589
submitted 8 months ago by jhymesba@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

While rebutting another post here on Lemmy, I ran into this. This says exactly what I want to say.

I am not a friend of Biden's Administration. I think they drug their feet over a variety of things ranging from holding Trump and his goons accountable for January 6th through rulemaking on issues like OTC Birth Control and abortion rights, and yes, I think he's too quick to please big business. But then I remember what the alternative is, and ... well, disappointed in Biden or not, I'm voting for him. Because my wife is a Black bisexual goth woman, four strikes under Team Pepe's tent. And I have my own strikes for marrying her as a White dude, and respecting her right to not have kids since she doesn't want them is another strike against me. And I care about my Non-Christian, Gay, Transgender, and Minority friends, and will never willingly subject them to Team Pepe.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] sturmblast@lemmy.world -2 points 8 months ago

So... instead of providing some kind of actual proof or evidence of your argument, you insult me and post a relatively useless link to a wikipedia article that wouldn't pass the sniff test in high school.

[-] Nevoic@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

First time using Wikipedia? There are actually a dozen resources at the bottom. Use those.

Anyway, you didn't address anything I actually said. You sit back as Israel invades, bombs, and slaughters thousands upon thousands of children for the purposes of wiping out a native people, and you argue about the semantics of genocide. It's so fucking pathetic, people did the same thing during the Holocaust to try to argue against U.S intervention and it fucking worked, the only reason we intervened was Japan bombing pearl harbor.

Genocide apologists like yourself should go spend a day actually experiencing the fucking genocide, then maybe you'll have an ounce of compassion. It just sucks having you out here, potentially changing public sentiment away from helping those being genocided. The difference between an indifferent bystander and a genocide enabler is not as large as you'd probably imagine, being the former yourself.

[-] sturmblast@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

You jump to conclusions with weak arguments and result to insults instead of listening to what I'm saying.

The information I provided isn't false and neither is yours. There's some differing opinions on the definitions of genocide. In this case, I would agree that it hasn't really met that threshold. By the text book definition. That's all.

It's not that it's not terrible. All war is terrible. But I also am of the opinion that violence is part of nature. I accept it as part of life.

[-] Nevoic@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

There's a misconception among western intellectuals that emotion and intellect are juxtaposed, that your indifference towards the genocide that is taking place is somehow a virtue. It's not. It's your inability to actually comprehend what is going on. If you lived the life of a Palestinian you wouldn't just be mad, you'd be fucking helpless, and your inability to internalize that and have it impact your view on the world is a common human failing.

If the bombs Israel purposefully dropped on civilians killed someone you cared about, you wouldn't be on here arguing against people who use the word genocide. People you yourself admit aren't actually saying anything wrong. You're trying to move people who are literally just stating facts about the world in an emotionally charged way away from intense language. To what end? Do you actually care? Probably not.

You should develop some empathy. It's not a weakness.

this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
589 points (88.9% liked)

politics

19198 readers
2468 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS