

Had*

The reason it's such a problem is because in effort to get as much traffic and ad revenue they can, these companies only want to put you in an echo chamber of like-minded ideology.

Right. I could see that.

You can see this in action if you go to any political commentary, suddenly your recommended feed is full of the same sort of ideologic content.

@Maw in my opinion relegating it to the dark corners of the internet did more harm than good

it creates a persecution complex reinforcing beliefs

and removes any and all people from providing counterpoints

For sure, hence why I said the tagging system they started was the best option.

Rather than suppression.

I don't even follow that logic. Especially since the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court has been pretty clear that the 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendments apply the States just as they do the Federal Government. It has also ruled that portions of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th Amendments also apply to the States.

The question really is what did the Framer's of the Constitution intend. If you look at State Constitutions like Pennsylvania and Vermont specifically list the right of self defense and hunting. This is important because they were written just 12 years prior to the 2nd Amendment and many of the very same people had a hand in the drafting of each.

To "bear arms" literally means "“to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight," per the Oxford Dictionary (a pretty good source considering that the blokes that wrote our Founding Documents were, in fact, subject of the British Crown at one point.

Again, stop using modern definitions of words that were different 250 years ago.

so are you making an originalist argument?

or a textualist

YouTube thinks I want to see Newsmax, NTD and epic wedding fail compilations. Thanks for 2 of the 3, R&R.

Textualist.

I'm taking the originalist stance.

yes i take the originalist stance as well

even if you use a textualist stance it still supports it

if you follow the definitions at the time

wtf What did you watch to recommend the latter?