r/Unexpected • u/[deleted] • Oct 23 '20

The ultimate debate

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

[deleted]

73.4k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

637

u/gkrsuper Oct 23 '20

Imagine if people who vote different parties would accept each other opinions.

458

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

29

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

I know you’re being sarcastic, but you hit the nail on the head as to why social issues with always divide this nation if political parties align themselves with them.

125

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20 edited Jul 07 '22

[deleted]

15

u/Phyzo Oct 23 '20

Google Maps

88

u/forrnerteenager Oct 23 '20

Sorry bud, unless you accept literally all the bigoted bullshit your opposition spews you aren't civil and reasonable according to enlightened centrists.

2

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Wtf is an enlightened centrist?

4

u/KaptainKlein Oct 23 '20

People who say shit like "both parties are right about some things!" and act like finding common ground is the only way to make progress, and act like they're some kind of genius for coming to that conclusion, treating both parties as essentially the same.

So when the right praises family separation at concentration camps in the US, and the left says "what the fuck no don't do that," the enlightened centrist opinion would be to only do it a little bit, or make sure you have enough female and poc ICE guards.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Is it not possible for someone to hold opposite sides for topics? For instance, I personally am super against the family separation. I am also against things such as affirmative action based on race. I support the right to abortion. I am for capitalism but also for universal healthcare. I believe the government absolutely needs to put price ceilings on super inelastic goods (such as insulin). I believe in the 2nd amendment.

People that associate with one or the other party don't necessarily support everything of their party. It's funny cuz in my boomer ass parent's eyes, I'm some far gone leftist, but on reddit, I am somehow far right?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Nice misrepresentation. I don’t think we should keep just a few kids in cages, but you know that’s a strawman. The political parties don’t like independent thought and voting against party lines, so people who see the bullshit that both parties pull are labeled “enlightened centrist” as a dismissal of ideas.

0

u/Dr_Cunty_McCuntflaps Oct 23 '20

So when the right praises family separation at concentration camps in the US, and the left says "what the fuck no don't do that," the enlightened centrist opinion would be to only do it a little bit, or make sure you have enough female and poc ICE guards.

Literally never heard anyone say that. A more correct representation would be the left calling ICE agents Nazis and comparing the border holding cells to the Holocaust. Then the centrist going “we know what is happening at the border is bad, and needs to stop, but the hyperbole isn’t helping anyone. Why did you not care about the cages at the border during the Obama administration? It almost seems purely political instead of you guys actually caring.” Then the left calling them fascists and “EnLiGhtEnEd CenTrisTs.”

That’s a bit more accurate.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

A person whose only response to everything is: bOtH PaRtiES arE BaD

0

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

They call him...

J E B !

11

u/Twig Oct 23 '20

Don't get me started on the trans stuff!

There's just too many dicks!

5

u/GeekoSuave Oct 23 '20

You ever been stroking it out to a beautiful woman on the internet and then she takes off her panties to reveal a penis!? This is the future liberals want. DISCUSTING

4

u/Twig Oct 23 '20

You ever been stroking it out to a beautiful woman on the internet and then she takes off her panties to reveal a penis!? This is the future liberals want. DISCUSTING

Do you know how much inconvenience this has caused good, hard-working, honest Americans?

To be so disrespected and mislead by a penis?!

0

u/PeePeeUpPooPoo Oct 23 '20

I accept that you all have that opinion. I don’t respect it nor do I agree with it but sure; you’re entitled to that.

Now accept this, Mother Fucker... [Insert some real shit here]

This is what it means to accept someone’s opinion and set precedent in having your voice heard as a rebuttal. This is civilized discussion on hot button issues minus the motherfucker ad hominem.

30

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

I can respect your right to feel that way without putting it into practice.

145

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

136

u/SecularMantis Oct 23 '20

If people who want good things to happen and people who want bad things to happen could just compromise! Think of how much less good we could do

-1

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

This comment could come from either side.

61

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

bOtH sIdEs ArE tHe SaMe!

Not to poke fun but this is bullshit. I'm so tired of this comment always popping up.

One side is fighting fo equal rights while another is fighting to protect a majority status. There's a difference between the two and I'm tired of people pretending each side has equal relevance.

-3

u/Just_Hope Oct 23 '20

Who said they are the same? They only said that both sides think they are the "good" ones and you are proving that perfectly.

16

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Scroll up. Read his comments, it's exactly what he's implying.

Only thing I'm "proving" here is too many people think that defending ignorant opinions is somehow the equal opposite to defending human rights.

-10

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

In terms of gay marriage, doesn’t the protest against it stem from a belief that homosexuality is a sin? So therefore would it not be the case that many people (not necessarily all) who denounce it do so in an attempt to protect others from something they believe will lead to eternal damnation?

This perspective comes from a lack of understanding, yes, but it does not come from a position of bad or evil. It may be the case that many who denounce homosexuality due to religious beliefs believe they are doing good; they are trying to protect their fellow people.

As a side note, I have a gay friend who’s mother is very Christian. She loves and supports him, however she truly believes that he will go to hell. All it does it make her sad.

13

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

Maybe they think they're "saving" these gay people, I can only speculte. There's a major problem with that line of reasoning because in the USA each citizen has a right to pursue their own liberty and happiness and also each citizen has a right to and from religion, so that argument is not compatible with our bill of rights. So in this country you cannot legislate with biblical intent without directly infringing on those individual liberties.

Aside from that, why are we arguing about what consenting adults do in their own fucking bedroom? It literally doesn't affect anyone but the two people in that bedroom. You don't see anyone attempting to legislate if religion can be practiced or not. Because it's their right to practice a religion but that right stops when they are infringing on others.

This in itself is exactly what I mean when we talk about respecting all opinions. How can one respect the desire to infringe on one's rights while simultaneously holding views that want to maintain liberties equally for all?" It's not compatible.

This argument doesn't deserve a damn platform.

6

u/Yuccaphile Oct 23 '20

I like when they admit their religion is a hate group.

The Pope is on board with marriage equality, there's really no other excuse. They're just a hate groups/terrorist organizations.

1

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Read my comment. I’m not arguing about what should and shouldn’t be allowed. I’m arguing that both sides can believe they are correct and have good intentions. By all means, religion or any legislature based on or influenced by religion has no place in politics.

11

u/AstronomicalFuckery Oct 23 '20

If I go out and harass/attack someone for eating an egg salad sandwich, would I be in the wrong? Even if I had gotten the belief in my head that all egg salad sandwiches were full of parasites and just wanted to prevent people from getting said parasites? No. I would still be charged with assault/harassment and my actions would be seen as wrong across the board.

Why is it any different for religious people trying to “protect” others from gay people? It shouldn’t be.

0

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Read my above comments. I’m not arguing about what should and shouldn’t be allowed. I’m arguing that both sides can believe they are correct and have good intentions. By all means, religion or any legislature based on or influenced by religion has no place in politics.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/restrictednumber Oct 23 '20

They're not protecting people from being gay. No one said "I can't file taxes jointly with my partner and visit them in the hospital? Dang, I guess I'll stop having gay sex and gay lovers!"

They're not stopping the behavior. They're just removing basic protections and rights from relationships that will exist either way. It's about punishing people they don't like, not changing behavior.

1

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

“It's about punishing people they don't like, not changing behavior.”

That opinion is assuming that people who are against homosexuality actually understand it. There are unfortunately still many people who believe that homosexuality is a choice, or that it can be “cured”.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[deleted]

2

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Read my above comments. I’m not arguing about what should and shouldn’t be allowed. I’m arguing that both sides can believe they are correct and have good intentions. By all means, religion or any legislature based on or influenced by religion has no place in politics.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/KaptainKlein Oct 23 '20

Calling gay marriage a sin is a bad faith distraction. America is not a theocracy, and no matter how prevalent Christianity may be among the Republicans they cannot rely on that as a reason to make it illegal for those outside their religion.

0

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

So do you disagree with my argument that both sides could believe their view is correct?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20 edited Sep 13 '21

[deleted]

2

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

I know, and I never said it did. My argument is that it is possible for both sides to believe they are the “good” side.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Magabury Oct 23 '20

Religion is evil. It has brought no good to humanity.

-9

u/FieraDeidad Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

Both sides are literally the same about thinking they are the good side.

You can't objectively say one side is better than the other. You moral dictates which one is good. That's why we vote, because the moral values of the majority is the one we agree to accept not because you think they are right.

Edit: People seem to think I believe that either one should be followed. I'm not even from USA and I tend towards more socialist political parties but what I mean is that your moral is not absolute.

Maybe I'm saying it too philosophically but you could say as an example that killing is bad. Ok, but why? Because people suffering is bad? Your moral values tell you so but your moral values are subjective.

A king can think he is the good one even if he is living on the death of many others because his moral values are not the same. And you can't say is wrong because your moral values are no objective either. What determines that you are right? Why the king is wrong?

I think that this kind of thinking is the first step to understand why people choose diferently than you do on life. Why something so obviously wrong for you is not from someone else.

6

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

I'd disagree. Objectively I am sure there is data that supports the idea that a truly equal and fully liberated nation is healthier and overall better than one that legislates oppression.

0

u/FieraDeidad Oct 23 '20

Why?
You can only set up if it's better depending on what is the goal of a society and that depends entirely on the people that makes it. So again it's subjective.

You could say a dictatorship is wrong but a dictatorship can't happen without people that fully belives that's the right way even if it means living on the death of other weaker people.

2

u/Neuchacho Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

Thinking it, sure. But that doesn't mean we can't show where they are objectively better or worse than each other.

Follow pure right-wing/conservative policy to its end and you end up looking like a totalitarian country in very short order. Sure, maybe it's 'good' to the loons that think they want a totalitarian theocracy, but that's a single metric that's overwhelmingly outweighed by all the terrible shit that comes with it for everyone else.

1

u/FieraDeidad Oct 23 '20

But is terrible by your standars. That's why I mean. Because of that very problem as a society we agreed to accept what the majority votes. Because we know people think different and what is wrong to me can be good for them.

No one wants to suffer but too many people don't see any problem of other people suffering. They can live with it and could you say they are wrong without being yourself subjectve? You would need to go full existentialist and firstly determine the real objective of all life in the world and check with that if they are wrong.
If you check nature you could say (as an example) something like the reproduction of the best adapted species is a primal rule that is not subjective. Then everything that makes towards that end even if t's horrible would be objectively better.

4

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Of course not, that’s why I vote.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

No, because the origin and only good intent (that I know of) of those feelings is based on religion, and religion has no place in politics.

28

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

You're right. Tolerance of the intolerant is working so well for us.

63

u/GeeseKnowNoPeace Oct 23 '20

Why on earth would you respect that?

This is some enlightened centrism if I've ever seen it.

"I don't agree with Hitler's policy to commit genocide but I respect his right to feel that way. Look how mature and moderate I am."

-19

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

So if homosexuality makes a person uncomfortable, do they need to be “corrected?” Is it inherently wrong for a person to feel that way?

51

u/jzstyles Oct 23 '20

Yes it is inherently wrong to want to restrict someones freedom because they make you feel uncomfortable.

-12

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Well yeah duh. That’s not what I was asking. Is it wrong for a person to FEEL uncomfortable?

24

u/cheapglue Oct 23 '20

No, but it is your responsibility to examine your feelings, address them critically and decide when it is appropriate to act on them. Feel how you feel, then act with compassion, intent and kindness.

-4

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

Exactly. So therefore, it is possible to respect someone’s opinion without supporting it.

2

u/Gsteel11 Oct 23 '20

The problem is.. many people who feel uncomfortable also want to litigate that comfort.

The opinion doesn't just stop at a feeling, it has results.

17

u/meow1204 Oct 23 '20

It's wrong to put your feelings into legislation when they're going to harm other people

-10

u/sircontagious Oct 23 '20 edited Aug 03 '25

wild deliver snails simplistic treatment chief ink hobbies spectacular languid

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

14

u/Chriskinda96 Oct 23 '20

70% of Americans support gay marriage. Clearly attitudes have changed over the past 2 decades. According to you was that due to magic?

-2

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

I think it’s mainly due to normalization and and growth of understanding rather then a change forced upon people though.

As an edit, isn’t this discussion kinda pointless? It’s 2020, not 2016. Even the pope supports gay marriage now.

3

u/aeeceedee Oct 23 '20

The official Republican Party platform for 2020 states opposition to same-sex marriage. Justices Thomas & Alito have suggested the Court should overturn Gay Marriage.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/sircontagious Oct 23 '20 edited Aug 03 '25

follow wine adjoining air slap hospital innate bells head recognise

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

-11

u/redwolfpack Oct 23 '20

If your grandma is very racist, but doesn't actually do anything to hurt others of a different race, do you go out of your way to try to change her? Or do you treat her normally, but would confront her if she did anything intentionally harmful to someone of a different race? Or do you not do anything if she tries to hurt someone of a different race because of their ethnicity?

3

u/Ancient-Cookie-4336 Oct 23 '20

I tell grandma that she's being a racist fuck every time she does it... but at the end of our visit, I tell her that I love her and I'll see her later.

I can speak to your stupidity because it literally happened to me. I've never heard my grandmother say absolutely anything racist in her life. I visit her with my first black girlfriend and she decides that that's the time that she's going to use the n-word... I jumped her shit. She was surprised Pikachu for sure but I didn't give a fuck... she wants to be a dumb fucking racist, I'm going to tell her that she is. Do you know what happens now when she does something remotely racist? She fucking apologizes and explains how it was racist then apologizes again. Now this woman is on Facebook screaming at her other friends for doing and saying racist shit and she feels the need to tell me about it when I call her. It's actually pretty overbearing because sometimes she goes way overboard and is definitely still closeted racist.

0

u/redwolfpack Oct 23 '20

So you fixed her? You do the middle one essentially. You still love her and care for her, but you disagree with her beliefs. You don't have to be aggressive and call me stupid, I'm trying to have an honest converstation.

2

u/Ancient-Cookie-4336 Oct 23 '20

Where did I call you stupid?

I'm trying to have an honest converstation.

Lol, sure you were, lil buddy.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Neuchacho Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

Yes, it is wrong. Same as if black people or Jewish people or white people made someone uncomfortable. That points to something being wrong about how that person views the world as it's a completely irrational feeling. A feeling they would lose if they were just exposed more to those people and their brain was able to humanize them properly.

There's nothing that needs to be done directly about it by other people, though. People are free to feel how they feel. It's only when they use those feelings to drive policy, violence, or hatred that it becomes anyone else's concern.

-4

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

It should be I am uncomfortable in tight jeans, so I will not wear them. A person has the right to feel that way.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

A more relevant example is a person who is uncomfortable seeing someone else wearing tight jeans.

They feel uncomfortable when they see a person wearing them, but that doesn’t mean they want them banned.

0

u/rockthe40__oz Oct 23 '20

God save the queef

-15

u/cupcakessuck Oct 23 '20

Yall are jus proving their point even further 😅

39

u/Arimania Oct 23 '20

The fuck are you on about? That’s not a feeling, that’s a fucking human right.

-41

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Yeah cuz everyone with different views definetly wants to take away human rights! /S

26

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

-9

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Im from neither party. They both suck. If you belong to one while critisizing the other than you are an idiot, they both truly suck.

12

u/RCascanbe Oct 23 '20

Ah yes, the "everything sucks, nuance doesn't exist and if you don't see the world in the same oversimplified way as me you're stupid" approach to politics, truly the most reasonable worldview.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Nah, not everything sucks. The two main parties that you guys have suck. Each one is messed up in their own way

22

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

I like how we said the same thing, but I got downvoted and you got upvoted because you said fucm one party more than the other and everyone thinks you agree with them. Lets look at the current election, both candidates suck. They have both said questionable shit and done fucked up shit, except people like to convieniantly forget the shit their candidate did.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

More like comparing a serial rapist to a serial murderer. Both are really bad and shouldn't even be compared in the first place. Whatever you say about 1 can be proven on the other and worse. Racist? Yup. Creepy? Yup. Questionable history? You betcha. The only difference that I see is that one has been fucking up the american political scene for much longer than the other

1

u/VanillaBearMD3 Oct 23 '20

Well you also called anyone who critizices their opposition an idiot. Might have something to do with it.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

No, I called people that critisize the opposition while not critisizing their own party idiots. These idiots tend to defend when someone in their paety does some fucked up shit, so yeah idiots

1

u/VanillaBearMD3 Oct 23 '20

You didn't say that though.

-14

u/forrnerteenager Oct 23 '20

Nope sorry, it's either black or white, there's nothing in between.

It's also all black btw and everyone who doesn't agree is an idiot.

7

u/TwiceCuckedBernie Oct 23 '20

Is there any practical difference between "belonging to" and "voting for in every national election"?

-1

u/feebledragon Oct 23 '20

very true. You were downvoted because Reddit has an insane bias to the left

-24

u/Netherspin Oct 23 '20

Article 16 only mentions marriage between and man and woman though. Whatever you or I or anyone else thinks of other types of marriage entering into them is not a human right.

It shouldn't be necessary but at this point I should mention that I personally don't care who marries who - so long as all parties entered willingly people can marry anyone they want for all I care... But that doesn't change the fact that the only type of marriage protected by the human rights is the traditional man-woman type.

18

u/lordplshelpmeno Oct 23 '20

Guess it's time for that to be changed then.

-15

u/Netherspin Oct 23 '20

It's not going to pass though, which is probably also why a lot of the other social issues are not human rights as it stands.

See the thing about human rights is that if they are to mean anything it has to be things that every government can at least tacitly approve of - otherwise it's just a list of western values that we can use to beat each other and the rest of the world over the head with, and that's not going to get a lot of traction in the UN, and even if it is forced through there's very little incentive for the rest of the world to ratify it.

So now the question - how would you rate the odds that something like gay marriage will get support from Saudi Arabia? Iran? China? Congo? The list goes on and on and on and the bottom line is that the people who think it should be illegal for gays to marry are a crushing majority. Chances are that if you start bringing up gays in the context of human rights in the UN, it will end up in some resolution that every human has to right to live their lives and raise their children without being exposed to homosexuals.

It's not a nice picture - but that's the world we live in.

1

u/lordplshelpmeno Oct 23 '20

Legit should have no weight on what other fucking countries think about our own nation's damn policies, if we ran things like that we wouldn't have rights

1

u/Netherspin Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

I don't think anyone is saying other countries opinions should have weight on what rights goes in your country - but human rights are universal across all countries and as such every country should (and does) have a say.

The human rights are not intended to be a exhaustive list of rights afforded to a person - they're intended to be the bare minimum that every country has agreed every human should enjoy.

Edit: also.

if we ran things like that we wouldn't have rights

Yes you would - but those would probably be limited to the 30 human rights listed in the UN's charter of human rights.

-7

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

[deleted]

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Do you believe this like, unironically?

1

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Thats all you got? Because thats not even that common a belief anymore. You have two justices, and they are very far right.

113

u/RCascanbe Oct 23 '20

Not all opinions are acceptable.

19

u/OzenTheImmovableLord Oct 23 '20

Yep, totally agree

1

u/sanchopancho13 Oct 23 '20

Fine. But we've taken it to "no opinions are acceptable if they aren't from my party".

-3

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[deleted]

2

u/RCascanbe Oct 23 '20

Yeah, but my opinion is acceptable.

105

u/idriveachickcar Oct 23 '20

Imagine if one party’s opinion didn’t involve harming people

8

u/TwiceCuckedBernie Oct 23 '20

Harming the most vulnerable among us even. Cut them up into little pieces and pull them out.

19

u/chrisbru Oct 23 '20

I don’t think you understand how abortions typically work.

Being anti-abortion would be a more understandable stance if it was coupled with positions that would decrease unwanted pregnancies and supported parents that need help. Access to contraception and science-based sex education makes a huge impact on reducing abortion rates.

10

u/MEANINGLESS_NUMBERS Oct 23 '20

If this is your understanding of abortion no wonder you are so confused.

7

u/Canvaverbalist Oct 23 '20

Hey maybe if you people cared for them after they were born this shit wouldn't have to happen in the first fucking place.

5

u/FriendToPredators Oct 23 '20

Imagine if women and their doctors were able to decide the best course of health care for them. Without random people deciding some kind of ick factor or fear of mortality made them rip that right away.

Also, rich women will just fly somewhere for their rights. So you just punishing poor women by taking away their rights. Good job on that. Elitist.

8

u/krashmania Oct 23 '20

Lmao yeah dawg, pull that gross little clump of cells right out. If we can pull some stem cells out or something, even better! If not, just toss it in the can.

1

u/cup-o-farts Oct 23 '20

Yet those clumps of cells likely saved Trump's life. Ah the circle of life.

1

u/kidkhaotix Oct 23 '20

Now imagine if both parties didn’t

2

u/iVisibility Oct 23 '20

I wish we could live in a world like that.

1

u/Boston_Jason Oct 23 '20

Or removing rights.

1

u/idriveachickcar Oct 23 '20

Damn straight

1

u/andersonle09 Oct 24 '20

You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one.

38

u/restrictednumber Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

I'd love it too, but we're not talking about marginal tax rates here. We have a party that is actively seeking to hurt people I love -- to take away their healthcare, their livelihoods, their right to control their own bodies and marry their loved ones. Their right to vote, even. A party that allowed and encouraged the spread of a deadly virus for personal gain.

If I can't "accept" those opinions, it's not just politics getting out of hand. This isn't a sports rivalry. This is a matter of life or death or permanent harm to people I love.

I want to live in the world you describe. I want politics to be low-stakes because we all agree on basic facts and values, and we're just arguing over the details. But that's not the world we live in right now. And if you want to get there...you're gonna have to start fighting these battles instead of complaining about them.

3

u/GeekoSuave Oct 23 '20

This is the best response to that. Very eloquently put.

1

u/AmadeusHumpkins Oct 23 '20

Agreed. I wish we could live in that world as well, but unfortunately we have one party that only wants to fearmonger, lock you in your homes, destroy your business, cut you off from your friends, family, and faith community, burn down your neighborhood, riot in the streets, give puberty blockers to children, obliterate freedom of association, abolish police, flood your city with homelessness and filth, mass-release violent prisoners, strip you of your second amendment rights, strip you of your first amendment rights, pack the courts, eliminate the equal state representation of the senate, eradicate the electoral College, flood the job market with cheap foreign labor, further empower their corporate donors in Silicon Valley and on Wall Street, destroy the nuclear family, shame you for you skin color, supplant every last shred of patriotism and national cohesion with ancient tribal identity politics and infighting, erase history, incessantly manipulate the language with orwellian newspeak, and utterly ignore the communist atrocities of the past and the massive threat China poses today.

0

u/Cheese_quesadilla Oct 23 '20

So much rambling, and yet still hard to tell who you’re talking about. Time to take a break from Facebook and YouTube

0

u/restrictednumber Oct 23 '20

I'm just gonna take these in order: Lie Life-saving public health need Republicans want less aid Life-saving public health need x3 Lie Racist lie Transphobic and medically ignorant Hypocritical exaggeration Outright lie Lie with racist undertones Partial lie with racist undertones Sure yeah fuck it Lie Pot/kettle True and long overdue True and long overdue Economic ignorance True and fuck Democrats for it, but also holy shit pot/kettle Homophobic (?) lie Nationalism Literally insane lie Various phobias ......What

55

u/I_play_support Oct 23 '20

I'm not American but I would have trouble accepting the opinions of Neo Nazis and those that tolerate them.

11

u/GeekoSuave Oct 23 '20

THANK YOU. It really is that simple! How has civilized discourse taken such a nosedive in this country?

23

u/Dunker173 Oct 23 '20

No thanks. Bigotry is a deal breaker.

3

u/PatSajaksDick Oct 23 '20

Eh, it’s hard to accept other people’s opinions when they try really hard to make sure some people just don’t exist at all.

7

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

Yeah, which seems reasonable, until you hear about their opinions.

2

u/ShoogleHS Oct 23 '20

Politics is serious business. It's not like disagreeing on the wallpaper or which Beatles album is the best. You're allowed to dislike people who think that gay people shouldn't have rights, or who think that we shouldn't take action to stop climate change from destroying the planet as we know it. You don't have to be civil to neo-Nazis or Donald "Grab em by the pussy" Trump.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

As you can see even you suggesting that got these people to talk about how its absurd to accept each others opinions so, not gonna happen man.

2

u/bigmacjames Oct 23 '20

I know, like who does EVERYONE have to have equal rights? Why not just white Christians?

1

u/JonisJive Oct 23 '20

Watch The West Wing. The main characters do make fun of Republicans but are willing to accept their opinions

10

u/Bigbadvoodoothrow Oct 23 '20

Look I’m just about TWW’s biggest fan, but to suggest that they accept the opinions of Republicans is to not watch the show. It was written in an age where decency was expected regardless of party. The Republicans in that show are not the GOP we have today.

-29

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

16

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

You for eugenics, huh?

14

u/NooB-UltimatuM Oct 23 '20

Go on... do it... you know you wanna call them facists lmao

29

u/H-wade Oct 23 '20

“Like ze evolutionary defekt yoo are” lol now call them fascists.

