Yes, which is why using speciation/genetics as the determining factor as to what constitutes a human is a terrible idea.

No, not a trolling fail on my part. You're begging the question. Your answer to 'what makes a human' has 'well, first it has to be human'.

Well. That's circular. The law should continue to prohibit chimpanzees from having legal protections and rights like owning things, inheriting, etc because currently the law prohibits chimpanzees from having legal protections and rights like owning things, inheriting, etc.

So I take it you would have no problem if somebody were to murder a severely mentally disabled person? They can't act like a human being, therefore they aren't, right?

Who we are, as a people, is defined by our actions - or lack thereof.

Oy. A judge-decided trial isn't constitutionally problematic in that sense, because the ultimate decision-maker is still in the same room as the person being tried. That's the crux of the issue here - you're entirely okay with a defendant never actually seeing the people chosen to ultimately decide guilt because they…

Even if you truly are just trying to educate other white people, that should be done by pointing out how horrible black people have it as opposed to how good you have it comparably.

No, it isn't. Period. Changing the subject means to stop talking about thing 'A' and to talk about something else, instead. Contrasting things means you continue talk about thing 'A' and also introduce a thing 'B'. Usually (and definitely in this case) it is in an effort to better understand the thing 'A'.…

You realize there is systemic injustice, right? That the injustice isn't that people are killed by the cops. The injustice is that only black people are killed by the cops. You are aware of that right? And the only way to show that injustice is to compare and contrast it? These things aren't foreign concepts are they?

Comparing and contrasting thing 'B' to thing 'A' isn't changing the subject from thing 'A' to thing 'B'. Pointing out how black people are treated worse than white people isn't changing the subject from racism to whiteness.

And, to be fair, any POC reading it should be very, very angry about it. It is a completely justified emotion.

And I thought, in this day and age, people knew what the term ad hominem meant. Guess we were both naive.

You don't think that a public trial would necessarily preclude sticking the jurors in the room with a dvd of the trial?

So, so many problems with this - beginning with, who's going to do the editing? Can they be trusted? Can they be paid off? Who decides what gets edited?

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be…

And I 'feel' that, by definition, you're an idiot and no one should take anything you say seriously.

It is still a Ricktatorship. Tyrese said that they could do it with a trade, Daryl agreed. Then Rick made the call. There was no vote or anything, iirc. Rick listened to his underlings/advisors, then made the call.

Yet, I've never heard of a youngling driving through a mall and running down everyone in their path.

So....

But don't forget everyone. Whenever someone doubts a rape claim or blames the victim, its because they are misogynists.