blakelivesmatter
Derpacleese
blakelivesmatter

Sorry, friend, but your response is the copout in this situation. We’re not talking about a hobby store that doesn’t like gay people, we’re talking about one of the biggest corporations in history that has been actively trying to change how we purchase FOOD. We don’t get to run away from this one.

Oooh, bringing Deuteronomy into the game...so you’re cool with having your wife raped and children kidnapped if you sin? (Deut 28:30-32)

Except the 2nd is an AMENDMENT — that means the founding fathers in their ineffable 18th century wisdom, realized the Constitution needed fixing. They weren’t fucking wizards, you asshat, they couldn’t possibly have recognized the harm they have wrought. For fuck’s sake, Jefferson is quoted as saying that the

Beat me to the punch — the odds of killing a loved one are DRASTICALLY higher if you have a gun in your home, and there’s PLENTY of research to back that up.

Amazon is.

Again, I’ve been speaking in the broadest terms; glad that you’re on point with your argument, at least. (not sarcastic)

It seems to me that you have a limited perception of how the 1st is actually applied...beyond that, I think you’re missing the point I was trying to make.

Unless you have different information than I do, he didn’t say he was going to attack anyone. His post was certainly threatening and implied violent action, but there’s a difference between implication, intent, and action.

True, in the strictest sense. In application, that’s not how it actually plays out. That said, I’m speaking in the broader terms, as in the values that are intended to represented by each Amendment (freedom versus security, again, being VERY broad here), how those values tend to conflict, and how those on either

I agree whole-heartedly, and we’re thankfully seeing businesses begin to step away from the NRA and those associated with it — Enterprise Rent-A-Car just pulled support. Obviously that won’t break the NRA’s back, but it’s a positive step.

You’re touching on a key point here, one that I think ideologues will have a hard time with — is ignoring the First Amendment in order to defame/disparage/put aside those who advocate the Second Amendment the right way to go about things? The twisted logic there should be...self-evident.

I didn’t know that and thus feel stupid. Thank you for calmly informing me about chilling out, really fits the narrative.

How about America takes John Oliver’s advice and picks up a new anthem? That song is designed for this kind of shit.

The question is “where do you draw the line?” I brought the topic up in the first place because the day before last week’s shooting in Florida, a kid was arrested and charged with attempted murder in Washington state because his journals made it pretty clear he planned a similar act (I’m sure I mentioned this). It

I’m curious about whether all those black dresses cost as much as the $1M pounds Emma Watson donated...

How about taking politics out of something that puts a spotlight on the need to adopt neglected animals?

To try to reply to both at the same time (this Kinja shit really does suck): 1) I’m not saying that secondary or tertiary victims are new — they are VERY much the foundation of Western society, after all — my question is how do we address that now, when one person is responsible for all that? Again, I have no good

Those are very, very different situations that you posit — health care reform that brings the US closer to the rest of the developed world would help with the first issue, and probably the second as well, as addiction is a mental health issue and should be treated as such.