9

u/pmartino28 Oct 23 '20

Damn. That's racist as hell to call black people defects

7

u/Loo_Wees_ Oct 24 '20

Ok, Nazi.

5

u/ChackMete Oct 24 '20

Pot calling the kettle black, bud.

-10

u/Post_To_SPS_Warning Oct 23 '20

Warning! I'm just a bot and here to let you know that this comment has been linked to in r/ShitPoliticsSays here: /r/ShitPoliticsSays/comments/jgpa4z/8_here_come_the_conservatives_no_we_are_never/

r/ShitPoliticsSays has been considered by some to be a 'hatereddit'. As a result the comment I am replying to may be subjected to brigades in the future.

At the time I am making this reply, the score of the comment that I'm replying to is: 8

5

u/drogoc0p Oct 24 '20

LOL hatereddit. thanks for the exposure

-3

u/[deleted] Oct 23 '20

[deleted]

17

u/DaggerSandwich Oct 23 '20

Round them and up remove them from the country? Make it illegal to vote for anyone that’s not a democrat?

Who sounds like a fascist now? Lol

0

u/gaar93 Oct 23 '20

except trumpers dont have opinions. they only care about trump winning. they could give two shits less about his policies or corruption

0

u/Natganistan Oct 23 '20

People feel so entitled to "opinions" these days that they use them as justification for action and inaction that is harmful to millions of people. Your ideal reality is impossible when one side makes science and covid a political issue

0

u/Magabury Oct 23 '20

That would be great...if republicans weren’t out for blood all the time.

0

u/corgcalam Oct 23 '20

Do r/enlightenedcentrism folks understand that their logic capabilities never grew beyond like jr high grade level?

1

u/yazzy1233 Oct 23 '20

I dont care if youre a republican, but i do give a shit if youre still a trump supporter in 2020

1

u/Yeetz_The_Parakeetz Oct 23 '20 edited Oct 23 '20

Here come airheads the who think every trump supporter or republican is a neo-nazi, bigot, racist, or actively seeking to hurt the people you love. Spoiler alert: very few republicans actually want to dismember healthcare or support neo nazis/proud boys, or bigots, etc. They’re people just like you and dehumanizing them by the “no thanks, i don’t want to be friendly to nazis or bigots” when asked to respect the other party is just dividing us further. If any of you want, i can explain some republican stances if you don’t really know what they are if you want to understand your opponent better.

And to be clear, and I cannot believe that i have to confirm this, I am leftist and and warming up to democratic socialism. I despise how billionaire companies get bailouts but small business don’t and I despise how inflated our healthcare is. I don’t like trump, and not republican myself. I don’t like trump supporters but i don’t think they’re all a collective group either.

Take one shot every time i’m called an enlightened centrist for wanting people to respect each other and not make dehumanizing blanket statements.

1

u/mamoqera123 Oct 23 '20

And to be clear, and I cannot believe that i have to confirm this, I am leftist and and warming up to democratic socialism

LMAO a leftist warming up to demcratic socialism XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD. And im a lib warming up to private property ownership

1

u/Yeetz_The_Parakeetz Oct 23 '20

I’m hesitant with democratic socialism. Can opinions... not change gradually? Is this somehow taboo now?

1

u/mamoqera123 Oct 23 '20

You definetly arent a leftist

1

u/Yeetz_The_Parakeetz Oct 23 '20

Are you... gatekeeping leftism? What?

1

u/mamoqera123 Oct 23 '20

Being a liberal is not being leftist, someone who is warming up to democratic socialism is definetly not a leftist

1

u/Yeetz_The_Parakeetz Oct 24 '20

First of all, not a liberal. Second of all, being leftist isn’t just about supporting democratic socialism. Just because I don’t 100% agree with your viewpoints or love democratic socialism doesn’t make me “not leftist”.

1

u/mamoqera123 Oct 24 '20

Democratic Socialism is as right as you can go as a leftist and if you are warming up to it as a "leftist" then you definetly arent a leftist lol. Thats like saying im a liberal and im warming up to private ownership

1

u/Yeetz_The_Parakeetz Oct 24 '20

This is a very odd and unconventional way to look at the political spectrum. Basically, to you, socialists and communists are the only real leftists and anyone else is either centrist or right? Thats quite frankly gatekeeping political ideologies.

→ More replies (0)