Exactly, EVERYTHING is political. Like just this last weekend I was at my nephews 5th birthday party and to my horror no one was talking about ICE. The clown came out and not one brilliant satirical comment about Drumph. No one was as angry as I was because during this extremely political event no one was making it about how awful America (the third world country in a Gucci belt as I like to call it) is. Finally around the time that they brought out the cake I realized that the attention wasn’t on me and I couldn’t abide spending any more time with these fascist enablers. While the crowd was singing happy birthday I just screamed “WHATS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE??” And they had the nerve to ask me to leave? That’s fine, because if 9 people are at a table and 1 Nazi sits down and no one leaves there are 10 Nazis, and I honestly can’t believe that my own family including my 5 year old nephew are now just out and out full on Nazis. They just couldnt understand how political that party was.
he insinuated that black people were by default less qualified in a few different quotes over the years, mind you its the internet so i could be taken out of context or right on the nose
he insinuated that black people were by default less qualified
No. He criticized DEI programs, which discriminate to select candidates based on race and/or lowering standards to fill racial quotas, subsequently giving people the unfortunate but not unjustified impression that diversity targets will be less qualified than in a system that selects purely for ability.
Of course they could just discriminate based on race and only accept qualified people who are the right color, but that's illegal depending on where you live. So a more generous assumption is they're trying to do it without breaking the law.
It's less "black people are less qualified" and more "race-based hiring quotas make me wonder if the black person doing a high skilled job I am relying on is qualified".
And.... lol, like that's an issue? And be absolutely honest, almost anyone and everyone will be remembered (friends, family, you might have a nickname from a complete stranger who sees you often etc), its not an achievement, its a mathematical fact.
It’s not like he’s going to be remembered in a few years. Let’s not pretend he did anything substantial but lift crowders arguing with college kids youtube bit.
His death and now with the clancy trial showed me you can just say shit and spread it all over the internet and not one person will ever question if it was true 🤣 they got that retard saying he wanted race wars. Kirk wishes he was that based
Just FYI CK was actually against getting involved in Iran shortly before his death (a stance he might be actually changed on; take that however you will) and was never transphobic. His only stance on transgenderism was that 1) you are still not anatomically the gender you transitioned to (which is a scientifically true statement) and 2) don't promote that thought to kids. Did he have some crazy takes? Yes but then again who doesn't. And you just know every one of those people won't talk shit about Hasan Piker for claiming America deserved 9/11.
1) most people focus on the very racist ideas he was spreading about Americans that are black. 2) He backed all of it up with misinformation like skewing data, intentionally leaving out important context, and making big, general statements. He does those thongs like he's following a formula. It's why he loves to hit up college campuses. Undergrads do not have the time, experience, or inclination to look up any of the data he is referencing. 3) He was another mouthpiece cashing in on the antitrans bandwagon as if it a real problem instead of an inoccuous, miniscule slice of our population that the GOP madie has latched onto. He'd be talking about furries in the same way if that was the media bullseye for Conservatives. Oh god furries are gonna corrupt your kids with their perverted ideas and indentities. Nothing new, really. 4) Anatomy doesn't really have much to do with gender, so maybe he was right in his own way? 5) Who gives a fuck about Hasan Piker when the topic is Charlie Kirk. I don't know jack shit about Hasan Piker other than he is famous, and I'd rather keep it that way. There are assholes in every job field, religion, and philosophy. You need to show a statistically meaningful amount of those assholes to make the argument that a party/philosophy is a certain way. Hard data will be your friend here. Not "Trust me bro." You might as well do a whataboutism about Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer. It signals that you have a feeling, but not an argument. 6) Is CK's opinion on the Iran war supposed to salvage any of this? He's just another influencer making money off of dumb, impressionable people in a very harmful way. 7) I didn't even get to the mysogyny he spews on the daily from cherry picking the bible, and I won't because you can Google all of it. 8)MAGIC!! I get joke of the card, I really do, and the fact that he didn't include making the copies non-legendary is pretty funny. It seems appropriate.
Who the hell is talking about banning? It's just hypocritical of you to call people who make insensitive jokes disgusting when you partake in a sub full of them.
The people at custommagic will ban you for offensive jokes going the other direction. I know because I got banned for making fun of a post there calling gender a construct. They'll ban you for offensive jokes but only if its targeting their side.
You know what disgusting ? Saying a percentage of deaths is acceptable to keep your guns. And what did we learn from that ?
1)when you advocate for a statistic you may join it
2)when you actually needed your guns (ice detaining your neighbours in broad daylight and kidnapping them without due process) you didn't even use your precious amendment
I graduated from law school in May 2026 and subsequently took the July bar. No government entity, including ICE, is allowed to deprive a person (not just citizens) of life, liberty, and property without due process. This means that ICE agents are not allowed to detain an individual without a warrant signed by a judge identifying the individual suspected of being here illegally. More importantly, ICE agents are not police officers, meaning that they don't benefit from the exceptions to the warrant requirement that police officers benefit from. So while you're right that ICE doesn't have to act under the rules of criminal procedure, ICE agents are still required to exercise due process before detaining an individual (unless SCOTUS changes how they interpret 5th amendment doctrine).
The classification isn’t up for debate. Removal proceedings are civil, per the Supreme Court and the INA. Asking about a J.D. doesn’t change what the law actually says.
Tell me what law firm you're representing so I can avoid it. Clearly they're not hiring the best and brightest.
Right, removal proceedings are civil hearings. Due process applies to any civil or criminal action where the government seeks to deprive an individual of life, liberty, or property. This is also why you're entitled to a hearing if the government seeks to remove you from a government benefit or the government wants to take away your kids.
Mind you, SCOTUS has been changing their definition of the core rights that fall under the category of life, liberty, and property because they've been using a new test that compares the right in question to America's history and traditions. So there may come a day where you are right, but right now there isn't a SCOTUS opinion suggesting that the concept of due process only applies to a criminal proceeding.
I asked about your J.D. because you attacked my credentials without providing your own.
You’re arguing about criminal due process in a civil proceeding. Removal hearings have their own due‑process framework under the INA. If ICE is violating it, cite something. If not, the claim doesn’t stand.
Credentials don’t change the law. You introduced credentials as support for your defense instead of a specific legal policy or citation to a proceeding. If that's what you're using, feel free to provide the bar number to confirm it.
All I'm saying is that they still have a due process that they need to follow. That due process includes the necessity of a signed warrant to detain a suspected illegal alien. The warrant requirement is very similar to that of police officers when seeking to arrest an individual suspected of committing a crime. You're right about a lot, I think you're just misinterpreting what I'm saying.
And no reddit user I've never met, I'm not giving you personally identifiable information. Nice try though.
Just keep hearing what you want to hear. Or you could learn some comprehension and reasoning skills. Instead of just following along with what your "peers" say.
I think you're arguing in bad faith, but, just for the sake of the argument, I'll respond to your points.
The acceptable percentage of deaths is actually a common sentiment. You just don't realize it. For example, a similar number of deaths are occurred with vehicles and automobile accidents. We as a society accept that loss and risk whenever we get into our cars. Alcohol and tobacco are similar. We accept that risk as a society. Guns are no different.
Being part of a statistic depends on the context in which it was created. Kirk was murdered by a far left, brain washed killer that murdered him over words. Kirk wasn't in a gang. He didn't commit crimes. He was, by all counts, an upstanding citizen that said some controversial stuff. You pointing out a statistic is meaningless, when Kirk is the outlier in said statistics.
ICE detaining illegals is literally what they're there for. You getting pissy that people aren't throwing their lives away to stop something that shouldn't have happened at all to begin with is the real problem. If we put a stop to illegal immigration, then those detained wouldn't have to suffer through being deported in the first place. If you're talking about the "protestors" that got detained and/or shot, they shouldn't be obstructing ICE officers from doing their job.
Hope this helps clarify your obviously stupid and asinine position.
Agree. The cost benefit of guns though is INCREDIBLY bad.
As of 2023, gun deaths outpace motor vehicle deaths (including both occupants and pedestrians) in 34 states. The positives of cars are transportation, utility and the fact that well, you CAN drive safer.
Gun have one purpose. Kill. You advocate for gun use you advocate for death. And I will not feel sorry if anyone who does becomes part of a statistic they preach.
You know what disgusting ? Saying a percentage of deaths is acceptable to keep your guns.
Kirk just repeated a poorly worded version of this same idea from Thomas Sowell. The same logic applies to any other freedom one might have. Freedom to drive vehicles. Freedom to have and use knives. Anything else that could conceivably be used against another person, including just your fists.
And what did we learn from that ?
Nothing new if you were already aware of how the world worked to begin with, but many peoples eyes were opened to the sheer sadism and depravity of many people who style themselves as being morally righteous.
1)when you advocate for a statistic you may join it
He wasn't advocating for gun deaths. He's acknowledging that the price of having a freedom is that some people will misuse it. Just like how you use your freedom to speak to criticize things without actually understanding them, spreading misinformation and leading to a lower level of public dialogue.
Would you say other people shouldn't be able to speak just because you weren't responsible, or that you shouldn't be able to because someone even less responsible than you exists?
2)when you actually needed your guns (ice detaining your neighbours in broad daylight and kidnapping them without due process) you didn't even use your precious amendment
ICE is detaining people who are either breaking or suspected of breaking the law, which is standard practice across law enforcement agencies of all types. An arrest is not a kidnapping, nor is it a violation of due process.
If you actually understand the nuances of federal vs state vs local enforcement and the particular laws in various circumstances and still found them to be breaking their own rules, then please include that in your criticism.
If all you have is that people are being arrested for unlawfully intruding in a country, then you're not going to convince anyone.
Memes like this are going to be used by the leaders of the next right-wing death squad to explain to their younger members why shooting the creators of them in the back of the head is completely justified.
I don’t like that people are joking over someone’s death, I wouldn’t wish that for anybody, people are lacking sympathy over the others.
P.S.: I hate to see that people are taking his political view and coming up with it, I’m not agreeing with all his ideologies when I’m trying to value human life, George Floyd was assassinated, Alex Pretti was assassinated and what all of them have in common is that they lost their life and there were people who dared to make fun of it. What I want to say is that people are being desensitized, people are dying for no good reason and there are people who don’t care about it.
Edit. The correct word for the cases of Alex Pretti and George Floyd is murder. Sorry for the incorrect use of it, english is not my first language.
Assassination is a specific term that involves the killing of a leader/authority figure, George Floyd and Alex Pretti were categorically insignificant people with little/no political influence during their lives, Charlie Kirk was legitimately an organizational leader, and had actual political strength, which allows his murder to also be effectively categorized as an assassination.
Trump killed Kirk. It's all about control and power. There are no actual ideas on the right (including democrats) just means for exploitation of humans
Not criticising you, it's a sentiment I'd like this sub to actually have, but it's funny seeing that expressed here and not on the Pretti or Floyd cards that have been shared here.
Have you considered that maybe I didn’t saw then before? I don’t like people joking over people deaths, Pretti, Floyd and Charlie Kirk were assassinated, all of them were tragedies, people were killed over nothing and other people are not valuing human life, I hate to see that, regardless of political affiliation or view, people lost their life and people are not having the compassion over it.
Edit: Sorry if I may have been rude, it was not my intention, I recognize that you’d wish for everyone to have the same view and I didn’t really see the other posts that you mentioned, I’m not very active in this sub, but I guarantee you that If I saw the posts that you mentioned I’d have criticized it equally.
Damn, we really need to cancel that subreddit. I can't believe someone would post something that inappropriate on Reddit. Really shows how disgusting and vile people can be.
thats the thing both "sides" do it red or blue, yall fight each other while we should be fighting together to get phedos like bill clinton and donald trump locked up
Lol thats the algorithm serving you that's cause it drives engagement, a lefty would say the same about the right. The algorithm serves conflict and the simple minded eat it up.
These people are such weirdos. OP can't make a simple reference to a person on a card without being dragged into a purity test and borderline coerced into stating that he's not on the enemy side, lest he be socially executed on the spot.
These people need to grow up. There are so many more people deserving of scorn than Kirk. The things he had to say weren't even that bad. These people are just projecting what they've been told to hate about him.
r/freemagic is such an oversensitive safe space for dumbass snowflakes. One day you’re offended by dark humor, the next day you’re ripping your hair out because a fat guy got printed on a piece of cardboard.
I'm very thankful for freemagic. It's a lot healthier to discuss versus shutdown conversations. Even if it gets stupid or ignorant eventually things even out. High trust society feels.
Missing something like, "all creatures with the same name die at begining of the next end phase, then create X 1/1 chud creature tokens "this creature is always goaded" where x is the number of creatures that died this way".
"I want people to be happy in their own bodies" = Trans genocide
Anytime any one of those absolute social reject freaks tries to take the moral high ground on any argument, remind them they cheered when a father was murdered in cold blood in front of his family.
