2 edits
@vivify saidNothing logical about comparing these two issues.
The Republican said his efforts to ban drag shows were to "protect children".
No child dies from drag shows. Scores of children are murdered from gun violence. So why does he fight against gun restrictions if he actually cares about protecting children?
That's a very logical line of questioning from Jon.
May I introduce the issues of giving needles, or whatever in the hell they are doing, to the street people? Is that a good idea? Should we debate whether to compare needles to guns, being the same type of problem? I would rather have seen Jon compare those 2 like-kind issues rather than the ludicroous gun vs. drag conversation. Apples and toadstools.
How about debate that Suzy** wants to (cancel culture) promote cancelling MB on that election-during-war thread. No free speech for MB, by god. Allow drag quears, but not free speech.
You fellers are simply hypocrites, face it.
** ..on the 'MB is a troll' thread
@averagejoe1 saidInteresting complaint given how right wingers frequently compare car accidents to gun murders. "Oh, you want to ban cars too??" Remember to post this same thing next time your buddies make dumb comparisons.
Nothing logical about comparing these two issues.
Should we debate whether to compare needles to guns, being the same type of problem? I would rather have seen Jon compare those 2 like-kind issues rather than the ludicroous gun vs. drag conversation. Apples and toadstools.
There is a difference though: the Republican claims drag show bans are to "protect children" when no child has ever been harmed by a drag show. Countless children are murdered by guns, yet he keeps fighting any restrictions on them.
His logic doesn't add up.
@vivify saidThere is no question that liberals have a hell of a different definition of 'harm' than that of the dictionary, , so your comment languishes.
Interesting complaint given how right wingers frequently compare car accidents to gun murders. "Oh, you want to ban cars too??" Remember to post this same thing next time your buddies make dumb comparisons.
There is a difference though: the Republican claims drag show bans are to "protect children" when no child has ever been harmed by a drag show. Countless children are murdered by guns, yet he keeps fighting any restrictions on them.
His logic doesn't add up.
@averagejoe1 saidDo murdered children meet your definition of harm?
There is no question that liberals have a hell of a different definition of 'harm' than that of the dictionary, , so your comment languishes.
@vivify saidMurdered children is bad. Murdered babies is bad. Murdered old folk is bad. Murdered transmans is bad. Anyone murdered is bad.
Do murdered children meet your definition of harm?
I think we can all agree.
We can also agree vivify is attempting to sound profound and deep but failing big time.
@vivify saidMy my, you are referring to the young victims, children, murdered by people with guns, just the same thing Jon was talking about. Halleluia. The people above on the forum were trying to mix that up with the queer drag people harming our children.
Do murdered children meet your definition of harm?
YOu see, they are two different issues, tell that to all of your light-loafered friends on the Forum.
So to your point. Murdered children have been harmed by a projectile sent through their little bodies by very bad people. So, it would seem that a solution needs to be arrived at to avoid such things happening.
Note, after all this harangue, no one here, nor Jon Stewart, have any idea how to fix this problem.
Do you? Can you tell us what you mean by this post, other than enlightening us that children shot have been harmed? Even Suzianne and Sonhouse know that. Who is your question directed to?
@wajoma saidYes, he is being somewhat childlike, even faking a bit of glibness, and it just isn't working. I think he will explain the post above which I refer to.
Murdered children is bad. Murdered babies is bad. Murdered old folk is bad. Murdered transmans is bad. Anyone murdered is bad.
I think we can all agree.
We can also agree vivify is attempting to sound profound and deep but failing big time.
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidEither you're senile or slow. Jon put forward ideas like background checks and registration, which the Republican opposes. *You* even discussed registration in this thread.
Note, after all this harangue, no one here, nor Jon Stewart, have any idea how to fix this problem.
Jesus Christ, dude.
@averagejoe1 saidIt’s nothing compared to right wingers and what they think “initiation of force” is
There is no question that liberals have a hell of a different definition of 'harm' than that of the dictionary, , so your comment languishes.
@vivify saidI clearly said that there should be registration. Y'all really fly off the handle when you are overcome with emotion and anger.
Either you're senile or slow. Jon put forward ideas like background checks and registration, which the Republican opposes. *You* even discussed registration in this thread.
Jesus Christ, dude.
@athousandyoung saidYeah right on thousand. You and Suzi really nail it every time
It’s nothing compared to right wingers and what they think “initiation of force” is
@averagejoe1 saidYou keep repeating that Jon offered no solutions when that's clearly false. Jon brought up background checks and registration
I clearly said that there should be registration.