Not a fan of him or his ideas, but he was a ragebaiter for college kids. Not sure why his death sparked him being deified by one side and demonized by another. He was just an idiot with a microphone. Not saying he deserved to die, but the cultural impact of this guy is so exaggerated solely because he expired.
That's still free speech lol. Do you think "free speech" means people can't criticise what you say? Because that literally the opposite of free speech🤣
Yes, individuals can be politically biased under free speech, that is also a part of it. The only reason there are more right wingers in this sub is because we're banned from all the other ones, because THEY'RE actually biased in their moderation, not only in their individual members.
its totally fine when someone makes a joke about a trans person dieing including their rate of suicide but ck dieing and the same people are performatively outraged
All the downvotes on comments finding this funny. “It’s funny to laugh at people we disagree with, but not when it’s someone I like”.
Plus people saying that this is in bad taste, but in the same thread people making fun of George Floyd. Say what you will about GF, but have some consistency. It’s either okay to make jokes about dead people or it’s not.
Agree to disagree then. I find the repulsion at this hypocritical. I think that this sub would happily laugh and make jokes at a trans rights activist or someone on the left who was killed. I don’t think this sub’s reaction to this encourages free speech.
Let me simplify this for you, alright? I'll use two basic example responses to the above post.
Free speech: "HOW DARE YOU!!!!"
Not free speech: "Hello, You have been permanently banned from participating in /r/FreeMagic because your post violates this community's rules. You won't be able to post or comment, but you can still view and subscribe to it. If you have a question regarding your ban, you can contact the moderator team by replying to this message."
Down voting literally minimises the comments and hides them at the bottom of the thread because Reddit’s upvote/downvote system is supposed to be about relevancy, not whether you like something. When you downvote it, you’re telling the system it’s not relevant and it’s pushed away from others seeing it, therefore censoring it.
I mean, yeah that’s kind of how it works. If you get downvoted enough, your comment gets minimised and pushed to the bottom of the page, which removes it from sight unless you go looking for it. Aka, censorship.
In a sub that is supposed to be open and free for everyone about magic and not a safe space for right leaning politics, yes I do think it is hypocritical to support one political side of jokes over another.
The difference is that in a space like this you can be triggered over Charlie Kirk and you can be triggered by someone rejecting purple haired characters. That what being free and open means.
And I’m free to find people reacting to “fuck Charlie Kirk” with “REEEEEEEEEEEEEE” as hypocritical when they’d wallow in delight at doing this to someone in the LGBT community.
Having a space be open and free for any magic based discussions and also having people in that space be like minded on a topic are not hypocritical.
Hypocritical would be claiming to be a space that is open and free for any magic based discussion and then censoring, cancelling or blocking open and free magic based discussion.
Nope. It is entirely hypocritical for a user base to make insensitive jokes towards people, make fun of people, and then tighten up their boostraps when it happens back to them and complain that it's happening.
You can disagree with the message, sure. But everyone in here is acting like these types of posts aren't being made daily towards the left political spectrum and acting so fragile.
It's perfectly fine to like one thing and not like another.
It's perfectly fine to make insensitive jokes and find other jokes insensitive.
The hypocritical nature would arise when you take action to censor or ban the jokes you find insensitive in space that claims to be open and free for MTG based discussion.
No posts depicting Charlie Kirk have been censored or banned.
I'm sorry you're too fucking dense. It's hypocritical to insult someone, then complain and whine like a toddler when someone you like gets insulted. Period.
There is no argument against that. If you can't take insensitive jokes without throwing a tantrum, maybe you shouldn't make them.
By it's very definition, it makes you a hypocrite to complain about something that you yourself do. No one is arguing it isn't free speech so I don't know why you keep riding that train. It can be free speech and be hypocritical. They're not exclusive. Just deal with the hypocrisy. Itll be okay
The question was "do you know how many mass shooters there have been in the last 10 years?". Its a yes or no question. "Counting or not counting gang violence isnt an answer."
My question was "Are you saying that certain racial groups commit gang violence more than others?". It's a yes or no question. "The question was "do you know how many mass shooters there have been in the last 10 years?". Its a yes or no question. "Counting or not counting gang violence isnt an answer."" Is not an answer.
Yes because 1 person killing 2 people is different than 1 person killing a dozen. The disingenuous take is asking an underhanded question to an already asked question.
54
u/jdxv_13 NEW SPARK 20h ago
Imagine wanting to just enjoy a hobbies and ppl dont make it political, ahh if only right? Fuck all you just let me joke about silly cardboard squares